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

Permit Number: DP15-0084
Parcel: 117130250

Address:
1 W BROADWAY BL

Review Status: Completed

Review Details: DEV PKG

Permit Number - DP15-0084
Review Name: DEV PKG
Review Status: Completed
Review Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description Status Comments
05/21/2015 PGEHLEN1 START PLANS SUBMITTED Completed
05/22/2015 MARTIN BROWN COT NON-DSD FIRE Approved
05/28/2015 GARY WITTWER DOT LANDSCAPE REVIEW Reqs Change Trish,
I looked in Permits Plus, but could not find a spot for my comments.
Here they are:

1. There are two additional trees in the ROW that are not being shown. Please check on them.
2. There is existing irrigation to all four trees that will need to be protected in place, or repaired if damaged.
3. All new irrigation needs to be sleeved under concrete. Sleeves not needed under brick.
4. Mature size of Palo brea may be a concern for modern street car cantinary lines. This will be the property owners responsiblity to maintain.
5. Both the bike rack and the trash recepticals need to be black.
6. Please all standard notes for planting in ROW. (attached)

Thanks,
Gary

City of Tucson
Department of Transportation
Standard Notes for Planting in ROW

1. It is the owner's responsibility to keep the Sight Visibility Triangles (SVT), and the pedestrian access area clear of vegetation at all times, per Land Use Code (LUC) section.
2. It is the owner responsible to keep vegetation from growing past the curb line clear, and keep a 15' high clear zone over the travel lane.
3. Final plant locations must be in compliance with all utility setback requirements.
4. The owner understands that if the City of Tucson Transportation Department or any utility company needs to work within the ROW in the landscaped area, plants and irrigation may be destroyed without replacement or repair.
5. The owner takes full liability for this landscape and irrigation, and any damage to roadway, sidewalk and utilities.
6. The only private irrigation equipment that is allowed within the ROW are lateral lines, tubing and emitters that are not under constant pressure. All other equipment must be on private property. (excluding water meter)
7. Contractor to obtain a Right Of Way excavation permit prior to construction within the right-of-way.
05/29/2015 JASON GREEN ENGINEERING REVIEW Reqs Change DATE: June 04, 2015
DUE DATE: June 18, 2015
SUBJECT: 1 West Broadway Development Plan Package- Engineering Review
TO: Metro TED; Attn: Lisa Bowers
LOCATION: 1 W Broadway Blvd; T14S R13E Sec13
REVIEWERS: Jason Green, CFM
ACTIVITY: DP15-0084

SUMMARY: Engineering Division of Planning & Development Services Department has received and reviewed the proposed Development Plan Package and Drainage Statement (Cypress Civil Development, 18MAY15). Engineering Division does not recommend approval of the Development Plan Package at this time. This review falls under the Unified Development Code (UDC), Administration Manual (AM) and Technical Standards Manual (TSM). Refer to the following link for further clarification:
http://www.amlegal.com/nxt/gateway.dll/Arizona/tucson_az_udc/administrativemanual?f=templates$fn=default.htm$3.0$vid=amlegal:tucson_udc_az

The following items need to be addressed:

SITE PLAN:

1) AM Sec.2-06.4.3: The relevant Development Plan Package case number (DP15-0084) may be added to the lower right hand corner of the plan on all sheets.

2) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.A.2: Revise the development plan package to provide a General Note to read per the referenced section. Specifically list the gross area of the site by square footage and acreage.

3) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.B.3: Revise the development plan package to include a Drainage Note per the referenced section; "Drainage will remain in its natural state and will not be altered, disturbed, or obstructed other than as shown on this development plan."

4) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.C.2: Revise the development plan package to provide a General Note to read per the referenced section; "No structure or vegetation shall be located or maintained so as to interfere with the sight visibility triangles in accordance with Section 10-01.5.0, Sight Visibility, of the Technical Standards Manual."

5) AM Sec.2-06.4.7.D: Revise the development plan package to provide a General Note to read per the referenced section; "Any relocation or modification of existing utilities and/or public improvements necessitated by the proposed development will be at no expense to the public."

6) TSM Sec.8-01.5.1.D: Revise the development plan package to provide a General Note to read per the referenced section; "A single property owner, property management company, or home owners association (HOA), will be responsible for the management and maintenance of the solid waste collection services and storage area(s) for all development/business occupants." Where a development is intending to provide centralized storage and collection to serve multiple buildings, tenants, or businesses, a general note must be included within the plan.

7) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.C: Revise the development plan package to dimension the existing width of right of way, curbs, curb cuts, curb to property line, etc. Label all roadways as "Public" and both Broadway Blvd and Stone Ave as "MS&R."

8) AM Sec.2-06.4.8.F: Revise the development plan package to label all existing storm drainage facilities on and adjacent to the site with the Improvement Plan Number in plan view. Clarify the existing storm drain inlets shown on Sheet 4, per the landscape plans these are to act as tree wells.

9) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.1: Provide approval from TDOT for the track access permit that is required when any work is being proposed along the streetcar route. The permits can be obtained from TDOT Permits and Codes.

10) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.2: Revise the development plan package and Keynotes 18 and 19 to correctly dimension the 20-foot stem length of the SVTs for the driveway and the Local Street and the Near Side dimension along Jackson Street, refer to TSM Sec.10-01.5.3 for line of sight matrix. To modify the 20-foot stem length to 15-feet as depicted a TSMR application will be required. Provide a General Note on the development plan package (DP15-0084) referencing the TSMR Case #, date of approval and any conditions (if applicable).

11) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.H.5.a Revise the development plan package to provide a standard vehicle parking space detail. Verify on the detail the required 2.5 foot overhang for spaces adjacent to sidewalks, landscape areas, wall, proposed riprap swale, etc. Refer to UDC Figure 7.4.6-C for the 2.5 foot overhang dimension.

12) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.M: Provide a copy of the Geotechnical Engineering Investigation as stated in Earthwork & Material Testing + Certification Note #1 on Sheet 3 for review for the proposed earthwork and pavement design recommendations.

13) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.R: Refer to comments from Ron Brown, RA Structural Plans Examiner for all handicap accessibility comments that may be associated with this project.

14) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.S: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension all sidewalk widths within the public right-of-ways. The project has existing and proposed sidewalks along all 3 streets that need to be clearly labeled to ensure minimum width requirements.

15) AM Sec.2-06.4.9.T: Revise the development plan package to provide for centralized onsite solid waste and recycle collection service pick up for both waste and recycling containers per TSM Sec.8-01.5.1.A. Approval from Environmental Services and TDOT is required for the proposed type of refuse pick up from the MS&R Street, Stone Ave. Provide a TSMR application to modify the requirement per TSM Sec.8-01.5.3.G that off street service is not permitted from an arterial or Collector Street.

GENERAL COMMENTS:

Please provide a revised Development Plan Package that addresses the comments provided above. Include a comprehensive response letter addressing in detail responses to all of the above comments.

For any questions or to schedule meetings call me at 837-4929.



Jason Green, CFM
Senior Engineer Associate
Engineering Division
Planning & Development Services Department
06/01/2015 FDILLON1 DESIGN EXAMINER REVIEW Needs Review Project requires Design Review. FD
06/02/2015 PGEHLEN1 PIMA COUNTY ADDRESSING Reqs Change 201 N. STONE AV, 1ST FL
TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207





MICHELENE NOWAKADDRESSING REVIEW
PH #: 724-9512


TO:
CITY PLANNING
FROM:
MICHELENE NOWAK, ADDRESSING REVIEW

SUBJECT:
DP15-0084/1 WEST BROADWAY-DEVELOPMENT PLAN -1ST REVIEW

DATE:
June 1, 2015








The above referenced project has been reviewed by this Division for all matters pertaining to street naming/addressing, and the following matters must be resolved prior to our approval:


1.Label Project Number #DP15-0084 on all Sheets.2.Street Suffixes need to added to all streets Broadway Boulevard, Stone Avenue, Jackson Avenue and label streets as: PUBLIC 3.Provide Building Plans for each floor showing units and office/retail spaces.4.Label hatched area to the southeast as: “EXCLUDED”5.Per Plans there appears to be no access to Broadway Bl or Stone Av—only Jackson Av. The most critical problem emergency service providers have is locating property without physical frontage on the road from which the parcel is addressed. Address should be corrected to reflect access from Jackson Av
06/08/2015 STEVE SHIELDS ZONING REVIEW Reqs Change CDRC TRANSMITTAL

TO: Development Services Department
Plans Coordination Office

FROM: Steve Shields
Lead Planner

PROJECT: 1 West Broadway
Development Package (1st Review)
DP15-0084

TRANSMITTAL DATE: June 11, 2015

DUE DATE: June 18, 2015

COMMENTS: Please resubmit revised drawings and any redlined plans along with a detailed response letter, which states how all Zoning Review Section comments 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

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 May 19, 2016.

