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: SITE
Permit Number - T11CM01957
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/24/2011 | MARTIN BROWN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 06/29/2011 | LEERAY HANLY | H/C SITE | REVIEW | Denied | Following comments are for SP pages: Tactile warning devices required for pedestrian circulation path from public way where sidewalk crosses PAAL. Please dimension widths and depths of curb ramps Please indicate maximum slope and cross slope of curb ramps and accessible parking areas Please detail curb ramp next to store coming from pedestrian path off of Craycroft. PP A1.1 Tactile warning devices at HC parking access aisles (other than those serving as part of a pedestrian circulation path) are not necessary |
| 06/29/2011 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: 5441 E. 22 Street - Parking Re-Strip and Façade Remodel T11CM01957 Site Plan (1st Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 29, 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 changes to the parking area. 2. D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8, Provide a detail for the standard vehicle parking spaces. 3. D.S. 2-02.2.2.A.4 Provide a vehicle parking space calculation that includes the number required and provided. This calculation can be completed one of two ways; 1. Provide a copy of the last approved site plan and use the number of required vehicle parking spaces shown on that plan, or 2. Provide a vehicle parking space calculation based on the current requirements in the Land Use Code (LUC). 4. Sheet SD1.1 as this sheet is the "SITE DEMOLITON PLAN" remove all of the proposed changes to the site from the plan. 5. Once the above comments have been addressed zoning is willing to provide an over-the-counter review. Please call or email to schedule this appointment. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956. C:\planning\site\2011\t11cm01957 RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan. |
| 07/11/2011 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Ensure that all of the keynotes are accurately placed and accurately described. |
| 07/19/2011 | RICK MYERS | PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL | REVIEW | Denied | 1.Revise the site drawing to include the following information: a.the location and size of the water meter b The location of the main water lines and fire hydrants c.The location of the gas meter d.The location and size of the public sanitary sewer and e. the location, invert, and rim elevation of all manholes and cleanouts. Reference: City of Tucson Development Standard No. 2-01.1.0 2 3.8 D and Section 103.2.3, UPC 2006. 2. Revise the site drawing to show the location and size of both the water meter and the reduced pressure backflow preventer assembly. Reference Section 103.2.3, UPC 2006. |
| 07/21/2011 | ANDREW CONNOR | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Submit previously approved landscape plans for reference. If no plan exists then provide the location, size, and name of existing vegetation to remain in place, including both the proper and common name of each type of plant material on the submitted landscape plan plan. 2. Within the vehicle use area an unpaved planting area, which is a minimum of thirty-four (34) square feet in area and four (4) feet in width, must be provided for each canopy tree LUC 3.7.2.3.A.1.c. Dimension or provide detail for planters within parking lot. 3. The site plan and landscape plan must show identical site layout to avoid conflict between the two plans. Ensure that all changes to the site plan are reflected on the landscape plan. 4. Additional comments may apply |
| 07/22/2011 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approved |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/27/2011 | CPIERCE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 07/27/2011 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |