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.

Inspection History Details

Permit: T04BU02370

Parcel: 14117007C


Addresses:

7511 S HOUGHTON RD


Inspection Status: Approved

Inspection History: GRADING - INTERMEDIATE

Permit Number - T04BU02370

Inspection Description - GRADING - INTERMEDIATE

Inspection Status - Approved

Date Description Inspector Results Comments
04/11/2007 GRADING - INTERMEDIATE Approved
03/30/2007 GRADING - INTERMEDIATE Partial Approval WALKED SITE WITH LOU BOCK AND NEW SUPER BRIAN

RECVD BASIN CERT
-GROUT RIP RAP @ INLET
-DUMPSTERS AND PORTA TOILET NEED TO BE REMOVED
-SWEEP SITE =)~
03/28/2007 GRADING - INTERMEDIATE Partial Approval CURSORY INSPECTION
TALKED TO BILL KOCH ABOUT BASIN CERT REQUIREMENTS AND FINAL GRADING INSPECTION
03/15/2007 GRADING - INTERMEDIATE Partial Approval A ATLAS CLOSE TO BEING READY FOR FINAL GRADING
LANDSCAPE WORK HAS BEEN DONE
BASIN APPEARS TO BE COMPLETE
SITE WORK IS SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLETE
10/19/2006 GRADING - INTERMEDIATE Partial Approval MET ONSITE WITH RON'S CONCRETE AND LOU BOCK ABOUT ON SITE RAMPS AND TRUNCATED DOMES
09/27/2006 GRADING - INTERMEDIATE Partial Approval -TALKED TO SCOTT W/ DIV II BRAKEMAX GAVE HIM COPY TEMP C OF O PROCEDURE PAPERWORK
-TALKED TO TERRY W/ DIV II CHUYS GAVE HIM A COPY OF TEMP C OF O PROCEDURE
-TALKED TO LOU BOCK ON SITE ABOUT TRASH ENCLOSURES-MUST HAVE BOLLARDS ON ALL SIDES OF ENCLOSURES TO MEET DEVELOPMENT STANDARD 6-01.4.2.C.2
06/14/2006 GRADING - INTERMEDIATE Revision PER PAUL MACHADO

Subject: Chuy's on Houghton
Creation Date 06/14/2006 7:24:32 AM
From: Paul Machado

Created By: Paul.Machado@tucsonaz.gov

Recipients
tucsonaz.gov
DSPO2.CHDOM2
JFemlin1 CC (James Femling)
LAlsham1 CC (Laith Alshami)
MFlick1 CC (Matthew Flick)
NKalaha1 (Nichole Kalahar)

Nicole,

I met with Matt F. and Tony Capp (Architect) concerning the refuse enclosure at this site. It seems that the grading plan has the service approach for the enclosure coming from the south and the development/site plan has the approach coming from the west. The preferred path is from the west. A revision to the grading plan is not warranted for this discrepancy.

Thanks,
Paul M.
COT/DSD