Permit Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: RESUBMITTAL - GRADING ALL
Permit Number - T10BU00346
Review Name: RESUBMITTAL - GRADING ALL
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 06/08/2010 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and floodplain Review, 06/08/2010 Old Vail Road Industrial Grading Plan Comments: 1. The previous redlined grading plan was not included in the submittal. Submit the redlined copy to facilitate the review. 2. Based on the proposed grades and existing grades, it appears that water ponding might occur at the northeast corner of the development behind and near the existing decorative wall. Show the grades next to the wall and clarify how water will drain if ponding occurs. Wall openings and a drainage swale might need to be installed to help with this problem. Provide construction details for any proposed solutions (i.e. wall openings, swales, etc.). The response to this previously made comment was not clear and unsatisfactory. 3. Provide the missing curb radii wherever applicable. This previously made comment does not appear that it was addressed properly. 4. It appears that the 1' toe down depths in Details F/6 and G/6 may not be sufficient. Justify the proposed depths or revise them. 5. Provide an appropriate toe down for the riprap at the downstream end of the western channel. Show the toe down in the riprap detail H/6. 6. Provide a Geotechnical Report that addresses the stability of the proposed 1:1 slopes and how to stabilize them if required. The reinforced riprap protects the slope surface and may or may not stabilize the slope. 7. 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. SWPPP Comments: 1. Include in the text that the City of Tucson received or will receive a copy of the authorization certificate (Part III.D.4). 2. Describe the construction activity (what is being built, what is being disturbed, how long it is expected to take, etc.) (Part III.C.2). This previously made comment was not addressed satisfactorily. The proposed structures and pavement, etc. need to be included in the text. 3. Show on the SWPPP exhibit possible locations of on-site material storage, equipment storage or other supporting activities (Part III.C.3.e). Include the symbols in the legend. 4. Identify the Julian Wash as the nearest receiving waters on the Location Map (Part III.C.4). 5. I t appears that before the completion of all improvements, including the western interception channel, BMP's must be installed along the western property line to intercept exiting runoff. If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4933 or Laith.Alshami@tucsonaz.gov |
| 06/15/2010 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | Grading notes for permits plus. With DEVELOPMENT PLAN 03/25/2010 Development Services Department Zoning Review Section Terry Stevens Lead Planner 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. Zoning will re-review the grading plan on the next submittal to insure compliance with the approved site/development plan. Additional comments may be forthcoming. |
| 06/17/2010 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | Ensure that all Engineering comments and concerns are addressed prior NPP / Landscape approval stamp. |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 08/19/2010 | CINDY AGUILAR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 08/19/2010 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |