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 - T05BU01921
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/09/2005 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | 1. A Native Plant Preservation Plan per Development Standard 2-15.3.0 is required. 2. An aerial photograph, taken within a maximum of three (3) years of submittal, at a minimum scale of 1" = 60' showing the site's boundaries, the locations of all Protected Native Plants within those boundaries, and the plants' identification numbers keyed to the inventory list in Sec. 2-15.3.1.A.2. Any aerial photograph submitted, which was taken more than one (1) year prior to submittal, shall be accompanied by a letter stating that the site is substantially unchanged from the date of the aerial photograph. 3. Preparation of all elements of the Native Plant Preservation Plan as required under LUC 3.8.6.7.D shall be performed by a plant professional, such as: · An arborist certified by the International Society of Arboriculture. · A landscape architect. · A horticulturist, biologist, or botanist with a minimum B.A. or B.S. in an appropriate arid environment natural resource field. 4. Submit any previously approved landscape and NPPO plans. |
| 08/24/2005 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: August 25, 2005 TO: John Evans SUBJECT: Regalo Del Sol Estates, Grading Plan Review REVIEWER: Loren Makus ACTIVITY NUMBER: T05BU01921 SUMMARY: The Grading Plan and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan were reviewed by Development Services Department Engineering Division. The Grading Plan and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) were not approved at this time. Grading Plan comments: 1. Revise the design of the basin outlet structure to be consistent with the drainage report and letter submitted with the permit application. The letter and narrative of the drainage report indicate that the low flow pipe will be place at one foot above the bottom of the basin. This is required because the basin does not infiltrate at a rate sufficient to empty the basin within 12 hours. 2. Provide sizing and embedment specifications for all areas of grouted riprap. A bed of concrete must be provided for the grouted riprap to forestall failure. 3. Provide five foot sidewalks along the street. 4. Provide a geotechnical report indicating the soils in the vicinity of the basin will be able to support the proposed retaining wall and providing structural specifications for the wall footing in light of the repeated inundations that will be expected in the basin. This report can be submitted when the wall permit is applied for. Indicate by note that a separate permit will be required for the wall. 5. Show how the access ramp for the basin will be accessed from the street. 6. Show how the drainage from lots 5, 6 and 7 will be directed east along the easement as described in the drainage report. 7. Provide truncated dome warning surfaces at each access ramp. Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan comments: 8. Part IV.B.2.c Explicitly indicate in the SWPPP the name of the operator with operational control over project specifications (including the ability to make modifications in specifications). 9. Part IV.B.2.c Explicitly indicate in the SWPPP the name of the operator with operational control over day-to-day activities at the construction site. 10. Part IV.C.2.e. Include and identify receiving waters in the general location map. 11. Part IV.C.3.g. Identify on the map locations where stormwater is discharged to a surface water (e.g. ephemeral waters or dry washes) and to MS4s 12. Part IV.D.8.c. Describe BMPs for managing concrete truck washout and surplus concrete discharge. 13. Part IV.H.1Indicate if the inspection frequency is to be at least once every 7 calendar days OR indicate if the inspection frequency is to be at least once every 14 days and also within 24 hours of the end of each storm event of equal to or greater than 0.5 inches. The operator must indicate which inspection schedule will be used. 14. Part IV.H.2. If the site is eligible for reduced inspection frequency indicate why it is eligible and how it will be inspected once each month AND anytime rain is predicted AND within 24 hours of the end of a storm event of equal to or greater than 0.5 inches 15. Provide a discussion of the timing for installing the permanent stabilization along the channel from the street to the basin and at the discharge location from the basin. Show the controls that will be used to limit the sediment discharge from the low flow pipe at the basin discharge location. Revise the Grading Plan and prepare a SWPPP to address all of these comments and resubmit three copies of the grading plan and four copies of the SWPPP. 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 |
| 09/09/2005 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 09/09/05 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. 4. Rip rap is propsed along the south property line of lots 2 and 10. I do not believe tha the rip rap is allowed to encroach over a utility eastment as depicted on the grading plan. In conferrriong with Loren Makus (Engineering Reviewer) he has indicated that the rip rap must be placed outside the easment areas. Please contact Loren for more information on this issue if you have any questions. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/21/2005 | CINDY AGUILAR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 09/21/2005 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |