Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE
Permit Number - T05CM00598
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/14/2005 | JIM EGAN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 02/26/2005 | DAN CASTRO | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | Correct handicap parking fine on sign detail to $518. |
| 02/26/2005 | DAN 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. The subject property is incorrectly labeled in the location map. In addition, correct township, range, and section. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.4) 2. Provide copy of recorded cross access agreement. 3. Per LUC Sec. 3.3.5.1, the calculation for a mixed use development does not apply to Administrative and Professional Office. If vehicle parking is to be removed on subject property and the vehicle parking is required for the adjacent office development, the office development may not be able to lose any of their required parking. Demonstrate through a site plan, how the parking requirements for the adjacent office building will remain in compliance with the proposed removal of said parking on subject property. Additional comments regarding the relocation of required vehicle parking may be forthcoming depending on where the existing office parking is relocated. 4. Correct fine on handicap parking sign is $518. 5. Provide dimensions at the following locations: between bicycle parking space and vehicle parking space in front of building 1; closest point of along west side of building 1 and the PAAL; between loading space and back of building 1; between closest point along east building wall and the PAAL. Refer to redlines on site plan. 6. If applicable, provide the location, type, size, and height of existing and proposed free standing signage and outdoor lighting on the site plan. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.13) (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.25) 7. 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 ext. 1180. An appointment is required to discuss these comments in person. |
| 03/02/2005 | PAUL MACHADO | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | To: Bruce Patton DATE: March 3, 2005 Rick Engineering Co. 1745 E. River Rosd Tucson, Arizona 85718 SUBJECT: 6420 E.Grant Road Site plan T05CM00598 (First Review) T14S, R15E, Section 6 RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Site Plan and Drainage Report. The Site Plan (SP) and Drainage Report (DR) cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal. Site Plan: 1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the SP. 2. Please provide property description per D.S. 2-02.2.1.3. The description at the lower right of each page should reference the record of survey. Also reference all Book 22, Page 9 call out with "Record of Survey". 3. The information on the Location map incorrect. Revise as required. 4. Label each page as to what it represents ie: Site plan, Grading plan, Paving plan or include a sheet index. 5. Label existing and future sight visibility triangles per D.S. 2-02.2.1.10. The SVT's are not drawn correctly. Stem side is 20', not 25'. Also show the SVT's for the west ingress/egress as well. 6. Please show dimensioned right-of-way, including any applicable Major Streets and Routes (MS&R) Plan right-of-way per D.S. 2-02.2.1.19. Call out the future and existing dimensions. 7. Bench Mark based on City of Tucson Datum, including City Field Book and page number per D.S. 2-02.2.1.23. Call out the Datum in the bench mark description, i.e: NAVD 88. 8. Show Site plan (T05CM00598) number on all sheets per D.S. 2-02.2.1.29. 9. A permit or a private improvement agreement will be necessary for any work performed within the Right-of-way. Contact Permits and Codes at (520) 791-5100 for permit information. 10. Please show the proposed roof drainage patterns, 100% of the 10-year flow must be conveyed under the sidewalks including any other site drainage as well. Please provide supporting calculations to demonstrate compliance with D.S. 3-01.4.4. If the location(s) of the roof scuppers have not yet been decided, a general note indicating sidewalk scuppers will be used when the roof scuppers locations have been designed and located will suffice. Edit Site plan note no. 6 to include any other drainage crossing the sidewalks will use scuppers. 11. Security barriers are required around the perimeter of the entire retention basin. 12. It is not clear where the basin discharge/weir is located. 13. Will the rip-rap at the outlet weir be constructed as drawn? 14. Provide a maintenance ramp for the retention basin. Drainage Report: 1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the HR. 2. The DR was reviewed for Site Plan purposes only. Final acceptance will be done along with the Grading plan. 3. Grade basin to drain. 4. Security barriers are required around the perimeter of the entire retention basin. 5. As mentioned in the DR, percolation test and results are required prior to the issuance of permits. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 x1193 or Paul.Machado@tucsonaz.gov Paul P. Machado Senior Engineering Associate City of Tucson/Development Services Department 201 N. Stone Avenue P.O. Box 27210 Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210 (520) 791-5550 x1193 office (520) 879-8010 fax C:/6420 E.Grant Rd Site |
| 03/04/2005 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. The planting plan and layout calculations will include the following Information: · Both the proper and common name of each type of plant material. · Locations on site, size, and name of existing vegetation to remain in place. 2. Within a vehicular use area, 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 3. All disturbed areas including area between sidewalk and curb shall be treated with ground cover such as decomposed granite to help reduce dust pollution per LUC 3.7.2.7 Revise note regarding decomposed granite as necessary. 4. A twenty-five 25' minimum height clearance, free of any overhead obstructions (wires, branches, and trees etc.), shall be provided above the collection site per DS 6-01.4.3.G relocate Acacia Stenophylla as necessary. 5. Landscape plan indicates 30" screen wall the grading plan identifies a 42" wall. Revise the landscape plan to include the correct wall height. 6. Structures such as retaining walls are acceptable for up to 35% of basin perimeter per DS 10-01.4.3.1 page 79. Retention wall exceeds requirements revise design as necessary. 7. Basin shall conform to the following slope to depth ratios 3ft. deep or greater maximum 4:1 slope per DS 10-01.4.3.1 page 78. Portions of the basin do not meet standards. 8. Submit NPPO plan or Application for Exception per DS 2-15.0 |
| 03/07/2005 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit NPPO plan or Application for Exception per DS 2-15.0 |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 03/09/2005 | TAMI ACHONG | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 03/09/2005 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |