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: RESUBMITTAL - GRADING ALL
Permit Number - T06BU00578
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - GRADING ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 08/02/2006 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Site plan approval is necessary to continue review. |
| 08/14/2006 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: August 18, 2006 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T06BU00578 PROJECT NAME: Aloft Hotel PROJECT ADDRESS: 1900East Speedway Blvd. 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 STATEMENT SWPPP is acceptable. Once the grading plan is close to approval submit 4 copies of the SWPPP with the grading plans. 1. A copy of the stamped approved Site Plan must be included with the Grading Plan submittal. The above comment is from the first review. The response to the comment was, "Comment Noted. The Site Plan and Landscape Plan are reviewed in conjunction with the Grading and Paving." Please be aware that the Site Plan must be approved by all the reviewing sections prior to the grading plan being approved. The reviewing sections include, Fire, Zoning, Engineering and Landscape. 2. Indicate building roof slope/drainage (flow arrows), downspouts and sidewalk scuppers. DS 2-02.2.1.A.16 The above comment is from the first review. It is acknowledged that the direction of roof drainage has been shown. However there is no indication of rain gutters, downspouts or sidewalk scuppers. Sidewalks shall be flood free for all storm discharges for up to a 10-year event. How is the stormwater from the roof going to be addressed? Where is the flow going to be directed? The roof is sloped to the south where there is sidewalk and a recreational area. Show how the roof drainage will be routed on the grading plan and provide any structural elements. Provide appropriate details. 3. Indicate truncated domes and ADA complaint ramps for the transition of the sidewalk crossing the alley along Norris Ave. 4. Indicate the height of the screen wall in the typical cross-section through the south parking lot, Detail O/7. 5. There appears to be a typo in cross section L with the finish grades. The grade for the above ground parking lot reads 59.37', on the plan view the grade reads 69.5'. Revise and or clarify in the response letter. DRAINAGE STATEMENT 1. Address in the statement how the drainage directed to the underground garage will be addressed under a storm event. Is there a pump to pump stormwater out of the parking garage? Does the existing trench drain provide relief? Clarify and illustrate in the statement. The above comment is from the first review. It is acknowledged in the response letter an existing sump pump will pump the runoff that accumulates in the underground parking facility. However it was requested to submit a drainage statement to explain (illustrate) how the existing trench drain provides relief. Neither of which was provided. At minimum provide the maximum depth of water in the underground parking facility in a 100-year event. Provide calculations to support this. Be advised stormwater can not exceed 1' in depth during a 100-year event in an overnight parking facility and with unattended vehicles. Provide this information in a sealed drainage statement. SMDDFM 2.3.2., 12.3.2. 2. This office recommends exploring an alternative solution to the 2 cfs entering the underground storage facility. A grade break or a speed hump that diverts the drainage to the adjacent landscape border to the north would be an alternative solution. Revise the plan appropriately if this suggested solution is used for an alternative to the 2cfs entering the underground parking storage. |
| 08/18/2006 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 09/18/06 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 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 site plan. Please submit two copies of the approved and stamped site, landscape, and NPPO plans with the next grading plan submittal. 3. Zoning will re-review the grading plan on the next submittal to ensure compliance with the approved and stamped site plan. Additional comments may be forthcoming. 4. There are several issues that are of major concern to zoning, related to the site plan. Please ensure that all the zoning issues are addressed and that an approved and stamped site plan is included with the next grading submittal. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/13/2006 | DELMA ROBEY | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |