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.
Plan Review Detail
Review Status: Completed
Review Details: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Plan Number - S05-073
Review Name: TENTATIVE PLAT REVIEW
Review Status: Completed
| Review Date | Reviewer's Name | Type of Review | Description | Status | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05/09/2005 | FERNE RODRIGUEZ | START | PLANS SUBMITTED | Completed | |
| 05/10/2005 | JIM EGAN | COT NON-DSD | FIRE | Approved | The Tentative Plat is approved May 10, 2005. |
| 05/13/2005 | TOM MARTINEZ | OTHER AGENCIES | AZ DEPT TRANSPORTATION | Approved | NO COMMENT S05-073 DELPH ENGINEERING, INC. BRICHTA WASH SUBDIVISION |
| 05/19/2005 | JCLARK3 | ENV SVCS | REVIEW | Approv-Cond | * Dragoon Landfill is over 1000 feet from this subdivision. * Curbside service for individual resident lots approved. * Need clarification on service for lot 1. As shown cannot pick up the containers infront of the lot. |
| 05/20/2005 | KAY MARKS | PIMA COUNTY | ADDRESSING | Denied | 201 N. STONE AV., 1ST FL TUCSON, AZ 85701-1207 KAY MARKS ADDRESSING OFFICIAL PH: 740-6480 FAX #: 740-6370 TO: CITY PLANNING FROM: KAY MARKS, ADDRESSING OFFICIAL SUBJECT: S05-073 BRICHTA WASH SUBDIVISION / TENTATIVE PLAT DATE: MAY 16, 2005 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: On site Location Map change 57/47 to 40/55, change 34/55 (eastern most) to 57/47 and change 25/48 to 25/84. 2: Add resubdivision information to all Title Blocks. 3: Label approved interior street names on Final Plat. |
| 05/31/2005 | MARILYN KALTHOFF | PIMA COUNTY | WASTEWATER | Approv-Cond | May 31, 2005 TO: Kent Delph, P.E. Delph Engineering, Inc. THRU: Patricia Gehlen City of Tucson, Development Services Department FROM: Dickie Fernández, E.I.T. Pima County Development Services Department Development Review Division (Wastewater) SUBJECT: Brichta Wash Subdivision, Lots 1-19, Common Areas A-C and Tract A Tentative Plat - 1st Submittal S05-073 The proposed sewer collection lines to serve the above-referenced project have been reviewed on behalf of the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality (PDEQ) and the Pima County Wastewater Management Department (PCWMD). This review letter may contain comments pertaining to the concerns of either Department. The following comments are offered for your use. 1. This project will be tributary to the Roger Road Wastewater Treatment Facility via the Santa Cruz Central Interceptor. Provide a letter from PCWWM Planning Services, written within the past 90 days, stating that treatment and conveyance system capacity for this project is available. Contact Robert Decker, PCWWM Planning Services, at (520) 740-6625 regarding this matter. 2. Based on the evaluation of the project site, this project would qualify for Non-Participating sewer connection fee rates. 3. ALL SHEETS. Add the project number, S05-073, to the title block of each sheet. This number should be shown larger or bolder than any cross-reference numbers. 4. SHEET 1. Revise General Note 2 to read ON-SITE SANITARY SEWERS WILL BE PRIVATE AND WILL BE CONSTRUCTED, OPERATED AND MAINTAINED ON A PRIVATE BASIS. THE LOCATION AND METHOD OF CONNECTION TO AN EXISTING PUBLIC SANITARY SEWER IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE PIMA COUNTY WASTEWATER MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT AT THE TIME OF SUBMITTAL OF PLUMBING OR BUILDING PLANS. 5. SHEET 1. Add the following General Note MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION OF THE PRIVATE SANITARY SEWER TO ITS POINT OF CONNECTION TO THE PUBLIC SEWER IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PROPERTY OWNER. 6. Subject to the above, the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality and Wastewater Management Department hereby approve the above referenced submittal of the tentative plat. The required revision(s) may be shown on the Mylars. Please note the following: Approval of the above referenced submittal does not authorize the construction of public or private sewer collection lines, or water distribution lines. Prior to the construction of such features, a Construction Authorization (Approval To Construct) may need to be obtained from the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality. Also, air quality activity permits must be secured by the developer or prime contractor from the Pima County Department of Environmental Quality before constructing, operating or engaging in an activity which may cause or contribute to air pollution. If you have any questions regarding the above mentioned comments, please contact me. Sincerely, Dickie Fernández, E.I.T. Telephone: (520) 740-6947 Copy: Project |
| 06/01/2005 | LIZA CASTILLO | UTILITIES | TUCSON ELECTRIC POWER | Approved | SUBJECT: BICHTA WASH SUBDIVISION Lots 1-19 S05-073 Tucson Electric Power Company (TEP) has no objection to the tentative plat submitted for review May 9, 2005. Enclosed is a copy of TEP's facility map showing the approximate location and unit numbers of the existing facilities. This map also indicates the possible feeds for the project. TEP will provide a preliminary electrical design on the Approved Tentative Plat within fifteen (15) working days upon receipt of the plat. Additional plans necessary for preparation of the design are: building plans including water, electrical, landscape, sidewalk and paving plans. Also, submit the AutoCAD version of the plat on a CD or email to lcastillo@tep.com <mailto:lcastillo@tep.com> . Should you have any questions, please contact me at (520) 917-8745. Liza Castillo Right of Way Agent Land Management Tucson Electric Power Co. (520) 917-8745 lcastillo@tep.com <mailto:lcastillo@tep.com> |
| 06/04/2005 | ROGER HOWLETT | COT NON-DSD | COMMUNITY PLANNING | Denied | DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PLANNING & DESIGN (1st review) Regarding SUBJECT: Community Design Review Committee Application CASE NUMBER: CASE NAME: DATE SENT S05-073 Brichta Wash Subdivision 06/02/05 () Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan () Landscape Plan ( ) Revised Plan/Plat ( ) Board of Adjustment ( ) Other CROSS REFERENCE: N/A (not associated with a rezoning) NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN: Santa Cruz Area Plan GATEWAY/SCENIC ROUTE: N/A (Silverbell is Scenic Route north of Ironwood Hills) COMMENTS DUE BY: June 7, 2005 SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT PLAN/PLAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY COMMUNITY PLANNING AND PRESERVATION, AND STAFF SUBMITS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS: ( ) No Annexation or Rezoning Conditions, Not an RCP - No Comment ( ) Proposal Complies with Annexation or Rezoning Conditions ( ) RCP Proposal Complies With Plan Policies () See Additional Comments Attached ( ) No Additional Comments - Complies With Planning Comments Submitted on: () Resubmittal Required: () Tentative Plat ( ) Development Plan () Landscape Plan () Other – see comments REVIEWER: Joanne Hershenhorn 791-4505 DATE: 6/1/05 Brichta Wash Subdivision, S05-073 This project is being developed using the Residential Cluster Project (RCP) option. According to the Land Use Code (LUC § 3.6.1.1). the purpose of the RCP is to provide greater flexibility and creativity in the design of clustered residential development by Providing incentives to achieve community goals, Maintaining consistency with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, Providing incentives for the design and development of low- and moderately-priced housing, and Encouraging high-quality development within the City In addition, RCPs must be in conformance with the design policies and criteria of the General Plan and any of its components, including adopted area and neighborhood plans (LUC § 3.6.1.4). The project site is within the bounds of the Santa Cruz Area Plan, so both the General Plan and Santa Cruz Area Plan policies apply. Santa Cruz Area Plan Policies General Development Policy 7 – New development within or near existing neighborhoods should be designed and scaled to be compatible with the neighborhood characteristics. General Plan Policies Element 3, Circulation, Policy 5 – Plan and encourage the use of pedestrian facilities as a critical element of a safe and livable community to meet the transportation and recreational needs of the community. Supporting Policy 5.3 – Design pedestrian facilities that are direct, safe, comfortable, aesthetically pleasing, and continuous. Element 4, Community Character and Design, Policy 5 – Promote neighborhood identity and visual character. Supporting Policy 5.4 – Promote subdivision design that responds to the physical characteristics of the site, adjacent land use patterns, and unique visual qualities. Policy 6 – Promote quality in design for residential … development. Brichta Wash Subdivision, S05-073 Comments: The site is surrounded by C-1 zoning and uses to the north and west, including a dental office, Jiffy Lube, and Rusty’s restaurant along Grant Road, a bank at the corner of Grant and Silverbell, and a Famous Sam’s south of the bank on Silverbell. There’s a Brake Max south of the Famous Sam’s and west of the site in C-2 zoning, with six bay doors that face the proposed subdivision. Sole access is proposed from Silverbell via a PAAL easement between the Brake Max and Famous Sam’s. To the south of the site are 2-story apartments. To the east is a mix of commercial and possibly industrial uses in I-1 zoning. The Brichta Wash drains to the north in a constructed channel along the site’s western boundary. Some of the surrounding commercial uses, especially the auto service and repair shops, and restaurants that serve alcohol, may generate noise, visual and other impacts on residents of the proposed subdivision. For this reason, staff is interested in the type, location, and aesthetic appeal of any screening, whether existing or proposed, that will be used to buffer this residential development from the adjacent non-residential uses. Screen Walls On the Development Plan (DP) and/or Landscape Plan, please clearly show the height, extent, and construction material of all existing and proposed screen walls, and label the walls as existing or proposed. Provisions for drainage should be made where appropriate and must be shown on the DP. For all existing and proposed screen walls that surround the site and are visible from the site interior, identify the wall color. Discuss any measures that will be taken to ensure that the existing walls will visually “fit in” with the proposed walls and the overall development. Pedestrian Circulation System If feasible, provide direct pedestrian connections and easements between this development and the apartments to the south, and the restaurant and bank to the north and northwest. Show and label the pedestrian connections on the DP. If it is not feasible to provide these connections, discuss why not. Brichta Wash Subdivision, S05-073 Recreational Area On the DP, please show that the recreational area is handicapped-accessible by an all-weather path. Quality in Design The color, finishing materials, massing, and varied rooflines should add visual interest and character to this subdivision. Desert earth-tone colors are to be used on building exteriors (please see www.cityoftucson.org/planning/urbdesign.htm and scroll down to Sonoran Desert Color Palette for Building Exteriors for additional information). Submit elevations and discuss methods that will be used to make this development visually-interesting. Submit photographs of nearby residential development, and discuss how this development will be architecturally-compatible with other residential development in the neighborhood. Please call Joanne Hershenhorn at 791-4505 if you’d like to discuss these comments and/or set up a meeting. |
| 06/04/2005 | FRODRIG2 | OTHER AGENCIES | PIMA ASSN OF GOVTS | Approved | 182 ESTIMATED DAILY TRIPS IN 24 HR PERIOD. |
| 06/07/2005 | ELIZABETH EBERBACH | ENGINEERING | REVIEW | Denied | TO: Patricia Gehlen; CDRC Coordinator SUBJECT: Brichta Wash Subdivision Tentative Plat Engineering Review LOCATION: T14S R13E Section 3 REVIEWER: Elizabeth Eberbach ACTIVITY NUMBER: S05-073 SUMMARY: The Tentative Plat, Title Report, Schedule B easement documents, Landscape documents, and Drainage Report were received by Engineering on May 9, 2005. Engineering has reviewed the received items and does not recommend approval of the Tentative Plat or the Drainage Report at this time. The Drainage Report was reviewed for Tentative Plat purposes only. DRAINAGE REPORT COMMENTS: 1) City of Tucson Development Standards (DS) Section No. 2-03.2.4.L: Clarify / address the following Brichta Wash drainage comments: a) Add discussion in the Drainage Report stating whether the existing conditions of Brichta Wash convey the jurisdictional flow within the channel. b) State freeboard height with respect to low chord elevation of existing crossing structure. c) A palo verde tree was seen growing out of the middle of the concrete box culvert bridge structure. Discuss the existing condition of the structure in the Drainage Report. Provide any current Bridge Report for this structure showing that the existing condition of the crossing can be utilized for the proposed development. Also, provide correspondence documentation from TDOT stating acceptance of crossing structure's condition for subdivision. 2) DS Sec.10-02 page 8.06: Table 8.1: In Drainage Report, revise worksheets for roadway capacities to reflect a roadway Manning's coefficient of .020 for the maximum value for asphalt when cars are present, per this section of the standards. 3) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.2: Clarify the proposed drainage solutions: a) Provide on site drainage exhibit for developed conditions in Drainage Report. b) Label existing and post developed flowrates at proposed pipe outlet into Brichta Wash showing that no increased flowrate is flowing into Brichta Wash. c) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.5: Verification is required when any drainage solution occurring outside the boundaries of the plat is constructed with adjacent owners' permission. Additional documentation of TDOT approval of the proposed pipes entering Brichta Wash from the basin will need to be submitted with the drainage report. 4) DS Sec.10-01.III.3.5.1.3.a: Discuss results of infiltration testing in drainage report to demonstrate the drain time for the retained stormwater for proposed Common Area "B" basin meets the maximum disposal time. 5) In the Drainage Report, discuss assumptions for losses for the hydraulic grade line analysis for the proposed HDPE stormwater drainage system to demonstrate that the friction losses at the bends for the system have been accounted for in the sizing of the pipes in the system. 6) DS Sec.10-02.2.3.1.1.B: Label the administrative / site address on the front cover of report. 7) DS Sec.10-02.1.5.1: Regarding basin maintenance, add to Drainage Report a drainage maintenance list. At minimum, this will be required at Grading Plan review. 8) DS Sec.10-02.14.3.2: The maintenance notes specified in this section must be included on the Final Plat or in the CC&Rs. At minimum, this will need to be addressed at Final Plat stage. TENTATIVE PLAT COMMENTS: 9) DS Sec.10-01.III.3.5.1.3.a, 10-02.14.2.6: Submit a bound copy of the soils report that discusses suitability and feasibility of the project; the report should discuss existing geotechnical conditions, and proposed recommendations for foundations and pavement design. Infiltration test results will be required to be submitted. The geotechnical report shall specifically address all criteria listed in this section. See last sentence of this section for items 6 (c) & (d) regarding hydro-collapsing soils and 30-foot test boring for basin design. Infiltration rates shall meet Water Harvesting and Detention / Retention criteria per DS Sec.10-01.III.3.5.1.3.a. 10) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.4: For clarification of proposed flow conditions, provide typical lot grading detail, that shows direction of drainage around proposed lots and explains the following: a) Clarify and provide flow arrows, area for mechanical equipment, A/C unit locations, swale dimensions, slope setbacks for screen walls, slope run-outs, building setbacks, minimum slope grades, and general access. b) Show general / typical high point or grade break locations, as well as minimum flow grades around building pads. 11) DS Sec.2-03.2.1.J: For the legend, address the following comments: a) Existing bollard symbol. b) clarify existing and proposed rip rap. 12) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.A: Label the local benchmark location on planview. 13) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.C: All existing easements (including those listed in Title Report Schedule B item 9 and those shown on the prior final plat) need to be drawn on the plat, and recordation information, locations, widths, and purposes shall be included. Please acknowledge that if the anchor, Gas & Electric, underground electric line, and 17' Utility easements are relocated, not in use, or proposed for abandonment, then the documentation of the vacation/abandonment/relocation shall be submitted prior to approval of Final Plat. Blanket easements should be listed in the notes, together with recordation data and their proposed status. 14) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.J: Provide further clarification for the following drainage elements: a) Label the existing wall opening location and width on planview sheet 3 of the Tentative Plat. b) Label dimension of the Brichta Wash drainage way. c) Clearly delineate the 100-year floodplain limits on planview sheet 3 of the Tentative Plat. d) Provide cross section at drop inlet structure on Tentative Plat. 15) DS Sec.2-03.2.3.E: Provide information of the following existing conditions: a) Existing CMU wall opening locations along east boundaries. b) location of any fire hydrants within 100 feet of the site 16) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.C: Label each common area individually with a separate letter designation. Enclose with a solid line each common area, private street, etc. Clarify area between lots and delineate separate common area for basin separately from other drainage areas. 17) DS Sec.10-01.4.3: Where human activity zones are proposed in the basin area, 8:1(H:V) side slopes are needed at location of pedestrian access, and shall not conflict with inlets to the basin. Label grades for side slopes at east and west side of basin. 18) DS Sec.10-02.14.3.4: Delineate basin maintenance access and show that no proposed vegetation will block access. 19) DS Sec.2-05.2.4.F: Clarify the proposed emergency access area at the north side of the project. Verification will need to be provided for the access improvement as well as any proposed new utility easements, which occur outside the boundaries of the development plan area, such that it is constructed with adjacent owners' permission. (Additional notarized documentation of that approval will be submitted). 20) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.F: Provide a copy of the proposed private street design plans. 21) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.L.4: Provide clarification of FFE with respect to the finished pad grade for the lots. 22) On sheet 3, it is unclear which entity will be abandoned by the plat. Provide clarification in response letter. 23) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.1.c: Some sewer easements are indicated as 15-ft wide. The minimum width of sanitary sewer easements shall be 20 feet. If applicable, indicate that off-site easements will be recorded by separate instrument. 24) DS Sec.2-03.2.4.1.b: Add the following as a General Note: "No permits will be issued for any structure proposed to be built within a sewer easement." 25) DS Sec.3-01.3.3: Clarify sidewalk connections adjacent to crossing structure. 26) DS Sec.11-01.2.1.A: A Grading Plan and Permit will eventually be required. Proposed developments exceeding 1 acre are subject to NPDES requirements. The next submittal should address all the above items. Submit soils report, revised Drainage Report, and revised Tentative Plat. You may schedule a meeting to go over comments, or if you have any questions, please call me at 791-5550 extension 2204. Elizabeth Eberbach, PE Civil Engineer Engineering Division Development Services |
| 06/07/2005 | DALE KELCH | COT NON-DSD | TRAFFIC | Denied | Traffic Engineering REJECTS this TP: 1. Local streets must be designed with parking on both sides of the street, unless parking is provided in common areas distributed throughout the subdivision, at a ratio of one parking space per dwelling within the subdivision. (DS 3-01.2.4.D) Section 1/1 does not meet this requirement. This section may be appropriate for lots 15-19 as there are no houses on the opposite side of the street. However, lots 10-14 will require adequate guest parking. D. Dale Kelch, PE Senior Engineering Associate Traffic Engineering Division (520)791-4259x305 (520)791-5526 (fax) dale.kelch@tucsonaz.gov |
| 06/07/2005 | JOE LINVILLE | LANDSCAPE | REVIEW | Denied | 1) Revise the mitgation calculations on the Native Plant Preservation and Landscape Plans to include mitigation for plants to be TOS. LUC Table 3.8.6-I 2) A water-conserving irrigation system is required for the proposed turf area located in Common Area C. Add a note to the irrigation plan stating that the irrigation system is designed to conserve water and will be designed and installed in accordance with DS 2-06.5.4. RESUBMITTAL OF ALL PLANS IS REQUIRED |
| 06/07/2005 | ED ABRIGO | PIMA COUNTY | ASSESSOR | Approved | Office of the Pima County Assessor 115 N. Church Ave. Tucson, Arizona 85701 BILL STAPLES ASSESSOR TO: CDRC Office Subdivision Review City of Tucson (FAX# 791-5559) FROM: Ed Abrigo, Mapping Supervisor Pima County Assessor’s Office Mapping Department DATE: June 7, 2005 RE: Assessor’s Review and Comments Regarding Tentative Plat S05-073 Brichta Wash Subdivision T141303 (115-20) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * X Plat meets Assessor’s Office requirements. _______ Plat does not meet Assessor’s Office requirements. COMMENTS: Thank you for your submittal. Please make the following additions/corrections in the final plat. Remove all shading. Add bearings for lot lines. Label the streets as Common Area “A” and add square footage; label Common Area “B” and add square footage. If there are any questions, please contact Susan King at 740-4391. NOTE: THE ASSESSOR’S CURRENT INVOLVEMENT IN PROCESSING ITS MANUAL MAPS TO DIGITAL FORMAT IS EXPEDITED GREATLY BY EXCHANGE OF DIGITAL DATA. IN THE COURSE OF RECORDING THIS SUBDIVISION YOUR ASSISTANCE IN PROVIDING THIS OFFICE WITH AN AUTOCAD COPY WOULD BE GREATLY APPRECIATED. THANK YOU FOR ANY DIGITAL DATA PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED. Susan King |
| 06/07/2005 | DAN CASTRO | ZONING | REVIEW | Denied | COMMENTS 1. Section 4.1.7.1, LUC, permits a maximum of one year from the date of application to obtain approval of a tentative plat. If, at the end of that time, the tentative plat has not been approved, it must be revised to be in compliance with all regulations in effect at that time, and must be resubmitted for a full CDRC review. The one-year expiration date for this tentative plat is May 8, 2006. 2. City zoning history maps indicate that this site was rezoned. Case number C9-81-23 applies to this project. Provide a copy of the rezoning conditions with the next plan submittal. Note the rezoning case number in the lower right corner of each sheet on all plans. Contact Aline Torres at 791-5550 to request a copy of the conditions and for additional information regarding the rezoning case. Additional comments may be forthcoming as a result of the rezoning conditions. (D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.1) 3. Tract A is included in this subdivision and is zoned I-1. Add the I-1 zoning classification to general note one (1). (D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.2) 4. List the rezoning case number and conditions on the plat. (D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.3) 5. What is the proposed use for Tract A? Please note on the plat. If it is remain vacant, please state as so on the plat. (D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.5) 6. Delete general note two (2), as it is not required. 7. Adjacent zoning classifications listed under general note four (4) are incorrect. Please revise. (D.S. 2-03.2.4.D) 8. Add the following general note: "This plat is designed to meet the overlay zone criteria for a Residential Cluster Project (RCP)." (D.S. 2-03.2.2.B.7) 9. Per D.S. 3-01.2.4.D, local streets must be designed with parking on both sides of the street, unless parking is provided in common areas distributed throughout the subdivision, at a ratio of one (1) parking spaces per dwelling within the subdivision. Per the parking calculation provided on sheet 1 of 3, a total of 17 on-street parking spaces are provided, short of the 19 required. In addition, I am only able to count a total of 15 on-street parking spaces. There may be parking spaces that are covered by labels. Revise plat to clearly show every on-street parking space provided. 10. Provide a copy of all applicable ingress/egress easements and cross access agreements. 11. Indicate the type of easement proposed for abandonment (easement keynote 14). 12. Provide, by note on the plan, the density calculation. (D.S. 2-10.3.1.C) 13. The Final Plat may not be approved until the CC&R's are reviewed and approved by the Zoning Review Section. The CC&R's must meet criteria listed in L.U.C. 3.6.1.5. If applicable, the CC&R's must also detail the restrictions on any proposed natural areas. (D.S. 2-10.3.2.E) (L.U.C. 3.6.1.5) 14. Please be aware that the maximum building height allowed for detached accessory structures (i.e. garage) is 12 feet. (LUC 3.2.5.3.B) If you have any questions about this transmittal, please call Dan Castro, (520) 791-5608. |
| 06/10/2005 | FRODRIG2 | COT NON-DSD | REAL ESTATE | Approved | No objection |
| 06/10/2005 | GLENN HICKS | COT NON-DSD | PARKS & RECREATION | Approved | DATE: June 10, 2005 TO: Ferne Rodriguez, Development Services FROM: Glenn Hicks, Parks and Recreation SUBJECT: CDRC Transmittal, S05-073 Brichta Wash: Tentative Plat CC: Craig Gross Patricia Gehlen, Development Services Staff has no comments. Glenn Hicks Parks and Recreation 791-4873 ext. 215 Glenn.Hicks@tucsonaz.gov |
| 06/10/2005 | CRAIG GROSS | ZONING-DECISION LETTER | REVIEW | Completed |