Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: REVISION - GRADING
Permit Number - T04BU01950
Review Name: REVISION - GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10/12/2011 | ELIZABETH LEIBOLD | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: October 12, 2011 SUBJECT: Silverbell Vista Final Revision / As-built Grading Plan 4th Resubmittal Review TO: Urban Engineering (Bill Cowie, PE) REVIEWER: E Leibold, PE ACTIVITY NUMBER: T04BU01950 LOCATION: T13S, R13E, Section 33 SUMMARY: The revised Silverbell Vista subdivision project closure documents were resubmitted for review. The 2011 annual subdivision drainage certification report was submitted to the City of Tucson 11OCT11. EOR addressed punch list items from walk-through on 19JUL11. A significant amount of work has been done of the project recently including improvements to the east and west drainage inlet/outlet structures. The recent erosion to the north bank along the basin from the last storm has not been repaired. A letter from the EOR was emailed on 10OCT11 discussing north slope. A meeting with the consultant is required before resubmittal to go over remaining comments. PRIVATE STREET, GRADING PLAN AND DRAINAGE ADDENDA COMMENTS: DS Sec. 11-01.16: Address the remaining clarifications: 1) Paperwork items a) - After the north slope is resolved (see below) and the rest of the paperwork below is completed, Developer will need to ask the Title Agent to email a request to the City for full release of assurances; b) - Complete sidewalk in front of lots 38 & 39 - OR - submit acknowledgement that the City will be placing a CofO restriction to have sidewalk completed at future lot development; c) - Submit paperwork regarding north slope (see below); d) - Submit copy of Parks & Rec acceptance of completion of rezoning condition 11 (PDSD recalls this was completed and confirmed in early 2010 but does not a have a copy in the file); e) - Submit copies of pavement construction reports for mix, compaction etc.; f) - EOR shall go over with Reviewer submittal items per last set of comments to reconfirm/clarify documentation received. 2) North slope On 10OCT11, the EOR submitted a clarification letter regarding the north slope erosion and a recommendation to reseed the eroded area. After discussing with staff in a meeting 11OCT11, the City determined that there is insufficient as-built elevations to show adequate freeboard at the top of this slope. Flows are to be directed into the eastern ROW and the as-built elevations do not indicate that storm event flows will be directed towards the eastern weir. In the approved plans there may be higher grades called out than what was built. The City will need to consider solution(s) that the EOR will propose to assure adequate freeboard. For instance, if additional rip rap is to be placed along the inside slope to bring the elevation of the top of north slope higher, then at minimum, a letter stating that this was done would be needed to address freeboard. Also, the proposed reseed would not be accepted to address the erosion for release since there is time involved to irrigate and establish vegetation; therefore, rip rap w/ filter fabric would be accepted for the north side of this slope after regrading. EOR should call to discuss proposals before proceeding. 3) Latest Annual Report response In the 2011 Annual Report sealed 5OCT2011, the engineer discusses several items that he recommends as developer's responsibility. The City is requesting that the EOR go over this recent report and provide a sealed statement that addresses the items, and, either proposes corrections that will be done in agreement between the developer and HOA, or explains how the items are not the responsibility of the developer. In particular, the City would like a response to the following 5 items from this last annual report: i - erosion from one wall opening (not part of north slope), and; ii - no filter fabric was placed under lot 18 end of swale rip rap; annual report is asking for a cutoff wall and spillway redesign/reconstruction, and; iii - ponding water on the pavement at the private street entrance - asking for repair, and; iv - change in basin configuration is questioned, that sand was added to basin bottom (?), re-confirm basin volume, and; v - what appears to be a request for a retaining wall on the existing western hill. In staff meeting on 10OCT11, Jim Vogelsberg and Dave Roberts stated that there will be an assurance inspection by Dave Roberts after the grading permit is closed out. If you have any questions, you are welcome to call me at 837-4934. Elizabeth Leibold, P.E., CPM, CFM Civil Engineer Engineering Division Planning & Development Services |
| 10/17/2011 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | October 17, 2011 Development Services Department Zoning Review Section Michael St.Paul Planning Technician T04BU01950 Grading Plans for S03-033 Comments: 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 Sections and until all zoning comments or concerns have been addressed. 2. Zoning will re-review the grading plan on the next submittal to ensure compliance with the CDRC approved and stamped tentative plat. Additional comments may be forthcoming. |
| 10/19/2011 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | Ensure that all Engineering comments and concerns are addressed prior to NPP / Landscape approval stamp. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11/07/2011 | CPIERCE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 11/07/2011 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |