Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Permit Number - T05CM04276
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/01/2006 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 03/02/2006 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: February 27, 2006 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T05CM04276 PROJECT NAME: Material Storage PROJECT ADDRESS: 1315 E. Miracle Mile 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, DRAINAGE REPORT 1. Show the recordation (Book and Page) information for Miracle Mile. It is acknowledged that the parcel (tax code number) has been provided. However the requested information was the recordation (Book and Page) information for Miracle Mile. Show this information on the site plan. 2. Dimensions from street centerline to the existing curb, sidewalk, and utility lines. (See above comment 6). Label dimensions accordingly. This comment has not been addressed from the first review. Provide the requested dimensions from street centerline. DS 2-01.2.1.A.21. 3. A minimum of a 25' curb return is required on all driveway/PAALs to an arterial road. Show and label on the plan a 25' curb return for the driveway located along Miracle Mile. TAMG Table 5-2. 4. Show more spot elevations as pertinent and give Bench Mark based on City of Tucson Datum, including City Field Book and page number. DS 2-02.2.1.A.23. The above comment is from the first review and has not been addressed completely. It is acknowledged the Bench Mark based on City of Tucson Datum, including City Field Book and page number has been added to sheet C1-1. However spot elevations have not been added. It is acknowledged more finish grades have been added to the site plan, which is helpful to determine the direction of drainage after the site has been paved. Per SMDDFM 12.5. Stormwater must be accepted and released from developments essentially at the same locations, and with the same magnitudes, as encountered under natural or existing conditions. Showing existing grades (spot elevations) on the site plan helps determine if the direction of drainage is being changed. Provide spot elevation (existing grades). DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS 1. The existing and developed runoff coefficients (0.60 existing and 0.92 developed) used for calculating the 100-yr peak discharge (Q100) are different then the coefficients used (0.32 existing and 0.711 developed) for calculating the retention volume. Provide an explanation on why the same coefficients have not been used when calculating the retention volume or revise the drainage report to use the same coefficients. Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual Section 3.2.2. |
| 03/07/2006 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | Upon inspection this site does contain protected native species per LUC 3.8.5. Revise Application for Exception to indicate that protected plants will not be impacted and include locations of the preserve in place trees on the landscape plan or submit NPPO plan with appropriate mitigation. |
| 03/09/2006 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Upon inspection this site does contain protected native species per LUC 3.8.5. Revise Application for Exception to indicate that protected plants will not be impacted and include locations of the preserve in place trees on the landscape plan or submit NPPO plan with appropriate mitigation. |
| 04/21/2006 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Terry Stevens FOR: David Rivera Senior Planner Principal Planner PROJECT:T05CM04276 1315 W. Miracle Mile Commercial Storage Site Plan Transmittal date:2nd Review 4/21/06 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. Per LUC Sec. 3.3.7.3 The indicated storage areas are considered vehicular use areas and must be surfaced with asphalt (not asphalt millings) or concrete. If these areas are to used only by forklifts or similar equipment and not vehicular use, the asphalt or concrete is not required. Asphalt millings may be used for dust control only. 2. Per DS 3-05.2.3.C.1 The vehicular use areas (the four loading areas indicated) require post barricades or wheel stop curbing to prevent vehicles from driving on unimproved portions of the site. 3. Per DS 2-02.2.1.12 Access ramps at crosswalks connecting to sidewalks must be provided. In addition Truncated Dome (early warning systems) must be added to all access ramps where transitioning from the pedestrian area to the vehicular use area or at HC access aisles transitioning to the sidewalk area. 4. At the sidewalk area (in the right of way) for the vehicular ingress/egress for the site, handicap ramps, crosswalk, and radius curbs are required. See engineering comments. 5. The above comments are minor in nature and for zoning purposes can be completed over the counter once landscape and engineering have approved the site plan. If you would contact me for an appointment I would be willing to complete the review over the counter. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 791-5550 ext. 2000. |
| 04/21/2006 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Denied | see zoning comments |