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 - T04BU00230
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/20/2004 | Laith Alshami | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Hydrology Report Comments: 1. State the reason for the proposed drainage channel in the Drainage Report. 2. Provide the Hydrologic Data Sheets (SMDDFM 2.3.1.3). 3. Address the maintenance process and responsibility of the channel. Additionally, provide access ramp into the channel. 4. Provide the proposed gabion design information. Site/Grading Plan Comments: 1. Since the submitted plan is being reviewed under two different project numbers (i.e. site plan review and grading plan review), provide five copies of the plan in the next submittal. 2. Label the plan as "Grading/Site Plan". 3. Revise Grading Note #3 to include all missing information. 4. Provide the property description (2-02.2.1.2). 5. Provide the project address (2-02.2.1.3). 6. It is not clear why the 100-year floodplain limit is shown just out side the channel, which is designed to contain the 100-year runoff with freeboard. Additionally, it is not clear what the floodplain limits, shown on the City property (DKT 6926, PG 420), represent. Is this a discharge that enters the City property from the Haystack Apartments? 7. Show a cross section detail for the channel outlet at the Pantano and the proposed gabion. Show how deep (below the ground surface) the gabion shall be installed. 8. Provide the lot dimensions and bearings (2-02.2.1.5). 9. Show the existing and proposed limits of the 100-year floodplain limits and water surface elevations (2-02.2.1.15). 10. Provide gross and net lot area (2-02.2.2.A.1). 11. Show and label the berm and the 16' maintenance access on the plan. 12. Delineate the limits of the property used for refuse disposal in order to determine if the location and the design of the channel are adequate. If the area, underneath the proposed channel, is being used for garbage disposal, it should be completely excavated and replaced with clean fill in order to achieve the required 95% compaction. Alternatively, the channel can be built on engineered piers to ensure that channel failure does not occur in the future. SWPPP Comments: 1. Part IV.C.2.a. Clearly describe the project and its intended use after NOT is filed 2. Part IV.C.2.c. Indicate the total area of site including any areas to be used for equipment staging and material storage. 3. Part IV.C.3.d. Identify on the map locations where permanent stabilization practices are expected to occur. 4. Part IV.C.3.f. Identify on the map locations of all surface water bodies (including ephemeral waters). 5. Part IV.C.3.g. Identify on the map locations where stormwater is discharged to a surface water (e.g. ephemeral waters or dry washes) and to MS4s. 6. Part IV.D.2.c. Describe the practice and schedule to routinely remove offsite accumulation of sediment 7. Part IV.D.8.b. Describe measures to be used to minimize off-site vehicle tracking of sediments and the generation of on-site dust |
| 04/26/2004 | JOE LINVILLE | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Approved site and landscape/NPP plans required prior to approval. 2) Clearly delineate the limits of disturbance on the grading plan. |
| 04/30/2004 | David Rivera | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | May 1, 2004 Approved site plan requuired to approval of the grading plan. Approved and stamped site plan must be included with the grading plan packet. Zoning will review and approve the grading plan upon approval by the Engineering Section. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 05/03/2004 | LISA LESNY | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |