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: GRADING
Permit Number - DP13-0224
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/15/2013 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | CDRC TRANSMITTAL TO: Planning and Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: Chick Fil A @ Tanque Verde & Grant. Grading Plan (1st Review) DP13-0224 TRANSMITTAL DATE: November 15, 2013 DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administrative Manual (AM) & Technical Standards Manual (TSM) were addressed. 1. This grading plan was reviewed for compliance with the approved development package. 1. Provide the grading plan case number, DP13-0224, adjacent to the title block on all sheets. 2. Until the development package has been approved by all PDSD agencies zoning cannot approve the grading plan. 3. Until the grading plan has been approved by PDSD Engineering & Landscape Zoning cannot approve the grading plan. 4. Zoning will re-review the grading plan on the next submittal to insure compliance with the approved development package. Additional comments may be forthcoming. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised grading plan. |
| 11/19/2013 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: November 21, 2013 SUBJECT: Chick-Fil-A Grading Plan- Engineering Review TO: Bob Hatch LOCATION: 6675 E Grant Road; T14S R15E Sec06 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: DP13-0224 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed grading plan, Geotechnical Engineering Analysis (GILES Engineering Associates, Inc.; 29OCT13) and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (Zell Company, LLC, 06NOV13). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the grading plan at this time. This review falls under the Unified Development Code (UDC). Refer to the links for further clarification: http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az The following items need to be addressed: GRADING PLAN: 1) AM Sec.2-06: Verify that the grading plan document and all details meet the approved Development Plan Package (DP13-0083). The 2 plan sets must match in location, details, and all site improvement layouts prior to grading plan approval. 2) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: The relevant grading plan case number (DP13-0224) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets adjacent to the referenced DP13-0083. 3) AM Sec.2-06.4.7: Revise all notes on the grading plan sheets to reflect the correct jurisdiction, City of Tucson. 2 specific notes that were found are the Disclaimer which references Phoenix and Utility Note #7 which references MAG standards. All notes and standards must reference City of Tucson, revise. 4) AM Sec.2-06.4.7: Revise the grading plan General Note #26 to read; "No structure or vegetation shall be located or maintained so as to interfere with the sight visibility triangles in accordance with Section 10-01.5.0, Sight Visibility, of the Technical Standards Manual." 5) AM Sec.2-06.4.7: Revise the grading plan General Note #30 to read; "All work shall conform to the City of Tucson Technical Standards Manual Sec.2-01 Excavation and Grading." 6) AM Sec.2-06.4.7: Revise the grading plan General Note #46 to correctly state the area of disturbance. The site does disturb over an acre and a SWPPP is required and has been submitted. 7) AM Sec.2-06.4.7: Revise the grading plan Grading Contractor Note #5 to provide the dates of the soils report together with the names, addresses and phone numbers of the firms or individuals who prepared the report. 8) AM Sec.2-06.4.7: Remove on the grading plan Grading Contractor Note #11 since there are no basin associated with the site this note is not applicable. 9) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a: Revise the grading plan document and Detail 5/C-4 to provide wheel stops to prevent encroachment into the pedestrian access path and or show the required 2.5 foot overhang for the 18-foot space without obstructions. Per the detail there are handicap signs and a bollard that fall within the required clear 2.5 foot space. 10) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.N.2: Revise the grading plan document, Keynote #14 and the "blow up" view on Sheet 8 to reference the required sidewalk scupper at the "U" channel location. All sidewalks must provide a scupper at discharge concentration points to convey the 10-year flow event. 11) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Revise the grading plan document to dimension the sidewalk width for all proposed sidewalks onsite. Per Keynote #2 and Detail on Sheet 4 it states to see plan view for sidewalk widths; however not all sidewalk dimensions could be located. Verify a clear 4-foot sidewalk width for all onsite pedestrian access areas. 12) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Revise the grading plan document to provide a construction detail for the refuse enclosures. The detail must match TSM Sec.8-01 and Figure 3a for the required enclosure walls with gates, concrete thickness and compressive strength, concrete approach apron dimensions, 14'x40' clear approach for each container, etc. SWPPP: 13) Tucson Code Ordinance 10209, Chapter 26 Section 26-42.2: The proposed SWPPP meets the minimum requirements of the AzPDES Construction General Permit (CGP). However the SWPPP and Exhibits can not be stamped approved until approval of the grading plan. Provide both copies with resubmittal for stamp approval. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised grading plan 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 |
| 12/04/2013 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Development package approval is necessary to continue review Ensure that all Engineering comments and concerns are addressed prior NPP / Landscape approval stamp. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 12/11/2013 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 12/11/2013 | CPIERCE1 | REJECT SHELF | Completed |