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: T06BU01435
Parcel: 14101111G

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: GRADING

Permit Number - T06BU01435
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
06/09/2006 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Denied 1. Submit a copy of the approved tentative plat including the approved landscape and native plant preservation plans for reference. The grading application will be reviewed for compliance with the approved documents and applicable codes and standards only when the approved documents are included in the submittal.

2. Include note on grading plan: Fencing is required during construction for all undisturbed natural desert areas and individual Protected Native Plants to be preserved-in-place. The area to be fenced shall be beyond the "drip-line" of the vegetation by one-half (½) the distance of the "drip-line" radius. DS 2-15.6.0
07/05/2006 LAITH ALSHAMI ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 07/06/2006

Sierra Morado Unit 4 East, Borrow Pit Grading Plan Comments:

1- The purpose of this submittal is not clear since the grading of Unit 4 was reviewed by the City under case #T06BU00959.
2- Provide the T06BU01435 case number in the Tile Block.
3- Show the basis of bearing between two found physically monumented points and described.
4- Remove the reference to "Pima County Development Services" under the acceptance signature line on Sheet 1 of 4. Replace "Pima County" with "City of Tucson".
5- Add a General Grading Note, which states that "a SWPPP inspection and a pre-construction meeting between the Contractor and Development Services Engineering Inspector is required before construction activities start. Call for SWPPP inspection and pre-construction meetings. for a DSD 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
6- Provide the project Administrative Address.
7- Revise General Notes #2 and #25 to remove the reference to "Pima County" and replace it with "City of Tucson".
8- Add a general note, which states that the project will be in compliance with City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01.0 (Excavation and Grading).
9- Add a general note, which requires the contractor to depress all landscaped areas a maximum of 6" for water harvesting.
10- Show the Detention basin maintenance access ramp. The ramp shall be barricaded to prevent inadvertent vehicular access.
11- Submit a Geotechnical Report that addresses the soil type in the subject development.
12- The Geotechnical Report shall address the recommended slope treatment and required setback lines from ponding water in the detention basins. The report shall specify the slope percentage or ratio and the recommended treatment based on the angle of the slope. The Grading Plan shall demonstrate compliance with the Geotechnical Report recommendations.
13- Specify the compaction percentage of the proposed local streets.
14- Call out whether the streets are public or private.
15- Provide plan and profile for all proposed private streets.
16- Resubmit the redlined plan with future Grading Plan submittals.
17- Provide a detailed response letter with the next submittal that explains how the comments were addressed and references the exact locations/sheets where the revisions were made.
18- Please be advised that several comments, that are included herein, were made previously on similar Sierra Morado submittals and could have been addressed and avoided on this submittal.

If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550 x1195 or Laith.Alshami@tucsonaz.gov

SWPPP:

The stormwater pollution prevention plan does not meet the requirements of the general permit. Please revise the SWPPP to address the following requirements.
We have received a copy of a letter from ADEQ after their review of a SWPPP for another project. Parts of this letter are applicable to this SWPPP and are reflected in the following comments. Furthermore, this SWPPP is very generic and provides very little specific direction to the operators. Comments from both ADEQ and EPA indicate that the SWPPP's must be specific and tailored to the project. The SWPPP must be revised to be specific to this site and to provide specific direction to the operators. The following comments are examples of elements that are incomplete or not sufficiently tailored to this site. The list is not all-inclusive but is representative.

1. Items 1, 2, 4, and 6 of the "Contractor's Report" are required elements of the SWPPP that must be completed before the SWPPP can be approved.
2. Part IV.C.3.c. Identify and clearly label on the map locations of structural and nonstructural controls identified in the SWPPP. Include the location of the washout area, locations of storage areas
3. Part IV.D.2.c. Describe the practice and schedule to routinely remove offsite accumulation of sediment. Address both the removal of dirt tracked onto adjacent streets and deposits of sediment at outfall locations.
4. Part IV.D.5.b Describe where and what type of velocity dissipation devices will be used at discharge locations and along outfall channel. Provide specific instructions that discharge locations and outfall channels will be stabilized as soon as possible after construction.
5. Although the narrative of the SWPPP (page 7) indicates that a combination of silt fencing and straw bale barriers are proposed, the site map does not clearly indicate locations where each is appropriate. Provide specific direction to the operators.
6. The SWPPP indicates that commonly used dust palliatives are described in the "Stormwater Pollution Control Measures" section. Since this is a very large section of the SWPPP, provide more complete locating instructions. (This applies to all references to this section.) I did not find a discussion of the palliatives in this section.
7. Revise sediment control note 3 on page 7 to indicate that Drexel Road will be swept as often as required to keep the roadway free of tracked sediment.
8. Revise the notes provided at each basin to clarify that the sediment barriers may be removed from around basin area once the basins have been graded. Sediment barrier must remain at downslope project boundaries. Indicate that the low flow outlets must be blocked until the project site has been stabilized.
9. Part IV.C.3.g. Clearly label on the map locations where stormwater is discharged to a surface water (e.g. ephemeral waters or dry washes) and to MS4s. Non-concentrated discharge areas should also be identified.
10. Part IV.D.4.b. In the discussion of temporary stabilization measures, indicate what stabilization efforts will occur.
11. On page 13 the "Non-Stormwater Discharges" section has a note in bold face type. The note describes a required element of the SWPPP that must be completed before the SWPPP is approved.
12. Part IV.D.5.a.i Describe the location, size and retention capacity of the drainage basin(s) and the areas that drain into them. Provide calculations to show that the basins will be able to store the complete discharge from a 2-year 24-hour storm.

The SWPPP must be revised to meet the requirements of these comments. The entire SWPPP must be revised to be specific and to provide specific instructions to all of the operators of the project.
If you have any questions, I can be reached at 520.791.5550 ext. 1161 or at loren.makus@tucsonaz.gov.

Loren Makus, E.I.T.
Senior Engineering

If you have any questions regarding the Grading Plan comments, you may contact Laith Alshami at 791-5550 x1195 or at Laith.Alshami@tucsonaz.gov
08/03/2006 PATRICIA GEHLEN ZONING REVIEW Denied Zoning-
Zoning will review and approve the grading plans once the base plan is approved and Engineering and NPPO have approved the grading plans.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
08/04/2006 BETH GRANT OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
08/04/2006 SUE REEVES REJECT SHELF Completed