Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: GRADING
Permit Number - T04BU02306
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/21/2004 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit approved site plan including landscape and NPPO plans to continue review. |
| 09/27/2004 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | Approved site plan required. |
| 10/12/2004 | Loren Makus | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: October 15, 2004 TO: Paul Nzomo, Coronado Engineering SUBJECT: Landscape Material Facility, Site Plan and Grading Plan Review REVIEWER: Loren Makus ACTIVITY NUMBERS: T04CM04208 and T04BU02306 SUMMARY: The Site Plan and Grading Plan were reviewed by Development Services Department Engineering Division. The Site Plan, Grading Plan and Drainge Report (DR) were not approved at this time. Drainage Report Comments 1. Throughout the text of the report and the figures, there are many inconsistencies concerning the extent of the project site. Clarify the figures and text so that the affected property is clearly defined. The drainage report should analyze the whole parcel. (Development Standard (DS) 10-02.2.3.1.2) 2. Clarify the relationship between concentration points 1 and 4 and the project site. Both of these concentration points appear to be downstream from the project site. (DS 10-02.2.3.1.3.A.2) 3. On page 3 the DR states, "The site is not impacted by any off-site generated runoff from the adjacent lot to the east and southeast. Revise this statement to be consistent with the rest of the report. Also revise the statement "The site is not in COT floodplain" to indicate that the floodplain will be delineated. 4. Remove the statement, "The site is not in a balanced or critical basin … see figure 6." 5. Provide results of a percolation test demonstrating that the retained volume in the basins will be disposed of within 24 hours. 6. Present the calculations used to delineate the floodplain limits. Clearly identify the hydraulic cross-sections on the site plan. (DS) 10-02.2.3.1.4.E) 7. Revise the site plan in the drainage report to include all of the required elements from DS 10-02.2.3.1.6. This shall include the following: location, size and type of inflow and outflow structures, with dimensions and elevations; location and size of maintenance access ramps and roadways; and maximum water-surface elevations and the limits of ponding. Any other applicable requirements must also be include. 8. Provide the required routing sheets for each basin as described in DS 10-02.2.3.1.6.B. Include all of the supporting calculations. 9. Provide a detailed basin maintenance checklist and describe the required inspection program. (DS 10-02.2.3.1.6.C.) 10. Show how the stated inflow into the basin will be directed to the basins. 11. Show that the discharge from the project area will maintain the existing flow characteristics after the proposed improvements are completed. 12. Provide engineering calculations to substantiate all of the engineering conclusions presented in the report. 13. Show that the project will be provided with all-weather access. Provide calculations showing depth of flow across the private access easement. 14. Determine the erosion hazard setback for each of the drainageways and Site Plan and Grading Plan Comments. 15. Clearly show and label the flood-prone areas on the site plan. Show water surface contours at least every 200 feet. 16. Clearly show the locations of proposed weirs and channels. Show erosion control structures and surface treatments. 17. Clarify the nature of the surface treatment of the vehicle use areas. The same symbol is used for areas labeled "G.S.A. PAVING" and "DECOMPOSED GRANITE." The Land Use Code requires all vehicle use areas to be surfaced with an approved material. Specify one of the materials listed in LUC 3.3.7.3. 18. In a note, state that the grading will conform to City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01.0. 19. The basin routing pages in the drainage report appear to indicate that the basins will have outlet weirs. Provide details, dimensions and elevations for each weir. 20. Clarify the surface treatment for the areas labeled "FINISHED GOODS", and "MATERIAL STORAGE MOUNDS" as well as other areas within the proposed development. 21. Show the sight visibility triangles for access onto Littletown Road. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.10) 22. Show points of egress and ingress including the width of driveways. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.11) 23. Revise the design of the retention/detention basins so that they have curvilinear shapes and provide visual interest. 24. Show and label the solid waste container location and access thereto fully dimensioned. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.32) 25. Indicate the area of disturbance and show grading limits. If more than 1 acre will be disturbed, including any off-site improvement, a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan must be prepared and submitted. Include a completed copy of the ADEQ checklist showing where in the plan each requirement has been met. Revise the Site Plan, Grading Plan and the Drainage Report to address all of these comments and resubmit three copies of the site/grading plan and two copies of the SWPPP and Drainage Report. If you would like to meet with me to discuss any of these comments please call me at (520) 791-5550 ext. 1161. Loren Makus, E.I.T. Senior Engineering Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 01/10/2005 | TAMI ACHONG | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 01/10/2005 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |