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 - T11BU00126
Review Name: GRADING
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 01/31/2011 | LAITH ALSHAMI | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | Laith Alshami, Engineering and floodplain Review, 02/04/2011 Walmart Expansion - Store No. 1325-01 Grading Plan Comments: 1- It appears that the proposed parking lot improvements, south of the Walmart building, shown on the submitted plans, were not on the approved Development Plan. The proposed improvements on the Grading Plan and on the Development Plan should match. Contact CDRC to determine if the approved Development Plan needs to be revised. 2- Clarify what is being proposed. Is there any area where the pavement will be removed and the grades will be altered? 3- The submitted plan includes many sheets that do not appear to be grading review related. This makes the review confusing. Revise the submittal to include only grading related sheets. Please be advised that the cover sheet shall be clearly marked "Grading Plan" 4- Provide the T10BU00126 case number in the Tile Block on every sheet. 5- Show and label the actual grading limits. Include the grading limits symbol in the legend. 6- Provide the actual cut and fill quantities. 7- Show clearly existing and proposed grades. 8- Clarify how the truck wells and the trash compactor area will be draining. It appears that the proposed drainage conveyance systems were not addressed in the approved drainage statement. Revise the drainage statement to address all proposed drainage revisions. 9- 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. Any proposed 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. c. 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 Planning and Development Services Department. d. CALL FOR SWPPP INSPECTION AND PRE-CONSTRUCTION MEETINGS. FOR A PDSD ENGINEERING INSPECTIONS, CALL IVR (740-6970), OR SCHEDULE WITH A CUSTOMER SERVICE REPRESENTATIVE AT THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, OR CONTACT DSD ENGINEERING AT 791-5550 EXTENSION 2101, OR SCHEDULE INSPECTIONS ONLINE AT: http://cms3.tucsonaz.gov/pdsd/inspections. e. The project will be in compliance with City of Tucson Development Standard 11-01.0 (Excavation and Grading). f. 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. g. Any revision to the Grading Plan MAY require a re-submittal of a revised grading plan for review. Contact PDSD Engineering at 791-5550 to discuss changes in grading design. h. If grading construction is expected to last longer than the expiration date of the grading permit, contact PDSD 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 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 PDSD 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". 10- Provide roof drainage arrows for all buildings and show the locations of all downspouts and their splash pads. 11- Provide all radii wherever applicable. 12- 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. 13- Resubmit the redlined plan with future Grading Plan submittals. 14- 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. A SWPPP is required for this project if the amount of dirt disturbance is one acre or more. If a SWPPP is submitted for a disturbance that is less than one acre, the SWPPP still has to comply with the requirements of the Arizona General Permit. 2. Show the grading limits on the SWPPP exhibit. 3. Place controls inside grading limits. 4. Include in the sequential activities, as the first two activities, determining the disturbance limits, and installing the proposed BMP's within these limits. 5. Include a copy of the completed (filled out and signed by the owner) NOI form that was submitted to ADEQ (Part III.D.3). Provide some blank forms for the unknown operators. (Part IV.F) Each operator is responsible for submitting a completed NOI to ADEQ and to the City of Tucson. Please note that the remaining signatures from the operators must be on the onsite copy of the SWPPP at or before commencement of construction. 6. Include a copy of the authorization certificate received from ADEQ (Part III.D.2). 7. Include a dated and signed certification form for each known operator (including the owner) in accordance with Part VII.K. (Part IV.J.1). Provide blank certification copies for unknown operators. 8. Identify any city or county which received a copy of the authorization certificate (Part III.D.4). 9. Describe the construction activity (what is being built, what is being disturbed, how long it is expected to take, etc.) (Part III.C.2). 10. Show on the SWPPP exhibit possible locations of on-site material storage, waste storage or receptacles borrow areas, equipment storage or other supporting activities (Part III.C.3.e). Include the symbols in the legend. 11. Show areas of soil disturbance and areas that will not be disturbed (Part III.C.3.b). If you have any questions, I can be reached at 837-4933 or Laith.Alshami@tucsonaz.gov |
| 02/15/2011 | MICHAEL ST. PAUL | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | February 15, 2011 Development Services Department Zoning Review Section Michael St.Paul Planning Technician T11BU00126 Grading Plans for D10-0031 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 one copy 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. |
| 02/25/2011 | ANDREW CONNOR | NPPO | REVIEW | Denied | 1. Submit a copy of the approved development plan including landscape and native plant preservation plans for reference. 2. The grading plan has been reviewed by the Landscape / NPPO Section but cannot approve the plan until all Engineering, comments, concerns, and appropriate revisions have been addressed. 3. Additional comments may apply |
Final Status
| Task End Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 03/02/2011 | CINDY AGUILAR | OUT TO CUSTOMER | Completed |
| 03/02/2011 | SUE REEVES | REJECT SHELF | Completed |