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 - T09BU00283
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 03/03/2009 | DAVID RIVERA | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | 03/03/2009 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 at this time. 2. While zoning acknowledges that the grading plan is in substantial zoning compliance as it relates to the Zoning review purview, with the approved version of the tentative plat, the grading plan cannot be approved at this time. Prior to Zoning approval the Engineering and Landscape Sections must approve the grading plan. 3. Cross section detail 8/3 could not be verified on the grading plan sheets. It is assumed that the the numbers are a typo. If not add the correct symbol and sheet number. Revise the number 3 to 2 on the cross section detail symbol on lots 282. I believe the numbers should be 8/2 if the cross section is for the detail depicting the side lot drainage. 4. Label the tentative plat case number in the lower right coerner of all grading plan sheets. 5. Zoning is willing to review and approve the grading plan over the counter once the enginering and landscape sections have approve this plan. Please call me to set up an appointment for a counter review and approval of the is grading plan. |
| 03/05/2009 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Grading permit application shall be accompanied by a plan in sufficient clarity to indicate the nature and extent of the work DS 11-01.4.1.F. If phased development is proposed indicate the extent of work on the grading plan. 2. Reference the subdivision case number in the lower right corner of all grading plan sheets. 3. Ensure that all Engineering & Zoning comments and concerns are addressed. |
| 03/24/2009 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and Floodplain Review, 03/24/2009 Mountain Vail Estates, Part E, Lots 243 thru 286 and Common Area "B" Grading Plan Comments: 1- Provide the "T09BU00283" case number in the Tile Block. 2- Provide the administrative number on the first sheet. 3- Show the basis of bearing between two established monuments. 4- Provide the bearing for the tie between the Basis of Bearing and the subject development. 5- Fill in the Book and Page numbers in the blank spaces on the first sheet. 6- Show and label grading limits. Include the grading limits symbol in the legend. 7- Add a note, which states all proposed cut or fill slopes shall be set back at least 2' from the parcel line. 8- City of Tucson does not have Type 2 Grading Permit. Remove the note that references Type 2 Grading Permit from the first sheet of all phases Grading Plans. 9- The Geotechnical Report shall recommend the required setback from existing/proposed slopes whether they are created by a cut or a fill. Verify compliance with the Soils Report recommendation. 10- 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 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. Alternatively, the contractor may utilize BMP's at the basin inlet(s) to prevent the fines from entering the basin. 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 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. f. A copy of the approved Grading Plan, SWPPP, Grading Permit, and any Geotechnical Reports shall be kept at the site at all times, until final grading approval. g. Any revision to the Grading Plan MAY require a re-submittal of a revised grading plan for review. Contact DSD Engineering at 837-4933 to discuss changes in grading design. h. 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. i. See the associated Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan as a part of this grading permit. 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 basin and 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". 11- There should be some bollards at the end of the roads near Lot 277. 12- Provide construction easement to work on the adjacent property near Lots 272 thru 286 wherever applicable. 13- Show the concrete curb terminal detail near Lots 291 and 292. 14- Label the streets whether they are public or private. 15- Show the wall between the lots on Detail 8/2. 16- Show no parking sign on the left side of Detail 4/3. 17- It appears that Lots 277-282 do not comply with the requirements of differential grading as described in Development Standard 11-01.8.0 Fills. Either readjust the said lot elevations or verify compliance with the requirements of D.S. 11-01.8.0. 18- Provide Lots 272-274 existing contour lines and elevations. Ensure that these lots comply with the requirements of differential grading. 19- According to the approved Drainage Report, Lots 263-266 are Type "A" lots. The Grading Plan shows those lots as "C" and "B" lots. Address this issue and discuss any possible adverse impact on the approved drainage scheme. 20- Provide additional grading information for the slope behind Lots 243-246 and 251 and 252. 21- Show the location of Detail 5/2 on the plan view. 22- The pipe sizes in Details 6/4 and 5/4 do not match. Additionally, the riprap shown on the right side of Detail 5/4 requires additional information. Revise as necessary. 23- City's experience with grouted riprap that 4" grout is usually not sufficient and deteriorates in a relatively short period of time especially when it is installed improperly. This Office recommends using a minimum of 6" grout based on the proposed rock size. 24- Correct the spelling of the word "berm" in Detail 9/2. 25- All proposed cuts and fills shall be pulled back a minimum of 2' from the parcel line. Revise Detail 9/2 and all applicable details accordingly. 26- Since Basin B-12 is proposed to have human activities, provide an access area with slopes of 8:1 or flatter. 27- Detail 8/3 call out, near Lots 272 and 273, is incorrect. Revise. 28- Provide additional information for the riprap on the right side of Detail 7/4. 29- It is not clear why the curb was turned into a concrete header only on one side of the street as shown in Detail 13/2. 30- Provide additional information on Detail 8/4. 31- Provide a detail that shows the proposed 6" orifice opening at the inlet of all detention basins bleed pipes. The orifice shall be installed closer to the pipes inverts. 32- Please be advised that since this project has been phased out into 8 different phases, it is assumed that grading all eight phases will not happen all at once. Grading plan approvals expire after 180 days from the date when the review fees are paid plus another 180 days if an extension is requested. Once the permit fees are paid, the developer has 180 days before the permit expires unless inspections are requested in a timely manner. Address this issue and determine if it is still the developer's wish to review all phases the same time. 33- 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. 34- Resubmit the redlined grading plan with future Grading Plan submittals for comparison. 35- 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. 36- Submit a revised drainage report that addresses the drainage modifications if necessary. 37- Additional information may be required with next submittal. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 04/14/2009 | CINDY AGUILAR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 04/14/2009 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |