Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: GRADING
Permit Number - T04BU01867
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/29/2004 | Andrew Connor | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit approved development plan including landscape and NPP plans to continue review. |
| 08/12/2004 | Loren Makus | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: August 13, 2004 TO: Steve Wollerman, AMEC Infrastructure SUBJECT: Adobe Veterinary Clinic Grading Plan Review REVIEWER: Loren Makus ACTIVITY NUMBER: T04BU01867 SUMMARY: The Grading Plan and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) were reviewed by Development Services Department Engineering Division. They were not approved at this time. Grading Plan comments: 1) The Development Plan must be approved before the grading plan can be approved. Include a copy of the approved Development Plan with the grading permit application. 2) Clearly show the areas that are not to be disturbed. Delineate and label the areas that are shown as undisturbed on the landscape plan 3) Provide general dimensions for the berm that creates the basin. 4) Revise the backup spur at the west end of the parking area to conform to the development standard. The bollards, if used must be at least three feet behind wheel stops placed at the back of the spur. (Development Standard (DS) 3-05.2.2.D 5) Provide a description for Key note 30, which is called out, but no corresponding note is provided for it. 6) The area along Tanque Verde Road is shown on the county assessor's map as belonging to Pima County. Check with the Pima County Real Property Division on this issue and get something in writing from them explaining the status of this parcel. If it is Pima County property, then the County should be involved in the review for those portions impacting their property. 7) Show how that all fill will be protected from erosion in accordance with Section 26-5.2.12 of the City Code. 8) Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Comments 9) Review the SWPPP and ensure that it specifically addresses this project. For example Page 3 of the SWPPP states that the project will involve the disturbance of 18 acres and that clearing and grubbing has already occurred. Page 5 states that perimeter erosion controls must be in place before clearing and grubbing. 10) There are many differences between the information on the plan sheets and in the bound report. Revise one or both so that they are consistent with each other. 11) Indicate on the site map all areas where existing vegetation is to be preserved. (Part IV.D.4.b) 12) The SWPPP must be signed by each operator. Revise the Grading Plan and SWPPP to address all of these comments and resubmit three copies for review along with a copy of the approved Development Plan. If you would like to meet with me to discuss any of these comments please call me at (520) 791-5550 ext. 1161 or email me at loren.makus@tucsonaz.gov. Loren Makus, E.I.T. Senior Engineering Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
| 08/22/2004 | David Rivera | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 1. The grading plan has been reviewed by Zoning Review Section but cannot approve the plan until it has been approved by the Engineering and Landscape Review Section and approval of the development plan as a site plan. 2. Two copies of the approved and stamped development/site plan (which has the SCZ approval stamp as well), landscape and NPPO plans must be included with grading plan. 3. This development plan is still under CDRC review and has not been approved. In addition approval of the Scenic Corridor must be granted by DSD. Both the Development plan and Scenic Corridor plans have been denied a this time due to incompletness of the plans. See CDRC Zoning review comments for deficiencies in the Scenic Corridor plan. The grading plan canot be approved by the Zoning Review section until the thirty day appeal period for the Scenic Corridor has expired. Contact the Zoning Section for more information. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 12/16/2004 | BETH GRANT | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 12/16/2004 | ANGIE SHOFFSTALL | REJECT SHELF | Completed |