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: T05CM04276
Parcel: 107060560

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL

Permit Number - T05CM04276
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - SITE ALL
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
02/16/2006 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
02/27/2006 SREEVES1 NPPO REVIEW Needs Review
02/27/2006 SREEVES1 LANDSCAPE REVIEW Needs Review
02/27/2006 SREEVES1 ZONING HC SITE REVIEW Needs Review
02/27/2006 SREEVES1 ZONING REVIEW Needs Review
02/27/2006 PATRICIA GILBERT ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied DATE: February 27, 2006
ACTIVITY NUMBER: T05CM04276
PROJECT NAME: Material Storage
PROJECT ADDRESS: 1315 E. Miracle Mile
PROJECT REVIEWER: Patricia Gilbert, Engineering Associate

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

RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED: SITE PLAN, DRAINAGE REPORT


1. Show the recordation (Book and Page) information for Miracle Mile. It is acknowledged that the parcel (tax code number) has been provided. However the requested information was the recordation (Book and Page) information for Miracle Mile. Show this information on the site plan.

2. Dimensions from street centerline to the existing curb, sidewalk, and utility lines. (See above comment 6). Label dimensions accordingly. This comment has not been addressed from the first review. Provide the requested dimensions from street centerline. DS 2-01.2.1.A.21.

3. Show more spot elevations as pertinent and give Bench Mark based on City of Tucson Datum, including City Field Book and page number. DS 2-02.2.1.A.23.

The above comment is from the first review and has not been addressed completely. It is acknowledged the Bench Mark based on City of Tucson Datum, including City Field Book and page number has been added to sheet C1-1. However spot elevations have not been added. It is acknowledged more finish grades have been added to the site plan, which is helpful to determine the direction of drainage after the site has been paved. Per SMDDFM 12.5. 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. Showing existing grades (spot elevations) on the site plan helps determine if the direction of drainage is being changed. Provide spot elevation (existing grades).

DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS

1. The existing and developed runoff coefficients (0.60 existing and 0.92 developed) used for calculating the 100-yr peak discharge (Q100) are different then the coefficients used (0.32 existing and 0.711 developed) for calculating the retention volume. Provide an explanation on why the same coefficients have not been used when calculating the retention volume or revise the drainage report to use the same coefficients. Stormwater Detention/Retention Manual Section 3.2.2.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
02/27/2006 SUE REEVES OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed