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: REVISION - SITE
Permit Number - T07CM01474
Review Name: REVISION - SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/05/2011 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Veterans Plaza T07CM01474 Site Plan (Revision) TRANSMITTAL DATE: April 5, 2011 COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. 1. This site plan was reviewed for compliance with the City of Tucson Development Standards (D.S.) and Land Use Code (LUC) for full code compliance for the areas of change only. 2. A recorded Major Streets and Routes Covenant is required. Provide a copy of the recorded covenant and provide a note on the site plan stating "MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES COVENANT RECORED UNDER DKT ### & PAGE ##. 3. This comment was not addressed correctly. The zoning for the property east of 6th is R-2.D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.28 Provide the zoning for the parcel(s) located on the east side of 6th. 4. D.S. 2-02.2.2.4 Future Site: Clarify what reduction you are using in the vehicle parking calculation.. 5. D.S. 2-02.2.2.4 Site and Future Site: The bicycle parking calculation is not correct. Per Ordinance #10886 Section 3.3.8.2.B "RETAIL TRADE USE GROUP" two (2) short-term (Class 2) and two (2) long-term (Class 1) are required. long-term on the plan. Provide a detail for the long-term on the plan that meets the requirements of Ordinance #10886 Section 3.3.9.4.B. 6. D.S. 2-02.2.2.4 The short-term bicycle parking shown at the northeast corner of the site does not meet the requirements of Ordinance #10886 Section 3.3.9.3.B.1. Relocate the parking or remove from the plan as only two (2) spaces are required. 7. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.1 Future Site: Clarify how the site square footage can be the same as the site plan after 4000 sq .ft. is removed for MS&R taking. 8. For your information per Ordinance #10884 Section 3.4.5 zero (0) loading spaces are required for this project. 9. Depending on how the above comments are addressed addition comments may be forth coming. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956. C:\planning\site\t07cm01474 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents. |
| 04/11/2011 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | April 14, 2011 T07CM01474/T08BU02004 1. The conclusions of the Hydrologic/Hydraulic Report (JAS Engineering, Jeffrey A Stanley, 4-4-11) are accepted. 2. As we have previously discussed, show how the water harvesting basins will be constructed. Provide dimensions on the sections showing the water harvesting areas. The change in grade and labeled slopes seem to result in the available space being used up by slopes and setbacks. 3. Also provide a section along the length of the water harvesting basins along the street frontage to demonstrate that effective water harvesting will be achieved along the whole length of the basins. 4. The sections are labeled with scale notations of ¾" = 1'. The scale doesn't match the drawings. Please provide correct notations. 5. The section callouts on sheet G-01R don't refer to the correct sheets for the details. Provide correct sheet references. Make sure there are callouts for all provided details and make sure the details reflect what is on the plan view. |
| 04/11/2011 | RONALD BROWN | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Denied | SHEET S-01R 1. At the Northerly marked crossing: a. There is no protection provided to keep cars from backing onto the accessible route. b. Extend the concrete walk, ramp and curbing on the East side of the marked crossing to a point just inside the starting edge of the accessible parking aisle. 2. Delete all the detectable warnings strips at the ramps to the accessible parking aisles. These are not required. 3. The accessible parking signs need to be mounted down the center line of the accessible parking spaces. END OF REVIEW |
| 04/14/2011 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Approved Plans are to be an exhibit to an executed covenant for recordation stating the responsibility of the property owner, successor, or assignee as to the removal of improvements and compliance with the LUC at no cost to the City. Include covenant with next submittal for review LUC 2.8.3.5.F. 2. Ensure that all Zoning & Engineering comments and concerns are addressed prior Landscape approval stamp. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04/20/2011 | DELMA ROBEY | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |