Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: GRADING
Permit Number - T04BU03081
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/25/2005 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: January 25, 2005 TO: Andrew Ogas, Gene Goldstein, Architect. SUBJECT: Jumbo Property, 7225 E. Broadway Bl. Site and Grading Plan Review REVIEWER: Loren Makus ACTIVITY NUMBERS: T04CM04755 and T04BU03081 SUMMARY: The Site Plan and Grading Plan were reviewed by Development Services Department Engineering Division and were not approved at this time. Revise the site and grading plans in accordance with the following comments. Site Plan comments: 1. Provide the lot dimensions and bearings for all of the lot lines on the site plan. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.5) 2. Dimension and label Broadway as an MS&R route. Dimension the existing and future right-of-way. Show existing and future sight visibility triangles. (DS 2-02.2.1.A.10) 3. Provide Drainage patterns and finished grades per D.S. 2-02.2.1.16. 4. List estimated cut & fill quantities on the site plan per D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.17. 5. Provide existing topographic contours at intervals not exceeding two (2) feet and/or spot elevations as pertinent and Bench Mark based on City of Tucson Datum, including City Field Book and page number. (D.S. 2-02.2.1.A.23.) 6. Show drainage patterns including roof drainage on the Site Plan. Show that sidewalks and pedestrian circulation routes will be kept floodfree for up to a 10-year event. (DS 2-08.3.1 and DS 2-08.4.1.E) 7. Show and label the maintenance access for the retention basin. 8. Provide a detail of the solid waste enclosures showing steel pipes along the rear and sides and including the 10 feet of clear space between the bollards. Grading Plan Comments: 9. Show limits of grading for this project. 10. Indicate by note or by some other means that the basin is to be graded to drain to the location of the outlet weir. 11. Provide details for the solid waste container enclosures per development standard 6. 12. Revise general note 1 to indicate that the 2003 edition of the standard details will be used. 13. The project is in violation of the differential grading provisions of Development Standard 11-01.8.1. Revise the grading plan to show that fill within the outer 100 feet does not exceed 2 feet. Otherwise, show that all of the other requirements of the development standard has been met. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Comments: 14. It is unclear from the project description in the SWPPP that the project area is already developed and only a part of the parcel will be under construction. Revise all parts of the SWPPP to clarify the nature of the project and the extent of construction activities and to provide consistency throughout. 15. Indicate on the site map the areas that will be disturbed and the areas that will not be disturbed. 16. Explain the function of the proposed silt fence to be installed at the upstream side of the project. Note that existing discharges onto the property cannot be obstructed. 17. Show the stabilized construction entrance on the site map as referenced on page 3. 18. Provide an estimate of the area expected to be disturbed. Part IV.C.2.b 19. Show the receiving waters on the general location map. Since the map appears in two places, revise both maps. Part IV.C.2.e 20. Describe specific dust control measures that will be used. Part IV.D.8.b 21. Provide for frequent sweeping of the existing paved areas of the project for dust control purposed. With a proposed net fill of 3400 cubic yards, significant tracking onto the paved area is expected and resulting dust and sediment transport must be controlled. Address the possibility that tracking onto broadway may occur and must be corrected immediately. 22. Revise the site map to clearly show the areas that will be disturbed and the areas that will not be disturbed. Part IV.C.3.b 23. Since the operator has been identified, the contractor's report sectio must be completed for SWPPP approval. Revise the Site Plan, to address all of these comments and resubmit two copies of the Site Plan 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 or email me at loren.makus@tucsonaz.gov. Loren Makus, E.I.T. Senior Engineering Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
| 01/26/2005 | Andrew Connor | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Site plan approval is necessary to continue review. |
| 01/31/2005 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 01/31/05 Development Services Department Zoning Review Section David Rivera Senior Planner 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. An approved site is required prior to final approval of the grading plan. 3. Zoning will re-review the grading plan on the next submittal to insure compliance with the approved site/development plan. Additional comments may be forthcoming. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 02/02/2005 | SUE REEVES | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |