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 - T03BU00941
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/12/2003 | JOE LINVILLE | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | NPPO Pre-Permit inspection required prior to plan approval. |
| 06/13/2003 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | 1- In order for this project to comply with the Scenic Corridor Zone and the Floodplain Ordinance requirements, and to minimize the disturbance of the wash, move the detention basin out of and away from onsite wash and its floodplain. 2- The Soils Report should address the detention basin and the required building setback from the basin. 3- Show clearly the permanent water harvesting areas and how you propose to convey onsite runoff including roof drainage to the proposed water harvesting basins. 4- Submit the revised SWPPP with the Grading Plan. |
| 06/20/2003 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | Zoning 6/20/2003 Grading plans may not be reviewed and approved until after Engineering has approved the plans. |
| 06/23/2003 | LOREN MAKUS | NPDES | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Comments: This submittal was reviewed as a Site Plan submittal ONLY. The Site Plan is acceptable and hereby approved. The following items should be addressed on the Grading Plan: 1- In order for this project to comply with the Scenic Corridor Zone and the Floodplain Ordinance requirements, and to minimize the disturbance of the wash, move the detention basin out of and away from onsite wash and its floodplain. 2- The Soils Report should address the detention basin and the required building setback from the basin. 3- Show clearly the permanent water harvesting areas and how you propose to convey onsite runoff including roof drainage to the proposed water harvesting basins. It is better to submit the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) with the Grading Plan. The SWPPP Submittal Comments: 1- Provide identification of all operators and the areas over which each has control (Part IV.C.1) Where an operator is unknown (such as a yet to be determined general contractor) leave space for the identity to be supplied later. 2- Provide existing data on soils and quality of site discharges (Part IV.C.2.d). 3- Provide general location map showing and identifying receiving waters within 1 mile (Part IV.C.2.e). 3- Include a copy of the AzPDES permit and the NOI on forms provided by ADEQ. (Part IV.F) Each operator is responsible for submitting a completed NOI to ADEQ and to the City of Tucson. 4- Provide a blank form for updates of material inventory (Part IV.D.8.c). 5- Specify when the BMP's will be installed and when they will be removed. Additionally, provide the sequence of events. 6- Add a note which addresses the following: "Erosion and sediment controls shall be designed to retain sediment on site. (Part IV.D.2.a)If sediment does leave the site, off-site accumulation of sediment must be routinely removed to ensure no adverse effects on water quality. (Part IV.D.2.c)". 7- Provide a blank form to keep record of stabilization. 8- Describe in the text the "Post Construction Stormwater Controls". 9- Provide exported dirt activity. 10-Silt fences are not acceptable in areas of concentrated flows. You may use straw bales or other acceptable methods instead. Revise SWPPP downstream of the detention basin outlet. 11-explain how the non-storm water will managed and discharged. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08/04/2003 | TAMI ACHONG | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 06/23/2003 | ANGIE SHOFFSTALL | REJECT SHELF | Completed |