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: SITE
Permit Number - T03CM01353
Review Name: SITE
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/22/2003 | JIM EGAN | FIRE | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 09/12/2003 | DOUG WILLIAMS | SANITATION | REVIEW | Approved | |
| 09/12/2003 | DOUG WILLIAMS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | SUBJECT: Insurance Auto Auction REVIEWER: Doug Williams DATE: 9-12 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 | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | See Landscape comments. |
| 09/19/2003 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) The site and landscape plans submitted vary in the following areas: A) the parking design and number of spaces along Irvington Road, B) the location of the refuse storage area, C) the location and nature of pedestrian facilities which connect the site to the Irvington Road right-of -way. Revise the site and landscape plans to provide consistent information related to the items listed above and any other areas which may apply. DS 2-07.2.0 2) Revise note 17 on sheet L-1 if necessary to clarify the proposed right of way area treatment. If the area is to be left undisturbed no additional treatment may be necessary. 3) The refuse storage area is to be screened per LUC Table 3.7.2-I. 4) The landscape legend on sheets L-2 and L-3 should refer to sheet L-6 for the hydroseed specifications. 5) A summary of plants required to meet the Native Plant Preservation requirements is to included on the landscape plan. DS 2-15.3.4.B 6) Barriers to vehicle access are to be provided in areas of the site where access to unpaved areas is possible. Revise the plans to restrict vehicular access to any non-compliant areas remaining. DS 3-05.2.3.C 7) Revise the plans and the landscape border and screening schedule on sheet L-1 to provide the type of screening specified per LUC Table 3.7.2-I (6' high). |
| 09/24/2003 | DAN CASTRO | HANDICAP-SITE | REVIEW | Denied | Refer to Zoning Review comment number three (3). |
| 09/24/2003 | DAN CASTRO | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | COMMENTS: Please attach a response letter with the next submittal, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed. CODE SECTION/ DEVELOPMENT STANDARD 1. Label the GFA for the proposed building on sheet S1 and SP1. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.6) 2. Dimension the building setback from the back of future curb along Irvington Road. Face of future curb is located 12 feet in front of the future right-of-way line. (D.S. 2-02.2.1A.6) (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.21) 3. Provide a disabled pedestrian access path to the building from the disabled access aisle. Detail access ramps. Post disabled parking signs. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8) (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.12) 4. Per D.S. 3-05.2.3.C.2, a wheelstop must be located two and one-half (2 ½ ) feet from the front of the parking space. Revise detail on sheet DTL1 as required. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.8) 5. This plan may be reviewed over the counter by the Zoning Review Section. Please contact Dan Castro to set an appointment. 6. All requested changes must be made to the site and landscape plans. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Dan Castro, (520) 791-5608. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/26/2003 | DELMA ROBEY | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |