Microfiche records prior to 2006 have not been completely digitized and may not be available yet on PRO. If you cannot find what you are looking for please submit a records request.

Permit Review Detail

Permit Number: T07BU00291
Parcel: 137041500

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - GRADING ALL

Permit Number - T07BU00291
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - GRADING ALL
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
07/16/2007 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied DATE: July 17, 2007
SUBJECT: Grading Plan associated with T06VL00773- 2nd Engineering Review
TO: Bootjack Company, Inc.
LOCATION: 5359 S Nogales Hwy, T15S R13E Sec01, Ward 5
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: T07BU00291


SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the revised grading plan, revised drainage report (Greg Carlson Engineering, Inc., 6-19-07), revised Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Floodplain Use Permit application (T07OT01567) for the above referenced property. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the grading plan or FUP at this time. The following items need to be addressed:


GRADING PLAN COMMENTS:

1) Provide a signed notarized agreement from all property owners stating that the applicant/contractor has the permission from the adjacent property owners to access, grade and improve the area as defined on the proposed grading plan.

2) DS Sec.11-01.2.3.C: Provide an approved Native Plant Preservation Ordinance (NPPO) plan from the Landscaping Department showing conformance with all NPPO regulations. Per conversations with the Development Services Zoning Division a site plan will not be required for this project if an approved NPPO is submitted with the next grading plan resubmittal.

3) DS Sec.11-01.4.1.C.4: Revise the detail and elevation references for the proposed sewer line crossing, refer to drainage comment #8. Provide revised details on the grading plan for the sewer line that is in conformance with the proposed drainage report and Pima County WasteWater permit. Reference the Pima County WasteWater permit number for the sewer line crossing on the site plan.

4) DS Sec.11-01.2.3.A: Add a note on the grading plan that states: "A bond shall be posted for native seeding. If grading construction does not commence within 60 days after grubbing, the disturbed area shall be native seeded within 30 days following the expiration of the 60 day period.

a) Acceptable temporary controls during grading construction and up to the 60 +30 day period of non-activity:
- interim erosion and sediment controls as indicated by standard accepted BMP's
- spray-ons
- unestablished vegetation
- water truck for dust abatement
- daily sweeping of the streets

b) For graded areas that expect to last longer than a couple of months, the accepted permanent erosion protection shall be in the form of:
- established revegetation
- gravel or rock"

5) DS Sec.11-01.11.1: Verify that the face of cut and fill slopes are prepared and maintained to control against erosion until proposed development relating to a development/site plan is submitted for review and approval through all DSD Divisions. Provide a note on the grading plan that states "All slopes stepper than a ratio of 3:1 (H: V) must be stabilized with properly engineered hand-placed stone riprapping."

6) DS Sec.2-02.2.1.A.10: Revise the near side sight visibility triangle (345-foot near side) in plan view for the entrance off of South Nogales Hwy. Refer to DS Sec.3-01.5.2 for SVT determinations and line of sight distances. It is acknowledge that this access point has existing curbing and will not be used as access for the site without first obtaining the proper permits from TDOT and Development services Department for construction.

7) For future information the use of the Nogales access point, which must be shown on any proposed development/site plan, will require replacement of the corrugated metal pipes with reinforced concrete pipes for vehicular use. Per DS Sec.10-02.11.2.4 reinforced concrete is the acceptable material for culvert design within a public right-of-way. An engineering analysis will be required for culvert sizing and design.

Review and approval from TDOT Permits and Codes for all proposed improvements within the public right-of-way will be required. A right-of-way use permit application will be required prior to construction. Contact Steve Tineo at 741-3115 for all right-of-way requirements and permit applications.
DRAINAGE REPORT:

8) Revise or clarify the scour calculation used for the sewer line across the Nebraska Wash. Per the calculation sheets, Step 3, the Rc/Tw is equal to 3.02 which would indicate that condition #3 be used to determine Design Flow Scour Depth, which would result in a larger Total Scour requirement. Clarify why condition #2 was used to determine Design Flow Scour within the report or provide revised calculations. All changes to the sewer line must be provided to Pima County WasteWater for their review and approval prior to grading plan approval. Provide a copy of the referenced equation or clarify in the report the equation number with reference to the Pima County WasteWater method.

9) The discussion within the drainage report only covers Lots 29-34, however the grading plan shows that Lots 35-39 are included within the scope of this project. The drainage report must provide a discussion on the entire project site (2.36 acres) and show that the overall area was used within the hydrology and hydraulic calculations and site design.

10) For future projects refer to the latest Official Community Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) that have an effective date of February 8, 1999. For this project the correct floodplain determination is Zone X as stated, but the correct Firm Panel is #04019C2239K, effect. 2/8/99. Please update the your FIRM reference for future projects.


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:

11) CGP Part IV.C.2.a: Provide a discussion within the report on the future proposed use of the project (Lots 29-39) and give a time for when the Notice of Intent (NOI) will be filed with the Arizona Department of Environmental Quality.

12) CGP Part IV.D.6: A bond shall be posted for native seeding. If grading construction does not commence within 60 days after grubbing, the disturbed area shall be native seeded within 30 days following the expiration of the 60 day period.

a) Acceptable temporary controls during grading construction and up to the 60 +30 day period of non-activity:
- interim erosion and sediment controls as indicated by standard accepted BMP's
- spray-ons
- unestablished vegetation
- water truck for dust abatement
- daily sweeping of the streets

b) For graded areas that expect to last longer than a couple of months, the accepted permanent erosion protection shall be in the form of:
- established revegetation
- gravel or rock

13) Provide temporary culverts under the proposed construction entrance to allow the 10-year storm event to pass under the entrance without ponding water on the upstream side. The SWPP must clearly address the maintenance of the temporary culverts after each major storm event or if debris accumulates at the upstream end of the culverts.

14) Revise Section 2.0 of the SWPP report to clarify the improvements for this proposed grading plan application. The block wall has been omitted from the grading plan and must be reflected in the SWPP report language.


GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised grading plan, drainage report, SWPPP and approved NPPO plan that address the comments provided above. The Floodplain Use Permit will be approved in conjunction with the final grading plan. 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, drainage report, SWPPP, and NPPO plan. Please enclose "redlines" with the resubmittal package for reference.

If you have any questions, or to schedule an appointment, I can be reached at 837-4929.



Jason Green, CFM
Senior Engineer Associate
Engineering Division
Development Services
07/20/2007 MICHAEL ST. PAUL ZONING REVIEW Denied July 20, 2007

Development Services Department
Zoning Review Section

Michael St.Paul
Planning Technician

T07BU00291 Grading Plans for S06-218

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.

Please see the previous comments by David Rivera below:



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
development plan. 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.

5. It is not clear at this whether a development plan or site plan has been submitted
for review. Please clarify what type of development is proposed for this site and
if an application for a site or development plan has been submitted. Additional comments
may be forthcoming based on the response to this comment.

A zoning administrator determination has been made that storage of soil cannot be approved
without approval of a site plan. Please contact me for more information on this comment.

6. Please ensure that the grading plan matches the approved and stamped development
plan.
07/24/2007 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Denied 1. Submit a copy of the approved development plan 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 development plan.

2. The development plan must have a site card with DSD stamps and approvals from the appropriate divisions before the grading plan can be reviewed.

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
08/09/2007 CINDY AGUILAR OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
08/09/2007 SUE REEVES REJECT SHELF Completed