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: DP13-0141
Parcel: 12912162A

Address:
1019 E 31ST ST

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: SITE and/or GRADING

Permit Number - DP13-0141
Review Name: SITE and/or GRADING
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
10/07/2013 RBROWN1 ADA REVIEW Passed
10/09/2013 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Denied CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: Grace Temple Church
Development Package (1st Review)
DP13-0141

TRANSMITTAL DATE: October 10, 2013

DUE DATE: November 04, 2013

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings along a response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments regarding the Land Use Code and Development Standards were addressed.

This plan has been reviewed for compliance with the Unified Development Code (UDC) Administrative Manual (AM) Section 2-06. Also compliance with applicable development criteria for the proposed use as listed in the City of Tucson Uniform Development Code (UDC) and the UDC Technical Standards Manual (TSM).

The review comments include the actual standard first with the applicable Administrative Manual section number and the following paragraph is the actual comment related to the specific item that must be addressed. If you need to review the sections listed below click on the link or copy it in the address bar of your internet program. http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az

This link will take you directly to the section used for the standards review. The UDC & TSM requirements are in the Unified Development Code and can be viewed at the same web link as above

1. Section 3.3.3.G.5.c UDC, An applicant has one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a site plan that complies with zoning and other development requirements in effect at the time of application, unless an ordinance adopted by Mayor and Council during this period states otherwise. A site plan application that has been in review for a period of one year and has not yet been approved is considered denied. To continue the review of a site plan for the property, a new site plan must be submitted that complies with regulations in effect at the time of re-submittal. The new submittal initiates a new one-year review period. One year Expiration date is October 08, 2014.

The following comments are based on sheet 1 "SITE PLAN".

2-06.3.12 - An index of sheets in the development package shall be provided on the first sheet.

1. COMMENT: Provide a sheet index on the cover sheet.

CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.1 The name, mailing and email addresses, and phone number of the primary property owner of the site, the developer of the project, registrant(s), and other person(s), firm(s), or organization(s) that prepared the development package documents shall be provided on the right half of the cover sheet. The applicable registration or license number shall be provided if prepared by or with the assistance of a registered professional, such as a surveyor, architect, landscape architect, or engineer. All sealing shall be consistent with Arizona Board of Technical Registration guidelines.

2. COMMENT: Provide the address for "CORONADO ENGINEERING" on the plan.

2-06.4.2.D - The page number and the total number of pages in the package (i.e., sheet xx of xx).

3. COMMENT: Provide the page number and total number of pages, 5, on each sheet.

2-06.4.3 The administrative street address and relevant case numbers (development package document, subdivision, rezoning, board of adjustment, DDO, MDR, DSMR, overlay, etc.) shall be provided adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

4. COMMENT: Provide the administrative address and development package number, DP13-0141, adjacent to the title block.

2-06.4.4 The project-location map to be located on the first sheet of the development package in the upper right corner, shall cover approximately one square mile, be drawn at a minimum scale of three inch equals one mile, and provide the following information.

5. COMMENT: The provided location map is not to scale.

2-06.4.4.A - Show the subject property approximately centered within the one square mile area;

6. COMMENT: Clearly identify the subject property on the location map.

2-06.4.4.C - Section, township, and range; section corners; north arrow; and the scale will be labeled.

7. COMMENT: The section corners labeled on the location map are not correct.

2-06.4.7.A.1 - List as a general note: "Existing zoning is ____."

8. COMMENT: Provide a general note stating "EXISTING ZONING IS R-2."

2-06.4.7.A.2 - List the gross area of the site/subdivision by square footage and acreage.

9. COMMENT: Provide a general note listing the site by square footage and acreage.

2-06.4.7.A.4 - Identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses.

10. COMMENT: Provide a general note stating "PROPOSED USE RELIGIOUS"

2-06.4.7.A.6 - If a plan or plat is prepared in conjunction with other applications or overlays or the parcel being developed is subject to conditions of an application processed previously, additional information must be added to the plan. Such applications and overlays include, but are not limited to: annexations; rezonings; special exceptions; Board of Adjustment variances; Design Development Options; Technical Standard Modification Request; overlays (Airport Environs Zone, Environmental Resource Zone, Gateway Corridor Zone, Hillside Development Zone, Historic Preservation Zone, Major Streets and Routes, Rio Nuevo District, Scenic Corridor Zone, WASH); Modification of Development Regulations through the Downtown Area Infill Incentive District or Rio Nuevo District; Downtown Heritage Incentive Zone; or, Design Review Board. Provide the following information on the plan.

11. COMMENT: Provide a general note stating "THIS PROJECT IS DESINGED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA, UDC SECTION 5.4 MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES SETBACK ZONE (MS&R)".

2-06.4.7.A.8.b - Percentage and area in square feet of building and accessory building coverage;

12. COMMENT: Provide a lot coverage calculation that meets the requirements of UDC Section 6.4.3.

13. COMMENT: Per UDC TABLE 6.3-2.B: EXCEPTIONS TO THE R-1, R-2, R-3, MH-1, & MH-2 DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS the allowed lot coverage for a religious use in the R-2 zone is 60%. It appears that the proposed project exceeds the allowed 60% lot coverage. A Board of Adjustment for Variance may be required once a lot coverage calculation is provided.

14. COMMENT: Remove the reference to "FLOOR AREA RATIO" from the plan as it is not applicable.

2-06.4.7.A.8.c - Percentage of building, lot area, or vehicular use area expansion. If the building(s) or lot area have been previously expanded, those calculations shall be included; and,

15. COMMENT: It appears that several parcels have been combined recently, provide a lot area expansion calculation on the plan.

2-06.4.9.F - All existing zoning classifications on and adjacent to the project (including across any adjacent right-of-way) shall be indicated on the drawing with zoning boundaries clearly defined. If the property is being rezoned, use those boundaries and classifications. The basis for this requirement is that some zoning requirements on a project are based on the zoning classification of adjacent property. Also, in some instances, each zone has to be taken into consideration on property that is split by two or more zoning classifications, as each may have different requirements.

16. COMMENT: Provide the zoning for the parcels west of Park and south of 31st. Also the zoning shown for the parcels north of this site is not correct. Show the C-1 and R-2 zones with the zoning boundaries clearly defined.

2-06.4.9.H.5 - If utilizing parking area access lanes (PAALs), they shall be designed in accordance with Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC.

17. COMMENT: Per UDC Table the minimum PAAL width for 90 degree parking is 24'. That said the PAAL shown at the west end of the site, 19'-10", does not meet this requirement.

18. COMMENT: Provide a PAAL width dimension for the PAAL shown southeast of Building A.

19. COMMENT: Provide a PAAL width dimension for the PAAL shown east of Building A.

2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Show all motor vehicle off-street parking spaces provided, fully dimensioned. As a note, provide calculations on the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided, including the number of spaces required and provided for the physically disabled. The drawing should indicate parking space locations for the physically disabled. A typical parking space detail shall be provided for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. For information on parking requirements for the physically disabled, refer to adopted building and accessibility codes of the City of Tucson. Design criteria for parking spaces and access are located in Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC.

20. COMMENT: The vehicle parking space calculation is not correct. Per UDC Table 7.4.4-1 : MINIMUM NUMBER OF MOTOR VEHICLE SPACES REQUIRED, CIVIC USE GROUP, Religious Use, 1 space per 100 sq. ft. GFA in all combined public assembly areas or areas where religious services are held, whichever is applicable. Revise the vehicle parking calculation.

21. COMMENT: Within the vehicle parking space calculation there are two different numbers that appear to relate to provided number of vehicle parking spaces, "85 FURNISHED & PROVIDED 88" clarify which is correct.

22. COMMENT: PARKING SPACE LAY-OUT, Sheet 4, the location of the parking block is not correct. Review UDC Section 7.4.6.H.1.3 for correct location.

23. COMMENT: PARKING SPACE LAY-OUT, Sheet 4, the location of the "HANDICAP PARKING SIGN" is different from what is shown on the site plan, clarify which location is correct.

2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Show bicycle parking facilities fully dimensioned. For specifics, refer to Section 7.4.9, Bicycle Parking Design Criteria, of the UDC. Provide, as a note, calculations for short and long term bicycle spaces required and provided.

24. COMMENT: Provide a short & long term bicycle parking calculation on the plan, see UDC Table 7.4.8-1 for requirements.

25. COMMENT: Remove the reference to "CLASS 2" bicycle parking from the plan as it is no longer applicable.

26. COMMENT: "MARK" note 22 calls out "NEW BICYCLE RACK (U) ON 5'X8' SLAB" Zoning was not able to fine the bike rack on the plan. Clearly show the location of the required short & long term bicycle parking on the plan.

27. COMMENT: Provide a detail for both short & long term bicycle parking, that demonstrates how the requirements of UDC Sections 7.4.9.B, .C & .D are met.

2-06.4.9.R - Show on-site pedestrian circulation and refuge utilizing location and the design criteria in Section 7-01.0.0, Pedestrian Access, of the Technical Standards Manual.

28. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.3.3.A Within all development, a continuous pedestrian circulation path is required to connect all public access areas of the development and the pedestrian circulation path located in any adjacent streets. That said provide a sidewalk from the buildings to the sidewalk shown in the right-of-way along Park Avenue.

29. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.3.3.B The areas within the development which must be connected include, but are not limited to, all buildings. Provide a sidewalk that connects Building B to the other buildings on site.

30. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.4.1.B A sidewalk is required adjacent and parallel to any access lane or PAAL on the side where buildings are located. That said provide a sidewalk along the west side of Building B.

31. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.4.1.B A sidewalk is required adjacent and parallel to any access lane or PAAL on the side where buildings are located. That said a sidewalk is required along the southeast side of Building A.

32. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.4.3.A All sidewalks must be a minimum of four feet wide and installed to avoid any obstruction which decreases the minimum width to less than four feet. That said the "HANDICAP PAKING SIGN" called out under "MARK" note 18, shown along the west side of Building A, appear to encroach into the 4 foot width of the sidewalk.

33. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.4.3.A All sidewalks must be a minimum of four feet wide and installed to avoid any obstruction which decreases the minimum width to less than four feet. That said there is what appears to be a sidewalk located near the southwest corner of the building that does not meet this requirement.

34. COMMENT: Demonstrate on the plan how there is an accessible path provided from the proposed accessible vehicle parking spaces to all buildings.

35. COMMENT: There is a 5' wall called out under "MARK" note 10, this wall appears to block the sidewalks shown running from Buildings B & C to the sidewalk along 31st Street.

Additional Comments:

1. Provide the height for the "NEW CHAIN LINK FENCE" called out under "MARK" note 27.

2. "ZONING NOTE" 1 refers to "DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 9-01.0" remove this reference as development standards are no longer applicable.


The following comments are based on sheet 2 "FUTURE SITE PLAN".

2-06.4.7.A.1 - List as a general note: "Existing zoning is ____."

1. COMMENT: Provide a general note stating "EXISTING ZONING IS R-2."

2-06.4.7.A.2 - List the gross area of the site/subdivision by square footage and acreage.

2. COMMENT: Provide a general note listing the site by square footage and acreage.

2-06.4.7.A.4 - Identify the existing and proposed use of the property as classified per the UDC. List all UDC sections applicable to the proposed uses.

3. COMMENT: Provide a general note stating "PROPOSED USE RELIGIOUS"

2-06.4.7.A.6 - If a plan or plat is prepared in conjunction with other applications or overlays or the parcel being developed is subject to conditions of an application processed previously, additional information must be added to the plan. Such applications and overlays include, but are not limited to: annexations; rezonings; special exceptions; Board of Adjustment variances; Design Development Options; Technical Standard Modification Request; overlays (Airport Environs Zone, Environmental Resource Zone, Gateway Corridor Zone, Hillside Development Zone, Historic Preservation Zone, Major Streets and Routes, Rio Nuevo District, Scenic Corridor Zone, WASH); Modification of Development Regulations through the Downtown Area Infill Incentive District or Rio Nuevo District; Downtown Heritage Incentive Zone; or, Design Review Board. Provide the following information on the plan.

4. COMMENT: Provide a general note stating "THIS PROJECT IS DESINGED TO MEET THE OVERLAY ZONE(S) CRITERIA, UDC SECTION 5.4 MAJOR STREETS AND ROUTES SETBACK ZONE (MS&R)".

2-06.4.7.A.8.b - Percentage and area in square feet of building and accessory building coverage;

5. COMMENT: Provide a lot coverage calculation that meets the requirements of UDC Section 6.4.3.

6. COMMENT: Per UDC TABLE 6.3-2.B: EXCEPTIONS TO THE R-1, R-2, R-3, MH-1, & MH-2 DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS the allowed lot coverage for a religious use in the R-2 zone is 60%. It appears that the proposed project exceeds the allowed 60% lot coverage. A Board of Adjustment for Variance may be required once a lot coverage calculation is provided.

7. COMMENT: Remove the reference to "FLOOR AREA RATIO" from the plan as it is not applicable.

2-06.4.9.F - All existing zoning classifications on and adjacent to the project (including across any adjacent right-of-way) shall be indicated on the drawing with zoning boundaries clearly defined. If the property is being rezoned, use those boundaries and classifications. The basis for this requirement is that some zoning requirements on a project are based on the zoning classification of adjacent property. Also, in some instances, each zone has to be taken into consideration on property that is split by two or more zoning classifications, as each may have different requirements.

8. COMMENT: Provide the zoning for the parcels west of Park and south of 31st. Also the zoning shown for the parcels north of this site is not correct. Show the C-1 and R-2 zones with the zoning boundaries clearly defined.

2-06.4.9.H.5 - If utilizing parking area access lanes (PAALs), they shall be designed in accordance with Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC.

9. COMMENT: Per UDC Table the minimum PAAL width for 90 degree parking is 24'. That said the PAAL shown at the west end of the site, 17'-10", does not meet this requirement.

10. COMMENT: Provide a PAAL width dimension for the PAAL shown southeast of Building A.

11. COMMENT: Provide a PAAL width dimension for the PAAL shown east of Building A.

2-06.4.9.H.5.a - Show all motor vehicle off-street parking spaces provided, fully dimensioned. As a note, provide calculations on the number of spaces required (include the ratio used) and the number provided, including the number of spaces required and provided for the physically disabled. The drawing should indicate parking space locations for the physically disabled. A typical parking space detail shall be provided for both standard parking spaces and those for the physically disabled. For information on parking requirements for the physically disabled, refer to adopted building and accessibility codes of the City of Tucson. Design criteria for parking spaces and access are located in Section 7.4.6, Motor Vehicle Use Area Design Criteria, of the UDC.

12. COMMENT: The vehicle parking space calculation is not correct. Per UDC Table 7.4.4-1 : MINIMUM NUMBER OF MOTOR VEHICLE SPACES REQUIRED, CIVIC USE GROUP, Religious Use, 1 space per 100 sq. ft. GFA in all combined public assembly areas or areas where religious services are held, whichever is applicable. Revise the vehicle parking calculation.

13. COMMENT: Within the vehicle parking space calculation there are two different numbers that appear to relate to provided number of vehicle parking spaces, "85 FURNISHED & PROVIDED 88" clarify which is correct. As there were 8 vehicle parking spaces removed from the plan the provided number shown on the future site plan should be 8 less that on the site plan.

2-06.4.9.H.5.d - Show bicycle parking facilities fully dimensioned. For specifics, refer to Section 7.4.9, Bicycle Parking Design Criteria, of the UDC. Provide, as a note, calculations for short and long term bicycle spaces required and provided.

14. COMMENT: Remove the reference to "CLASS 2" bicycle parking from the plan as it is no longer applicable.

15. COMMENT: "MARK" note 22 calls out "NEW BICYCLE RACK (U) ON 5'X8' SLAB" Zoning was not able to fine the bike rack on the plan. Clearly show the location of the required short & long term bicycle parking on the plan.

2-06.4.9.R - Show on-site pedestrian circulation and refuge utilizing location and the design criteria in Section 7-01.0.0, Pedestrian Access, of the Technical Standards Manual.

16. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.3.3.A Within all development, a continuous pedestrian circulation path is required to connect all public access areas of the development and the pedestrian circulation path located in any adjacent streets. That said provide a sidewalk from the buildings to the sidewalk shown in the right-of-way along Park Avenue.

17. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.3.3.B The areas within the development which must be connected include, but are not limited to, all buildings. Provide a sidewalk that connects Building B to the other buildings on site.

18. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.4.1.B A sidewalk is required adjacent and parallel to any access lane or PAAL on the side where buildings are located. That said provide a sidewalk along the west side of Building B.

19. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.4.1.B A sidewalk is required adjacent and parallel to any access lane or PAAL on the side where buildings are located. That said a sidewalk is required along the southeast side of Building A.

20. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.4.3.A All sidewalks must be a minimum of four feet wide and installed to avoid any obstruction which decreases the minimum width to less than four feet. That said the "HANDICAP PAKING SIGN" called out under "MARK" note 18, shown along the west side of Building A, appear to encroach into the 4 foot width of the sidewalk.

21. COMMENT: Per TSM Section 7-01.4.3.A All sidewalks must be a minimum of four feet wide and installed to avoid any obstruction which decreases the minimum width to less than four feet. That said there is what appears to be a sidewalk located near the southwest corner of the building that does not meet this requirement.

22. COMMENT: Demonstrate on the plan how there is an accessible path provided from the proposed accessible vehicle parking spaces to all buildings.

23. COMMENT: There is a 5' wall called out under "MARK" note 10, this wall appears to block the sidewalks shown running from Buildings B & C to the sidewalk along 31st Street.3

Additional Comments:

1. Provide the height for the "NEW CHAIN LINK FENCE" called out under "MARK" note 27.

2. "ZONING NOTE" 1 refers to "DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 9-01.0" remove this reference as development standards are no longer applicable.

3. A Major Streets and Routes Covenant will need to be recorded prior to approval of the development package. Provide a copy of the record document with your next submittal.

If you have any questions about this transmittal, please Steve Shields, (520) 837-4956 or Steve.Shields@tucsonaz.gov

RESUBMITTAL OF THE FOLLOWING IS REQUIRED: Revised development package, recorded MS&R Covenant.
.
10/11/2013 MARTIN BROWN FIRE REVIEW Approved
10/28/2013 LOREN MAKUS ENGINEERING REVIEW Denied The drainage report states the landscape water harvesting areas will be depressed one foot to account for retention/detention. Show locations and dimensions of depressed areas on the site and grading plans.
Where trees are required for parking areas, provide water harvesting basins and direct runoff toward the planting areas to the maximum amount feasible.
10/30/2013 RONALD BROWN H/C SITE REVIEW Denied SHEET 1
1. Please provide an accessible route from both accessible parking groups to the fronT entrance of the main building. Provide all ramps as necessary for an accessible entrance.
2. The most easterly group of accessible parking spaces needs an accessible route in front of the accessible parking spaces.
3. One of the four accessible parking spaces must be "Van accessible" with a 11' wide space and a 5' wide aisle or a 9' wide space and aisle.
a. Provide a large scale detail of both groups of accessible parkings showing all accessible requirements.
4. Provide detectable warning strips for all marked crossings as required by ICC A117.1, 406.12, 13 and 14 as applicable.
a. Provide a large scale detail of the marked crossing showing all accessible requirements.
5. Insure and note that all acessible route slopes on the property connecting all buildings comply with ICC A117.1, 403.3; 5% maximum running slope and 2% maximum cross slopes.
6. Provide an accessible route connecting the accessible entrances of all buildings.
a. Insure all entrances are accessible.
SHEET 4
7. Detail of Accessible Parking Space:
a. Provide one "Van Accessible" parking space as per 2012 IBC, Section 1106.5 and ICC A117.1, Section 502.
8. Detail of Curb/Sidewalk Access Ramps:
a. Retitle detail as "Marked Crossing and Access Curb Ramps"
b. Delete parking signs
c. Add Marked crossing identification
d. Adjust access ramps to that as shown for the marked crossing on the site plan.
END OF REVIEW
11/01/2013 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Denied 1. Revise the site drawing to include the points of connection for the three buildings to the existing public sewer. Reference: City of Tucson Administrative Manual No. 2-06.0.0, Section 4.8 and Section 107.2.13, IBC 2012.
2. The rim elevation of the next upstream sanitary manhole (5920-02, 2456.84') is less than 12" below the first floor elevation of building B (2457.83') and is higher than the first floor elevation of building A (2456.83'). Add a note to the site plan requiring the installation of a backwater valve per Section 715.1, IPC 2012 (as amended by the City of Tucson) when future plumbing work is done in the buildings.
11/04/2013 ANDREW CONNOR LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change ADMINISTRATIVE MANUAL SECTION 2-10.0.0: LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIREMENTS

Identification and Descriptive Data:

All improvements and site information, such as adjacent rights-of-way and property lines, shown on the landscape plan will be identical in size and location to those shown on the base plan (site plan or tentative plat). Should amendments be required to the base plan through the review process, the same amendments will be made to the landscape plan which will then be resubmitted along with the base plan.

The landscape plan will contain the following identification in the lower right corner of each sheet:

Any other relevant case number for reviews or modifications that affect the site.

Square footage of the vehicular use area; number of parking spaces, including the required and provided parking space calculations; and the calculation of the required number of canopy trees. Within a vehicular use area, one canopy tree is required for each four motor vehicle parking spaces or fraction thereof. The canopy trees must be evenly distributed throughout the vehicular use area. Every parking space must be located within 40 feet of the trunk of a canopy tree (as measured from the center of the tree trunk).

Material and areas of inert ground cover. Except as otherwise provided by this section, the area between the right-of-way line and sidewalk and the area between the sidewalk and the curb, if not covered with vegetation, must be covered with an appropriate inorganic ground cover, such as decomposed granite.


Maintenance Schedule:

Pruning schedules to show that plant material will maintain pedestrian and vehicular clearances or that the material will establish opaque hedge screens, if required;
Replacement criteria, should plant material not survive;

Replacement or upkeep maintenance schedules for inert ground cover materials;

Upkeep maintenance schedules for exterior hardscape materials; and,

Maintenance and replacement schedules for irrigation systems.

Grading Information:

The methods by which water harvesting or storm water runoff is used to benefit the planting areas on the site.

Irrigation Plan:

System specifications and system design and layout (Section 4-01.4.2, Irrigation Standards, of the Technical Standards Manual);


Type of water conserving irrigation systems proposed and differentiation between systems for the different water use zones on the site;

Source of irrigation water;

ARTICLE 7: DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS

LANDSCAPING AND SCREENING


Continuous screens along street frontages for vehicle use area must be as determined by Table 7.6.4-I. Provide appropriate screening.

Interior Landscape Borders:

Interior landscape borders are required as a buffer and visual transition along the common property lines between adjacent land uses and zones as follows, except as provided in Section 7.6.4.C.4, Exceptions to the Landscape Border Standards.

Interior landscape borders are required as determined in Table 7.6.4-1, which ranks land uses and zones based upon their land use intensity and the impact a use will have on adjacent land uses. One canopy tree is required for every 33 linear feet of landscape border or fraction thereof, excluding vehicular ingress or egress points.

Ensure that all Zoning and Engineering comments and concerns are addressed.

Additional comments may apply
11/04/2013 ANDREW CONNOR NPPO REVIEW Approved

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
11/13/2013 SHANAE POWELL OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed
11/13/2013 CPIERCE1 REJECT SHELF Completed