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 - T08BU01094
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/17/2008 | PETER MCLAUGHLIN | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Site plan approval is required prior to grading plan approval. |
| 07/01/2008 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | Development Services Department Zoning Review Section 07/01/2008 David Rivera Principal Planner Comments: 1. Zoning has reviewed the grading plan but can not approve the plan at this time. While it appears to match the unapproved version of the site/development plan the plan cannot be approved until a copy of the DSD/CDRC approved and stamped Site / Development Plan is included with the grading plan. 2. Zoning could not verify that the grading plan was in compliance with the approved site plan. Please submit two copies of the DSD approved and stamped site, 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 DSD approved and stamped site plan. Additional comments may be forthcoming. |
| 07/07/2008 | JASON GREEN | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | DATE: July 9, 2008 SUBJECT: Tutor Time Daycare- Grading Plan Review TO: BSW International Inc. Attn: Maolin Zheng LOCATION: 51 S Pantano Road, T14S R15E Sec16, Ward 2 REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM ACTIVITY: T08BU01094 (Grading Plan) SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Development Services Department has received and reviewed the grading plan, Drainage Report (BSW International, Inc., 10MAR08 revised 12JUN08), Geotechnical Engineering Report (Acura Engineering, 15NOV07 addendum 20MAR08 and 11JUN08) and Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (BSW International, Inc., 03JUN08) for the above referenced property. Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the grading plan or SWPPP at this time. The following items need to be addressed: GRADING PLAN COMMENTS: 1) Provide a copy of the last approved site plan (T08CM01058). The grading plan can not be approved until verification that all details, locations, dimensions, and plan profiles match the approved site plan. Provide a copy of the stamped approved site plan within the grading plan package. All items on the grading plan must match the site plan plus provide additional construction information on the grading plan sheets for construction purposes. 2) Revise Standard Paving and Grading Note #2 to read per the Project Benchmark reference. Only the correct Bench Mark should be shown on the grading plan, verify that the Bench Mark with the City of Tucson Datum is shown in General Note #2 and remove all others. 3) Revise the grading plan to clearly show that public access is not allowed through the proposed fire lane access point. Per conversation with City of Tucson Fire Department it has been asked that a rapid entry box be installed at the south end of the 20-foot access road at the intersection of the road and the proposed fire truck cul-de-sac. Vehicles can not use the fire access lane as a driveway or access point into the adjacent neighborhood, revise. For further information contact City of Tucson Fire Department. 4) Revise the grading plan and the proposed dimension of the berm to show a minimum 3-foot wide top for compaction and maintenance purposes. 5) Revise the grading plan to provide clean outs at all junctions for the 10-inch PVC pipe that is used for the roof run off. All junctions must provide a clean out for maintenance purposes, revise. 6) Revise the grading plan and all keynotes and/or details to include the minimum specifications for the "geotech fabric." Provide the type and minimum specifications for construction purposes on the grading plan. 7) Revise the grading plan and all keynotes to correctly call out the Public Standard Improvement Detail proposed, examples; keynote #21 call out a handrail per a standard detail, but does not reference the detail for construction purposes, revise. 8) Revise the grading plan and keynote #25 to provide a detail with dimensions for the proposed Nyloplast area drain. All drainage infrastructures must be detailed in plan view for construction purposes. 9) Revise the grading plan to provide a detail for the proposed 4-foot wide concrete headwalls that are proposed within the basins. All drainage infrastructure must provide a reference to a Standard Public Improvement Detail or provide a separate detail on the grading plan that provides all dimensions, thickness, concrete specifications, toe down for cut off wall, etc, revise. 10) Revise the grading plan and all basin cross sections to provide the minimum dimensions required to construct the propose basins in order to meets the required detention/retention volumes. Provide minimum bottom widths, top widths, lengths, etc. 11) Revise the grading plan to label all improvements that are to be constructed as part of this project, i.e. label all handicap access ramps within the public right-of-way. Provide the standard detail number or a separate detail for the handicap ramps that meet or exceed the standard improvement detail. 12) Revise detail 1/C-6 on the grading plan to clarify the 0.2 foot elevation of the top of grate from the basin bottom. Provide an elevation reference for the basin bottom in the detail to verify that the top of grate is elevated per the Drainage Report. 13) Revise detail 1/C-6 on the grading plan to provide the minimum 12-inch diameter pipe for the "Principal Outlet Structure" within the sump pump for maintenance purposes. Per DS 10-01.3.3.3 all "Principal Outlet Structure" must provide a minimum 12-inches and may have a restrictor plate on the upstream end with a smaller orifice. The 12-inch minimum for this location is for maintenance purposes of the pipes within the sump pump drainage structure. 14) Revise detail 1/C-6 on the grading plan and keynote #5 to provide for an erosion protection at the outlet of the drain pipe. Due to the concentrated flows and velocity of the 2-inch pipe extension erosion at the asphalt is expected; provide a riprap pad or other form of protection to prevent the existing asphalt from being eroded. 15) Revise detail 1/C-6 on the grading plan to provide for all construction details for the proposed riprap pad within the basin bottom. Provide the thickness, method of placement, fabric specifications, etc for construction purposes. 16) Provide a General Note stating that all proposed fencing and walls will require a separate permit for review and approval by all necessary Development Services Departments. 17) Revise general note # 18 on the grading plan to state the following: "Call for a Pre-construction meeting prior to start of earthwork. To schedule a DSD Pre-construction meeting, SWPPP inspection or general 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 18) Approval from TDOT Permits and Codes for all improvements within the public right-of-way will be required. A right-of-way use permit application will be required prior to construction. Contact Thad Harvison, (520)-837-6592 or Thad.Harvison@tucsonaz.gov for all right-of-way requirements and permit applications. 19) Please ensure that the proposed grading plan is consistent with the site plan, Drainage Report and Geotechnical Report with Addendums. Grading standards may be accessed at: http://www.ci.tucson.az.us/dsd/DevStandsTOC.pdf STORMWATER POLLUTION PREVENTION PLAN: The SWPPP does not meet the minimum requirements of the AzPDES Construction General Permit (CGP). 20) Part IV.J.1: The Owner/Operator must sign the SWPPP. 21) Revise Page 8 Section B.2 to provide the correct name of the grading inspector that must be contacted for the pre-construction meeting. The grading inspector for this project is Nicole Kalahar Zormeier and Jim Femling. 22) Revise Page 8 Section B.2 to provide the correct contact information for calling in the pre-construction inspection. Internal Voice Recognition (IVR) 740-6970, Customer Service Representative at the Development Services Department 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 GENERAL COMMENTS: Please provide the last approved site plan, 2 copies of the revised grading plan, 2 copies of the Drainage Report, 2 copies of the Geotechnical Report and 3 copies of the revised SWPPP reports that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments. Enclose "redlines" with the resubmittal package. Further comments may be generated upon resubmittal of the grading plan and SWPPP review. If you have any questions or to schedule an appointment call me at 837-4929. Jason Green, CFM Senior Engineer Associate Engineering Division COT Development Services |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 07/14/2008 | CPIERCE1 | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |