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 - T06BU00050
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/24/2006 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | |
| 01/28/2006 | MATT FLICK | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD Engineering recommends denial of the grading plan. The following comments are offered: Landscape Plan: Revise landscape plan to indicate type, location and length of masonry wall openings along southern property line necessary to allow offsite flows to enter property. Grading Plan: Sheet 1: Indicate cut & fill quantities in General Note #12. Sheet 1: Indicate directional location of benchmark in general Note #30. Sheet 2: There are four locations where offsite drainage is shown to enter property from south. The follwing comments pertain to that drainage: A. Indicate fine grading along area from masonry wall along southern property line to C.A. "A" or New Public Street "D". Flow must be able to enter basins and New Public Street "D" without ponding on adjacent properties. Top of ciyrbing on New Public Street "D" must be below adjacent offsite grades at wall openings to ensure that offsite flows are not blocked. B. Revise LANDSCAPE PLAN to indicate wall opening locations and length/type of wall openings. C. Neither the landscape plan nor grading plan indicate wall openings to allow offsite flows (3.9 cfs, 9.0 cfs, 8.4 cfs, 4.3 cfs) onto property. Provide a minimum of 2 linear feet of opening per 1 cfs (or as determined in the approved drainage report). Sheet 3: Revise Section F/3 to indicate location of masonry wall along southern property line. Sheet 3: Indicate concrete thickness and appropriate reinforcement for ramps on Section C/3. Minimum thickness and reinforcement in right-of-way is to correspond to PIA drawings. SWPPP: No adverse comments or conditions. Please submit a comment letter with the resubmittal addressing these comments. I can be reached at 791-5550, ext. 1192 or matthew.flick@tucsonaz.gov. Matt Flick 28JAN06 |
| 02/19/2006 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 02/19/06 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 all Engineering comments or concerns have been addressed. Engineering must approve the plan prior to Zoning approval. It may be necessary due to changes to the landscape plan as requested by the Engineering section for the Landscape Section Reviewer to re-review the grading plan and landscape plan to ensure compliance. In addition (3) copies of the revised landscape plan may have to be submitted to CDRC for restamp. Please check with Joseph Linville and ask if the three copies for CDRC will be required. 2. Zoning will re-review the grading plan and the revised landscape on the next submittal to ensure compliance with the CDRC approved and stamped tentative plat. Additional comments may be forthcoming. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 02/24/2006 | DELMA ROBEY | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 02/24/2006 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |