Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Review Detail

Permit Number: T05BU01518
Parcel: Unknown

Address:
1007 E IRWIN PL

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: GRADING

Permit Number - T05BU01518
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
10/27/2005 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approv-Cond
11/25/2005 DAVID RIVERA ZONING REVIEW Denied 11/25/05

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.

2. Zoning will re-review the grading plan on the next submittal to ensure compliance with the CDRC approved and stamped tentative plat. Additional comments may be forthcoming.

3. If the Enginering Section Approves tha plan please call me and setup and appointment and I will re-review the grading plan and approve it over the counter barring no significant changes to the plan are made that may affect zoning requirements.
12/05/2005 PATRICIA GILBERT ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied DATE: December 6, 2005
ACTIVITY NUMBER: T05BU01518
PROJECT NAME: Homes at Irwin Place Lots 1-12
PROJECT ADDRESS: 1007 East Irwin
PROJECT REVIEWER: Patricia Gilbert

The following items must be revised or added to the grading plan. Please include a response letter with the next submittal that states how all comments have been addressed.

RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: GRADING PLAN, DRAINAGE REPORT

STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN (SWPPP) IS ACCEPTABLE (see comment 15 and 16)

1. Indicate site address.

2. Indicate cut and fill quantities in cubic yards on the sheet 1 and 5.

3. Darken the type weight for the spot elevations. Numbers are too light.

4. On page 8 of the drainage report states in the second paragraph, the onsite runoff will be directed towards the front of each lot. Sheet 3 of the grading plan shows roof drainage arrows in both

5. Adjacent to lot 9, the onsite flow is directed towards the north west corner of the lot. Keynote number 14 shows a wall is blocking the flow. Is the intent to have a wall opening in this area to promote positive drainage? Clarify.

6. The general direction of drainage is to the northwest. Behind lot 8 the direction of onsite drainage is shown to the east. Stormwater must be accepted and released from developments essentially at the same locations, and with the same magnitudes, as encountered under natural or existing conditions. Revise the grading plan and/or clarify. SMDDFM 12.5.

7. One of the purposes of a grading plan is for the Engineering inspectors to utilize the plan during the Engineering inspections. Because of this, the plan must be clear. It is not clear what the lined symbol is indicating shown within the sidewalk area in front of each lot. Clarify with a keynote or in the legend.

8. Show the grading limits on the plan. See the Development Standard 11-01.9. for the required setbacks.

9. What kind of erosion protection will be used for the onsite flow behind lots 4 and 5 that enters the basin? Is there a wall between the basin and the lot? Onsite drainage must not create unnecessary sediment transport to the basin. Clarify and revise appropriately.

10. Indicate a dimensioned cross-section detail of the basin behind lot number 2.

11. Indicate spot elevations in common area "A" located in the southeast corner of the site. The area is a landscape area and water harvesting is a requirement.

12. Handicap curb access ramps are required to be constructed with truncated domes, per recent a Federal ADA requirement. Show a detail or add a general note to the site plan indicating all public and private handicap curb access ramps will have truncated domes.

13. Indicate the DSMR number on the plan and the verbiage of the approved DSMR.

14. It is not clear why there is a detention volume indicated on sheet 4, detail H/4. Is the shown water surface elevation for the retention volume or detention volume? Clarify. Indicate the ponding limits for the detention volume in the retention basin. Revise as necessary.

15. In the SWPPP Narrative the certification must be signed by the appropriate parties. Certification must be signed for SWPPP approval.

16. The SWPPP is approvable once the grading plan is approved. Submit three copies of the grading plan and the SWPPP.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
12/06/2005 DELMA ROBEY OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed