Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Review Detail

Permit Number: T06CM00365
Parcel: Unknown

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE

Permit Number - T06CM00365
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
01/26/2006 SUZANNE BOHNET ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied To: Doyle Beckham
DATE: February 3, 2006
FROM: Suzanne Bohnet
Engineering Division

SUBJECT: 301 E. Ft. Lowell Rd.
Storage Addition
Site plan T06CM00365 (First Review)
T13S, R13E, Section 25

RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: Site Plan, Drainage Report.

The Site Plan (SP) and Drainage Report (DR) cannot be approved as submitted. Please address the following review comments prior to the next submittal. The Floodplain Use Permit is approved.

Site Plan:
1. Please include a response letter to the comments along with the corrected copies of the SP.
2. Provide a note describing the lot bearings, the bench mark(s) used and the vertical datum used for all elevations on the site plan. If the City of Tucson Datum is used, please include the City Field Book and page number.

Drainage Report:
1. Please correct the error on page 5 for the finished floor elevation (FFE) requirement (bolded). It should read 2342.42' NGVD '29 datum, not 2341.42' NAVD '29 datum.
2. Please provide a statement addressing the effect on drainage due to proposed estimated fill.

Additionally, the amount of fill called out on the SP requires a Grading Plan (GP) and Grading Permit. With your SP resubmittal, please include the corrected drainage report, a GP and the application for a Grading Permit. The SP can serve as the GP. Change the title block to read "Site/Grading Plan" and include existing spot grades to ensure positive drainage and that no nuisance ponding will result offsite. Include drainage flow arrows and show the limits of grading.

If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 x1188



Suzanne Bohnet, Engineer Associate
City of Tucson / Development Services Department
201 N. Stone Avenue / P.O. Box 27210
Tucson, Arizona 85726-7210
(520) 791-5550 x1188 office
(520) 879-8010 fax
02/07/2006 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Denied 1. Landscaping requirements apply to expansion of existing development as follows:

· On sites where the gross floor area of the existing building(s) is more than ten thousand (10,000) square feet, expansion in square footage of land area, floor area, lot coverage, or vehicular use area as follows:

· If the expansion is 25% or greater or if expansions as of February 15, 1991 cumulatively result in a 25% or greater expansion in land area, floor area, lot coverage, or vehicular use area, the requirements of this Division apply to the entire site per LUC 3.7.1.2.B.

2. Submit a separate landscape plan to verify that the entire site meets minimum requirements per DS 2-07.0

3. Street landscape borders are required, a street landscape border, per LUC 3.7.2.4 is a landscape area with a minimum width of ten (10) feet, running the full length of the street property line(s) bounding the site except for points of ingress-egress. Dimension landscape borders accordingly.

4. Fifty (50) percent or more of the street landscape border area must have shrubs and vegetative ground cover per LUC 3.7.2.4

5. Interior landscape borders are required along site boundaries of the adjacent residential properties per LUC 3.7.2-I.

6. One (1) canopy tree must be provided for every thirty-three (33) linear feet of landscape border(s) per LUC 3.7.2.4.

7. Indicate square footage of all landscaped areas and calculation of the percentage of vegetative coverage per DS 2-07.2.2.2.g

8. The planting plan and layout calculations will include the following Information:

· Both the proper and common name of each type of plant material must be listed.
· Locations, size, and name of all existing vegetation to remain in place.
· All disturbed areas including adjacent right of ways shall be treated with ground cover such as decomposed granite to help reduce dust pollution per LUC 3.7.2.7. Indicate treatment for landscaped areas.

9. A 30" continuous screen along street frontages for vehicle use area must be provided per LUC Table 3.7.2-I

10. Within a vehicular use area, 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

11. Landscape plan shall include irrigation specification design and layout per DS 2-06.5.4.A & DS 2-06.5.4.B including source of irrigation, sleeves for driveways and sidewalks, locations of valves, low-flow bubblers or drip irrigation.

12. Submit NPPO plan or Application for Exception per DS 2-15.2.0.C

13. Additional comments may apply.
02/07/2006 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Denied Submit NPPO plan or Application for Exception per DS 2-15.2.0.C
03/06/2006 DAVID RIVERA ZONING REVIEW Denied TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Heather Thrall
Senior Planner

PROJECT: T06CM00365
301 E. Fort Lowell Road
Lot combination, new storage building
Site plan

TRANSMITTAL DATE: March 15, 2006

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. This plan was reviewed in accordance with requirements of the Land Use Code (LUC), Development Standard (DS), American National Standards Institute (ANSI), and the International Building Code 2003 (IBC).

This plan is subject to full code compliance regulations, as the site has a lot area addition greater than 25% of the size of the original site. This plan was reviewed for full code compliance.

2. This property consists of parcels that have been combined, and split off from adjacent parcels. Please provide the lot split/combination information for the new lot configuration, reviewed and approved by the city. Should this process not have been done via the city, the process must be done for each adjacent affected property.

3. Per DS 2-02.2.1.5, provide lot dimensions and bearings for total length of north property line and dimensions/curve data of future property line along Fort Lowell.

4. Per DS 2-02.1.6, and for record keeping, please provide building setbacks from:
A) For both buildings - the greater of 21' or height of exterior building wall from nearest edge of travel lane off Fontana to building wall/post - not roof overhang (for setback purposes only, Fontana is a Major Streets and Routes as Fontana intersects with Fort Lowell).
B) For existing building, the greater of 21' or height of exterior building wall from back of future curb off Fort Lowell - to building wall/post - not roof overhang.
C) For existing building to north property line
D) For proposed building to new east property line
E) Dimension distance between buildings

5. Per DS 2-02.2.1.8, staff acknowledges the number of parking spaces required is 44, please provide the actual parking calculation on the plan (1 space per 250 GFA).

The parallel parking spaces proposed at the west side of the site will greatly impede traffic circulation by limiting the minimum PAAL width substantially. These parking spaces must be removed. THIS PARKING AREA IN GENERAL DOES NOT APPEAR TO MEET FUTURE CODE REQUIREMENTS WITH THE TAKING OF THE RIGHT OF WAY.

The parking along the front along Fort Lowell will not meet standards once Fort Lowell Road is widened. A SEPARATE SITE PLAN SHOWING COMPLIANCE WITH THE FUTURE RIGHT OFWAY IS REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED. Review Section 2.8.3 of the LUC for further details.

6. Per ANSI - handicapped parking accessibility must be provided for two parking spaces on the site, one must be van accessible. The accessible aisle adjacent to the handicapped parking space at the north side of the site is not wide enough for either a regular handicapped or van accessible space. A van accessible access aisle is 8 feet wide at minimum. Please revise the drawing, identifying the van accessible space - be sure to provide the van accessible sign as well.

7. Provide back up spur at east side of site, along Fort Lowell Road parking lot area - adjacent to handicapped access aisle - and at north side of site in new parking area at east lot line. Review DS 3-05 standards.

8. The bicycle parking area should be located to ensure vehicle access areas - and parking spaces/access do not conflict the pedestrian access area around the racks. Review and revise to DS 2-09.

9. The minimum PAAL width is 24 feet, which does not appear to be able to be met with the widening of the future right of way along Fort Lowell Road. Provide a clear understanding of how this site will maintain code approved vehicle access upon the widening of Fort Lowell.

In addition, note PAAL width at north side of site, meeting standards.

SEE COMMENT 5.

10.Per DS 2-02.2.1.12, and Per 2-08, provide sidewalks from both streets connecting to the building on the site.

Provide handicapped ramps with truncated domes (early warning systems) at all ramps where transitioning from pedestrian to/across vehicular use areas. Show ramps on detail drawings to meet ANSI standards. Truncated domes in Chapter 7 of ANSI. Curbing should be provided adjacent to the revised handicapped access aisle at the north side of the site, or the handicapped access aisle should be relocated.

With reference to sidewalk along building under the roof area, ensure any pillars are shown that support the roof --and allow pedestrian access 4 feet wide unimpeded.

11. Provide information on the proposed parking lot lighting - with heights, dimensions - specifications.

12. Per DS 2-02.2.1.14, and LUC 3.4.5.3, show two loading zones at 12 x 35.

13. Per DS 2-05.2.1.20, show all easements, type and recordation information.

14. Per DS 2-02.2.1.32, dimension area between dumpster wall and parking space, and width of parking space adjacent. Width of parking space next to vertical object over 6" must be 10 feet wide to allow vehicle access.

15. As full code compliance is required, the prior LDO granted for the 8' tall wall erected at the north property line must be renewed under a new application, and approved. Once all zoning comments are addressed, the new LDO (now called a DDO for Design Development Option) may proceed with official staff referral in writing.

16. Per DS 2-02.2.2.A.1, revise net lot area to show lot area after buildings erected, and gross lot area broken down to show the square footages of each lot area added to the overall project.

17. The monument signs shown appear to be in the right of way, and need to be relocated.

18. Show compliance with landscaping requirements along both street borders, and see landscaping review for further advisement on landscaping requirements.

19. The proposed building is shown at a 0 setback, which abutting an R-3 zone is not permitted. The required minimum setback from the north property line is equal to 1.5 times the height of the proposed exterior building wall. Staff acknowledges the attached letter to the submittal from the adjacent property owner expressing permission for the shown setback, however, a DDO is required to reduce the building setback of a primary structure on a commercial property. At this review, this structure is not considered to be an accessory structure. Until a written determination from the Zoning Administrator allowing the adjacent property owner's approval for a reduced setback is granted, a DDO must be obtained for the proposed setback reduction.

20. Depending upon the responses provided, further review comments may be forthcoming. Should you have any questions on this review, please contact me at heather.thrall@tucsonaz.gov or at 520-791-4541x1156.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call (520) 791-5608.

HCT C:\planning\site\DSD\T06CM00365 301 e fort lowell.doc

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised site plan and additional requested documents
03/15/2006 HEATHER THRALL ZONING HC SITE REVIEW Denied see zoning review comments please

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
03/22/2006 AKLAPPE1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
03/22/2006 SUE REEVES REJECT SHELF Completed