Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you can not find what you are looking for please submit a records request.
Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: GRADING
Permit Number - T04BU02490
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 10/22/2004 | Andrew Connor | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit approved development plan including landscape and NPPO plans to continue review. |
| 11/04/2004 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: November 4, 2004 TO: Russell Wise, Rick Engineering Company SUBJECT: Pantano Gardens, Grading Plan REVIEWER: Loren Makus ACTIVITY NUMBER: T04BU02490 SUMMARY: The Grading Plan was reviewed by Development Services Department Engineering Division. It was not approved at this time. Grading Plan comments: 1. The grading plan cannot be approved until the development plan has been approved. Provide a copy of the approved development plan with the grading permit application. 2. Throughout the plan sheet and details there are call-outs that refer to non-existent or mis-identified details. Check all call-outs and provide all required details. 3. The grading plan proposed grading onto adjacent properties. Provide notarized letters granting permission for all off-site work from the adjacent property owners. 4. Provide an engineering evaluation of the surcharge and its effects on the existing retaining wall that may be caused by constructing the screen wall within the retained soil. Provide a notarized letter authorizing the screen wall construction from the owner of the wall. 5. Section I on Sheet 3 shows a cut slope at the property line. Revise the grading plan and all details so that all cut and fill slopes are at least 2 feet from the property line. 6. Provide general dimensions for the retention basin and for the water harvesting basins. Provide cross-section details for each basin showing the overall floor and sides. Show that the basins will be graded to drain to one location. 7. In the basin details, show the required concrete markers and graduated posts that should delineate the maximum sediment level. (DS 10-01.3.4.2) 8. Revise the detail of the solid waste enclosure to clarify that the distance between the bollards along the side walls are to provide 10 feet of clear opening. Drainage Report Comments: 9. Provide in the drainage report, results of percolation tests showing that the retained volume will be disposed of within 12 hours. SWPPP Comments: 10. Show the receiving waters in the general location map. 11. Include all off-site disturbed areas (such as the right-of-way improvements) within the limits of disturbance. 12. Show how the outlet channel from the basin will be stabilized to prevent erosion. Revise the Grading Plan to address these comments and submit three copies of the grading plan for review. Submit two copies of the SWPPP and two copies of the revised 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 or email me at loren.makus@tucsonaz.gov. Loren Makus, E.I.T. Senior Engineering Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
| 11/10/2004 | David Rivera | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | December 20, 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, and Landscape Review Sections and until all zoning comments or concerns have been addressed. 2. In addition to the approved and stamped tentative plat copies, two copies of the approved and stamped landscape and NPPO plans must be included with grading plan. 3. Zoning will re-review the grading plan on the next submittal to insure compliance with the approved and stamped tentative plat and landscape plans. 4. Please insure that the grading plan matches the concept and design of the tentative plat. Revise the grading plan to match the tentative plat or revise the tentative plat to match and comply with the grading plan. I acknowledge that changes occur at time grading plan submittal but in this case the tentative plat has not been approved and therefore changes to either plan can be made for consistency. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11/15/2004 | BETH GRANT | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 11/15/2004 | BETH GRANT | REJECT SHELF | Completed |