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 - T05BU00961
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/11/2005 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: May 11, 2005 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T05BU00961 PROJECT NAME: Encanto Villiage Lots 1-11 PROJECT ADDRESS: 3612 East 4th Street PROJECT REVIEWER: Patricia Gilbert The following items must be revised or added to the grading plan. Please include a detailed response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: 3 COPIES OF GRADING PLAN AND SWPPP. TWO COPIES OF THE GEOTECH REPORT AND DRAINAGE REPORT. REDLINED SWPPP NARRATIVE. 1. Submit an approved copy of the tentative plat with the next submittal. The grading plan will not be approved until the tentative plat is approved. Any information on the approved plat needs to on the grading plan. 2. All lettering and dimensions will be the equivalent of twelve point or greater in size. The purpose of this requirement is to assure that the lettering is legible when reproduced or microfilmed for record keeping purposes. The current font measures to 10 point, it must be at least 12 point or greater in size. Revise all lettering to be at least 12 point. 3. Indicate elevations on the contour lines. 4. Sheet 1 the Typical Lot Fine Grading Detail has a note stating, "Grade lots to drain to lowest lot corner." However there is only one grade per each lot. This makes it difficult to determine where the lot is draining. Show elevations on all corners on each of the lots. This will help determine if there is a differential grading issue for the site. 5. Show roof drainage (flow arrows) for each structure. DS 2-02.2.1.A.16 6. Indicate the height of the perimeter walls on detail 1 and 2 on sheet 1. 7. Indicate the size of the weep holes on the east wall. Label on the plan. 8. It is not clear why an erosion hazard setback line is indicated in the legend. The parcel is not effected by floodplain regulations. Remove or clarify. 9. Is there a wall proposed adjacent to Parcel 125-11-230A/B? If this is correct indicate the wall on the plan, show the height of the wall and dimension the wall openings. 10. Sidewalks must be flood free for up to the 10-yr. event. Add a note on the plan, "All roof down spouts on all structures must be routed under any adjacent sidewalk." DS 2-08.4.1.E DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS 1. Update the Onsite Existing and Developed Hydrology Map (Figure 1) to show the current retention proposal. 2. Under the Inspection/Maintenance Checklist indicate when the 2' sump will be cleaned out. SWPPP COMMENTS The following items must be revised or added to the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). Please include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed. RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: THREE COPIES STORM WATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN. REDLINED SWPPP NARRATIVE. 1. Indicate page numbers under the table of contents in the booklet (narrative). 2. Specifically state who the operator is with "Operational Control Over Construction Plans and Specifications." And who the operator is with "Control Over Day-To-Day Activities." Part IV.B.1 and 2. 3. Indicate where keynote letter A, B, C, E and F and Section D-D are located on the SWPPP site map. Are the controls being used? The SWPPP must be site specific. Show the location of the SWPPP control or remove from the SWPPP. 4. Indicate under the sequence of activities when the underground retention system is being put in. Give a description of the system. Include Stormtech's specs in the narrative. Part IV.D4.a. 5. Explain how the site while under construction will kept sediments out of the underground retention system. 6. Page 17 of the narrative, the last paragraph, it states the contractor must provide a narrative, describing best management practices for preventing discharges of non-stormwater discharges. This must be provided in the narrative or the contractor can complete the narrative prior to the Stormwater Pre-construction meeting and available upon the inspection. If the decision is made to do the latter this will be a condition of the permit. 7. Page 18, under the Maintenance/Inspection Section, VII.3 Routine Inspection choose between a or b. The operator must specify an inspection schedule in the SWPPP and may choose either of the following: a. The site will be inspected at least once every 7 calendar days, or b. The site will be inspected at least once every 14 calendar days, and also within 24 hours of the end of each storm event of 0.5 inches or greater. Revise the SWPPP narrative as necessary. |
| 05/18/2005 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 05/19/05 Development Services Department Zoning Review Section David Rivera Principal 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. Zoning could not verify that the grading plan was in compliance with the approved tentative plat. Please submit one copy of the CDRC approved and stamped tentative plat, landscape, and NPPO plans with the next grading plan submittal. 3. Zoning will re-review the grading plan on the next submittal to insure compliance with the CDRC approved and stamped tentative plat. Additional comments may be forthcoming. |
| 05/23/2005 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit stamped approved tentative plan including landscape and NPP plans to continue review. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 05/25/2005 | KMEDINA1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |