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 - T06BU02449
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - GRADING ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/28/2007 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Delineating NUOS areas on the grading plan identical to the approved NPPO/ Landscape plan. 2. Add note grading plan: Fencing shall be required during construction per DS 2-06.8.0 Fig.1 for all undisturbed natural desert areas of Protected Native Plants and for 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. For Saguaros and cacti, the area to be fenced shall be equal to the distance of one-half (½) the height of the plant per DS 2-15.6.0 3. Add note to grading plan: NPPO pre permit inspection is required prior to grading inspection can be scheduled by calling IVR system and entering inspection code 09015 or calling Landscape Field Representative directly @ 791-5550 EXT 1140. 4. The grading plan has been reviewed by the Landscape / NPPO section, approval cannot be granted until all Engineering comments or concerns have been addressed and appropriate revisions implemented. |
| 03/03/2007 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | Michael St.Paul Planning Technician March 3, 2007 Comments: T06BU02449 Grading Plans for S04-051 1. The grading plan has been reviewed by Zoning Review Section but cannot approve the plan until the Engineering and Landscape Review Sections have approved it. 2. Zoning will re-review the grading plan on the next submittal to ensure compliance with the approved tentative plat. Additional comments may be forthcoming. 3. Dimension the width of the roadway and right-of-way for all streets including cul-de-sac radius dimensions. 4. Clarify if each lot is to be reviewed individually for compliance with grading requirements. |
| 04/12/2007 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Michael Zimmerman, EEC SUBJECT: Gracious Estates S04-051 Grading Plan Resubmittal Review REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach ACTIVITY NUMBERS: T06BU02449 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department reviewed the Grading Plan and permit application resubmittal package, including 2 copies of the grading plan, and does not recommend approval of the grading plan or permit at this time. Address the following comments. GRADING PLAN COMMENTS: 1) DS Sec.11-01.2.3: For reseed bond calculation, per total disturbance area of 60,279 square feet provided on cover sheet, the required reseed bond is $3,013.95 2) Address the remaining drainage comments, as these did not appear to be found in the drainage report: a) Substantiate spillway rip rap areas with Drainage Report calculations. b) Provide drainage calculations for all storm-drain pipes. c) Provide hydraulic calculations for stormdrain channel adjacent to 23 and 24 providing freeboard and showing superelevation erosion protection for building pad 23. 3) On sheet 2, address the remaining comments: a) Remove redundant Grading Note 32. This comment was in error and redundant to note 38. b) Add the words City of Tucson to Grading Note 38: "A right-of-way permit is required for any development, excavation, or construction activity within the right of way. Contact Tucson Department of Transportation - Permits and Codes Section, Engineering Division at 791-5100 for questions relating to City of Tucson right of way permit information." 4) On sheets 3 and 4, address the remaining comments: a) On planviews, show areas of 404 jurisdictional limits per the approved Tentative Plat that are to be fenced off from disturbance, and/or not covered under a 404 permit. It will be necessary to explain response letter statement that there is a new document removing the previously added 404 area. Regarding heavy duty construction fence to be installed along edges of 404 areas, submit a copy of the document referenced in response letter regarding the 404 permit from ACOE that the jurisdictional wash has been removed for lots 21, 22, and 30. b) Provide call-outs for keynote 8 on planviews. c) Revise runout limits, and if necessary, revise surveyable limits for the private slope easements on planviews after addressing comment below. 5) On sheet 5, address the following comments: a) Revise details A and B on sheet 5 to show addition of 2-feet slope setback per discussions. 6) DS Sec.2-03.6.5.B: Some type of construction easement will be needed for those areas of improvements that are proposed outside of the property boundaries. Delineate, dimension, and label associated easements. Specifically, label dkt/pg of construction easement on sheet 3 that will be required to improve existing pavement at the end of Wildlife Drive within the county subdivision to the south. This easement will be required prior to approval of Grading Permit approval. 7) The Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) has the following remaining comments: a) Provide a copy of NOI that was submitted to ADEQ. b) Regarding the SWPPP exhibit, as a condition of the grading permit approval, it will be necessary to relocate, reposition, or field adjust the wash-out area to ensure that the area is set away from 404 and floodplain areas. c) For inspection purposes, please fill out the enclosed "AZPDES - Posting Requirements" green sheet, and post at construction entrance of the site at beginning of construction activities and maintain this posted document throughout project construction. 8) In this resubmittal, only two copies of the grading plan were provided and the floodplain use permit application was not included. Provide the following documentation for resubmittal: a) Submit a Floodplain Use Permit Application. b) Submit 4 copies of revised grading plans. c) Submit 4 copies of revised SWPPP plans. d) Submit copies of revised drainage report. e) Submit copies of the geotechnical report. f) Submit a copy of the public improvement street grading plans for reference. g) Copy of the approved Tentative Plat. Address all comments and resubmit revised package with a response letter. In order to facilitate an expedited review of this resubmittal, set up a meeting to go over revision when comments are addressed, call me at 837-4934. Elizabeth Eberbach, PE Civil Engineer Engineering Division Development Services |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04/18/2007 | CINDY AGUILAR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 04/18/2007 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |