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 - T03CM05012
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/17/2004 | JIM EGAN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 04/08/2004 | Joseph Linville | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Revise the plans to show properly drawn sight visibility triangles per DS 3-01.5.1.B 2) Revise the plans to conform with the driveway width restrictions of TCC 25-38A. The width is limited to twenty feet. 3) Revise the plans to include a street landscape border per LUC 3.7.2.4 4) Revise the plans to use a minimum .12 font per DS 2-02.2.1.B 5) Revise the landscape plan to include the correct common name for sophora secundiflora. DS 2-07.2.1A.1.d 6) Revise the plans so that so that the refuse collection vehicle does not have to back into moving traffic, on or off the premises. DS 6-01.4.1.j 7) The retention basin is required be landscape in accordance with DS 10-01. LUC 3.7.4.3.A 8) The landscape plan is to include a summary of the native plant preservation plan per DS 2-15.3.4.B. The landscape plan may require revision if a native plant preservation plan is approved. 9) Provide screen gates for the opening of the refuse storage area per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. 10) Revise the landscape plan to show all individual plants per DS 2-07.2.2.A.1.a 11) Revise the landscape plans to indicate indicate use of all runoff, from individual catch basins around single trees to basins accepting flow from an entire vehicular use area or roof area. LUC 3.7.4.3.B |
| 04/12/2004 | JOE LINVILLE | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit a native plant preservation plan per DS 2-15.0. The plan is to be prepared by a plant professional per LUC 3.8.4.4. |
| 04/14/2004 | 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. a) Provide a copy of the Zoning Review Section approved lot split plan. Pima County Assessors records indicate this property was split in 2003. The site plan may not be approved until the approved lot split plan or subdivision plat has been submitted to the Zoning Review Section. b) Note the legal description. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.2) 2. All lettering and dimensions shall be the equivalent of twelve (0.12") point or greater in size. (D.S. 2-05.2.1.C) 3. Note the proposed building height from finish grade under the design data block on sheet SP-1. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6) 4. Dimension the length of the standard vehicle parking spaces on the site plan. Minimum length required is 18 feet. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8) 5. Dimension the wheelstop location. Wheelstops must be located 2 ½ feet from the front of the parking space. (D.S. 3-05.2.3.C.2) 6. Detail access ramps. Provide slope, direction of slope, and spot elevations at disabled parking and access aisles to show conformance to Sec 405 of ICC/ANSI A117.1-1998. 7. Per LUC Sec. 3.3.4 "Multi-family Dwellings 0-70 units/acre": Two (2) Class II bicycle parking spaces are required for this project. Revise the bicycle parking calculation on sheet SP-1 to list the correct number and class type required and provided. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9) (D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4) 8. Provide a detail of existing and/or proposed free-standing signs, billboard, and outdoor lighting on the site plan. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.13) (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.25) 9. Label and dimension right-of-way for Utah Street. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.19) 10. Existing or proposed easements must be shown on the plan including width, type, and recording docket and page reference. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.20) 11. 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. |
| 04/14/2004 | DAN CASTRO | HANDICAP-SITE | REVIEW | Denied | Detail access ramps. Provide slope, direction of slope, and spot elevations at disabled parking and access aisles to show conformance to Sec 405 of ICC/ANSI A117.1-1998. |
| 04/15/2004 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: April 15, 2004 TO: Mr. Carlos Mungia SUBJECT: Dory's Apartments Site Plan Review REVIEWER: Loren Makus ACTIVITY NUMBER: T03CM05012 SUMMARY: The Site Plan was reviewed by Development Services Department Engineering Division. The Site Plan does not appear to meet the requirements of the City of Tucson Development Standard (DS) at this time. The site plan was not approved. Please address the following comments. Site Plan Comments: 1) Clearly indicate property boundaries. Provide a detail showing the proposed CMU wall relative to the property line. If any part of the wall , footing or trenching encroaches onto an adjacent property, provide evidence of a construction easement. (City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) 2-02.2.1.A.5) 2) Clearly show and dimension the existing right of way, including pavement width and sidewalk locations. Since Utah Street is not an MS&R route, no future right-of-way must be described. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.19) 3) Revise the Sight Visibility Triangles (SVT) so that they are drawn in accordance with DS 3-01.0 Figure 16. Dimension the SVTs. Since Utah Street is not an MS&R route, no future SVTs must be provided. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.10) 4) Show the water surface elevations for the basin. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.15) 5) Show drainage patterns, and proposed and existing grades and finish floor elevations on site plan. Include roof drainage patterns. Indicate that all flows up to a 10-year event will be conveyed under sidewalks. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.16 and DS 2-08.5.1.E) 6) Show existing contours on site plan. Include sufficient contours on adjacent properties to demonstrate that existing drainage patterns will be maintained. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.23) 7) Indicate whether the elevation benchmark is NAVD88, NGVD29 or some other datum. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.5) 8) The solid waste enclosure must include steel bollards along each side wall. (DS 6-01.4.2.C.2) 9) The minimum type size must be at least 12 point. Hydrologic/Hydraulic Report Comments: 11) Provide details for all basins and hydraulic structures, including inlet and outlet weirs. Include dimensions and elevations for key components. Revise the site plan to address all of these comments and resubmit two copies for review. Include a letter explaining how each comment has been addressed. If you have any questions or would like to set up a meeting, please call me at (520) 791-5550 ext. 1161 or email me at loren.makus@tucsonaz.gov. Loren Makus Senior Engineering Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04/16/2004 | EGRANT1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 04/15/2004 | ANGIE SHOFFSTALL | REJECT SHELF | Completed |