Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: GRADING
Permit Number - DP15-0150
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/22/2015 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | PDSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: 10680 E. Escalante Grading Plan (1st Review) DP15-0150 TRANSMITTAL DATE: September 22, 2015 1. The grading plan has been reviewed by Zoning Review Section but cannot approve the plan until all zoning comments or concerns have been addressed. 2. Show the proposed structures on the site sections so that the requirements of UDC Article 5.2.7.A HILLSIDE SITE IMPROVEMENT STANDARD, Building Height can be verified. 3. Zoning cannot approve the grading plan until approved by Engineering and Landscape review. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov or (520) 837-4956 |
| 09/25/2015 | PAUL BAUGHMAN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Reqs Change | DATE: September 25, 2015 DUE DATE: October 19, 2015 SUBJECT: Proposed Residences for Pima 6600 LLC TO: George Edward Holguin, RE LOCATION: 10680 E Escalante Road REVIEWERS: Paul Baughman, PE, CFM ACTIVITY: DP15-0150 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning and Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package. Normally floodplain and erosion hazard setback limits would need to be delineated by the applicant based on AM 2-06.4.8I. However, since the proposed structure and fill slopes are significantly setback both horizontally and vertically from the wash bottom, delineation is not being requested as a part of this submittal. If future development encroaches further into the flood prone area, delineation may still be required. The following items need to be addressed: 1) Per TSM 2-01.11.1 the faces of cut and fill slopes shall be prepared and maintained to control against erosion. There is an existing drainage path that is shown as being filled in on the east side of the fill pad. Please adjust proposed contours to eliminate erosion from blockage of the natural drainage path on east side of fill pad. 2) Per AM 2-06.4.9N4 please tie the proposed contours into the existing contours. There appears to be a problem where the proposed contours appear like they would need to tie into the existing contours within the dedicated natural area. This will also impact the 20211 square foot disturbable area assumptions. 3) Per AM 2-06.4.9N2 please show how roof drainage and drainage upstream of the site wall and fill pad is being diverted around the structure. This involves the need for additional flow arrows, call outs of keynote 3 and minimum percent slope. 4) Per AM 2-06.4.1 please add the email address and phone number for the owner to the plans. 5) Per AM 2-06.4.2D the page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx) should be filled in. 6) Per AM 2-06.4.3 please provide the relevant case numbers adjacent to the title block. This would include T15CM06066 and DP15-0150. 7) Per UDC 5.2.6B, C and D the document that contains the "dedicated natural area" needs to be recorded with the Pima County Recorder as a deed-restricted portion of the lot in favor of the City of Tucson. Please provide recording information on plan after addressing other comments. 8) Per TSM 9-01.3.1 the ACS calculation should be revised to only divide by the area that is not a dedicated natural area. The total lot area is only used when referencing Table 5.2.1: Development Standards Based on Average Cross Slope per UDC 5.2.5B. Please note that the "Sum of the lengths (L) of all contour lines" (ie. 4146) appears to only include lengths from the area to be disturbed. This would only be used if the ACS for the disturbable area was being calculated and the disturbable area was used for the A value. This would have the 1.065 acre area used instead of the 3.31108 acre area. The ACS would then be 16.103 in the area to be disturbed. Then Table 5.2.1, columns B and D would be used. The Maximum Grading Percent would be 13.3 percent of the entire 3.3108 acre area. Since this only allows 19,181 square feet of disturbance, the proposed 20,211 square feet of proposed gradable area needs to be reduced. 9) The maximum height is listed as 30 in the HDZ notes on sheet HDZ -1. Per UDC 5.2.7A this maximum height is for nonresidential. Please clarify if this is a non-residential structure (ie. Commercial). The HDZ note shows a 20" (inch) proposed. Please update. Please note that residential allows up to 24' (feet) in height. 10) There is a discrepancy between the cut and fill quantities on sheet HDZ-1 (Cut 286 CY Fill 298 CY) and sheet HDZ-2 (Cut 620 CY Fill 575). Please recalculate the cut and fill quantities and update both sheets HDZ-1 and HDZ-2 accordingly. 11) Per AM 2-06.4.4B please show the Pantano Wash in the project location map in the upper right corner on sheet HDZ-1. 12) Per AM 2-06.4.5 please provide a sheet index on sheet HDZ-1. 13) Per AM 2-06.4.7B2 please add the following note, "The developer, any successors and assigns, will hold the City of Tucson, its officers, employees, and agents harmless from any and all claims for damages related to the use of this development as shown hereon, now and in the future, by reason of flooding, flowage, erosion, or damage caused by water, whether surface flood or rainfall." 14) Per AM 2-06.4.7B3 please add the following note, "Drainage will remain in its natural state and will not be altered, disturbed, or obstructed other than as shown on this site plan." 15) Per AM 2-06.4.7D please add the following note, "Any relocation or modification of existing utilities and/or public improvements necessitated by the proposed development will be at no expense to the public." 16) Per AM 2-06.4.7E5 please add the following note, "Sewerage disposal will be by a private individual disposal system. Conceptual approval by the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality for a private individual system will be obtained prior to approval of the development package document." 17) Per AM 2-06.4.8 B please show all easements within 50 feet of property boundary on plan, including, width, and location recordation information. This includes access and utility easements. |
| 10/07/2015 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Reqs Change | Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed. Additional comments may apply |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/19/2015 | KROBLES1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |