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 - T07BU00215
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 02/13/2007 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit a copy of the approved tentative plat including landscape and native plant preservation plans for reference. The grading application will be reviewed for compliance only when the approved documents are included in the submittal. Revise grading plans as necessary to comply with the approved tentative plat. |
| 03/05/2007 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 03/05/07 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. Zoning could not verify that the grading plan was in compliance with the approved tentative plat. Please submit one copy of the CDRC approved and stamped tentative plat, 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 CDRC approved and stamped tentative plat. Additional comments may be forthcoming. 4. Please ensure that the grading plan matches the approved and stamped tentative plat. |
| 03/05/2007 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: March 6, 2007 SUBJECT: Las Nubes Grading Plan- Engineering Review TO: Jeffrey Stanley, P.E. LOCATION: Parcel ID 103-19-002E & F, T13S R13E Sec33, Ward 1 REVIEWER: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: T07BU00215 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the grading plan, Hydrology/Hydraulic Report (prepared by Stanley Engineering and Drainage, Inc., dated December 28, 2006), and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the above referenced property. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the grading plan at this time. The following items need to be addressed: DRAINAGE REPORT: 1) DS Sec.10-02.0-Section 5.3.2 of the City of Tucson's Standards Manual for Drainage Design and Floodplain Management (COT SMDDFM): Revise the Drainage Report to provide a backwater flow depth analysis for the entire site for each wash crossing designs, including the 48" and 60" culverts as well as a study for each of the other smaller culverts. The wash crossings present a hydraulic control factor that necessitates a more detailed analysis than that provided by the Manning's equation and the HEC-5 culvert analysis. 2) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.B.3: Revise the Drainage Report and grading plan to satisfy Rezoning Condition Notes #17 thru #22 regarding the details of the required detention/retention basin. Refer to DS Sec.10-01 for Detention/Retention Basin design and requirements. GRADING PLAN COMMENTS: 3) Provide a copy of the approved Tentative Plat (S06-050). The grading plan will not be approved until verification that all details, locations, dimensions, and plan profiles match the approved Tentative Plat. Provide all information associated with the Tentative Plat and the additional information that is required on the grading plan that will be used as the construction document. 4) 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). 5) DS Sec.11-01.4.1.C.4: Provide a General Note stating that all CMU walls and retaining walls will require a separate permit for review and approval by all necessary Development Services Departments. 6) DS Sec.2-03.2.2.B.3: Revise the grading plan to conform to the Rezoning Condition Notes #17 thru #22 regarding the details of the required detention/retention basin. Refer to DS Sec.10-01 for Detention/Retention Basin design and requirements. 7) Tucson Code Chapter 26.Sec26-11: Provide a Floodplain Use Permit (FUP) at grading plan resubmittal for the placement of fill and the proposed culverts within the floodplain and erosion hazard area as shown on the Tentative Plat. A FUP is required prior to grading plan approval. 8) Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the grading plan and approved Tentative Plat. GEOTECHNICAL REPORT COMMENTS: 9) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.K: A revised Geotechnical Report is required for this project due to the placement of fill at the wash crossings and the detention/retention requirements per Rezoning Condition Notes #17 thru #22. The soils report needs to discuss the suitability and feasibility of the project and is to include a discussion on the following: a) Description of existing soil constraints for the site, structural design recommendations, and other typical geotechnical data is needed, specifically for the placement of fill and erosion protection at all wash crossings; b) Provide identification / assessment of any potentially hazardous geotechnical areas; c) Provide proposed recommendations for setbacks from building to drainage areas include minimum distance from foundations to drainage swales, existing channels and proposed detention/retention basins; d) Pavement and asphalt design. e) Provide infiltration test results for the required retention basin; f) Recommendations need to be incorporated into the conceptual grading plan, Tentative Plat, and Drainage Report. STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN: The SWPPP does not meet the minimum requirements of the AzPDES Construction General Permit (CGP). Revise the SWPPP according to the following comment: 10) CGP Part IV.C.2.a: Describe the project and its intended use after the NOT is filed. 11) Part IV.C.2.c: Revise Section 2.4 to indicate the proper area of expected disturbance, include off-site borrow and fill areas). The Tentative Plat has Natural Open Space, 100-year flood plan and erosion hazard areas that can not be disturbed revise the disturbed area to include only the proposed improvements. 12) Part IV.C.3.b: Identify on the SWPPP exhibit areas of soil disturbance, and clearly identify on the exhibit the areas not to be disturbed. 13) Part IV.C.3.c: Identify on the exhibit the structural and nonstructural controls at both the 48-inch and 60-inch culvert locations. Provide a discussion in the report addressing the placement of controls, daily removal of controls within the regulatory wash and the removal of controls at the first sign of rain. 14) Part IV.C.3.d: Identify on the exhibit locations where stabilization practices are expected to occur. Specifically at all culvert and fill locations and the associated fill slope. 15) Part IV.C.3.e: Identify on the exhibit locations of off-site material, waste, borrow areas, or equipment storage. Per Section 1.2 if changes occur to the SWPPP (i.e. revisions from the contractor to locate the offsite storage area needed for fill and or equipment) then the changes must be provided in writing as a request to all state and local officials in writing. A re-certification notice in the SWPPP must be provided stating that the SWPPP has been modified to address any such changes. 16) Part IV.D.5: Revise the exhibit to show SWPPP control measures at all culvert locations. For the structural controls that are used in the floodplain, the SWPPP should document why effective controls could not alternatively be placed outside of the floodplain and address the removal of controls at any expected rain events. 17) 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. Per the rezoning comments and the Tentative Plat comments that are been addressed. 18) Part IV.D.5.a.iii: For a drainage area of < 10 disturbed acres, describe how and where smaller sediment basins or sediment traps are used along with silt fences, vegetative buffer strips, or alternatives on all side slope boundaries OR Describe how and where a sediment basin with storage for a 2yr, 24hr storm per disturbed acre drained will be used OR Describe how and where a sediment basin with 3600 ft3 of storage per disturbed acre drained will be used. 19) Part IV.D.5.b: Describe where and what type of velocity dissipation devices will be used at culvert discharge locations and along outfall channel. 20) CGP Part IV.D.8.b: Revise the SWPPP exhibit to show the stabilized construction entrance as shown in the legend. Provide a detail for the entrance on the exhibit for construction purposes. 21) Part IV.D.8.c: Describe the location and type of all construction and waste materials stored on site (Update SWPPP as necessary). 22) Part IV.D.8.c: Describe controls to be used to reduce pollutants from construction and waste materials stored on-site (including storage practices, and spill prevention and response practices). 23) Part IV.D.8.e: Describe measures to be used to sufficiently stabilize soil at culvert locations. 24) Part IV.J.1: The Operator must sign the SWPPP. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide the approved Tentative Plat, revised grading plan, Drainage Report, Geotechnical Engineering Report and SWPPP at re-submittal. The revised grading plan, Drainage Report, Geotechnical Report, and SWPP must address the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Please enclose "redlines" with the resubmittal package for reference. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 791-5550, extension 1189. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 03/15/2007 | GERARDO BONILLA | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 03/15/2007 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |