Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: GRADING
Permit Number - T04BU02212
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/23/2004 | Andrew Connor | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit approved tentative plat including landscape and NPPO plans to continue review. |
| 10/06/2004 | Elizabeth Eberbach | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: September 9, 2004 TO: Jeff Stanley PE, Entranco SUBJECT: Enchanted Hills Grading Plan Submittal Engineering Review LOCATION: T14S R13E Section 27 REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach ACTIVITY NUMBER: T04BU02212 SUMMARY: The Grading Plan and Drainage Report were received by Engineering on October 6, 2004. Engineering has reviewed the received items and does not recommend approval of the Grading Plan at this time. The Drainage Report was reviewed for Grading Plan purposes only. DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS: 1) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No.10-02: Submit current Drainage Report for review. 2) DS Sec.10-02.1.5.1: Clearly explain where the basin area will be accessed. 3) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.3.B.1: Backyards must be included in runoff calculations. Sizing for the wall openings will be required for grading plan submittal. Due to the concern about West Nile and providing positive drainage away from foundations, the watershed map needs to show that drainage design prevents ponding and provides positive drainage at adequate stormwater exit points. Provide revise exhibit showing revised watershed delineation. Update Drainage Report calculations with revised runoff areas. 4) DS Sec.10-02.14.3.4: Clarify whether ramp is used or access area is provided for basins. Ramp may not be used as spillway; clarify in the revised Drainage Report. GRADING PLAN COMMENTS: 5) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.4: Provide or clarify the following grading information: a) Proposed spot elevations for FFE's or FPE's, and describe vertical difference between FPE and FFE. This must be clearly defined to assess whether differential grading is an issue for this project; b) Dumpster enclosure adjacent to drainage channel north of south basin shall be relocated to an area not inundated by channelized stormwater; c) Add notation regarding wall openings on the Grading Plan. d) Provide proposed spot elevations at end of hammer heads on sheet 3. e) Provide dimensions on basin areas. 6) Add the following general notes to the Grading Plan: a) stating that Post Grading construction inspection as well as additional percolation testing may be required. b) Any special geotechnical recommendations should be added as general grading note. c) Contact Permits and Codes (791-5100) for any right-of-way requirements 7) Add notation to sheets that have retaining wall details, that a separate building permit is required for retaining walls. 8) Assure that grading design allows for runout for any incurred slope changes where cut or fill is adjacent to property boundary. Once existing topography is labeled further review can be done. 9) On sheet 1, address the following comments: a) Complete Grading and Paving Note 8. b) Complete Earthwork quantities shown on sheet 1. c) Provide area of disturbance in square feet. d) Add to legend the grading limit line - and show on all plan views. 10) Label existing contour lines on sheets 3, 4 and 5. 11) On sheet 2, call out material on section view for EXIT Detail. 12) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.M: Label on planview on sheet 2, the slope grades around basin per this section of Tucson Code IBC Chap.36 Sec.14.2&3. 13) DS Sec.10-02.14.3.4: Clarify whether ramp is used or access area is provided for basins. Ramp may not be used as spillway; clarify. 14) DS Sec.2-03.4.5: Submit a detailed response letter addressing comments with the resubmittal packet. 15) The Tentative Plat and drainage report must be approved prior to Grading Plan resubmittal. 16) For SWPPP, address the following: a) Clarify silt fence installation detail to remove any material built up against the silt fence fabric. Typically, the special drain material is not brought onto construction sites; native material should not be used to build-up against the silt fence. Slopes should be kept at grade. Show existing grade line on this detail. b) For the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), each operator must sign the SWPPP; Provide signature lines on the SWPPP. c) Indicate receiving waters on map. 17) Provide a copy of the soils report with any other geotechnical engineering evaluation addenda included in a bound report. The next submittal should address all the above items. Further comments may be forthcoming once Tentative Plat is revised and approved, and contour lines are labeled, and current drainage report is submitted. Submit the revised Grading Plan (3copies), soils report, current Drainage Report, revised SWPPP (3copies), and copy of the response letter. You may call to schedule an appointment to go over these comments, or if you have any questions, please call me at 791-5550 extension 2204. Elizabeth Eberbach, PE Civil Engineer Engineering Division Development Services |
| 10/07/2004 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | October 7, 2004 Development Services Department Zoning Review Section David Rivera Senior Planner 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 Review and Landscape Sections and until all zoning comments or concerns have been addressed. 2. In addition to the approved tentative plat copies, two copies of the approved and stamped landscape and NPPO plans must be included with grading plan. 3. Please insure that the grading plan matches the approved tentative plat. Revise the grading plan to include the requested sdiewalks leading to the dumpster locations. Draw required access ramps. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11/04/2004 | BETH GRANT | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 11/04/2004 | ANGIE SHOFFSTALL | REJECT SHELF | Completed |