Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: GRADING
Permit Number - T06BU00831
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 04/10/2006 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: April 21, 2006 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T06BU00831 PROJECT NAME: City of Tucson, Tucson Police West Side Sub-Station PROJECT ADDRESS: 1310 West Miracle Mile 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 1. A copy of the stamped approved Site Plan must be included with the Grading Plan submittal. 2. The Site Plan is currently in review. Any changes made to the Site Plan must be reflected on the Grading Plan. The Site Plan and Grading Plan must match. 3. Please note that the grading review was primarily a grading review of sheets C1.5 and C1.6. 4. Provide a legend applicable to the above referenced grading sheets. 5. Provide dimensions on the grading plan, PAAL widths, sidewalks, etc. 6. Remove all the building sheets with the second submittal. It is preferred for a grading review the building plan set is removed. Provide only the applicable sheets for a grading review, i.e. demolition plan, approved site plan, survey sheets, horizontal control plans, details, etc. Include any applicable line weights, symbols or hatching in the above requested legend. 7. Provide the cut and fill quantities on the grading plan. 8. Show roof drainage (flow arrows). The building roof slope, downspouts and sidewalk scuppers must be clearly shown on the grading plan view. Also add a general note, "All roof spouts will be routed under any adjacent sidewalk." DS 2-02.2.1.A.16 9. 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. Show more finish grades/spot grades on the grading plan, sheet C1.5 and C1.6. Because this plan does not have drainage patterns it can not be determined if the plan proposes changing the existing drainage. Drainage patterns must be readily definable in all areas. Positive drainage away from the structures must be demonstrated. DS 2-08.4.1.E, DS 2-02.2.1.A.16. 10. Demonstrate positive drainage towards all landscape areas in effort to promote water harvesting, provide curb openings/depressed curb. Drainage patterns must be consistent with existing conditions. Water harvesting is a requirement of all new development. LUC 3.7.4.3.B. 11. Call out the height of the screen wall indicated in keynote 22. 12. Keynote 19 indicates a new 6" sewer service to replace an existing 4'. Was the intent to replace a 4' sewer line or 4". Revise if necessary. 13. There is a monitoring well located southwest corner of the site indicated on the demolition plan sheet C1.2. On the grading plan the monitoring well is not shown on the plan view. Is the existing monitoring well going to be filled and abandoned? Is the monitoring well going to be used? If the monitoring well is an active well provide the permit number / authorization number and call it out on the plan view. Please clarify in detail in the response letter and revise on the plan view appropriately. 14. To ensure truncated domes are added to the handicap access ramp located within the ROW, show in a detail or add a general note to the site plan indicating all public handicap curb access ramps will have truncated domes. 15. Provide the onsite to off site 100-year stormwater (cfs) for the paved drainageway indicated in keynote 11. It is not clear where the drainageway begins and ends. It also appears that there are several areas providing site infrastructure along the north border of the site that could block the stormwater. Clarify in detail in the response letter, the drainage statement and on the plan view. Provide a cross-section or a detail showing the change in elevation (depth), width, etc. 16. Show the grading limits on the plan. Provide the line weight in the legend. See the Development Standard 11-01.9. for the required setbacks. DRAINAGE STATEMENT COMMENT 1. Provide the onsite to off site 100-year stormwater (cfs) for the paved drainageway indicated on the grading plan in keynote 11. It is not clear where the drainageway begins and ends. It also appears that there are several areas providing site infrastructure along the north border of the site that could block the stormwater. Discuss Address the drainageway in the drainage statement. SWPPP COMMENTS 1. In the narrative and/or the SWPPP site map add the following verbiage in a general note; Call for a Pre-construction meeting prior to start of earthwork. To schedule a DSD Pre-construction meeting, SWPPP inspection or general Engineering Inspections, call IVR (740-6970), or schedule with a Customer Service Representative at the Development Services Department, or contact DSD Engineering at 791-5550 extension 2101, or schedule inspections online at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/Online_Services/Online_Permits/online_permits.html 2. Please refer to the enclosed green document "AZPDES - Posting Requirements". This must be post at the construction entrance of the site at beginning of construction activities and maintain this posted document throughout project construction. Be advised this document must be completely filled out upon the time of the pre-construction meeting. 3. Once the parking lot has been paved, how will the straw bales be effective in stopping construction debris and pollutants from entering the stormdrain system? The straw bales will not be able to be staked into the ground. Discuss in the SWPPP a stormwater control for the catch basins once the parking lot has been repaved. 4. A stabilized construction entrance was not indicated on the SWPPP site map. It is clear that grading will be minimal however how will the construction site minimize tracking into the public streets? Revise the SWPPP appropriately. 5. Revise the SWPPP appropriately for any necessary stormwater controls for the drainageway located on the north side of the property. 6. Submit 4 copies of the revised SWPPP once the grading plan is closer to approval. |
| 04/24/2006 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | site plan approval required. |
| 04/24/2006 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Approved site plan required. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04/26/2006 | DELMA ROBEY | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 04/26/2006 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |