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: Stopped
Review Details: FLOODPLAIN
Permit Number - T03OT01228
Review Name: FLOODPLAIN
Review Status: Stopped
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/17/2003 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: July 17, 2003 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T03OT01228 PROJECT NAME: Bellevue Apartments PROJECT ADDRESS: 4441 East Bellevue Street PROJECT REVIEWER: Patricia Gilbert, Engineering Associate The following items must be revised or added. Please include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: FLOOD USE PERMIT APPLICATION THE DRAINAGE REPORT WAS REVIEWED FOR FLOOD USE PERMIT PURPOSES ONLY. A GRADING PERMIT WILL NOT BE APPROVED UNTIL THE FLOOD USE PERMIT IS APPROVED. 1. Add a general note on the Site Plan stating the entire site is located within FEMA Flood Hazard Zone AE. DS 2-02.2.1.A.15. 2. Show drainage patterns and proposed finish floor elevations (FFE) on the Site Plan. DS 2-02.2.1.A.16 3. Show 100- yr. peak water surface elevations on the plan. DS 2-02.2.1.A.15 Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management, SMDDFM, 2.3.1.4.C.1 4. The proposed drainage on the Site Plan does not follow the recommendation made in the Drainage Report. See Drainage Report comments. DRAINAGE REPORT 1. The Site Plan shows proposed drainage to the south. The Drainage Report specifies that drainage will be directed to the north. The Site Plan drainage scheme does not agree with that provided in the Drainage Report in any way. Correct. Because of the huge discrepancy between the plan and the report, new additional comments are likely in subsequent submittals. 2. An encroachment analysis is required. Provide HEC-2 data. All of the following points must be addressed. · The calculations used to assess the hydraulic effects that proposed structures will have upon the flood plan is needed whenever significant development is planned within FEMA recognized floodplains. SMDDFM 2.3.1.4.F · Development in the floodplain may not increase the base flood elevation more than one-tenth foot. Tucson Code Chapter 26-5.2 · The plan shows proposed finished grades across the entire property as being higher than the FEMA WSEL. The encroachment is therefore the entire property. Also a screenwall encircles the property also completely blocking flow. · Development shall not result in higher floodwater velocities which significantly increase the potential for flood or erosion damage. Tucson Code Chapter 26-5.2.(6) · Development shall not result in adverse impacts, including but not limited to erosion, upstream or downstream. It must be proved that the forcing of floodwaters around this proposed development will not adversely affect adjacent properties. Tucson Code Chapter 26-5.2.(3) 3. In areas where fill is to be used to raise the elevation of the building site, the building line shall be located not less than 25 ft. landward from any edge of the fill, unless a study prepared by a state-registered professional civil engineer and approved by the city engineer shows that a lessor distance is acceptable. Tucson Code Chapter 26-8(d)(2) |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/22/2003 | ANGIE SHOFFSTALL | REJECT SHELF | Stop |
| 07/08/2003 | ANY | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Stopped |