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

Permit Number: DP14-0056
Parcel: 141114050

Address:
8257 S RITA RD

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP14-0056
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
05/12/2014 DAVID RIVERA ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department Plans Coordination Office
FROM: David Rivera
Principal Planner

PROJECT: DP14-0056
8257 S Rita Road
Lots 42 Rita Ranch

TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 12, 2014

DUE DATE: June 9, 2014

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed.

This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Development Package Standards listed in section 2-06 of the City of Tucson Administrative Manual. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC).

The review comments include the actual standard first with the applicable Administrative Manual section number and the following paragraph is the actual comment related to the specific item that must be addressed. If you need to review the sections listed below click on the link or copy it in the address bar of your internet program. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az

This link will take you directly to the section used for the standards review. The UDC requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above

1. Section 3.3.3.G.5.c UDC, An applicant has one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a site plan that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application, unless an ordinance adopted by Mayor and Council during this period states otherwise. A site plan application that has been in review for a period of one year and has not yet been approved is considered denied. To continue the review of a site plan for the property, a new site plan must be submitted that complies with regulations in effect at the time of re-submittal. The new submittal initiates a new one-year review period. One year Expiration date is .

2. SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS)
Section:
2-06.1.0 GENERAL
2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS
2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS
2-06.1.0 GENERAL



2-06.1.1 PURPOSE
This standard has been prepared for the purpose of informing applicants of the submittal and review requirements for development package documents to assure proper and adequate information is presented in a consistent manner, thereby providing the basis for an efficient and timely review. The development package documents are prepared in support of applications for building permits and related reviews.

The information that is requested establishes the basis upon which the project will be approved and could affect what is required of the property in the future, should there be a proposal for expansion or for a different use of the property.

This standard does not waive any applicable city regulations or codes.

2-06.1.2 APPICABILITY
This standard shall be used for all site plans and tentative plats submitted to PDSD for review.

2-06.2.1 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Development Package applications are available from PDSD. Completed applications and accompanying materials shall be submitted to PDSD. Incomplete or inaccurate applications will not be accepted, nor will any application in which the pre-application conference or neighborhood meeting requirements have not been met. The types of documents and the specific number of copies required of each of the documents are on the PDSD website or may be obtained from PDSD. Resubmittals of development packages require a comment response letter that details how all previous comments have been addressed. Provide the same number of copies of the comment response letter as plans provided.
The following documents and information shall be submitted upon application:

2-06.2.1 Application Form
A completed application signed by the property owner or authorized designee;

2-06.2.2 Development Package
A development package must be prepared to the format and content requirements described herein;

2-06.2.3 Related Reviews
In addition to the plan process, a project may require review for other types of plans and documents. The applications for those processes are submitted to the appropriate department for review and approval. These related reviews can be applied for so that review can occur concurrently with the development package application. However, it must be understood that, should the related application be approved subject to conditions or denied, this may affect the;

2-06.2.4 Concurrent Reviews
The development package is designed to allow for concurrent review of any site related reviews. Concurrent review means that all plans and documents needed for the review are submitted as one package. Examples of site related reviews include but are not limited to: site plans, landscape plans, NPPO plans, water harvesting plans, grading plans, SWPPP plans, floodplain use permits, and overlay reviews. Separate applications are often required for the different site related reviews even if the plans are submitted concurrently; and,

2-06.2.5 Fees
Fees in accordance with Section 4-01.0.0, Development Review Fee Schedule.

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.3.1 - Each sheet shall measure 24 inches by 36 inches and include a minimum one inch margin on left side and one-half inch margin on all other sides to facilitate efficient record keeping. A larger sheet format may be used with the approval of the Planning and Development Services Department (PDSD).

2-06.3.2 - All mapped data shall be drawn at an engineering scale having no more than 50 feet to the inch. This scale is the minimum accepted to assure the plan will be legible during review and when digitized and/or reduced for record-keeping purposes. The same scale shall be used for all sheets within the set. Smaller scales (60:1 or greater) may be used for some or all of the sheets with the prior approval of PDSD when it is determined legibility and the ability to be digitized and/or reduced for archiving will not be affected.
2-06.3.3 - All lettering and text (upper or lower case), and numbering, shall be a minimum of three-thirty-seconds inches in height to assure the plan will be legible during review and when digitized and/or reduced for archiving.

2-06.3.4 - A title block shall be provided in the lower right quadrant of each sheet.

01. COMMENT: The verbiage in the title block of the DP and Landscape plans sheets must match. Revise the tit\le block to match. (Is the title supposed to be "Lots 42" plural or is this a typo?)

2-06.3.7 - A small, project-location map shall be provided in the upper right corner of the cover sheet.

02. COMMENT: Label the Rail Road in the location map.

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.2 - The title block shall include the following information and be provided on each sheet:

2-06.4.2.A - The proposed name of the project or subdivision, or if there is no name, the proposed tenant's name;

03. COMMENT: It's not clear if the words "Lots 42" is a typo and should be Lot 42 instead. Revise as required

2-06.4.2.B - A brief legal description and a statement as to whether the project is a resubdivision are to be provided. On resubdivisions, provide the recording information of the existing subdivision plat;

04. COMMENT: Include in the title block the recordation of the information for the plat i.e. Lot 42 as recorded in map and Plat Bk. / pg. (Title block info should match on all sheets, revise as required.)

2-06.4.3 - The administrative street address and relevant case numbers (development package document, subdivision, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

05. COMMENT: This project has been assigned the PDSD case number DP14-0056. If required as part of the review process, list any and all applicable or relevant case numbers as noted by the standard above.

2-06.4.7 - General Notes
The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable.

2-06.4.7.A.6 - If a plan or plat is prepared in conjunction with other applications or overlays or the parcel being developed is subject to conditions of an application processed previously, additional information must be added to the plan. Such applications and overlays include, but are not limited to: annexations; rezonings; special exceptions; Board of Adjustment variances; Design Development Options; Technical Standard Modification Request; overlays (Airport Environs Zone, Environmental Resource Zone, Gateway Corridor Zone, Hillside Development Zone, Historic Preservation Zone, Major Streets and Routes, Rio Nuevo District, Scenic Corridor Zone, WASH); Modification of Development Regulations through the Downtown Area Infill Incentive District or Rio Nuevo District; Downtown Heritage Incentive Zone; or, Design Review Board. Provide the following information on the plan.

06. COMMENT: This site is subject to compliance with the requirements of DMAFB Environs regulations. Add a general note that states that the site has been designed to comply with the requirements of ADC-2, NCD-A / 65-70 LDN.

2-06.4.8.B - All easements shall be drawn on the plan. The recordation information, location, width, and purpose of all easements on site will be stated. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. Should an easement not be in use and be proposed for vacation or have been abandoned, so indicate. However, should the easement be in conflict with any proposed building location, vacation of the easement shall occur prior to approval of plan unless written permission from easement holder(s) is provided.

07. COMMENT:
a. Per the DP site plan, storage yards are proposed over the recorded 60-foot easement area along the northern boundary of the site. Clarify what type of storage will be placed in this area and has the approval of the easement holder been given in writing to the proposed user of the site. Provide a copy of the document granting permission to use the easement area as proposed on the DP site plan.

b. A barrier to keep vehicles out of the ingress / egress driveway along the west side leading to Rita Road must be provided. Demonstrate on the plans how this will be accomplished.

2-06.4.8.C - The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks.

08. COMMENT: Draw, dimension and label the existing and future curb and sidewalk locations for Old Vail Road and Rita Road.

2-06.4.9 - Information on Proposed Development
The following information on the proposed project shall be shown on the drawing or added as notes.

2-06.4.9.H.5 - If utilizing parking area access lanes (PAALs), they shall be designed in accordance with Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC.

2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Show all motor vehicle off-street parking spaces provided, fully dimensioned. As a note, provide calculations on the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided, including the number of spaces required and provided for the physically disabled. The drawing should indicate parking space locations for the physically disabled. A typical parking space detail shall be provided for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. For information on parking requirements for the physically disabled, refer to adopted building and accessibility codes of the City of Tucson. Design criteria for parking spaces and access are located in Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC.

09. COMMENT: Clarify if vehicle access is proposed to the along the north side of the buildings. If so the vehicle use area will have to be paved. Concrete curbing or other means of a barrier other than a thickened pavement edge must be provided along the edges of the PAAL system where adjacent to undeveloped (dirt area) areas of the site. (Keynote 14 on sheet two (2) indicates a proposed paved curb.)

2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Show bicycle parking facilities fully dimensioned. For specifics, refer to Section 7.4.9, Bicycle Parking Design Criteria, of the UDC. Provide, as a note, calculations for short and long term bicycle spaces required and provided.

10. COMMENT: There three buildings proposed for this development. Explain how all employees will have access to the long term bicycle parking facility. The facility appears to be in one of buildings. It may be best to provide a box in each building or the boxes should be placed outside the buildings where any employee may have access to the bicycle locker(s).Also the detail drawing seven (7) does not depict how the code requirements will be met. A fully dimensioned and detailed drawing must be included.

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.)

11. COMMENT: See related comment eight (8).

2-06.4.9.M - Grading Plan

2-06.4.9.M.2 - Concurrent Review. For all projects, grading plans may be included in the development package and will be reviewed concurrently.

12. COMMENT: The grading plan sheet has been reviewed for compliance with the site plan sheet as it relates to the zoning review purview. The grading plan is assumed approved when the dp package is approved. Ensure that any changes made to the site plan sheet are made to

2-06.4.9.Q - Provide the square footage and the height of each commercial, industrial, or business structure and the specific use proposed within the footprint of the building(s).

13. COMMENT: Label the information on sheet two (2) as required by the standard above.

2-06.4.9.R - Show on-site pedestrian circulation and refuge utilizing location and the design criteria in Section 7-01.0.0, Pedestrian Access, of the Technical Standards Manual.

14. COMMENT: All sidewalks must be constructed of concrete cement or materials as listed in the Technical Standards Manual section 7.4.3.C. Pavement is not one of the listed materials for sidewalks, it is acceptable for jogging paths only as noted in section 7.4.3.C.5. Provide a concrete sidewalk (south side of the PAAL.) to the dumpster. Per TSM section 7.4.1.A, a four (4) foot wide concrete sidewalk which is physically separated from the PAAL is required from the sidewalk system along the front of the buildings to the Old Vail Road sidewalk. Revise the plan to show the required sidewalk. If the paved areas between the buildings are for vehicular access, provide four (4) foot wide sidewalks that are physically separated from the PAAL. If the public is not allowed beyond the front of the building to the back, a four (4) foot wide striped pedestrian refuge area must be provided, see redlines.

2-06.4.9.T - Show refuse collection areas, including locations of dumpsters, screening location and materials, and vehicle maneuverability, fully dimensioned, and access route. If dumpster service is not proposed, indicate type of service. For specific information on refuse collection, refer to Section 8-01.0.0, Solid Waste and Recycle Disposal, Collection, and Storage, of the Technical Standards Manual. Refuse collection on all projects shall be designed based on that section, even if collection is to be contracted to a private firm.

15. COMMENT: Demonstrate maneuverability in and out of the dumpster enclosure.

2-06.4.9.W - Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Indicate if there are any existing billboards on site. Compliance to the Sign Code, Chapter 3 of the Tucson Code, is required.

16. COMMENT: If applicable draw and label the location and size of any proposed freestanding monument signs.

2-06.4.9.X - Show compliance with landscaping and screening requirements by locations, material descriptions, and dimensions. Specific plant or hardscape material shall be detailed on a landscape plan. A detailed landscape plan is required. In accordance with Section 2-11.0.0, Landscape Plan Requirements.

17. COMMENT: See the landscape reviewer comments related to landscape buffers and screening.

18. COMMENT: Ensure that any changes made to the site plan are also made to the landscape and grading plan sheets.

19. COMMENT: Additional comments may be forthcoming based on the changes made to the plan and responses to the zoning comments.


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

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package site plan and any requested documents.
05/12/2014 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
05/22/2014 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. An approved development plan is not to be used for construction of on-site utilities (e.g. water service to the building, building sewer, site lighting, or electrical service to the building). The construction of the on-site utilities may be included with the permit for constructing the building or as a separate permit.
2. A separate permit is required for the installation of a private sewer collection system that has been reviewed by PDEQ. Reference: Title 18, R18-9-E302, 4.02 General Permit, Arizona Administrative Code.
3. For Building 2, the rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (2930.40') is less than 12" below the first floor elevation (2931.00'). Indicate the need for a backwater valve per Section 715.1, IPC 2012, as amended by the City of Tucson.
4. The minimum slope for a 3" to 6" building sewer is 1/8" per foot (see keynotes 30, 34, and 41). An 8" building sewer can have a slope of 1/16" per foot (approximately 0.5%). Reference: Section 704.1 and 708.3.2, IPC 2012.
5. The minimum size of a water service pipe to a structure is ¾" in diameter (see keynote 24). The size of a water service pipe shall be adequate to supply the structures with the water quantities and the required water pressures noted in Section 604, IPC 2012. Reference: Section 603.1, IPC 2012.
05/28/2014 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Denied Please provide No Parking Fire Lane sign detail and locations. Refer to C.O.T amendments to 2012 IFC, section 503.3 for information.
06/02/2014 RONALD BROWN H/C SITE REVIEW Reqs Change SHEET 1/10
1. Provide an accessible route to the Vail Road right of way.
2. As per the 2012 IBC, Section 1106.6 Location: Where buildings have multiple accessible entrances with adjacent parking, the accessible parking spaces shall be dispursed near the separate entrances. Please separate the two accessible spaces and locate them equally between all the accessible entrances.
3. For detail 3/4 of 10: Reference comment 2.
END OF REVIEW
06/09/2014 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL SECTION 2-10.0.0: LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS

Identification and Descriptive Data

All improvements and site information, such as adjacent rights-of-way and property lines, shown on the landscape plan will be identical in size and location to those shown on the base plan (site plan or tentative plat). Should amendments be required to the base plan through the review process, the same amendments will be made to the landscape plan which will then be resubmitted along with the base plan.

The landscape plan will contain the following identification in the lower right corner of each sheet:

Any relevant case number for reviews or modifications that affect the site

UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT CODE

ARTICLE 7: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

Canopy Trees in Vehicular Use Areas

An unpaved planting area, which must be a minimum of 34 square feet in area and four feet in width, must be provided for each canopy tree. Dimension planters within vehicle use area.

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

Additional comments may apply
06/09/2014 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved
06/09/2014 ELIZABETH LEIBOLD ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change TO: Jeff Stanley P.E.
SUBJECT: DP14-0056 Lot 42 Rita Ranch Development Package (SP/GP/SWPP) 1st submittal Engineering Review
ADDRESS: 8257 S RITA RD, Ward 4
LOCATION: T15S R15E Section 27
PROPERTY: 141-11-4030, BROWN/RITA RANCH LOT 40
FLOODPLAIN: FEMA zone X-unshaded, 2925L
REVIEWER: Elizabeth Leibold, P.E.

SUMMARY: Engineering has reviewed and provides comments to the Development Package including and Drainage Report. Engineering does not recommend approval of the Development Package or the Drainage Report at this time. Prior to resubmittal, address the following comments based on Tucson Code Chapter 26, Technical Manual section and/or Administrative Manual.

MASTER COVER SHEETS/ GENERAL NOTES:
1) Tech Man Sec.2-01.4.1.C: Address the following Development Package general note comments:
i) Revise Basis of Bearings and Basis of Elevation notes per redlines for both General Notes as well as Paving and Grading Notes on sheet 1. See also reference basis of bearings and basis of elevation on sheet 5 (Grading Plan sheet 1) of http://tdotmaps.transview.org/mandr/Plans/tifflist.cfm?plan=GR-2001-071
ii) Add on sheet 1 the proposed disturbance area in square feet or acreage.
iii) Add Grading Note to cover sheet 1 regarding sequence number for new water line to be provided at as-built Final Revised Grading Plan stage prior to grading final inspection. Otherwise provide sequence number for this easement on sheet 3.
iv) On sheet 1, for Paving and Grading Notes number 30, remove or revise if not applicable.
v) As a note, add verbiage for drainage maintenance per drainage manual: Tech Man Sec.4-04.14.3.2.
vi) Provide note to plans regarding total disturbance area subtracting area of preservation of vegetation.

BASE LAYER SHEET COMMENTS:
2) Admin Man Sec.2-06.3: Add DP14-0056 case number to Development Package sheets.
3) See redline set of plans for clarification of comments. Return redlines with resubmittal.

SITE PLAN SHEET COMMENTS:
4) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.7.A.6: Label MS&R 'Arterial' for both Rita Rd and Old Vail Road on sheet 2.
5) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.8.C: The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks. Include existing sidewalk and curb along Old Vail Road and Rita Rd.
6) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.8.F: Label of existing stormdrain pipes, including the type and size, at the south entry along Old Vail Rd as well as the west entry along Rita Rd, as indicated in Brown/Rita Ranch Grading/Tentative Plat http://tdotmaps.transview.org/mandr/Plans/tifflist.cfm?plan=GR-2001-071
7) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.9.G: Label type of barrier or proposed bollards on west ingress/egress area as this entrance is proposed to not be developed at this time.
8) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Label with dimensions & grades the proposed curb and sidewalk along south entry area.
9) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.9.O: Label north setback for proposed storage areas per zoning requirements. There is an existing gas easement along north boundary that may be in conflict.
10) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Show vehicle maneuverability with turning radii delineations on planview for refuse collection area per Tech Man Sec.8-01.5.3.C.

DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS:
11) Address the following drainage report comments:
a) Tech Man Sec.4-03.3.3.4: Provide velocity discussion in report or identify velocity of existing west channel on drainage report exhibit. Also provide embankment protection design based on rip rap sizing calculation taking into account 100-year flow velocity in existing channel.
b) Tech Man Sec.4-04.1.5.2: Provide a maintenance checklist, including slopes, inlets, stormdrain pipes, and outlets in a drainage improvement maintenance list in the Drainage Report.
c) Tech Man Sec.4-04.2.3.1.2.D.1: Add reference to the Rita Ranch Master Drainage Report. The Rita Ranch Master Drainage Report (Dooley-Jones & Associates Report dated November 19, 1984) states that your project area lies in a Balanced Basin Management Plan area, the detention requirements are met with the Rita Ranch Regional Detention Basin, as the watercourses from your property contribute to tributaries that flow into the regional basin.
d) Tech Man Sec.4-04.2.3.1.2.D.1: Add statement to the report whether the design for this project conforms to Brown/Rita Ranch plat design.
e) Tech Man Sec.4-03.3.5.1.10: Assure minimum FFE for buildings are above adjacent WSEL in channel.
f) Tech Man Sec.4-04.2.3.1.3: Address the following comments related to drainage exhibits in report:
i) Add sub-watershed lines on Existing Conditions Drainage Map.
ii) On Developed Conditions Drainage Map, clarify Q100 entering and leaving site at concentration points.

LANDSCAPE PLAN COMMENTS:
12) No comments.

GRADING, PAVING, DETAIL SHEET COMMENTS:
13) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.9.G: Label proposed bollards on west entry area as this entrance is proposed to not be used at this time for this development.
14) Tech Man Sec.2-01.4.1.C: Address the following grading comments for sheet 3:
a) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Delineate area of disturbance limits to clarify areas that will be used as construction staging and those areas that will be not disturbed.
b) Show and label local benchmark elevation location on planview.
c) Tech Man Sec.8-01.5.2.G: Label minimum 2% slope away within trash enclosure pad on planview sheet 3.
d) Show detail for existing west channel per drainage detail on Tentative Plat/Grading Plan sheet 8 (sheet 4 of Grading Plan) of http://tdotmaps.transview.org/mandr/Plans/tifflist.cfm?plan=GR-2001-071
e) Add additional cross section detail across existing channel for proposed erosion protection detail at outlet on sheet 4, showing existing grades and placement of rip rap, and also labeling existing channel velocity.
15) Tech Man Sec.8-01.5.2.D: For Refuse Enclosure detail 1 on sheet 4, add note that gates shall be opaque (no see-through gates allowed).

UTILITIES / EASEMENTS COMMENTS:
16) Admin Man Sec.2-06.4.8.B: Assure complete information is provided for easements on the site:
a) Show existing easements (dimensioned, with survey info) as shown on sheet 2 of the Brown/Rita Ranch Final Plat http://tdotmaps.transview.org/MandR/MP/MPList.cfm?Plan=MP-54-084&Done=True
b) The existing gas easement appears in conflict with proposed storage units along north property boundary. Provide utility documentation relinquishing vested interest or acknowledging and allowing proposed storage units over the easement.

STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN COMMENTS:
17) Tucson Code Chap.26 Article II: Address the following comments for SWPP plan and SWPP report:
a) Address the following comments of the SWPP plan in SWPP report and on sheet 5 of the development package:
i) 2-06.4.8.E: Provide and label topo lines.
ii) Clarify the grading limits with the following comments:
(1) Identify any areas for construction staging and areas to remain undisturbed.
(2) Show 2-ft offset from lot boundary for grading limits.
(3) Delineate the grading limits to match the grading plan sheet 3.
(4) Construction fencing or string line shall be identified on planview.
(5) Add to legend delineations and descriptions for disturbance/grading limits and string line/construction fencing.
iii) Relabel sheet number 1 to sheet 5 of 10.
b) Address the following comments for the SWPPP report:
i) Provide SWPP report with general permit.
ii) Add activity development package number to cover of SWPP report.

SOILS/GEOTECHNICAL REPORT COMMENTS:
18) Tech Man Sec.10-01.3.1.A: Provide soils report showing pavement structural design for detail 6 on sheet 4.

Please provide a revised Development Package plan sheets, revised Drainage Report, soils/geotechnical report, revised SWPPP report, redline set, and comprehensive response letter that address the comments provided above. It is recommended that a meeting is held prior to resubmittal. If you have questions, call me at 837-4934.

Elizabeth Leibold, P.E., CPM, CFM
Civil Engineer
Engineering Division
Planning & Development Services Department

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
06/11/2014 FERNE RODRIGUEZ OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed