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: T03BU01452
Parcel: 14002001A

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: REVISION

Permit Number - T03BU01452
Review Name: REVISION
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
08/22/2003 JIM TATE ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied SUBJECT: Insurance Auto Auction
REVIEWER: Doug Williams
DATE: 8 September 2003
ACTIVITY NUMBER: T03CM01353-R/T03OT01508

SUMMARY: Engineering Division has reviewed the drainage report, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and report, and the site plan received on 23 August 2003. Approval of the Site Plan may not occur prior to drainage report approval, and is not recommended at this time. An engineering study review fee of $150.00 is required with the resubmittal, in accordance with Tucson Code, Section 26-11.2 i. The following comments are offered:

DRAINAGE REPORT:
1. Please address/discuss potential adverse impact to adjacent properties or right of way (the increase in flow velocity specifically), at the northeast corner of the site, as a result of the proposed floodplain encroachment;
2. Provide an additional (east/west) cross-section for the basin inlet spillway, and include elevations and dimensions fully labeled, per the City of Tucson's Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management (SMDDFM), sec. 2.3.1.6 A 4 a;
3. Please omit the notes on Figure 4 indicating the 100-year Floodplain Limits are to be left natural. This does not appear to correspond with the intent and discussion contained in the report;
4. The report should address erosion protection measures at the basin discharge location;
5. Provide percolation test results with the resubmittal. Percolation test should be performed in accordance with the recommended procedures of the Pima County Department of Transportation-Flood Control District, and must demonstrate that the basin will percolate within the allowed time frame, as specified in section 3.5.1 of the Pima County/City of Tucson Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual (Development Standard -DS-10-01.0);
6. Provide a soils report addressing at a minimum, items a-d outlined in the SMDDFM, section 14.2.6 (DS 10-02.0);
7. Provide a minimum of one 15' wide vehicular access ramp into the basin, with a maximum slope of 15 percent, in accordance with the SMDDFM, section 14.3.4 (DS 10-02.0);
8. Please discuss the proposed 4" diameter orifice depicted in cross-section D-D, Figure 4;
9. Please remove the "min." notation for the outlet weir length of 9.3' on cross-section D-D, Figure 4;

SITE AND GRADING PLAN COMMENTS:

1. Please revise the proposed finish floor elevation to correspond with the recommended minimum elevation contained in the drainage report (2633.5');
2. Provide the finished floor elevation of the temporary modular office. The floor elevation must meet or exceed the minimum floor elevation recommendation contained in the drainage report (see comment 1, above);
3. Please remove the "min." notation for the outlet weir length of 9.3' on the "DTL" sheet weir detail;
4. Provide a detail for the spillway inlet, and a note for erosion protection measures at the outlet, fully labeled and dimensioned (see drainage report comment # 2, above), per the SMDDFM, section 2.3.1.6 A 4 a (DS 10-02.0);
5. Provide an average diameter (D50) for all grouted riprap noted on the plans;
6. Depict the basin100-year water surface elevation on the plan (DS 2-02.2.1.15);
7. Provide a basis of elevation with benchmark based on City of Tucson (COT) datum, including COT Field Book and Page (DS 2-02.2.23);
8. Demonstrate water harvesting to the maximum extent reasonably possible, in accordance with the City of Tucson Land Use Code, section 3.7.4.3 B and the SMDDFM, section 14.2.10 (DS 10-02.0);
9. Call out concrete headers at the driveway returns, per Pima County/City of Tucson (PC/COT) Standard Detail 213, as recommended in the drainage report.

SWPPP COMMENTS:
1. The plan does not depict a basin outlet - please depict an appropriate outlet, in accordance with the grading plan location;
2. Inspection of the existing topography provided on the SWPPP, there appears to be offsite runoff acceptance from the west. In order to assure this apparent sheet flow and any concentrated flows are not diverted as a result of silt fencing placement, please provide details or notes indicating continued acceptance at these locations, where applicable;
3. According to the limitations in the report BMP (64), silt fencing should not be used in locations where there are concentrated flows. Address sediment controls for the basin exit, offsite acceptance points and any other locations where flows may be concentrated in the report and on the plan;
4. Extend the stabilized entrance to the existing edge of pavement (EOP) on the plan view, and depict the EOP on the plan (BMP 39);
5. Please increase the font size for all proposed elevation data on the plan, for better readability.
Please address all of the above comments. Resubmittal shall include a revised site and grading plan, drainage report and SWPPP.
If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550, extension 1189 or Dwillia1@ci.tucson.az.us.

Doug Williams
Engineering Division
Development Services Department
09/12/2003 DOUG WILLIAMS NPDES REVIEW Denied SUBJECT: Insurance Auto Auction
REVIEWER: Doug Williams
DATE: 8 September 2003
ACTIVITY NUMBER: T03CM01353-R/T03OT01508

SUMMARY: Engineering Division has reviewed the drainage report, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and report, and the site plan received on 23 August 2003. Approval of the Site Plan may not occur prior to drainage report approval, and is not recommended at this time. An engineering study review fee of $150.00 is required with the resubmittal, in accordance with Tucson Code, Section 26-11.2 i. The following comments are offered:

DRAINAGE REPORT:
1. Please address/discuss potential adverse impact to adjacent properties or right of way (the increase in flow velocity specifically), at the northeast corner of the site, as a result of the proposed floodplain encroachment;
2. Provide an additional (east/west) cross-section for the basin inlet spillway, and include elevations and dimensions fully labeled, per the City of Tucson's Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management (SMDDFM), sec. 2.3.1.6 A 4 a;
3. Please omit the notes on Figure 4 indicating the 100-year Floodplain Limits are to be left natural. This does not appear to correspond with the intent and discussion contained in the report;
4. The report should address erosion protection measures at the basin discharge location;
5. Provide percolation test results with the resubmittal. Percolation test should be performed in accordance with the recommended procedures of the Pima County Department of Transportation-Flood Control District, and must demonstrate that the basin will percolate within the allowed time frame, as specified in section 3.5.1 of the Pima County/City of Tucson Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual (Development Standard -DS-10-01.0);
6. Provide a soils report addressing at a minimum, items a-d outlined in the SMDDFM, section 14.2.6 (DS 10-02.0);
7. Provide a minimum of one 15' wide vehicular access ramp into the basin, with a maximum slope of 15 percent, in accordance with the SMDDFM, section 14.3.4 (DS 10-02.0);
8. Please discuss the proposed 4" diameter orifice depicted in cross-section D-D, Figure 4;
9. Please remove the "min." notation for the outlet weir length of 9.3' on cross-section D-D, Figure 4;

SITE AND GRADING PLAN COMMENTS:

1. Please revise the proposed finish floor elevation to correspond with the recommended minimum elevation contained in the drainage report (2633.5');
2. Provide the finished floor elevation of the temporary modular office. The floor elevation must meet or exceed the minimum floor elevation recommendation contained in the drainage report (see comment 1, above);
3. Please remove the "min." notation for the outlet weir length of 9.3' on the "DTL" sheet weir detail;
4. Provide a detail for the spillway inlet, and a note for erosion protection measures at the outlet, fully labeled and dimensioned (see drainage report comment # 2, above), per the SMDDFM, section 2.3.1.6 A 4 a (DS 10-02.0);
5. Provide an average diameter (D50) for all grouted riprap noted on the plans;
6. Depict the basin100-year water surface elevation on the plan (DS 2-02.2.1.15);
7. Provide a basis of elevation with benchmark based on City of Tucson (COT) datum, including COT Field Book and Page (DS 2-02.2.23);
8. Demonstrate water harvesting to the maximum extent reasonably possible, in accordance with the City of Tucson Land Use Code, section 3.7.4.3 B and the SMDDFM, section 14.2.10 (DS 10-02.0);
9. Call out concrete headers at the driveway returns, per Pima County/City of Tucson (PC/COT) Standard Detail 213, as recommended in the drainage report.

SWPPP COMMENTS:
1. The plan does not depict a basin outlet - please depict an appropriate outlet, in accordance with the grading plan location;
2. Inspection of the existing topography provided on the SWPPP, there appears to be offsite runoff acceptance from the west. In order to assure this apparent sheet flow and any concentrated flows are not diverted as a result of silt fencing placement, please provide details or notes indicating continued acceptance at these locations, where applicable;
3. According to the limitations in the report BMP (64), silt fencing should not be used in locations where there are concentrated flows. Address sediment controls for the basin exit, offsite acceptance points and any other locations where flows may be concentrated in the report and on the plan;
4. Extend the stabilized entrance to the existing edge of pavement (EOP) on the plan view, and depict the EOP on the plan (BMP 39);
5. Please increase the font size for all proposed elevation data on the plan, for better readability.
Please address all of the above comments. Resubmittal shall include a revised site and grading plan, drainage report and SWPPP.
If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550, extension 1189 or Dwillia1@ci.tucson.az.us.

Doug Williams
Engineering Division
Development Services Department
09/19/2003 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Passed
09/19/2003 JOE LINVILLE NPPO REVIEW Denied 1) Submit revised plans for review.

2) Add the following note to the grading plan: "This project is subject to the provisions of a native plant preservation plan required by the City Of Tucson. Prior to any disturbance on the site a NPPO Pre Permit inspection is required. Call 791-5640 Ext. 1140 to schedule prior to grading.
09/24/2003 DAN CASTRO ZONING REVIEW Denied Grading Plan may not be approved until the site plan is approved by all sections and the grading plan is approved by Engineering.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
09/26/2003 DELMA ROBEY OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed