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: DP13-0110
Parcel: 13824022G

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP13-0110
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
06/19/2013 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
06/20/2013 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DATE: June 20, 2013
SUBJECT: USA Pawn & Jewelry Co. Development Plan Package- Engineering Review
TO: Bramic Design Group PLLC; Attn: Gene Goldstein, RA
LOCATION: 1895 W Valencia Rd; T15S R13E Sec15
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: DP13-0110

SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan Package at this time. This review falls under the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administration Manual (AM) and Technical Standards Manual (TSM). Refer to the links for further clarification:
http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/files/planning/UDC_ADOPTED_100912.pdf; http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/files/planning/Technical_Manual_ADOPTED_100912.pdf; http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/files/planning/Admin_Manual_ADOPTED_100912.pdf

The following items need to be addressed:

SITE PLAN: Due to the full code expansion requirement per the Zoning Section make sure that all dimensions, details, sections, keynotes, proposed improvements and all other aspects of this project meet the minimum requirements within the UDC, AM and TSM and are reflected on the development plan sheets.

1) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: The relevant Development Plan Package case number (DP13-0110) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets.

2) AM Sec.2-06.4.4.C: Revise the development plan document to correctly label the Township, Range and Sec along with the Section corners on the location map. Per the Title Block the correct legal description is T15 Range 13 Section 15.

3) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.B.2.a: Revise the development plan document to include the flowing note; "This project is affected by the City of Tucson Floodplain Regulations."

4) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.B.2.b: Revise the development plan document to include the flowing note; "A Floodplain Use Permit and Finished Floor Elevation Certificates are required for the new addition."

5) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Revise the development plan document to correctly dimension the Far Side SVT for the driveway entrance at Valencia Road. The far side dimension for a roadway with a median is 20'x30', revise.

6) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the development plan document to dimension the minimum vertical height clearance at the existing fascia that extends over the sidewalk and vehicular use area. Since the fascia extends over the parking spaces it must meet the minimum 15-foot height requirement per UDC 7.4.6.E.2.

7) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.L: Revise the development plan document to include the easement abandonment or relocation with SEQ # for the Water Facilities Easement per DKT9978/1420. All easements that are to be abandoned should not be shown on the development plan document since they should already be recorded and no longer exists, label the new easement location in plan view.

8) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N: Revise the development plan document to label the minimum finish floor elevation (FFE) in plan view. The FFE must match the FFE called out on the approved development plan due to floodplain restrictions. The approved development plan for Valencia Crossroads shows a FFE of 2475' NAVD88, 2 Elevation Certificates will be required.

9) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.2: Revise the development plan document and Keynote #20 to clearly label that the new water harvesting areas are to be depressed a minimum 6-inches.

10) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan document and associated Keynotes to reference the PC/COT Standard Detail #200 for Public Improvement for all proposed concrete sidewalks, or provide a separate detail for construction purposes.

11) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan document to label and dimension all new sidewalk width dimensions. Verify the minimum widths adjacent to parking spaces and the access road.

12) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the development plan document to include the required pedestrian circulation path that must connect the development to the proposed refuse enclosure per TSM Sec.7-01.3.3.B.

13) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Verify on the development plan document the minimum slope at the existing handicap access ramp. Verify that all onsite ANSI requirements are met due to the full code expansion. Label the curbing adjacent to the ramp to verify separation.

14) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Refer to comments from Ron Brown, RA Structural Plans Examiner for all handicap accessibility comments that may be associated with this project.

15) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Revise the development plan document to provide a construction detail for the refuse enclosures. The detail must match TSM Sec.8-01 and Figures 2 and 3b for the required enclosure walls with gates, concrete thickness and compressive strength, screen wall detail, bollard locations, etc.

16) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Verify on the development plan document the minimum access width for the PAAL adjacent to the refuse container location. A minimum 24-foot clear is required for the PAAL when the refuse doors are in the open position.

DRAINAGE STATEMENT:

17) Provide a Drainage Statement that addresses the proposed reconstructed vehicular use area and the proposed addition located within the mapped, regulatory, Shaded X 100-year floodplain as delineated on the FIRM Panel 04019C2270L.


GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised Development Plan Package and Drainage Statement that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments.

For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929.



Jason Green, CFM
Senior Engineer Associate
Engineering Division
Planning & Development Services Department
06/25/2013 KEN BROUILLETTE FIRE REVIEW Approved
07/01/2013 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied Revise the site drawing to include the first floor elevation for the building and the proposed new location of the water meter. Reference: City of Tucson Administrative Manual No. 2-06.0.0, Section 4.8 and Section 107.2.13, IBC 2012.
07/02/2013 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change 1. Provide previous approved landscape plan for reference AM 2-10.4.0.2.A.d.e.

2. Provide acceptable documentation, which clearly indicates that the project will not impact Protected Native Plants. Such documentation includes photographs of the site taken from all sides of the property. Photographs of the site are necessary for NPPO approval per. It appears from aerial photograph onsite trees are not indicated on landscape plans submitted.

3. In situations where the street landscape border is wider than the minimum ten foot standard, the landscape border width needs to be determined for the purposes of calculating the 50% vegetative coverage standard. The width is that area between the required screen and the property line, unless there is permitted encroachment into the right-of-way as per this section. TS 5-01 4.3. The width of landscape border is greater then 10'.

4. The landscape plan shall indicate use of all runoff, from individual catch basins around single trees to basins accepting flow from an entire vehicular use area or roof area DS 7.6.6.D.2. Show by detail or spot elevations how landscape areas will accommodate water harvesting

5. Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed .

6. Additional comments may apply
07/03/2013 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Reqs Change Provide acceptable documentation, which clearly indicates that the project will not impact Protected Native Plants. Such documentation includes photographs of the site taken from all sides of the property. Photographs of the site are necessary for NPPO approval per. It appears from aerial photograph onsite trees are not indicated on landscape plans submitted.
07/03/2013 RONALD BROWN H/C SITE REVIEW Denied 1. Confirm that all new concrete sidewalks (Accessible Routes) comply with the slope requirements of ICC A117.1, Section 403.3; 5% maximum running slope and 2% maximum cross slopes.
2. Provide a large scale detail of the accessible parking plan and include all accessible requirements such as dimensions, grade slopes, ramps and ramp slopes, markings, aisles, signage, access to building accessible entries and etc.
3. Provide a large scale accessible parking signage detail.
4. Show location of accessible parking signage on site plan and large scale details.
5. Verify with COT DOT that the accessible route connection at Valencia to a possible sloping ramp at the driveway is acceptable.
6. Verify the requirement with Zoning for an accessible route extension and connection to the Headly Street pedestrian way.
END OF REVIEW
07/08/2013 TERRY STEVENS ZONING REVIEW Denied DSD TRANSMITTAL

FROM: Terry Stevens
Lead Planner

PROJECT: DP13-0110
1895 W. Valencia
Development Package

TRANSMITTAL DATE: 07/15/2012

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. AM 2-06.4.3 This project has been assigned case number DP13-0110. Place this number near the lower right corner of all sheets.

2. AM Sec.2-06.4.4.C: Revise the development plan document to correctly label the Township, Range and Sec along with the Section corners on the location map. Per the Title Block the correct legal description is T15 Range 13

3. AM 2-06.4.7.A.8.b Building coverage percentage is not required. Remove from plans.

4. AM Sec.2-06.4.9.L: Revise the development plan document to include the easement abandonment or relocation with SEQ # for the Water Facilities Easement per DKT9978/1420. All easements that are to be abandoned should not be shown on the development plan document since they should already be recorded and no longer exists, label the new easement location in plan view.

5. AM 2-06.4.7.A.1 The existing zoning of this property is C-2 not C-1 as indicated in the notes. Revise.

6. AM 2-06.4.9.H.5.a Provide a dimensioned detail of a standard and handicap parking spaces.

Clearly indicate the location of required wheel stops on the plan and details to prevent the overhanging of the sidewalks and blocking pedestrian circulation path.

7. AM 2-06.4.9.H.5.d The detail 1 on sheet 1 of 4 for the short term bicycle parking spaces are incorrect. The minimum bicycle parking space per UDC Sec.7.4.9.B.2.f each required short-term bicycle parking space must be at least two feet by six feet.

Per USC Sec. 7.4.9.C.2.d Where buildings have more than one public entrance or a site has more than one building, short-term bicycle parking must be distributed so that at least one short-term bicycle parking space is within 50 feet of each public entrance. Revise plans to comply with the locational requirements.

Per UDC Sec. 7.4.9.B.2.h Requires a 5' access aisle for both long term and short term bicycle parking spaces, clearly indicate on plans

8. AM 2-06.4.9.J If street dedication is not required or proposed and the project site is adjacent to a Major Street or Route, draw the Major Street right-of-way lines for those
streets. (Add the MS&R future sidewalk, right-of-way lines, sight visibility triangles, etc.)

9. AM 2-06.4.9.Q. The square footage shown on the building footprints does not match to the square footage indicated in the calculations. Revise.

Provide foot print dimensions on the plan for the new addition.

10. AM 2-06.4.9.R See Technical Standards Sec. 7-01.4.1.A and comply. At least one (1) sidewalk is required to a project from each street on which the project has frontage. Missing along the south side of the proposed addition.

Pedestrian circulation from the handicap access aisles to the handicap ramp cannot extend out into a PAAL or vehicle use area. Revise.

Per Technical Standards 7-01.3.3.b a pedestrian circulation path must connect to the trash enclosure.

Per TM Sec. 4.3.A Clearly indicate the width of all sidewalks. Minimum width 4'. Missing along the north side of the property.

Clearly indicate that the pedestrian circulation path (sidewalk) along the south side of the building is physically separated from the vehicle use area.


If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Terry Stevens, (520) 837-4961

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
07/19/2013 CPIERCE1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
07/19/2013 CPIERCE1 REJECT SHELF Completed