SECTION 2-06.0.0: DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE (TENTATIVE PLATS AND SITE PLANS)
Section

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.2.0 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

2-06.3.0 FORMAT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.4.0 CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

2-06.5.0 FLEXIBLE LOT DEVELOPMENT (FLD) - ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS

2-06.1.0 GENERAL

2-06.1.1 PURPOSE
This standard has been prepared for the purpose of informing applicants of the submittal and review requirements for development package documents to assure proper and adequate information is presented in a consistent manner, thereby providing the basis for an efficient and timely review. The development package documents are prepared in support of applications for building permits and related reviews.

The information that is requested establishes the basis upon which the project will be approved and could affect what is required of the property in the future, should there be a proposal for expansion or for a different use of the property.

This standard does not waive any applicable city regulations or codes.

2-06.1.2 APPICABILITY
This standard shall be used for all site plans and tentative plats submitted to PDSD for review.

2-06.2.1 APPLICATION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
Development Package applications are available from PDSD. Completed applications and accompanying materials shall be submitted to PDSD. Incomplete or inaccurate applications will not be accepted, nor will any application in which the pre-application conference or neighborhood meeting requirements have not been met. The types of documents and the specific number of copies required of each of the documents are on the PDSD website or may be obtained from PDSD. Resubmittals of development packages require a comment response letter that details how all previous comments have been addressed. Provide the same number of copies of the comment response letter as plans provided.
The following documents and information shall be submitted upon application:

2-06.2.1 Application Form
A completed application signed by the property owner or authorized designee;

2-06.2.2 Development Package
A development package must be prepared to the format and content requirements described herein;

2-06.2.3 Related Reviews
In addition to the plan process, a project may require review for other types of plans and documents. The applications for those processes are submitted to the appropriate department for review and approval. These related reviews can be applied for so that review can occur concurrently with the development package application. However, it must be understood that, should the related application be approved subject to conditions or denied, this may affect the;

2-06.2.4 Concurrent Reviews
The development package is designed to allow for concurrent review of any site related reviews. Concurrent review means that all plans and documents needed for the review are submitted as one package. Examples of site related reviews include but are not limited to: site plans, landscape plans, NPPO plans, water harvesting plans, grading plans, SWPPP plans, floodplain use permits, and overlay reviews. Separate applications are often required for the different site related reviews even if the plans are submitted concurrently; and,

1) COMMENT: Remove all reference to building codes from the development package as they are not applicable.

2-06.2.5 Fees
Fees in accordance with Section 4-01.0.0, Development Review Fee Schedule.

CONTENT REQUIREMENTS

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.

2) COMMENT: Provide the development package case number, DP15-0084, adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

3) COMMENT: Provide the IID/MDR case number adjacent to the title block on each sheet.

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.

4) COMMENT: The project location map should cover approximately one square mile.

2-06.4.7 - General Notes
The following general notes are required. Additional notes specific to each plan are required where applicable.

2-06.4.7.A - Zoning and Land Use Notes

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

5) COMMENT: As a general note list the gross area of 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.

6) COMMENT: Provide the applicable use specific standards for the proposed General Merchandise Sales, excluding Large Retail Establishment use in the C-3 and OCR-2 zones within the "ZONING" table under the "NEW USE(S). See TABLE 4.8-4: PERMITTED USES - COMMERCIAL AND MIXED USE ZONES

2-06.4.7.A.5 - On residential projects, list the total number of units/lots proposed.

7) COMMENT: Provide the total number of proposed residential units on the plan.

2-06.4.7.A.6.a - List additional applications and overlays, by case number (if applicable), in lower right corner of each sheet. As a general note provide the type of application processed or overlays applicable, a statement that the project meets the criteria/conditions of the additional application or overlay, the case number, date of approval, what was approved, and the conditions of approval, if any.

8) COMMENT: Provide the above information for the IID/MDR on the plan.

2-06.4.7.A.8 - For development package documents provide:

2-06.4.7.A.8.a - Floor area for each building;

9) COMMENT: Provide a general note that provides the proposed floor area for each proposed use.

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

10) COMMENT: Remove the reference to "LOT COVERAGE" from the plan as it is not applicable.

2-06.4.8 - Existing Site Conditions
The following information shall be provided on the plan/plat drawing to indicate the existing conditions on site and within 50 feet of the site. On sites bounded by a street with a width of 50 feet or greater, the existing conditions across the street will be provided.

2-06.4.8.A - Provide site boundary/subdivision perimeter information, including bearing in degrees, minutes, and seconds, with basis for bearing noted, together with distances in feet, to hundredths of a foot, or other functional reference system.

11) COMMENT: It appears that the existing building, located on parcel 117-13-027A, encroaches onto this project site. Zoning recommends that a lot line reconfiguration be processed to correct this encroachment.

2-06.4.8.C - The following information regarding existing private or public right-of-way adjacent to or within the site shall be provided: the name, right-of-way width, recordation data, type and dimensioned width of paving, curbs, curb cuts, and sidewalks.

12) COMMENT: Provide the above information for all streets adjacent to this project.

2-06.4.9 - Information on Proposed Development
The following information on the proposed project shall be shown on the drawing or added as notes.

2-06.4.9.A - Draw in all proposed lot lines with approximate distances and measurements.

13) COMMENT: As this site is comprised of five (5) parcels a lot combination is required. Provide a copy of the approved Pima County Lot Combination Request form with your next submittal.

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.

14) COMMENT: Relocate the "VEHICULAR & BICYCLE PARKING" table to the first sheet.

15) COMMENT: Per UDC Section 7.4.3.G Fractional Amounts. When the calculation of required motor vehicle and bicycle parking spaces results in a fractional number, a fraction of one-half or more is adjusted to the next higher whole number, and a fraction of less than one-half is adjusted to the next lower whole number. That said the motor vehicle parking calculation is not correct. For the proposed "OFFICE 539 sf / 500 = 1.078 or 1 not 2 as shown in the table.


16) COMMENT: The provided motor vehicle parking requirements are based on UDC Section 7.4.5.B Downtown Parking District. Total required for the proposed mix use = 52, provided 0. IID/DRB/MDR review and approval required prior to approval of the development package.

17) COMMENT: Clarify what the "XXXXXXX" is referencing in the motor vehicle parking calculation.

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.

18) COMMENT: The required and provided number for the long term bicycle parking is not correct and should show 38.

2-06.4.9.O - All applicable building setback lines, such as erosion hazard, floodplain detention/retention basins, and zoning, including sight visibility triangles, will be shown.

19) COMMENT: Per UDC Section 6.4.5.C.2 and TABLE 6.4.5.C-I the required street perimeter yard setback is 21' or the height of the proposed exterior building wall (greater of the two) measured from back of curb. Proposed perimeter yard setback dimensions not provided. Based on the provided building height of 89'-3" the proposed building does not meet street perimeter yard setbacks. IID/DRB/MDR review and approval required prior to approval of the development package.

20) COMMENT: As encroachments, balcony and canopy, in to the right-of-way are proposed, some type of easement or agreement is required. Contact COT Transportation Real Estate to secure the required easement/agreement. The easement/agreement must be in place prior to approval of the development package.

2-06.4.9.Q - Provide the square footage and the height of each commercial, industrial, or business structure and the specific use proposed within the footprint of the building(s).

21) COMMENT: Provide the height and gross floor area within the footprint of the building on sheet 1.

22) COMMENT: Sheet 4 shows the proposed height of the building as "89.5'" sheet 1 under "ZONING" lists the building height has 89'-3", clarify the difference.

23) COMMENT: Per UDC Table 6.3-4.A: DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE C-1, C-2, C-3, OCR-1, & OCR-2 ZONES, C-3 Zone, Height (maximum) allowed is 75', proposed height is 89'-3". IID/DRB/MDR review and approval required prior to approval of the development package.

24) COMMENT: It does not appear that the entire structure is shown on sheet 1, i.e. the southern parking area and entrance off of Jackson.

2-06.4.9.T - Show refuse collection areas, including locations of dumpsters, screening location and materials, and vehicle maneuverability, fully dimensioned, and access route. If dumpster service is not proposed, indicate type of service. For specific information on refuse collection, refer to Section 8-01.0.0, Solid Waste and Recycle Disposal, Collection, and Storage, of the Technical Standards Manual. Refuse collection on all projects shall be designed based on that section, even if collection is to be contracted to a private firm.

25) COMMENT: Show the refuse collection area on the plan.

2-06.4.9.W - Indicate the locations and types of proposed signs (wall, free-standing, pedestal) to assure there are no conflicts with other requirements and that minimal locational requirements can be met. Indicate if there are any existing billboards on site. Compliance to the Sign Code, Chapter 3 of the Tucson Code, is required.

26) COMMENT: Provide a general note stating "ALL SIGNS REQUIRE A SEPARATE SIGN PERMITE".

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
06/09/2015 ROBERT SHERRY PLUMBING-COMMERCIAL REVIEW Reqs Change Revise the site utility drawing to include the invert and rim elevations of manhole 8137-20A. Reference: City of Tucson Administrative Manual No. 2-06.0.0, Section 4.8 and Section 107.2.13, IBC 2012.
06/16/2015 ZELIN CANCHOLA COT NON-DSD TRAFFIC Reqs Change June 16, 2015
DP15-0084
1 West Broadway
Zelin Canchola TDOT

Please revise the following:

AM Sec.2-06.4.9.S: Revise the development plan package to label and dimension all sidewalk widths within the public right-of-ways.

Page 3 of 9 paving and grading notes: #31 change 791-5100 to 791-4259

If you have any questions, I can be reached at 520 837 6659 or zelin.canchola@tucsonaz.gov
06/18/2015 CHRIS KIEL (WILDAN) ZONING HC REVIEW Reqs Change 1) Please provide verification that the proposed level 1 parking space complies with all of the requirements of ICC A117.1-2009 Section 502 (i.e. required width, column obstruction, etc.).

2) Please provide detail information of the reconstructed curb ramp at the northwest corner of the property in order to verify compliance with ICC A117.1-2009 Section 406.
06/18/2015 JOE LINVILLE LANDSCAPE REVIEW Approved
06/18/2015 PGEHLEN1 COT NON-DSD ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES Reqs Change The Development Package has been reviewed on behalf of Environmental Services and the following will need to be addressed on the resubmittal:
1. Keynote 12 on Sheet 1 of 9 shows the apron for service to be on the sidewalk. Provide a minimum 20 ft. x 10 ft. concrete apron, 6 inch thick, 3,000 psi with #4 rebar 12” OC within the loading area for the containers and the truck front wheels to be on during servicing.
2. Revise Keynote 6 on Sheet 1 of 9 to state “Building Owner’s facility personnel shall be responsible for positioning the solid waste and recycling containers within the eastern portion of building on the days of service collection, and shall roll the containers out clearly onto the service apron in the loading area when the service vehicle arrives and shall roll the containers back into the building after servicing so that the service vehicle operator remains in the service vehicle”.
3. Add a keynote on Sheet 1 of 9 stating signage will be added alongside the service vehicle and apron spaces within the loading area designating no parking between 7 AM and 8 AM weekdays.
4. Per TSM Section 8-01. 4.0.B, provide a general note specifying anticipated frequency of collection based upon the calculated tonnage from Table 1 in TSM Section 8.
5. Per TSM 8.01.6.2.C, a 25 ft. minimum height clearance shall be provided above the service area. Provide verification the tree and grate per keynote 23 that is adjacent to the collection vehicle service area will not encroach into the 25 ft. minimum clearance and hinder the operation of the truck and boom while servicing the containers.
If there are any questions, I can be reached at kperry@perryengineering.net




From: Patricia Gehlen [Patricia.Gehlen@tucsonaz.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2015 3:30 PM
To: Ken Perry; Addressing; Carolyn Laurie; Frank Dillon; Gary Wittwer; Jim Vogelsberg; Joseph Linville; Kenneth Brouillette; Robert Sherry; Ronald Brown; Steve Shields; Zelin Canchola
Subject: DP15-0084/1 West Broadway


Dear Reviewers:


This is an electronic distribution for a CDRC Development Plan review. If you normally receive paper copies of the review documents, you will receive them soon.


The applicable case numbers are:


CDRC Development Plan: DP15-0084
06/19/2015 PATRICIA GEHLEN ZONING-DECISION LETTER REVIEW Reqs Change This review has been completed and resubmittal is required. Please resubmit the following items:

1) Two rolled sets of the plans
2) A disk that contains all items submitted for review
3) All items requested by review staff
4) All items needed to approve the plans
06/19/2015 PATRICIA GEHLEN ADA REVIEW Passed

Final Status

Task End Date Reviewer's Name Type of Review Description
08/10/2015 KROBLES1 OUT TO CUSTOMER Completed