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 Number: T03CM04028
Parcel: 120086690

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T03CM04028
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
12/02/2003 Daniel 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. As requested in the previous review, the MS&R covenant submitted must be recorded and a copy of the recorded covenant provided with the next submittal of this plan.

2. Under the project data block, please note the building square footage breakdown as listed in response letter comment number seven (7). (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6)

3. Dimension the curb length for an angle parking space. (LUC Table 3.3.7-I) (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8)

4. Per D.S. 3-05.2.1.C.2.a, a vehicle stacking space may not block ingress or egress to a vehicle parking space. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8)

5. Future sign location is within the future sight visibility triangle. Lines of sight may not be obscured between 30 inches and six (6) feet through the SVT. You may delete the sign from the plan if it is to be obtained by separate permit or you may apply for a Development Standard Modification Request (DSMR) to allow for the sign to be located within the SVT. For information regarding the DSMR process please contact me at the number below. DSMR case number, date of approval, modification/s granted, and any conditions imposed must be noted on the plan. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.13) (D.S. 3-01.5.1.A.1)

6. Previous comment has not been addressed: Label and dimension MS&R future curb. Face of curb is to be located nine (9) feet from future right-of-way line. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.21)

7. All requested changes must be made to the site and landscape plans. (D.S. 2-07.2.1.A)

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Dan Castro, (520) 791-5608.
12/02/2003 DAN CASTRO HANDICAP-SITE REVIEW Approved
12/05/2003 DOUG WILLIAMS ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied SUBJECT: New Car Wash - 320 W. Irvington Rd.
REVIEWER: Doug Williams
DATE: 05 December 2003
ACTIVITY NUMBER: T03CM04028
T14S R13E Sec. 36

SUMMARY: Engineering Division has reviewed the Site Plan and Drainage Report received on November 6, 2003. A grading permit application does not appear to have been completed and submitted with the site plan. Sheets C1.1 and C1.2 must correspond with one another if the latter is to be considered a part of the site plan. Approval is not recommended at this time - resubmittal is required. The following comments are offered:

SITE PLAN:
1. The site and grading plans must correspond with one another - please revise keynote 1 at appropriate locations to ensure the vertical curbing specified in the drainage report is depicted on the site plan (see previous comment # 7);
2. Depict the location of the south detention basins and limits of ponding onsite, in accordance with section 2.3.1.6 A 4 of the City of Tucson Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management (SMDDFM) - DS 10-02.0 & 2-02.2.1.15 (see previous comment #8);
3. As stated previously, required detention and any related accessories may not be constructed within the future right of way. Please revise the site plan to demonstrate that all required drainage improvements are outside of the future (MS&R) right of way (see previous comment #9);

GENERAL COMMENT:
A grading permit will be required for this development. Please submit a completed grading permit application with the resubmittal. Notation should be provided on the grading plan that grading shall conform to the 2000 International Building Code (IBC), Chapter 36 (local amendment), Excavation and Grading - particular attention should be given to Sections 13 and 14. For further information, this document may be accessed online at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/2000_IBC_Amendments.pdf.

If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550, extension 1189 or Dwillia1@ci.tucson.az.us.

Douglas Williams
Sr. Engineering Associate
Engineering Division
Development Services Department
12/09/2003 JOE LINVILLE NPPO REVIEW Approved Exception.
12/09/2003 Joseph Linville LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1) The plans require revision in order to comply with LUC 3.7.2.3.A Canopy Trees in Vehicular Use Areas. Although the plan includes the required tree, the planter area is required to contain a minimum of 34 square feet. LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.c

2) Per LUC 2.8.3.5.F "An approved site plan is required indicating how the project will comply with LUC requirements when the MS&R right-of-way can no longer be used as part of the site. Such plan is to be an exhibit to an executed covenant for recordation stating the responsibility of the property owner, successor, or assignee as to the removal of improvements and compliance with the LUC at no cost to the City." Revise the site and landscape plans as necessary. Upon conditional approval of the future site plan, the plan must be recorded as an exhibit to an approved covenant.
Although we have received a notarized covenant, the document along with an approved site plan (Exhibit B to the covenant) must be recorded.

3) Detention basin 1 is required to be landscaped per LUC 3.7.4.3.A and DS 10-01.0
12/11/2003 JIM EGAN FIRE REVIEW Passed

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
12/11/2003 TAMI ACHONG OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed