Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: SITE
Permit Number - T05CM02767
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/18/2005 | JIM EGAN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 07/19/2005 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit NPPO plan or application for exception per DS 2-15.0. |
| 07/19/2005 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | A street landscape border is an area running the full length of the street property line bounding the site except for points of ingress-egress per DS 2-07.0. 2. All parking and maneuvering for vehicle use areas must be provided within the site boundaries. The proposed parking configuration on the north property line must be revised so that there is sufficient maneuvering area so that vehicle does not back out into the street per LUC 3.3.7.5 3. A 10' interior landscape border is required along site boundaries of the adjacent residential property to the east per LUC Table 3.7.2-I 4. One (1) canopy tree must be provided for every thirty-three (33) linear feet of interior landscape border per LUC 3.7.2.4 5. Alley access will be provided only where the alleys are constructed in accordance with Development Standard 3-01.0 and with a minimum 20' width. Provisions for alley service are noted in DS 6-01.2.1.B.1. 6. Provide wall sections for all required and proposed walls including heights, and finished grades per DS 2-07.2.2.3. ALL required screening must be provided on the developing property or a joint-use agreement must be provided. Verify if existing wall is located on site or provide appropriate documentation. 7. Submit NPPO plan or application for exception per DS 2-15.0. 8. Additional comments may apply |
| 07/21/2005 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Passed | |
| 07/22/2005 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | See previous comments for first review. |
| 08/24/2005 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: August 24, 2005 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T05CM02767 PROJECT NAME: Studio Addition PROJECT ADDRESS: 1520 East 25th Street 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. THIS IS A FULL CODE COMPLIANCE REVIEW RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: SITE PLAN 1. All lettering and dimensions will be the equivalent of twelve point or greater in size. The purpose of this requirement is to assure that the lettering is legible when reproduced or microfilmed for record keeping purposes. The current font measures to 10 point, it must be at least 12 point or greater in size. Revise all lettering to be at least 12 point. 2. All mapped data will be drawn to an engineering scale no more than 50 feet to one inch. 3. Sidewalks must be flood free for up to the 10-yr. event. Add a note on the plan, "All roof down spouts on all structures must be routed under any adjacent sidewalk." DS 2-08.4.1.E. 4. New projects consisting of 3 or more dwelling units will provide centralized on-site refuse storage, collection and pickup areas. The current proposal is not meeting the requirements of DS 6-01. Contact John Clark from Environmental Services for written approval of the solid waste proposal. Proposals not meeting the requirements of DS 6-01 will require a DSMR. 5. A street or alley may not be used for maneuvering directly into or from any parking space located wholly or partially outside the public right-of-way, except for Residential Care Services with four (4) or fewer spaces provided, single-family residential development, mobile home dwellings, or duplexes on individual lots. With the third structure added to this project maneuverability must be entirely on site. Demonstrate on site vehicle maneuverability for the parking spaces. LUC 3.3.7.5. 6. Maximum curb cut width is 20' in a residentially zoned area. The curb cut off of 25th Street exceeds the maximum curb cut width. Revise the site plan to meet the maximum curb cut width. Chapter 25 Section 28. 7. Dimension all curb cuts (Engineering scale). DS 2-02.2.1.A.11. 8. After the curb cuts are revised, sight visibility triangles are required for the PAAL to 25th Street. Revise to show the required SVTs. Near side length is 185' and the far side length is 110'. 9. Alleys are used for utility placement, the provision of sanitary services and a secondary point of access to property. The current proposal shows the alley is being used for primary access to the third structure. If the alley is to be used for primary access to the third structure written approval from the Department of Transportation is required. Be advised that when an alley is used for primary access that surface treatment is required, asphalt or double shot chip seal. Is the alley paved? If the alley is alley, indicate on the site plan. Contact Dale Kelch from the Department of Transportation for written approval for primary access from the alley to the third structure. 10. Back up spurs are required to have a 3' radius. Indicate on the site plan 3' radii with both back up spurs. DS 3-05.2.2.D. 11. Show finish grades on the site plan. DS 2-02.2.1.A.16. 12. An existing 5' wall is shown within the far side sight visibility triangle (SVT). A proposed building and 5' wall is within the near side SVT. This does not meet code and is a safety hazard. Revise the site plan to meet the requirement of DS 3-01.5. 13. Sidewalks are required within the ROW for all new development. Provide a 5' sidewalk along the entire length of the project. DS 3-01.3.3.A. 14. Indicate spot elevations within the proposed parking areas. DS 2-02.2.1.A.23. 15. Indicate the Bench Mark based on the City of Tucson Datum, include City of Tucson Field Book and page number. DS 2-02.2.1.A.23. 16. Site information must pertain to the actual site. Why is there a note regarding compliance with FEMA regulations when the site is not in a floodplain? Remove any unnecessary information that does not pertain to the proposed development. 17. Do to the amount of comments additional comments could be forth coming. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01/12/2006 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |
| 08/31/2005 | DELMA ROBEY | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |