Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: GRADING
Permit Number - T05BU00902
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/05/2005 | PATRICIA GEHLEN | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | Zoning 5/5/05 Grading plans will be reviewed and approved once the site plan is approved |
| 05/10/2005 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Site plan approval is necessary to continue review. |
| 05/24/2005 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Brent A. Gettinger, J.R. Tuttle SUBJECT: Spa Warehouse Engineering Review ACTIVITY NUMBERS: T05BU00902 (Grading Plan review), T05CM01701 (Site Plan review) SUMMARY: Engineering has received and reviewed the Grading Plan, Drainage Report and for grading and site plan review. The grading plan is not approved at this time. The drainage report was reviewed for grading purposes only. Address the following comments: DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS: 1) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No.: Revise basin design so that outlet flow is discharged in existing conditions. 2) Drainage improvements are not allowable within future MS&R right-of-way. Check location of basin with respect to future Country Club right-of-way. 3) Provide administrative address on cover of report for archival purposes. GRADING/SITE PLAN COMMENTS: 4) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No.2-02.1.1: Applicant must fill out information on the grading application form under applicant prior to or at resubmittal. 5) DS Sec.10-01.3.5.1: Provide a copy of the geotechnical report address the following: a) Description of soil suitability for this project. b) Provide testing results including results from percolation tests showing effective infiltration rates. Geotechnical report shall address percolation for both of the proposed basins. c) Provide positive drainage away from structure. It appears that there is proposed water harvesting adjacent to structure. Provide geotechnical recommended setback from ponding, or submit a letter from the Geotechnical Engineer stating that the grading plan has been reviewed and the water harvest area is acceptable; otherwise revise design to prevent ponded water from standing adjacent to the proposed structure. 6) Add a grading note to the grading plan stating that at post-grading construction inspection, additional percolation testing may be required. 7) Label and show local benchmark location on plan view. 8) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.30: Explain in response letter conformance of conditions of Annexation case C15-88-01, ordinance 7090. 9) Provide limits of grading delineation and add to legend. 10) Dimension basins. 11) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.32: For Refuse containers, provide dimensions and show or label gates or doors for trash enclosures. 12) Add general note referencing Geotechnical Report, name, job number, and date. State that the grading plan shall comply with recommendations within the report as well as any subsequent geotechnical addenda. 13) DS Sec.2-02: Label plans as Site/Grading/Paving Plans or provide separate site plan for review. 14) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.20: Provide recording information for the existing rights of way for Medina Road, Bonney Avenue, and Country Club Road. Show future MS&R right-of-way on plan view for Country Club. 15) Show sight visibility triangles on planview. 16) Grading design does not appear to accommodate for positive drainage at proposed building; clarify and check spot elevations around the structure. Also, explain FFE and slab elevations. 17) DS Sec.11-01: Add a general grading note stating that the grading work shall conform to City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01. 18) The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) does not meet the minimum requirements of the AzPDES Construction General Permit (CGP). Revise the SWPPP to according to these comments: a) On page 4, revise sequence of major activities to state that establishment of erosion and stormwater controls are to occur prior to clearing and rough grading of this site. b) Provide a copy of the AzPDES general permit (#AZG2003-001) as part of the SWPPP. See the weblink: http://www.azdeq.gov/environ/water/permits/download/constgp.pdf c) Add a note to the SWPP plan cover sheet stating that the operator shall report to ADEQ any noncompliance (including spills) which may endanger human health or the environment. The operator shall orally notify the office listed below within 24 hours: i) Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 1110 W. Washington, 5th floor (5515B-1) Phoenix, AZ 85007 Office: 602-771-4466; Fax 602-771-4505 d) Delineate limits of designated concrete washout location on SWPPP sheet 1. e) Two copies of the SWPP were in this submittal; provide 4 total sets of the SWPPP and report with NOI. 19) Revise general grading note 32 or add other notation to state the total disturbance area in square feet. 20) DS Sec.11-01.2.3: A bond shall be posted for native seeding. If grading construction does not commence within 60 days after grubbing, the disturbed area shall be native seeded within 30 days following the expiration of the 60 day period. The reseed bond will be required at time of grading permit issuance and is based on the total disturbance area in square feet at $0.05 per squarefoot. 21) Development Standards (DS) Section 11-01.16.2: Add a general grading note that states that DSD Engineering Division Inspections are required for initial stormwater controls as well as grading pre-construction meeting. For any questions, call me at 791-5550, extension 2204. Elizabeth Eberbach, PE Civil Engineer Engineering Division Development Services |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/08/2005 | CINDY AGUILAR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 07/08/2005 | ANGIE SHOFFSTALL | REJECT SHELF | Completed |