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 - T08BU00022
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/17/2008 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | 1. 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 when the approved documents are included in the submittal. Revise grading plans as necessary to comply with the approved tentative plat. 2. Note: New code provisions have been adopted since the initial application date. This submittal is subject to any regulations currently in effect. ยง Revise the plans to clarify that there is no encroachment within the 100-yr floodplain of the Palm Tree Drive Wash. This can be done by establishing clear grading limits within the floodplain boundaries on the Landscape, NPPO, and grading plans Per 9-06.1.1, pp 3, "If there is no encroachment within these Regulated Areas, the documentation requirements, development restrictions and mitigation requirements do not apply". Otherwise, an Environmental Resource Report per 9-06.2.5.B will be required. |
| 02/21/2008 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and floodplain Review, 02/27/2008 Barrio Arroyo Grading Plan Comments: 1- Provide a copy of the approved Tentative Plat. Please be advised that the grading plan shall be approved only after the tentative plat is approved. 2- Label the plan as "Grading Plan". 3- Provide the T08BU00022 case number in the Tile Block. 4- Provide the administrative address on the first sheet. 5- Show and label grading limits. Include the grading limits symbol in the legend. 6- Revise the word "Comes" in Grading Note #31 to read "Domes". 7- Add the following general notes: a. "CALL FOR SWPPP INSPECTION AND PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETINGS. FOR A DSD ENGINEERING INSPECTIONS, CALL IVR (740-6970), OR SCHEDULE WITH A CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE AT THE DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, OR CONTACT DSD ENGINEERING AT 791-5550 EXTENSION 2101, OR SCHEDULE INSPECTIONS ONLINE AT: http://WWW.CI.TUCSON.AZ.US/DSD/ONLINE_SERVICES/ONLINE_PERMITS/ONLINE_PERMITS.HTML b. The approved Grading Plan is the only acceptable construction plan onsite. The Contractor may not use any other plans, such as the approved Tentative Plat and/or Development Plan, for construction purposes. The Contractor may ask the Development Services Inspector to consult with the other approved plans for additional information or details that might not be included on the approved grading plan but needed for completion of work. c. The contractor shall remove the fine materials from the bottom of the detention/retention basin and scarify the basin bottom once the construction activities are completed in order to remove any fine material build up caused by construction and to restore soil percolation. d. Add a note, which states that any engineering work to be done below grade (i.e. toe-downs, cutoff walls, drainage pipes/structures, etc.) shall not be back filled until Development Services Inspector inspects the work and approves it. e. The contractor is not permitted to make an autonomous decision to carry out construction field changes without prior written approval from the Engineer of Record and the City of Tucson Development Services Department. f. Add the following note: " Depress all landscaped areas a maximum of 6" for waterharvesting" 8- Call out the basis of bearing on the plan and Provide the proper tie to the basis of bearing (between the basis of bearing and one of the subject parcel corner monuments) as required by D.S. 2-03.2.3.A. 9- Show the Basis of Elevation on the plan. 10- Show building setbacks from ponding limits based on the recommendations of the geotechnical report. 11- Clarify if Common Area "A" north of lot 51 is a retention basin or a water harvesting area. It appears that the water depth in the basin is more than 6", which is the maximum depth allowed in a water-harvesting basin. 12- Cross Section Detail X-X, on Sheet 4 of 4, shows the water surface elevation at 2686.40', which is too high and it will create a ponding situation in the cul de sac. Address this issue and revise as needed. 13- Show the parcel line on Detail X-X. 14- Detail "Basin P" shows the basin floor elevation to be 2682.3', which is not consistent with the basin elevations shown on Detail Z-Z. Revise as necessary. 15- Correct the word "Retention" in Note #2 on Sheet 4 of 4. 16- It has been the City's experience with grouted riprap that 4" thick grout does not provide durable protection. It cracks and deteriorates easily, which may require the owner to provide continuous and costly maintenance. We recommend using a minimum of 8" grout for D50 = 9" riprap. Revise Note #4 and all applicable details, on Sheet 4 of 4, accordingly. 17- Provide barricading at Basin "R" ramp entrance to prevent accidental vehicular access. 18- According to D.S. 11-01.9.0, the minimum cut or fill setback from the property line shall be 2'. Ensure that all details are compliant with this requirement. Modifying the minimum setback requires an approved DSMR. 19- The eastern entrance design is not acceptable. The design issue shall be addressed on the Tentative Plat. There might be different options for the entrance revision. One option might be to close the entrance and replace it with an acceptable turn around. Another option is to realign the entrance with Comino Seco. 20- Check if any of the proposed retention basins require security barriers. 21- Work in the public right of way requires an excavation permit and/or a private improvement agreement. Check with City of Tucson Department of Transportation Permits and Codes for additional information. 22- Resubmit the redlined plan with future Grading Plan submittals. 23- Provide a detailed response letter with the next submittal that explains how the comments were addressed and references the exact locations/sheets where the revisions were made. SWPPP Comments: 1. Show the grading limits on the SWPPP exhibit. 2. Place controls inside grading limits. 3. State the name of the receiving waters (i.e. wash) in the text within the Controls Section. 4. In the "Grading/Stabilization/Sediment Control Activities", the first activity shall be marking the grading limits on the ground and installing the grading limit fences before the BMP's are installed inside the grading limits. Revise the section accordingly. 5. Provide completed and signed NOI for all known operators and some blank forms for the unknown operators. (Part IV.F) Each operator is responsible for submitting a completed NOI to ADEQ and to the City of Tucson. Please note that the remaining signatures from the operators must be on the onsite copy of the SWPPP at or before commencement of construction. 6. Include a dated and signed certification form for each known operator in accordance with Part VII.K. (Part IV.J.1). Provide blank certification copies for unknown operators. 7. Provide copies of blank NOT form for the unknown operators. 8. All operators for the project site shall be identified, and the areas over which each operator has control (Part IV.C.1). 9. Indicate in the SWPPP the name(s) of the party(ies) with operational control over project specifications (including the ability to make modifications in specifications). (Part IV.B.2.c). 10. Indicate in the SWPPP the areas of the project where the operator has operational control over project specifications, including the ability to make modifications in specifications. (Part IV.B.1.b). 11. Indicate in the SWPPP the name(s) of the party(ies) with day-to-day operational control of those activities necessary to ensure compliance with the SWPPP or other permit conditions. Provide a table for recording the names and responsibilities for each party responsible for activities necessary to ensure compliance with the SWPPP or other permit conditions. (Part IV.B.1.d). 12. Indicate in the SWPPP the areas of the project where each operator has operational control over day-to-day activities. (Part IV.B.2.c). 13. Identify location and potential discharges from support activities, including asphalt/concrete plants and stockpiles if applicable. (Part IV.C.5). 14. Describe vehicles and equipment maintenance controls (Part IV.c.5). 15. Vehicle/Equipment wash out area is very close to Retention Basin "R", which is not acceptable. Relocate the wash out area to prevent pollutants from entering the basin. 16. The Equipment and Material storage location is not acceptable. Relocate the storage location away from Retention Basin "R". If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4933 or Laith.Alshami@tucsonaz.gov |
| 02/22/2008 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | February 22, 2008 Development Services Department Zoning Review Section Michael St.Paul Planning Technician T08BU00022 Grading Plans for S06-221 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. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 03/06/2008 | GERARDO BONILLA | APPROVAL SHELF | Completed |
| 03/06/2008 | GERARDO BONILLA | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 03/06/2008 | GERARDO BONILLA | REJECT SHELF | Completed |