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 - T08BU01010
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/04/2008 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 06/04/2008 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 on this review. 2. Zoning could not verify that the grading plan was in compliance with the CDRC approved and stamped development plan. Please submit two copies of the CDRC approved and stamped development, landscape, and NPPO plans with the next grading plan submittal. 3. Please ensure that the grading plan matches the CDRC approved and stamped development plan. 4. Zoning will re-review the grading plan on the next submittal to ensure compliance with the CDRC approved development plan. Additional comments may be forthcoming. |
| 06/20/2008 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Submit a copy of the approved development including landscape and native plant preservation plans for reference. The grading application will be reviewed for compliance only the approved documents are included in the submittal. Revise grading plans as necessary to comply with the approved plans. |
| 07/24/2008 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | July 28, 2008 T08BU01010 Grading Review The grading plan and associated documents have been reviewed by the Engineering Division. The plan cannot be approved at this time. Please address the comments below. Provide a response letter detailing how each item has been addressed. 1. The grading plan cannot be approved until the development plan is approved. Additional comments may be presented in future grading reviews. 2. Revise the grading plan to provide a physical separation between vehicle-use areas and landscape areas. For example, the landscape area west of Michaels on sheet 5, is separated from the PAAL by a header only. 3. Revise the storm drain within the right-of-way to indicate that all drainage structures in the right of way will be constructed of reinforced concrete. Provide a manhole at the property line to provide for maintenance access to the public and private facilities separately. 4. Provide details or notes that clearly indicate that the water harvesting areas will be constructed with mini-berms to provide for ponding throughout the landscape areas. 5. Label the spherical bollards on the grading plan sheets. 6. Clarify the detail for the "rolled curb." The detail appears to show wedge curb. Rolled curb is usually more like Standard Detail 209-1. 7. Make sure that lines and other drawing features don't obliterate text in the plan views. 8. Clarify the locations where curbs and headers transition to each other. For example on sheet 8 the same line indicates both header and curb. Clarify the transitions. SWPPP 9. Revise the SWPPP in conformance to the General Permit issued by ADEQ on February 29, 2008. For example, revise section 2.3 to indicate the percentage of the site that is impervious before project construction begins and the percentage that will be impervious after construction is complete. (I recommend SWPPP checklist provided by ADEQ on its web site.) 10. Indicate whether a drywell is located such that it could receive discharge from this site. If you have any questions or wish to set up a meeting, please contact me at loren.makus@tucsonaz.gov or at 520.837.4927. Loren Makus, EIT Senior Engineering Associate |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08/15/2008 | VFLORES1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 08/15/2008 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |