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: T08BU01845
Parcel: 141113970

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: GRADING

Permit Number - T08BU01845
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
10/31/2008 MICHAEL ST. PAUL ZONING REVIEW Denied October 31, 2008

Development Services Department
Zoning Review Section

Michael St.Paul
Planning Technician

T08BU01584 Grading Plans for D08-0037
Address: 9018 East Camino Abril

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. In addition, we could not verify that the grading plan was in compliance with the approved development plan for Zoning Review. Please submit two copies of the approved and stamped Development Plan, 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 development plan. Additional comments may be forthcoming.
11/04/2008 PETER MCLAUGHLIN NPPO REVIEW Approved
11/17/2008 LAITH ALSHAMI ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 11/17/2008

Brown/Rita Ranch Lot 34 Grading Plan Comments:

1- Provide the "T08BU01845" number in the Tile Block.
2- The telephone number, in the consultant name and address block, appears to have been disconnected. Provide an active number.
3- Label the dotted area south of the proposed building. Additionally, include the said area symbol in the legend.
4- Vehicles which park in the parking spaces near both entrances might conflict with entering and exiting traffic as they try to back out. This Office recommends revising the parking layout to reduce the possibility of a conflict.
5- Show and label grading limits. Include the grading limits symbol in the legend.
6- Add a note or show in a typical detail that proposed cut or fill slopes shall be set back at least 2' from the parcel line.
7- Submit a Geotechnical Report that recommends the required setback from existing/proposed slopes whether they are created by a cut or a fill. Verify compliance with the Soils Report recommendation.
8- The Geotechnical Report shall address slope stabilization and protection.
9- Provide a cross section for the existing channel and the proposed building. Verify that the building is set back from the channel appropriately in accordance with the Geotechnical Report recommendations.
10- Provide a detail that clarifies how offsite runoff enters the site.
11- A cutoff wall appears to be needed at the end of the riprap pad, in Detail A/3, to reduce the effect of any scour on the pad.
12- Provide all proposed riprap pads rock size in Details F/3 and G/3 on the plan on Sheet 2 of 3. Additionally, show filter fabric underneath the riprap. Show the building location and finished floor elevation on Detail H/3. Additionally, show the building setback line as recommended by the Geotechnical Report.
13- If the roof drains are proposed on the channel side, propose a method to prevent scouring next to the building.
14- Add the following general notes:

a. 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.
b. The contractor shall remove the fine materials from the bottom of the existing onsite channel 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 the channel bottom. Alternatively, the contractor may utilize BMP's at the basin inlet(s) to prevent fine materials from entering the channel.
c. 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.
d. 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.
e. CALL FOR 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.
f. The project will be in compliance with City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01.0 (Excavation and Grading).
g. A copy of the approved Grading Plan, Grading Permit, and any Geotechnical Reports shall be kept at the site at all times, until final grading approval.
h. Any revision to the Grading Plan MAY require a re-submittal of a revised grading plan for review. Contact DSD Engineering at 791-5550 to discuss changes in grading design.
i. If grading construction is expected to last longer than the expiration date of the grading permit, contact DSD to renew/extend the Grading Permit. If Final Grading Inspection has not been completed before the Grading Permit expires, and the permit has not been renewed, additional fees and reviews may be required.
j. Contact Permits and Codes at 791-5100 for any questions regarding any right-of-way permit requirements.
k. As-builts and letters of completion for the overall project are required.
l. The Engineer of Record shall submit a statement of conformance to as-built plan and the specifications.
m. The permitee shall notify the DSD when the grading operation is ready for final grading inspection. Final grading approval shall not be given until all work, including installation of all drainage facilities and their permanent protective devices, and all erosion control measures have been completed in accordance with the approved grading plan and grading permit, and any required reports have been submitted.
n. Depress all landscaped areas a maximum of 6" for waterharvesting"

15- Are perimeter walls proposed for this project? Perimeter wall footings must be completely within the private property. Wall footings shall not be completely/partially within the adjacent private property. Provide a typical detail that demonstrates compliance with this requirement.
16- Show all grade breaks and their elevations.
17- Work in the public right of way requires an excavation permit and/or may require a private improvement agreement. Check with City of Tucson Department of Transportation Permits and Codes for additional information.
18- Resubmit the redlined grading plan with future Grading Plan submittals for comparison.
19- 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.
20- Additional information may be required with next submittal.

If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4933 or Laith.Alshami@tucsonaz.gov

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
12/05/2008 DELMA ROBEY OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
12/05/2008 SUE REEVES REJECT SHELF Completed