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

Permit Number: T05CM04997
Parcel: 11803360A

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: RESIDENTIAL BLDG/ZONING/ENGINE/WWM

Permit Number - T05CM04997
Review Name: RESIDENTIAL BLDG/ZONING/ENGINE/WWM
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
10/05/2005 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Denied 1. Submit NPPO plan or application for exception per DS 2-15.0

2. Provide acceptable documentation, which clearly indicates that the project will not impact Protected Native Plants. Such documentation includes photographs of the site taken from all sides of the property and a signed statement from the property owner that Protected Native Plants are not located on the subject site. Photographs of the site are necessary for NPPO approval per DS 2-15.2.0.C
10/05/2005 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Denied Provide a riparian habitat mitigation plan.
10/20/2005 DAN CASTRO ZONING REVIEW Approved
11/09/2005 ELIZABETH EBERBACH ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied TO: Pedro Gonzales
SUBJECT: Floodplain Use Permit Submittal Engineering Review
LOCATION: 2150 S SAN JOAQUIN AV, T14S R13E Section 21
REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach
ACTIVITY NUMBER: T05CM04997, T05CM04997

SUMMARY: The copy of violation notice, site layout plan, and a Hydrologic & Hydraulic Analysis Report of the existing conditions were submitted for review. Engineering has reviewed the received items and does not recommend approval of the Floodplain Use Permit and associated culvert permit application until the following comments are addressed.

DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS:
1) Tucson Code (TC) Section 26-5.2(4): The report states a Q100 of 162 cfs is predicted for this existing watershed. A mitigation plan is needed for disturbance of jurisdiction flow within this disturbed wash.
a) TC Sec.26-3.1.(b)(1): The plan shall provide a cross section of the flow entering the site at the west side of the property.
b) Delineate the re-established wash limits on the plan.
2) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No. 3-01.4.4.D: From the analysis the pipes do not fully convey the 100-year flow and there is more than 1 foot of flow over the pipes. Provide a design that provides for 100-year conveyance that minimizes overtopping to less than a foot deep for compliance with all weather access. Include updated cross sections and spot elevations for both driveway crossings showing depths (not to exceed 1-foot deep above driveway), velocities, and flow rates.
3) TC Sec.26-5.2(12): Discuss and provide any recommendations if necessary for:
a) any excavation of excess fill at the site for re-establishment of wash grades;
b) erosion hazard set back due to disturbed and fill soils;
c) sediment controls at exit from pipe outletting adjacent to public road;
d) assurance that the design for the required improvements do not create adverse impact to neighboring parcels (significant change in floodplain limits or more than a tenth of a foot WSEL increase).
4) TC Sec.26-5.2.(9): Provide/label any future minimum lowest floor elevations derived from floodplain study for both of these parcels.
5) TC Sec.26-5.2.(11): Elevation Certifications may be required for the onsite existing structures to assure that the finished floor elevations are 1-foot above the regulatory floodplain. This may include the existing building and the storage structure, with associated adjacent electrical utility boxes. If after resubmittal it is determined that they are needed, the elevation certificates will be prepared for use by a registered land surveyor for completion prior to approval of the Floodplain Use Permit.

SITE PLAN COMMENTS:
6) TC Sec.26-6.1.(a) & 26-11(a): It was stated in the Violation Notice that fill was placed in the wash. From aerial photography, vegetation has also been disturbed and removed. A Grading Plan and Permit is required.
7) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.5.G: It appears that the site is split into two parcels. Provide easement dimensions and label recorded dockets and pages the following:
a) Clarify whether there will be a drainage maintenance easement for the pipes that are located beyond the parcel boundary or span the two parcels.
b) Provide access easement.
8) Revise the site/grading plan according to the following additional comments:
a) DS Sec.2-02.2.15: Draw 100-year flood limits from Figure Four on the plan.
b) DS Sec.26-7.2: Dimension distances for minimum setbacks from floodplain.
c) TC Sec.26-11.2.(a)(2)b: Provide topographical data with contours for the two parcels. The structures appear to be located on the south parcel whereas the plan shows the shed on the north parcel. Provide a plan that is to scale and label scale.
d) TC Sec.26-8(d)(2): Indicate erosion protection for building pads if needed, and at entrances to and at outlets from culvert structures.
e) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.17: Label cut and fill for proposed grading to re-establish wash and/or replace new culverts.
f) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.23: Label and identify location of local basis of elevation on a plan view.
g) TC Sec.25.38(a): The minimum distance between curb cuts for residential driveways is 12 feet. Dimension distance between two driveways.
h) DS Sec.2-02.2: Provide other required general Site/Grading Plan information:
i) The site plan may be entitled Site/Grading Plan if all information is to be shown on one document;
ii) The site plan needs to be in standard engineering scale;
iii) Label length, material, and diameter of culvert pipes;
iv) It is recommended that the site/grading plan be on 24" by 36" sheet(s);
v) DS Sec.2-02.2.10: Show sight visibility triangles;
vi) DS Sec.2-02.2.11: Label widths of driveways;
vii) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.19: Label the edge of existing pavement for San Joaquin Avenue.
9) Proposed developments exceeding 1 acre are subject to NPDES requirements and therefore this project's grading plan will require a SWPPP.

The next submittal should address all the above items. Submit the revised site/grading plan, a disturbed-wash Mitigation Plan, proposed conditions drainage report, and a response letter. You may call to schedule an appointment to go over these comments, or if you have any questions, please call me at 791-5550 extension 2204.

Elizabeth Eberbach, PE
Civil Engineer
Engineering Division
Development Services
11/15/2005 SREEVES1 BUILDING-RESIDENTIAL REVIEW Passed NO RES PER KEN V

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
12/02/2005 CINDY AGUILAR OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
12/02/2005 SUE REEVES REJECT SHELF Completed