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: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Permit Number - T06CM02391
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/07/2007 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/07/2007 | TERRY STEVENS | ZONING HC SITE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 08/13/2007 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: August 13, 2007 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T06CM02391 PROJECT NAME: Tucson: New Building PROJECT ADDRESS: 1375 West Glenn 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. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: SITE PLAN, DRAINAGE REPORT 1. Revise the near side SVT at the south entrance/exit drive to provide the length of the SVT to be located along the curb line. DS 2-02.2.1.A10. 2. Once calculated provide in a general note the water surface elevation, the required finish floor elevation (FFE) and the datum. DS 2-02.2.1.A.15. The above comment is from the first review. Given that a floodplain analysis was not conducted the reference water surface elevation could change. Revise general note14 to reflect the water surface elevation for the City of Tucson floodplain. See drainage report comments for additional comments. Fourth request. 3. After researching the City of Tucson Transportation Map Site the referenced datum for the baiss of elevation is not correct. The following web site address shows the datum at NAVD 1988. http://tdotmaps.transview.org/DigiApps/NAVD88/TiffList2.cfm?BK=1989B1&PG=8&LineID=169 Revise the plan accordingly. Please be aware the datum used for the WSE and the FFE should be the same as referenced on the plan, otherwise a conversion will need to be provided on the plan. DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS 1. Provide on the pre and post development site plans all points of drainage concentration for a 100 year event. Be advised this information will also need to be on the site plan. Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management 2.3.1.3.A and B 2.b. The above comment is from the previous review and the provide point of concentration could change based on the fact a floodplain analysis has not been provided. Once the analysis has been provided and if the Q changes revise the site plan and drainage report accordingly. 2. This project is not a mapped FEMA floodplain but the parcel lies within a City of Tucson (COT) Regulatory Flood Hazard Area. Areas with a 100-year discharge of 100 cfs or more are designated as a City of Tucson Regulatory Flood Hazard Area. The City of Tucson Floodplain Ordinance requires all structures located within a designated flood hazard area (FEMA or COT) is required to elevate one foot above the 100-year water surface elevation (WSE). Provide a floodplain analysis for the existing and future floodplain conditions for the proposed development. In the analysis provide the WSE for the 100 year event, the FFE and the datum. Refer to the Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management 2.3.1.4., for additional report format, content and requirements. Fourth request. |
| 08/20/2007 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Revise Landscape Border and Screening Schedule per DS 2-07.0. to indicate that existing site meets current minimum requirements. 2. Canopy trees are to be provided in an average of one (1) per thirty-three (33) feet, within the required 10' street landscape borders. Buffer area is to be located on site and measured from the street property line. Place required trees accordingly within existing landscape border along Glenn St. 3. There are situations where the LUC allows up to five (5) feet of the required 10 feet of landscaping to be located within the right-of-way. The required landscaping may be located within the right-of-way only if there are no utilities within the same area, the required landscaping area is extended only to the back of sidewalk, and the City Engineer's Office approves such use in the right-of-way. 4. 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. 5. Canopy trees planted within and adjacent to vehicular use areas should be planted in a manner, which will afford the greatest amount of shade to the paved areas. Canopy trees adjacent to the vehicular use area may count toward meeting this requirement, provided the trees meet the criteria listed in DS 2-06.3.3.A. 6. A 30" continuous screen along street frontages for vehicle use area must be provided per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. The screening requirement is in addition to the landscape requirements. Vegetative screens can encroach three (3) feet into the street landscape border. Identify the location of screening element along Flowing Wells Rd. 7. Submit NPP plan per DS 2-15.3.0 with appropriate mitigation methodology. |
| 08/20/2007 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit NPP plan per DS 2-15.3.0 with appropriate mitigation methodology. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/06/2007 | VFLORES1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 09/06/2007 | VFLORES1 | REJECT SHELF | Completed |