Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - GRADING ALL
Permit Number - T04BU01950
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - GRADING ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/05/2006 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | SUBJECT: Silverbell Vista Revision to Grading Plan Review TO: Steve Corrales Engineering Corporation REVIEWER: E Eberbach, PE ACTIVITY NUMBER: T04BU01950-R LOCATION: T13S, R13E, Section 33 SUMMARY: Copies of the drainage report addenda with cover letter, revised stormdrain system sheets R1 and R2, revised improvement plans sheets 4-8, and a copy of the master subdivision Drainage Report prepared by Urban Engineering were submitted for review. Approval of the subject plans is not recommended at this time. It was stated that the sewer line may have been constructed to incorrect elevations. Conflict in stormwater drainage pipe elevation appears to have instigated a revision to the stormdrain system. Due to concerns of current as-built elevations and constructed grades seen in the field visit on May 4, 2006, elevations will need confirmation; please address all comments listed below in a response letter and on revised grading plans. A revised grading plan (sheets 1-5) as well as revised sheets R1 and R2 will be required to be submitted addressing the following comments. GRADING PLAN AND DRAINAGE ADDENDA COMMENTS: 1) DS Sec.11-01.16.1.A: Address the following comments for the revised stormdrain system under the private street Bell Hollow Place: a) DS Sec 10-02.10.9.4: The drainage addenda and plans indicate a proposed stormdrain slope of 0.24% between stations 8+15 to 9+50. However, the minimum slope grades for CMP is 0.3%. Revise slope, or revise pipe material to smoother pipe for shallower slopes. Up to 0.1% is allowable for concrete or smooth metal pipe. b) On revision sheet R1, address the following comments: i) DS Sec 10-02.10.9.1.21: The plans indicate a few inches of cover between pavement structural section and CMP's. Clarify minimum clearance between top of CMP stormdrain pipe and pavement section per manufacturer's recommendations. ii) DS Sec 10-02.10.9.1.20: The plans show less than 2 feet of clearance between sewer pipe and stormdrain pipe. Show that the two systems have no less than 2 feet of clearance. iii) Clarify whether the invert at station 8+15.23 is proposed to be changed from the original plans. iv) On profile view, depict catch basin at station 14+63.36. c) For inlet structure of this stormdrain system, adjacent to lot 19 address the following: i) Clarify and show existing, original design, and proposed invert elevations at inlet. ii) DS Sec 10-02.10.9.1.13: Show that at the inlet, the hydraulic grade line shall be at least 6 inches below ground surface. iii) For clarification of detail 5B on sheet 3, label top elevation of east slope to accommodate for freeboard. d) On the original grading plan, the proposed PAD elevation for lot 19 is indicated lower than the approved Tentative Plat. Clarify revised minimum lot pad elevation on grading plan. This elevation appears to have been overlooked and needs revising to assure that the future home is 1 foot above WSEL. 2) DS Sec.11-01.12.5: Address the following elevation and as-built issues for resubmittal: a) Per calculations in drainage addenda show revised pad grades on plan view sheet 3. Assure that lots drain in the direction approved in the master drainage report. b) On plan view sheet 3, depict the project basis of elevation benchmark location, and state in response letter whether this elevation datum and benchmark are being used for grading construction. If the benchmark at the northwest property corner is not used, provide other local benchmark and clarify datum. c) Provide a detail for the proposed revision for the stormdrain inlet shown as a Type 4 catch basin at the southwest corner of lot 35. d) To prevent excessive sediment transport across Silverbell and to prevent erosion for the 435cfs exiting the box culvert and entering Common Area "I", extend erosion protection and show on sheet 5. e) For our files, please provide a copy of the soils report, one copy of the current SWPPP with next submittal. For review resubmittal, provide 4 copies of the revised grading plans (both the R1, R2 and sheets 1-5 of the onsite grading plans), a copy of the improvement plans sheets 4-8, one copy of the current Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, one copy/set of the stamped/approved Tentative Plat, a copy of the soils report, revised drainage addenda, and response letter. Any further proposed changes to grading design in the future may require a separate grading permit or a submittal review. Questions, call me at 791-5550 ext.2204. Elizabeth Eberbach, PE, CPM Civil Engineer Engineering Division Development Services |
| 05/11/2006 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | Engineering approval required |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 05/12/2006 | ADRIANNE OLIVO | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 05/12/2006 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |