Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - GRADING ALL
Permit Number - T06BU02304
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - GRADING ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/13/2007 | PATRICIA GILBERT | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: May 13, 2007 ACTIVITY NUMBER: T06BU02304 PROJECT NAME: Seaver Franks New Office Building PROJECT ADDRESS: 2552 North Alvernon Way 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 REPORT SUBMIT: APPROVED SITE PLAN, GEOTECHINICAL REPORT (Soil's Report) Please be advised this review was conducted by a different review than previous. 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. On sheet 5, remove the template of the CDRC stamp. This project is not subject to a review from the CDRC committee. 4. The solid waste enclosure detail on sheet 2 does not provide an inside clear dimension of ten (10) feet by ten (10) feet. Revise the detail to meet this standard. D.S. 6-01.4.2. 5. Show roof drainage (flow arrows). DS 2-02.2.1.A.16. 6. Private Drainage/Basin and Maintenance Easement is required given that the basin is located entirely on a different parcel. Provide description, dimensions and recordation data (docket and page). 7. In addition to the above comment a drainage construction easement, legal documentation to assure legal use of the offsite property improvements is required. Provide the recording information for the drainage construction and maintenance easement. 8. This office requests written documentation of acceptance of the basin location from the owner of the parcel. 9. A minimum of one 15-foot-wide vehicular access ramp shall be provided into each basin. The maximum roadway or access ramp slope shall not exceed 15 percent. Alternate means of access will be reviewed by the City Engineer on a case-by-case basis. 10. Show on the grading plan the discharge amount exiting the basin through the scupper. 11. Revise grading plan to show positive drainage within the basin. The basin must demonstrate positive drainage to the outlets. SMDDFM 12.5 12. Provide a detail of the spillway into the basin. 13. To ensure positive drainage is directed toward the basin provide more finish grades around the loading space and the entrance to the basin. 14. Please note that subsequent comments may be necessary upon resubmittal, depending on the nature and extent of revisions that occur to the plans. DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS 1. Per SMDDRM, 2.3.1.6.C., a very detailed Detention/Retention Basin Maintenance Checklist and Schedule shall be provided by an Arizona Registered Professional Civil Engineer, which will be followed by anyone performing scheduled and unscheduled maintenance on behalf of the owner(s). A maintenance checklist and schedule shall be provided in the drainage report in effort to clearly communicate the responsibilities involved by the owner for proper maintenance of retention basins. The report must also clearly outline the long-term maintenance responsibility for this project rests with the owner of this facility. Include the name, address and telephone number of the person responsible for the long-term maintenance for all drainage structures. Revise appropriately. SMDDFM 2.3.1.2.E.1. GEOTECHINICAL REPORT COMMENTS 1. Provide recommended setbacks from the existing structure to the basin. It must be clear the foundation of the existing structure is not comprised. |
| 05/15/2007 | STEVE SHIELDS | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | DSD TRANSMITTAL FROM: Steve Shields Lead Planner PROJECT: 2552 N. Alvernon Way - Office Building T06CM02304 Grading Plan (3rd Review) TRANSMITTAL DATE: May 15, 2007 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 insure compliance with the approved and stamped site plan. Additional comments may be forthcoming. If you have any questions about this transmittal, please contact me at Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.org or (520) 837-4956 C:\planning\grading\t06bu02304.doc RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Approved site plan and additional requested documents |
| 05/16/2007 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Site plan approval is necessary to continue review. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 05/18/2007 | DELMA ROBEY | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 05/18/2007 | DELMA ROBEY | REJECT SHELF | Completed |