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: RESUBMITTAL - GRADING ALL
Permit Number - T05BU00017
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - GRADING ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/22/2005 | DOUG WILLIAMS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | All previous comments have not been fully addressed. Please address the comments provided below in a response letter, on revised plans and a revised drainage report. As requested previously, a Floodplain Use Permit application must be submitted with the resubmittal package, or under separate cover prior to grading permit approval. 1. Discuss whether the discrepancy in hydraulic watercourse length shown on the hydrologic data sheet for the offsite watershed (Forgeus wash - existing conditions) will affect the calculated Q100, slope, floodplain limits, and therefore the design for this project. There is a discrepancy between the individual watercourse lengths and the Lc on this data sheet. Please clarify in a response letter and in a revised drainage report. 2. Please provide a copy of the soils report, as indicated in the response letter. A soils report is required to be submitted in conjunction with the design of each surface storage facility which utilizes infiltration as a method of basin drainage. The report shall contain at a minimum, technical information on soil classification, erodibility, permeability, slope stability, groundwater elevation, infiltration rates, recommended minimum building setbacks (from basins and drainageways), whether or not hydro-collapsing soils are present, and contain the results of a minimum 30 foot deep soil boring (10-01.0, Section 3.5.1.5 and Section 14.2.6 of DS 10-02.0). 3. Grading limits are not clear on the Grading Plan - the phase line depicted in the legend appears to be grading limits as well. Please clarify on the plan and in a aresponse letter. 4. Please label and dimension all new sidewalk to be constructed within the right of way on the site and grading plans (previous site plan comment # 5 and grading comment # 4). 5. Please address previous SWPPP comment # 3 regarding Owner/Operator signatures/certifications. |
| 06/23/2005 | DAN CASTRO | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | Grading plan may not be approved by Zoning until the Engineering Section has approved the grading plan. |
| 06/27/2005 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Site plan approval is necessary to continue review. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 06/28/2005 | KMEDINA1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |