Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - SITE
Permit Number - T04CM01286
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/13/2005 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/13/2005 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/16/2005 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: June 15th, 2005 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T04CM01286 PROJECT NAME: Bitar Fouad PROJECT ADDRESS: 402 East Prince 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 dimensions for Prince Road, centerline, curbs, sidewalk do not scale to the shown length. The 36' dimension for the existing ROW has a break in the line. Is the intent to have breaks in the other lines? Or is the intent to have the dimensioned lines scale to the shown length? If that is the case, the landscape border is located within the ROW. Revise and explain response in DETAIL in a response letter. DS 2-02.2.1.A.21. 2. Due to the above comment the following comment still applies. It can not be determined if the SVT's are located in the correct place. It is still difficult to see the depicted SVTs on the site plan. A site plan should be legible and able to be microfilmed and legible afterward. Revise the SVTs to have a bolder dashed line. DS 2-02. 3. There is a conflict with maneuverability to the loading area. A loading truck can not safely access the loading area without a conflict with the solid waste enclosure. Relocate the loading area to avoid problems with maneuverability. DS 2-02.2.1.A.14. 4. Demonstrate 25' curb return radius for the ingress/egress off of Prince Road and an 18' curb return radius for the ingress/egress on Geronimo Ave. TAMG5.5 5. Add sidewalk to the area where the curb cut will be closed off of Prince Road. The sidewalk along Prince is required to be 6'. Is the existing sidewalk 6'? The plan is not clear. Keynote 2 states "Existing 6" vertical curb and 4' sidewalk." Is the 4' sidewalk existing or proposed? All new development requires a 6' sidewalk along an MS&R Road (Prince Ed.). |
| 06/21/2005 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. One (1) canopy tree must be provided for every thirty-three (33) linear feet of landscape border per LUC 3.7.2.4. Additional trees are required within the street landscape border. 2. Within vehicular use areas, one (1) canopy tree is required for each 10 motor vehicle parking spaces and every parking space shall be located within forty (40) feet of the trunk of a canopy tree (as measured from the center of the tree trunk) per LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.a. Additional trees are required. 3. Note: In areas where a required landscape border falls within the vehicular use area, up to 50% of the canopy trees may be counted towards both the minimum parking lot canopy tree requirement and the landscape border canopy tree requirement 4. Provide a 6' wall to screen loading zone from Prince Rd. per LUC 3.7.2-I. Clearly identify loading zone on plan. |
| 06/21/2005 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 06/24/2005 | KMEDINA1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |