Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you can not find what you are looking for please submit a records request.
Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE
Permit Number - T02OT00914
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/20/2002 | JIM EGAN | FIRE | REVIEW | Denied | |
| 06/27/2002 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Paul Edwards 1418 N Sahuara Ave Tucson, AZ 85712 FROM: Peter McLaughlin Senior Planner FOR: Patricia Gehlen Principal Planner PROJECT: Hanarm, LLC 2623 N. Campbell Ave Site Plan TRANSMITTAL: June 27, 2002 COMMENTS: Please attach a response letter with the next submittal, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. This project is being reviewed as a change of use. Full code compliance is required. DS 2-02 2. Please clarify the principal use. The principal use is "mixed" -office and retail. Office is not a secondary use. Please revise information under Land Use Group. 3. The minimum required width of a two-way PAAL is twenty-four (24) feet. It is clear that the PAAL width in the western portion of the site is being reduced in order to save the existing large alleppo pine trees. A Board of Adjustment Variance is required to allow the reduced (22-1/2 foot proposed) PAAL width. If the variance is applied for and granted a general note which includes case number, variance granted, the date of approval and conditions imposed must be added to the site plan. DS 3-05.2.1.C, DS 2-02.2.1.38 4. Revise required building setbacks to specify that the street yard setback is the greater of 21 feet or height of structure measured from back of future curb location. Also, revise front setback provided to state the actual dimension of existing building from back of future curb location. The west perimeter line building setback and the street front (east) building setback requirements are not met. Because this is a change of use a Lot Development Option (LDO) will be required for the east and west lot lines. Place the LDO case number, LDO's approved, date of approval and conditions imposed in the general notes on the site plan. If variance is applied for, include setback requests in variance package. DS 2-02.2.1.31 5. The Assessor's record indicates the correct legal description of the site is Hedrick Acreage Tract No. 2, North 130 feet of Lot 3 except E 10 feet, Blk B, Bk 4, Pg 1 of Maps and Plats. Please revise legal description. Since this is described as a portion of a lot, please provide a copy of Zoning Review Section approved lot split documents or a 20-year history of the property. DS 2-02.2.1.A.2 6. The ROW area "A" does not appear to be correct in the MS&R parking reduction calculation. The area is dimensioned as 20 feet ´ 130 feet which equals 2,600 square feet. Please revise MS&R parking adjustment factor. Also, revise the gross site area under the parking reduction calculation to be consistent with the actual gross site area (31,941 square feet) stated above in the data. LUC 2.8.3.7 7. The dimensioned existing and future "right-of-way" widths shown for Campbell Avenue are actually 1/2 rights-of-way and must be labeled as such. Please revise. DS 2-02.1.A.19 8. Portions of existing buildings, landscaping, portion of a parking space are located within the future ROW. Parking is not allowed within SVT's. Show how the project will comply with LUC requirements when the future MS&R right-of-way can no longer be used as part of the site. A recorded covenant (see attached) is required stating responsibilities of the property owner, successor, or assignee as to the removal of site improvements within the MS&R right-of-way at no cost to the City of Tucson. DS 2-02.2.1.A.10 9. Revise parking and FAR calculations to be based solely on the proposed principal use (most restrictive of the two uses). The FAR calculation must include the proposed FAR (proposed gross floor area ¸ gross site area = FAR). The parking calc is 1 vehicle parking space per 200 square feet of gross floor area for single story buildings. DS 2-02.2.2.A.3, DS 2-02.2.2.A.4 10. Per LUC 3.3.7.8, any use providing less than 50 vehicle spaces may substitute a class II bicycle parking for the class I space. If this is to be done, revise the bicycle parking calcs to show that two class II spaces are required/provided. The bicycle parking layout must be fully dimensioned on the plan per DS 2-09, DS 2-02.2.2.A.4, DS 2-02.2.1.A.9, DS 2-09.6 11. Dimension the width of the on site sidewalks. Wheelstops must be provided in all parking spaces which abut pedestrian sidewalks (unless the sidewalks are a minimum 6-1/2 feet in width). Dimension the wheelstops from the front of parking spaces on the site plan. Wheelstops must be located two-and-one-half (2½) feet from the front of the parking spaces. DS 3-05.2.3.C.2 12. Dimension the width of ingress-egress point. DS 2-02.2.1.A.11 13. If free-standing outdoor lighting is proposed for this site, please detail on the site plan. DS 2-02.2.1.A.25 14. The location, type, size and height of any proposed free-standing signage must be shown. DS 2-02.2.1.A.13 15. If easements exist on the site, please show their location, type, width and provide recordation information. DS 2-02.2.1.A.20 16. Provide the height of the existing structures. Building setbacks may not be verified until height of building is determined. DS 2-02.2.1.A.6 17. No landscape plan has been included with this submittal. The site plan must be accompanied by a landscape plan with information specified in DS 2-07. DS 2-02.2.1.C If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Peter McLaughlin, (520) 791-5608. |
| 07/05/2002 | JOE LINVILLE | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | Exception. LUC 3.8.3.5.D |
| 07/05/2002 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | A landscape plan in compliance with LUC 3.7 is required. Form and content should be in compliance with DS 2-06, 2-07. Plans will not be accepted for review without the landscape plan. |
| 07/22/2002 | BLANCA ESPINO | FLOODPLAIN | REVIEW | Denied | SEE ENGINEERING FOLDER. |
| 07/22/2002 | BLANCA ESPINO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Indicate all existing and proposed buildings and structures, including roof slopes and downspouts. D.S. 2-02.2.1.6 2. Demonstrate and dimension maneuvering area for loading space. D.S. 2-02.2.1.14 3. Indicate drainage flow patterns, proposed finish floor elevation(s) and finish grades. D.S. 2-02.2.1.16 4. Indicate estimated cut and fill quantities if applicable or not. D.S. 2-02.2.1.17 5. Indicate if street is Public or Private. D.S. 2-02.2.1.18 6. Dimension existing and proposed curbs, sidewalks, driveways and utility lines. D.S. 2-02.2.1.21 7. Refuse container location, size and access thereto fully dimensioned. Demonstrate and dimension maneuvering area. Gates are required on enclosure. Show a detail of refuse area. D.S. 2-02.2.1.32 8. Indicate dimension widths for walkways. 9. The P.A.A.L. on the west side of property is 22'-6". It requires to be 24' wide. Please make correction. |
| 07/22/2002 | BLANCA ESPINO | SANITATION | REVIEW | Denied | SEE ENGINEERING FOLDER. |
| 07/23/2002 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | HANDICAP-SITE | REVIEW | Denied | 7/23/2002 Handi-cap A ramp detail and handicap signage must be added to the site plan. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/23/2002 | MONICA VALDEZ | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |