Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Review Detail

Permit Number: T03CM02422
Parcel: 129090420

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T03CM02422
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
10/31/2003 Doug Williams ENGINEERING REVIEW Approved
10/31/2003 LOREN MAKUS SANITATION REVIEW Denied A centralized, onsite refuse provision is required for all new commercial developments (3 or more units per lot), per City of Tucson Development Standard 6-01.0. Demonstrate compliance with such, or provide written approval from Environmental Services Department on the plan, or written correspondence clearly granting said approval. If an approval is granted with conditions, specify conditions on the plan, and depict approved pick-up location(s) on the site plan.
11/03/2003 DAN CASTRO ZONING REVIEW Denied 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.
CODE SECTION/ DEVELOPMENT STANDARD

1. Per the Zoning Administrators determination letter dated August 4, 2003, the studio addition is to be reviewed as a principal dwelling unit. The following comments are based on a full code compliance review of the entire site. Commercial site standards are applicable for three (3) or more multi-family dwelling units.

2. Revise the building height noted for all three (3) buildings to be based on the maximum existing and proposed building height. Height should be measured from finished grade to the top of the ridge. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6)

3. Under the zoning information block on sheet 01, the east and west building wall heights for the proposed studio should be revised to 10 feet high.
(D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.7) (LUC Sec. 3.2.6.4. "AA")

4. Per LUC Sec. 3.3.7.5, a street may not be used for maneuvering directly into or from any parking space located outside the public right-of-way.
(D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8)

5. Handicap parking is not required for 3 dwelling units. You may remove the handicap parking space, access aisle, and ramp from the plan and replace it with a standard vehicle parking space.
(D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8)

6. Per D.S. 3-05.2.3.C.2 (Figure 2), the length of the area for the back-up spur is to be a minimum 24 feet wide. The plan shows a much smaller area.
(D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8)

7. Ingress/Egress from alley must be 24 feet wide for two-way travel.
(LUC Table 3.3.7-I) (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.11)

8. If a Board of Adjustment Variance is applied for, please list the Board of Adjustment case number, date of approval, variances granted, and applicable conditions on the site plan. For information regarding the variance process please contact Russlynn Wells or Wayne Bogdan at 791-5550.

9. All requested changes must be made to the site and landscape plans.


If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Dan Castro, (520) 791-5608.
11/03/2003 DAN CASTRO HANDICAP-SITE REVIEW Denied Refer to Zoning Review comments.
11/03/2003 Joseph Linville LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1) Per LUC 3.3.7.5 "Use of Street or Alley for Maneuvering Area. A street or alley may not be used for maneuvering directly into or from any parking space located wholly or partially outside the public right-of-way".

2) The site plan is to be drawn at a standard engineering scale no larger than l" = 60'. DS 2-02.2.1.A

3) A native plant preservation plan is required. LUC 3.8

4) A street landscape border per LUC 3.7.2.4 is required along 24th St. The border is required along the entire street frontage except for approved ingress/egress locations.

5) A 6' masonry screen wall is required for refuse area screening. LUC Table 3.7.2-I

6) The parking areas on the site are required to be screened per LUC Table 3.7.2-I.

7) Per DS 3-01.6.6 "Alleys are to be used for utility placement, provision of sanitary services, and as a
secondary point of access to property." The alley is not to be used for primary acces to required parking spaces.
11/03/2003 JOE LINVILLE NPPO REVIEW Denied Submit a native plant preservation plan. LUC 3.8
11/18/2003 JIM EGAN FIRE REVIEW Approved

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
11/21/2003 MONICA VALDEZ OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
11/19/2003 ANGIE SHOFFSTALL REJECT SHELF Completed