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 - T06BU01679
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 07/24/2006 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit a copy of the approved site plan (Case # T06CM03296), including landscape plans for reference. The grading application will be reviewed only when the approved documents are included in the submittal. |
| 08/10/2006 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: August 11, 2006 SUBJECT: Grading Plan for TRS Home Furnishing-Engineering Review TO: Stantec Consulting, Inc Attn: Tom Lenczycki LOCATION: 2140 W Grant Road, T13S R13E Sec33, Ward 1 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: T06BU01679 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the grading plan and the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and does not recommend approval of the grading plan or SWPPP at this time. The following items need to be addressed: GRADING PLAN COMMENTS: 1) DS Sec.11-01: Provide general grading notes, including a grading/drainage note specifying conformance with City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01.0 (excavation and grading requirements). 2) DS Sec.11-01.4.1.C.1: Revise the location map to show the parcel location approximately centered within a one square mile area. Identify conditions within the square mile area shown on the project location map, such as subdivisions, major streets, and major watercourses. Reference recorded subdivision plats by book and page numbers. 3) DS Sec.11-01.4.1.C.4: Provide on the grading plan all information associated with the drainage report. Grading standards may be accessed at http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/DevStandsTOC.pdf. The following information must be indicated on the grading plan: a) Provide the ponding limits in the parking lot for the existing scuppers and storm drain. b) Provide drainage arrows for roof drainage, label and dimension all scuppers that are used for collecting roof drainage and discharges at the pedestrian sidewalk. The scuppers proposed under the sidewalk must be designed and constructed to convey the 10-year flood flow. Provide a drainage statement showing scupper calculations that demonstrate that the 10-year flood flow is contained under the sidewalk. c) Provide ponding limits for the proposed grate and scupper associated with the truck well located at the back of the existing Safeway store. Provide in plan view a detail for the grate and scupper and show how it is drained away from the building and into an associated storm drain. Provide spot elevations showing positive drainage away from the truck well so that ponding does not occur in this localized water shed. 4) DS Sec.11-01.4.1.C.7: Provide both geotechnical report as referenced in the Grading Note #7 and the Engineering Note #1 with recommendations that shall be incorporated into the grading plan. Refer to the comments in the Geotechnical Report Section. 5) DS Sec.11-01.4.1.C: Provide typical lot grading details, show minimum side and rear setbacks, and provide detailed cross sections for each perimeter, fully labeled and dimensioned. 6) DS Sec.2-08.5.1.A: Revise Grading Note #8, on sheet C1.4, on the grading plan to label the required minimum 4-foot wide sidewalk to be installed to avoid any obstruction which decreases the minimum width to less than 4 feet. 7) DS Sec.6-01.3: Provide location and dimensions for refuse container show or label gates or doors for trash enclosures. The enclosure must have a minimum inside clear dimension of 10 feet by 10 feet between steel pipes that are required between the container and the enclosure's rear and sidewall. Refer to DS Sec.6-01.4.2 for specifications and requirements on access, placement of containers, bin enclosure and construction. Show maneuverability for refuse vehicles in plan view. 8) DS Sec.3-05.2.1.3.a: Revise the grading plan to show the minimum unobstructed radius of 18-feet for all PAAL intersections. Refer to DS Sec.3-05 for all other vehicular use area design criteria. 9) Provide the required maneuvering area for the loading zone that is shown on the site plan. Refer to AASHTO for the national standards for turning radii. DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS: 10) DS Sec.11-01.4.1.C.4: Provide on the grading plan all information associated with the drainage report. The following information must be clarified on the grading plan or the drainage report must be revised to reflect the proposed grading plan: a) Provide calculations for the proposed 12" HDPE storm drain that ties into the existing storm drain used for parking lot drainage. Show the ponding limits in the parking lot for the existing storm drain. b) Provide drainage arrows for roof drainage, label and dimension all scuppers that are used for collecting roof drainage and discharges at the pedestrian sidewalk. The scuppers proposed under the sidewalk must be designed and constructed to convey the 10-year flood flow. Provide a drainage statement showing scupper calculations that demonstrate that the 10-year flood flow is contained under the sidewalk. c) Provide ponding limits and calculation for the proposed grate and scupper associated with the truck well located at the back of the existing Safeway store. Provide in plan view a detail for the grate and scupper and show how it is drained away from the building and into an associated storm drain. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT: 11) DS Sec.11-01.4.1.C.6: Provide the Geotechnical Reports referenced in the Grading and Engineering Notes #7 and #1, respectively as shown on Sheet C1.0. The geotechnical evaluation needs to address the following: a) The soils report shall provide identification / assessment of any potentially hazardous geotechnical areas, and state any geotechnical recommendations and whether there are special provisions for the soil preparation for this development. b) Provide pavement structure design recommendations. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN: The SWPPP does not meet the minimum requirements of the AzPDES Construction General Permit (CGP). Revise the SWPPP according to these comments: 12) CGP Part III: Provide a completed and accurate signed and dated Notice Of Intent (NOI) form from a qualified signatory prior to grading plan approval. 13) CGP Part IV.C.2.b: Revise Storm Water Management Note #6 to state that the owner/contractor will file a Notice of Termination (NOT) 30 days after project completion and final site stabilization. The NOT shall be submitted to ADEQ and a copy sent to the City of Tucson Development Services Engineering Division. 14) CGP Part IV.C.3.a: Identify on the SWPPP Exhibit the following information: a) Provide a general location map showing major cross roads, and receiving waters within 1 mile; b) Provide the location, with a symbol included in the legend, for the designated waste disposal areas including concrete, stucco and paint washout areas. 15) CGP Part IV.C.3.c: Identify on the SWPPP, Sheet C3.1, the temporary erosion control measures being added at the inlet to the grate and scupper associated with the proposed truck well. 16) CGP Part IV.C.3.e: Provide on the SWPPP the location and dimensions of on -site and off-site material, waste, borrow areas, stockpiles, or equipment storage areas. 17) CGP Part IV.C.4: Revise Section 2.5 of the SWPPP to identify the nearest receiving watercourse that the stormwater is discharged into downstream. 18) CGP Part IV.D.1: Provide under the Stormwater Control section which operator is responsible for the control measure's implementation. 19) CGP Part IV.D.8.c: Revise the SWPPP to describe the location where the construction material is stored on-site. 20) CGP Part IV.J.2: Describe how and where the operator will post a sign at the main entrance to the site containing: AZPDES authorization number, construction site contact name and telephone number, brief description, location of SWPPP. See the enclosed, green AZPDES Posting Requirements form enclosed in the package. 21) CGP Part VII.K.4: Provide a signed project manager/owner certification and contractors certification form (if available) 22) CGP Part VII.L.5.a: Add a note to the SWPP plan cover sheet stating that the operator shall report to ADEQ any noncompliance (including spills) which may endanger human health or the environment. The operator shall orally notify the office listed below within 24 hours: Arizona Department of Environmental Quality 1110 W. Washington, 5th floor (5515B-1) Phoenix, AZ 85007 Office: 602-771-4466 Fax 602-771-4505 A SWPPP Checklist outlining the City of Tucson submittal requirements is included. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide a revised grading plan, a revised SWPPP, a drainage report, and the referenced geotechnical engineering reports. The revised grading plan, revised SWPPP, drainage report, and geotechnical reports must address the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the grading plan, SWPPP, drainage report, geotechnical reports. For any questions or to schedule a meeting, call me at 791-5550, extension 1189. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
| 09/15/2006 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 09/15/06 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. Please submit two copies of the approved and stamped development, 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 site/development plan. Additional comments may be forthcoming. 4. A site card with DSD approvals by Fire, Zoning, Handi-cap, Engineering, and Landscape/NPPO including the approved development plan stamped for site plan approval and signatures is required before the grading plan can be approved by Zoning. Two copies of the approved development plan, landscape and NPPO plans are to be submitted with the grading plans packet for processing and approval as a site plan. No fees are involved in re-stamping the development/tentative plat plans as an approved site plan. The development plan may be walked through for stamps and site card sign off. Submit the following: two copies of the stamped development plan, landscape and NPPO plans must be included with the grading plans packet processed together for site approval. If the revised development plan has been processed as a site plan, provide two copies of the revised D.P. which should have been re-stamped with site approvals. Incude landcape and NPPO if applicable to the revised D.P. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 09/19/2006 | BETH GRANT | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 09/19/2006 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |