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 - T04BU01574
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/09/2004 | JIM TATE | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: July 9, 2004 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T04BU01574 PROJECT NAME: Lecocq Apartments PROJECT ADDRESS: 1204 N. Winstel PROJECT REVIEWER: James C. Tate, P.E., CFM 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 drainage comments have been addressed. Resubmittal Required: Grading Plan Submittal Required: Drainage Report Grading Plan 1. Include the copy of the stamped approved Site Plan with the Grading Plan re-submittal. 2. Include a copy of a revised drainage report with the next submittal. It appears that the intention is to change the drainage from the approved Site Plan. Changes to drainage must be substantiated in a revised drainage report. 3. The plan as submitted has been modified with a black marker. It can not be determined what this plan is actually supposed to look like. Have these changes been approved by the architect whose stamp is on the plan? The plan is unreadable as submitted. Eliminate the black marker changes. 4. It appears that the black marker is intended to change scupper locations? Scuppers must be located as originally approved. Sidewalks must be flood free for up to the ten year event. 5. Show existing grades on adjacent properties. The Grading Plan must show that the proposed revised drainage scheme will not adversely affect the proposed development on adjacent properties. 6. Submit both Sheets C1 and C2 for approval as a Grading Plan. The sheets must agree as to all intended changes to the approved plan. They must also agree with the revised Drainage Report. 7. Black marker has been used to eliminate approved drainage holes in the block wall. The revised Drainage Report must address any and all changes to the approved Site Plan drainage. 8. The elevations on the plan do not make sense. This property is already developed. The plan shows existing and proposed grades. The existing grades should be the proposed grades. Are the existing grades meant to represent the grades that were present prior to development? If this is the case, why have they changed from the original plan? Obviously the previous existing grades could not change. All elevations must be clearly indicated on the plan. Revise the plan to clear up all these discrepancies. The elevations must be in agreement with the proposed drainage scheme as indicated in the revised drainage report. 9. The Grading Plan must match the approved Site Plan. Revise the Site Plan as necessary. |
| 07/13/2004 | Andrew Connor | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit a copy of the stamped approved site plan to continue review. |
| 07/15/2004 | JTATE1 | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | Engineering approval is required prior to Zoning approval. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/19/2004 | ANGIE SHOFFSTALL | REJECT SHELF | Completed |
| 07/15/2004 | ANGIE SHOFFSTALL | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |