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 - T03BU02850
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 11/28/2003 | JIM TATE | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: November 28, 2003 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T03BU02850 PROJECT NAME: Sixth Ave. Warehouse PROJECT ADDRESS: 2251 N. 6th Ave. PROJECT REVIEWER: James C. Tate, P.E. The following items must be revised or added to the Grading Plan. Please include a letter with the next submittal addressing how all the engineering and floodplain comments have been addressed. Resubmittal Required: Grading Plan, Drainage Report Submittal Required: NPDES Plan GRADING PLAN 1. A copy of the stamped approved Site Plan must be included with the Grading Plan submittal. 2. The Site Plan is currently in the review process. All changes made to the Site Plan must be reflected on the Grading Plan. 3. Proposed developments disturbing areas exceeding 1 acre are subject to NPDES requirements. Contact Patricia Gilbert, 791-5550, for submittal requirements. The NPDES submittal must accompany the next Grading Plan submittal. 4. Place a note on the plan that all roof downspouts will be routed under any adjacent sidewalk. Sidewalks must be flood free for up to the ten year event. DS 2-02.4.1.E 5. Dimension the basin on the plan. Length and width. Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management, SMDDFM, 2.3.1.6.A.4 6. Indicate the 100 yr. peak water surface elevation (WSEL) on the plan for the basin. Show 100-yr. peak ponding limits for the basin. SMDDFM, 2.3.1.6.A.4.e 7. Show onsite to offsite 100-yr. peak flow quantity and location for the developed condition. SMDDFM, 2.3.1.3..B 8. Label the cross-sections on the plan view (ie. No. 1, 2, 3). DRAINAGE REPORT 1. The runoff coefficients used in the retention calculation appear to be incorrect. The coefficient for B type soil in completely undeveloped conditions for the five year event is .24. The coefficient for 100% impervious conditions for the five year event is .92. The hydrologic data sheets provided in the report do not identify correctly the existing and proposed impervious surface. Correct the retention calculation and justify the runoff coefficients used. Correctly identify the amount of impervious surface. Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual, SDRM, 3.2 2. What is the intended outlet structure for the basin? If it is intended that the basin overflow uniformly (no outlet structure), curbs will force the overflow to the east on to an existing structure. Is this intended? It appears that current flows are directly north to Sahuaro. Please clarify the proposed onsite to offsite drainage scheme. SMDDFM, 2.3.1.6.A.4.a 3. The Grading Plan shows the northwest portion of the lot (at the basin) to be filled about two feet. Overflow from the basin will be directed offsite in this area down the two foot slope. What is the intended bank protection? Show on the Grading Plan. 4. Determine the 100-yr. peak WSEL for the basin. Determine 100-yr. peak ponding limits. Determine 100-yr. peak onsite to offsite flow location and quantity. SMDDFM, 2.3.1.6.A.4.e DATE: November 28, 2003 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T03BU02850 PROJECT NAME: Sixth Ave. Warehouse PROJECT ADDRESS: 2251 N. 6th Ave. PROJECT REVIEWER: James C. Tate, P.E. The following items must be revised or added to the Grading Plan. Please include a letter with the next submittal addressing how all the engineering and floodplain comments have been addressed. Resubmittal Required: Grading Plan, Drainage Report GRADING PLAN 1. A copy of the stamped approved Site Plan must be included with the Grading Plan submittal. 2. The Site Plan is currently in the review process. All changes made to the Site Plan must be reflected on the Grading Plan. 3. Proposed developments disturbing areas exceeding 1 acre are subject to NPDES requirements. Contact Patricia Gilbert, 791-5550, for submittal requirements. The NPDES submittal must accompany the next Grading Plan submittal. 4. Place a note on the plan that all roof downspouts will be routed under any adjacent sidewalk. Sidewalks must be flood free for up to the ten year event. DS 2-02.4.1.E 5. Dimension the basin on the plan. Length and width. Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management, SMDDFM, 2.3.1.6.A.4 6. Indicate the 100 yr. peak water surface elevation (WSEL) on the plan. Show 100-yr. peak ponding limits for the basin. SMDDFM, 2.3.1.6.A.4.e 7. Show onsite to offsite 100-yr. peak flow quantity and location. SMDDFM, 2.3.1.3..B 8. Label the cross-sections on the plan view (ie. No. 1, 2, 3). DRAINAGE REPORT 1. The runoff coefficients used in the retention calculation appear to be incorrect. The coefficient for B type soil in completely undeveloped conditions for the five year event is .24. The coefficient for 100% impervious conditions for the five year event is .92. The hydrologic data sheets provided in the report do not identify correctly the existing and proposed impervious surface. Correct the retention calculation and justify the runoff coefficients used. Correctly identify the amount of impervious surface. Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual, SDRM, 3.2 2. What is the intended outlet structure for the basin? If it is intended that the basin overflow uniformly (no outlet structure), curbs will force the overflow to the east on to an existing structure. Is this intended? It appears that current flows are directly north to Sahuaro. Please clarify the proposed onsite to offsite drainage scheme. SMDDFM, 2.3.1.6.A.4.a 3. The Grading Plan shows the northwest portion of the lot (at the basin) to be filled about two feet. Overflow from the basin will be directed offsite in this area down the two foot slope. What is the intended bank protection? Show on the Grading Plan. 4. Determine the 100-yr. peak WSEL for the basin. Determine 100-yr. peak ponding limits. Determine 100-yr. peak onsite to offsite flow location and quantity. SMDDFM, 2.3.1.6.A.4.e |
| 12/01/2003 | Joseph Linville | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit approved site plans, including landscape and NPP plans. |
| 12/05/2003 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | Engineering, Floodplain and NPPO approvals required. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 12/09/2003 | TAMI ACHONG | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 12/08/2003 | ANGIE SHOFFSTALL | REJECT SHELF | Completed |