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 - T07BU00215
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - GRADING ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/24/2008 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: June 25, 2008 SUBJECT: Las Nubes Grading Plan- 4th Engineering Review TO: Jeffrey Stanley, P.E. LOCATION: 2740 W Goret Road, T13S R13E Sec33, Ward 1 REVIEWER: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: T07BU00215 SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department only received the revised grading plan sheets for the above referenced property. Prior to a grading plan review all references, Revised Tentative Plat (showing phasing), Drainage Reports, Geotechnical Reports, Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plans, Floodplain Use Permit, etc. must be submitted for a complete review. None of the comments from the January 17 2008 comment letter were addressed at this submittal. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the grading plan at this time. The following items need to be addressed: GRADING PLAN COMMENTS: 1) Provide a copy of the approved revised Tentative Plat (S06-050) showing the new proposed phase lines for the proposed roadway. 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. 2) 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). 3) 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. 4) Revise the grading plan to label and dimension invert protection for the proposed culverts. Due to the angle of the corrugated metal pipes (CMPs) within the centerline of the flow channel erosion around the invert of the pipe is expected. Provide concrete wing walls with a concrete toe down for erosion protection of the invert of the proposed CMPs due to the velocities shown in the drainage report. Provide details on the grading plan that show all dimensions, angles, thickness, etc for construction purposes. 5) Revise the profile of the proposed roadway at station 3+71.43. The road profile shows a low spot in the middle of the inverted crown roadway that must be revised to show how the water is drained from the roadway. The roadside drainage must be designed to prevent erosion to the roadbed and/or the adjacent properties and must be designed so that the 10-year flow is contained under any proposed pedestrian walkways. 6) Revise the grading plan to show erosion protection at the outlet of the larger sized culverts (specifically the 48-inch CMP). Due to the angle of the culvert within the centerline of the wash the outlet velocity is directed right at the embankment of a protected hillside that must be armored to prevent undermining of the slope and re-channelization of the wash. 7) Revise the grading plan to show all roadside drainage and how this stormwater is being collected and diverted to main channel without causing damage to the proposed roadway or any adjacent property. Per the proposed grading plan there are existing drainage channels that are being cut off by the construction of the road. All small tributaries must be collected as roadside drainage and deposited into main channels with out causing erosion to the main channel or the road itself. 8) Revise the grading plan and the location of the 24-inch CMP at the east-end of Black Cloud Court. The proposed invert of the pipe does not fall within the flow line of the channel at the road location. The grading plan must show how the water is collected into the invert of the pipe without causing erosion to the roadway or adjacent properties. 9) Revise the profile of the proposed roadway at station 12+50.00. The road profile shows a low spot in the middle of the inverted crown roadway that must be revised to show how the water is drained from the roadway. The road drainage must be designed to prevent erosion to the roadbed and/or the adjacent properties and must be designed so that the 10-year flow is contained under any proposed pedestrian walkways. 10) Revise the profile of the proposed roadway at station 1+50.00. The road profile shows a low spot in the middle of the inverted crown roadway that must be revised to show how the water is drained from the roadway. The road drainage must be designed to prevent erosion to the roadbed and/or the adjacent properties and must be designed so that the 10-year flow is contained under any proposed pedestrian walkways. 11) Revise all of the culvert cross sections on Sheet 4 to clearly show all dimensions, erosion protection, invert elevations, water surface elevations, Q100 discharge values, and a profile view showing limits of riprap around the proposed culvert, wing wall locations, required cut off wall, etc. 12) Revise Cross section 2 on Sheet 4 and the call out detail for the proposed depressed curb. Standard Detail 209 as referenced is not for depressed curbs, provide a new detail or a modified detail showing all construction related dimensions and labels. 13) Revise the grading plan to show the location for cross section 1 in plan view. Provide the numbered cross section in plan view for easier review. 14) Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the grading plan and approved Tentative Plat. DRAINAGE REPORT: 15) DS Sec.10-02.11.4.2.1: Revise the grading plan and details to provide for inlet protection of the larger CMPs. Due to the location and angle of the culvert at the flow line of their channels inlet control is required to protect the culvert, riprap and roadway free from erosion. Provide a concrete wing wall design at the culvert inlets so that the velocity of the stormwater does not undermine the proposed culvert. 16) DS Sec.10-02.11.4.2.2: Revise the grading plan and detail to provide for outlet protection at the embankment for the proposed 48-inch CMP. The proposed culvert is angled so that the velocity coming out of the culvert is directed right at the embankment of a hill slope that must be protected from erosion. Provide a discussion on the erosion protection with calculation for rock rip rap size. 17) Provide a discussion with calculations for all required roadside drainage channels that must be constructed to prevent erosion to the proposed roadway and existing channels. 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: 18) CGP Part IV.C.2.a: Describe the project and its intended use after the NOT is filed. 19) 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. 20) 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. 21) 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. 22) 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. 23) 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. 24) 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. 25) 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. 26) 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. 27) 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. 28) 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. 29) Part IV.D.8.c: Describe the location and type of all construction and waste materials stored on site (Update SWPPP as necessary). 30) 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). 31) Part IV.D.8.e: Describe measures to be used to sufficiently stabilize soil at culvert locations. 32) Part IV.J.1: The Operator must sign the SWPPP. GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide the approved revised Tentative Plat, revised grading plan, FUP, Drainage Report, Geotechnical Engineering Report and SWPPP at re-submittal. All information associated with a grading plan review must be submitted prior to DSD Engineering review can happen. 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 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division Development Services |
| 06/30/2008 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 06/30/2008 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. |
| 07/01/2008 | 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. |