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 - T04OT02177
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/03/2004 | Jim Egan | FIRE | REVIEW | Denied | Fire hydrants) required. Submit approved COT Water Plan. |
| 11/16/2004 | Daniel Castro | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 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. Parking count for both phases as shown on the site plan totals 203 spaces provided and the vehicle parking calculation indicates a total of 206 spaces to be provided. Re-check parking count for overall site and if applicable revise calculation as required. 2. The landscape area pop-outs provided along the south property line appear to interfere with vehicular parking. A vehicle must have a minimum of 15.5 feet (length) of unobstructed area plus a minimum of 2 ½ feet for overhang. Assure compliance with the aforementioned dimensions graphically. 3. Provide directional signage for the bicycle parking locations in compliance with D.S. 2-09.5.1. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.9) 4. Dimension the width of all PAAL's. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.11) 5. The pedestrian path in Phase II must connect with the pedestrian circulation path in Phase I to provide a continuous on-site pedestrian circulation system for the overall site. Within this path an accessible route is also required. The accessible route must connect all areas of the development and the pedestrian circulation path located in any adjacent streets. This accessible route may be identical to the pedestrian circulation path. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12) (D.S. 2-08.3.1) 6. If applicable, provide a detail of any existing and/or proposed free-standing signage/billboard and outdoor lighting on the site plan. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.13) (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.25) 7. If applicable, all existing and 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) 8. The zoning classification north of the subject property on sheet 1 of 3 is labeled incorrectly as C-1 zoning. The correct zoning shall be revised to MH-1. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.28) 9. For each existing and proposed land use classification listed under general note two (2) please add the applicable "subject to" LUC Sections. The "subject to" sections may be found under LUC Sections 2.5.3.2. for C-1 zoning and LUC Section 2.5.4.2 for C-2 zoned uses. This information is necessary to inform a potential tenant or property owner of any restrictions or additional requirements for the land use. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.31) 10. 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 ext. 1180. An appointment is required to discuss these comments in person. |
| 11/19/2004 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 11/19/2004 | Andrew Connor | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | When the proposed site is part of a larger site, the calculations encompass the entire site, whether existing or proposed per DS 2-07.2.2.B. Include approved landscape plan for Phase 1 with re-submittal. |
| 11/19/2004 | DAN CASTRO | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | The pedestrian path in Phase II must connect with the pedestrian circulation path in Phase I to provide a continuous on-site pedestrian circulation system for the overall site. Within this path an accessible route is also required. The accessible route must connect all areas of the development and the pedestrian circulation path located in any adjacent streets. This accessible route may be identical to the pedestrian circulation path. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12) (D.S. 2-08.3.1) |
| 11/24/2004 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: November 22, 2004 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T04OT02177 PROJECT NAME: Plaza Antigua PROJECT ADDRESS: 4299 North Campbell Avenue 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. Dimension the width of all PAAL's. DS 2-02.2.1.A.11. 2. Vehicular and pedestrian circulation for Phase II must connect with the vehicular and pedestrian circulation for Phase I. Demonstrate a continuous vehicular and pedestrian circulation for the entire site, Phase II and I. DS 2-02.2.1.A.12. 3. Give the estimated cut and fill quantities for Phase II. If cut and fill quantities equal zero, please note on the plan. 50 cubic yards of cut or fill a grading plan is required. It is recommended with the second site plan submittal to submit a grading plan and a green grading application card if quantities are 50 cubic yards or more. DS 2-02.2.1.A.17. 4. Please note that when a grading plan is submitted a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan SWPPP) is required because site disturbance exceeds an acre. 5. It is acknowledged that during Phase I of Plaza Antigua, the County approved a scupper that crosses the Rillito River Park where the stormwater discharges into the Rillito River. The drainage report states on page 6 the scupper will be constructed during phase I. Has the scupper been constructed? Has construction on the scupper started? Please clarify the status of the construction of the scupper. DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS 1. On page 10 of the drainage report in the section, "Erosion Hazard Setback" it states that an erosion hazard setback is not required because the banks of the Rillito River are protected by soil cement. Per Chapter 26, Section 7.1. it states for regional watercourses that are stabilized to the level of baseflood the erosion hazard setback is 50'. On sheet 2 of the site plan an erosion hazard setback of 50' is depicted on the plan. The site plan and the drainage report must match. Page 13 of the report also makes reference that an erosion hazard setback is not required. Revise the drainage report appropriately in the sections that state an erosion hazard setback is not required. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11/29/2004 | CINDY AGUILAR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 11/29/2004 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |