Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - SITE
Permit Number - T04CM00358
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/07/2004 | Andrew Connor | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | Submit photographs of the site including existing vegetation. |
| 07/07/2004 | Andrew Connor | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit photographs of the site including existing vegetation. |
| 07/07/2004 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: July 7, 2004 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T04CM00358 PROJECT NAME: Top Gem Minerals PROJECT ADDRESS: 1820 North Oracle Road PROJECT REVIEWER: Patricia Gilbert, Engineering Associate The following items must be revised or added to the site plan. Please include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: SITE PLAN 1. The location of the solid waste enclosure is required to have a clear approach of 14' by 40' for the collection vehicle. The current proposal does not meet this requirement. The collection vehicle would go collide into the loading truck when it is parked in the loading space. This is not a "clear approach." Contact John Clark from Environmental Services for assistance for a solid waste enclosure location solution. Proposals not meeting the requirements of DS 6-01 will require a Development Standard Modification Request (DSMR). DS 6-01.4.1.C. 2. The maneuverability for the solid waste collection vehicle does not mean the requirements of DS 6-01. Collection vehicles require 36' inside radius and 50' outside radius to meet the minimum requirement for maneuverability. The current proposal does not meet this requirement. It is noted that the collection vehicle exits to Plata Road. However this egress does not meet the requirement for a 36' inside radius and 50' outside radius. Please contact John Clark from Environmental Services for a solution to solid waste enclosure location and maneuverability problems. Proposals not meeting the requirements of DS 6-01 will require a Development Standard Modification Request (DSMR). |
| 07/07/2004 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | August 12th, 2004 1. The current site plan is not the site plan the Engineering Section reviewed on 7/7/04. Comments made on 7/7/04 were based on a different plan (the plan submitted has a stmaped date of 8/03/04). The current solid waste proposal works, however the parking locations are going to change. Engineering will review plan during the next submittal for any conflicts with the new parking locations and the solid waste enclosure. |
| 08/12/2004 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | FROM: David Rivera Senior Planner FOR: Patricia Gehlen Principal Planner PROJECT: T04CM00358 SW Corner of 11th Avenue and Plata Street Commercial Storage Site Plan Transmittal date: 3rd Review August 12, 2004 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along with redlines and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. As discussed with Anselmo on August 12, 2004, the site calculations for both uses must be listed separately and must comply with the minimum development criteria for each use. Please find attached a copy of the Land Use sections that deal with more than two principal uses with different development designators. Follow the guidelines and revise or adjust the calculations as required. Also please revise the parking calculations as discussed. (Previous Comment: Per the revised site plan it appears that the site will also be developed with residential units, which were not included on the previous site plan. All the proposed use on this site must meet code for the specific use as it pertains to the land use code development criteria. Add the required data for each use and insure that the criteria can be met for each use.) (Previous Comment: Please, clarify what specific use is proposed. Under the parking calculation the proposed use is noted as Commercial Storage but the parking ratio used is for a Wholesale use. Please clarify the specific use and revise the parking calculations appropriately. If the specific use is Commercial Storage the number of vehicle parking spaces required will be less than indicated but will be acceptable as excess parking. DS 2-02.2.1.A.8) 2. I have redlined and included the required development criteria on one of the site plan copies that must be revised or updated to demonstrate compliance with the development criteria for each use. (Previous Comment: Please, include the development designator and any subject to section numbers for the residential use.) (Previous Comment: Under the General Site Information add as a note, the existing use of the site. DS 2-02.2.1.A.31) Per today's conversation with Anselmo the site plan which was submitted in late June or early July and was reviewed by all reviewing agencies except Zoning. The site plan was replaced with a revised site plan based on comments by the other reviewing agencies minus Zoning comments. This has caused a minor problem because the plan I reviewed today is not the same site plan that the other reviewing agencies reviewed and comments for the previous plan do not apply to the new site plan. I have discussed the problem with Anselmo and he is aware that additional comments may be forthcoming as a result of the new site plan. 3. Revise the parking calculations accordingly as redlined and per our conversation. 4. A wheel chair ramp is required at the connection between the H.C. parking space access isle and the sidewalk. The access ramp must not be placed within the access aisle. A minimum of a four-foot wide landing at the back of the access ramp is required. Please revise the plan as required. Maximum slope allowed for the ramp is 1:12. 5. Based on the two proposed uses and the parking requirements for each use a total of ten vehicle parking spaces are required of which one must be a handicapped parking space. The handicapped parking space must be reserved as a van accessible space, which requires an eight-foot wide access aisle. Please revise the plan as required. In addition, the loading was to be relocated to allow for placement of two vehicle-parking spaces or a minimum of one additional parking space to comply with the parking requirements. It may be necessary to add two parking spaces as a result of the requirement for an eight-foot access aisle for the van accessible parking space which if added may encroach into the turning radius for the refuse truck and tractor-trailer. See redlines. Again please address all comments and see redlines related to zoning comments. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call David Rivera, (520) 791-5608. RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and landscape plan and requested documents |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/02/2004 | CINDY AGUILAR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 09/02/2004 | ANGIE SHOFFSTALL | REJECT SHELF | Completed |