Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - GRADING ALL
Permit Number - T09BU01057
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - GRADING ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 09/11/2009 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | Clearly define grading limits of proposed development and include a description of scope of work. Submit a copy of the COT approved development plan S04-183 including landscape and native plant preservation plans for reference. Revise grading plans as necessary to comply with the approved documents. |
| 09/18/2009 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | See last comments. Nothing has changed. Provide the last stamped approved site plan or development plan. |
| 09/23/2009 | LOREN MAKUS | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | October 2, 2009 The Comments from the August 27, 2009 review do not seem to have been addressed. Please revise the plan to address these comments which are repeated here. 1. Clarify the status of the lot. Currently the areas labeled as Block 1 and Block 2 are still a single lot. Indicate that the boundaries shown are proposed until the plat is approved and recorded. 2. Include the drainage report with the grading plan submittal. Include a discussion showing how the differences between the proposed drainage and the previously approved drainage designs are justified. 3. Clearly show the locations and quantities of on-site and off-site discharges that affect the site. Clearly show off-site contours to the extent that they affect drainage onto and from the project site. 4. Ensure that data is not overlapped to render it illegible. 5. Clearly show and provide details for all inlet and outlet structures both existing and proposed. Provide sufficient detail to show how drainage is currently discharged from the site and how proposed changes will be made. 6. Correct the section callouts to refer to the correct sheets. 7. Clarify the extent of work that is proposed for this grading permit. 8. Provide a legend to identify all symbols used on the plan. Please also address these comments concerning the drainage report. 1. Clarify the data sheets in Appendix A of the Drainage Report. 2. All of the data sheets are labeled as "Existing Conditions." Clearly differentiate between the existing (pre-development) data sheets and the developed data sheets. 3. The numbers for the extent of imperviousness for existing and developed conditions are not consistent for the site conditions especially on the sheets that seem to represent the pre-development conditions. 4. Provide a clear discussion of the changes between the pre-development conditions and the developed conditions. The table on page 2 (existing conditions) for example has lists of concentration points some of which seem to be cumulative over several areas shown on the corresponding exhibit. The table on page 4 doesn't seem to have corresponding areas for comparison. Provide detailed and explicit discussions results of flood peak estimations and retention and detention. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/29/2009 | CINDY AGUILAR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 10/29/2009 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |