| Date |
Text |
| 2021-06-09 14:29:36 | GENERAL COMMENTS: |
| | |
| | 1.) ALL PROPOSED CHANGES SHALL BE IDENTIFIED IN THE |
| | JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT. [4/9/2021 REPEAT COMMENT: NO |
| | REVISED JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT FOUND IN THE |
| | RESUBMITTAL PACKAGE.] |
| | |
| | 2.) PLEASE CONFIRM THAT THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE |
| | SITE WILL NOT IMPACT THE APPROVED CIVIL PLANS, AS NO |
| | CIVIL PLANS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED, AND REPEATED REQUESTS |
| | WERE MADE TO THE APPLICANT TO CONFIRM. WILL NEED |
| | STATEMENT FOR THE FILE. |
| | |
| | |
| | PLANS AND EXHIBIT: |
| | |
| | (THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS ARE REPEAT COMMENTS BUT HAVE |
| | BEEN MODIFIED BASED ON STAFF?S REVIEW OF THE 5/25/2021 |
| | RESUBMITTAL PACKAGE): |
| | |
| | 1.) THE PLANS AND EXHIBIT ARE NOT CONSISTENT WHICH HAS |
| | CREATED A LOT OF CONFUSION WITH THE PROPOSED CHANGES |
| | FOR THE MINOR AMENDMENT. ALL PLANS MUST MATCH. ADDRESS |
| | FOR CONSISTENCY. |
| | |
| | 2.) CONFLICTING INFORMATION PROVIDED FOR THE EAST |
| | (REAR) SETBACK IN THE PLANS AND TABULAR. ADDRESS FOR |
| | CONSISTENCY. |
| | |
| | 3.) NORTH (SIDE) SETBACK SEEMS TO HAVE CHANGED TO |
| | 190?-0?; HOWEVER, THE OLD SETBACK OF 193?-5? IS STILL |
| | NOTED IN THE PLAN SHEETS. |
| | |
| | 4.) SURFACE PARKING LAYOUT FOR POD 3 IS INCONSISTENT IN |
| | THE PLAN SHEETS. LAYOUT MUST MATCH IN ALL SHEETS. |
| | ADDRESS FOR CONSISTENCY. |
| | |
| | 5.) CHECK PARKING CALCULATIONS FOR POD 3. NUMBERS |
| | PROVIDED IN THE PLAN SHEETS (INCLUDING EXHIBIT |
| | HIGHLIGHTING CHANGES) DO NOT MATCH THE NUMBERS PROVIDED |
| | IN THE PARKING CALCULATIONS TABULAR. ADDRESS FOR |
| | CONSISTENCY. |
| | |
| | 6.) PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE LOADING AREA OF POD 3 IS |
| | NOT REFLECTED IN THE PLAN SHEETS. ADDRESS FOR |
| | CONSISTENCY. ALSO MAKE SURE THAT THE LOADING AREA HAS |
| | UNOBSTRUCTED ACCESS TO THE LOADING ZONE. |
| | |
| | 7.) RELOCATE THE UNIT MIX BREAKDOWN TABULAR SO THAT |
| | STAFF SEE ENTIRE BUILDING FOOTPRINT AND VERIFY THE |
| | CLOSEST SETBACK DISTANCE ALONG THE EAST (REAR) PROPERTY |
| | LINE. THE TABULAR SEEMS TO OBSTRUCT THE LOCATION OF THE |
| | CLOSEST POINT OF THE BUILDING TO THE EAST (REAR) |
| | PROPERTY LINE THAT WAS DEPICTED IN THE APPROVED SITE |
| | PLAN. |
| | |
| | 8.) TO MAINTAIN THE 8 FT. HIGH CONCRETE WALL ALONG THE |
| | WEST PROPERTY LINE, THE WALL MUST BE SETBACK GREATER |
| | THAN 5 FT. (AS IT WAS PROVIDED IN THE APPROVED PLAN). |
| | THE PLANS ARE INCONSISTENT AND SHOW THE WALL IN VARIOUS |
| | LOCATIONS ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE. ADDRESS FOR |
| | CONSISTENCY. |
| | |
| | |
| | INSTRUCTIONS FOR RESUBMITTAL: |
| | |
| | * ALL REVISION DATES SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE MODIFIED |
| | SHEETS FOR TRACKING PURPOSES. FAILURE TO PROVIDE THE |
| | REVISION DATE WILL RESULT IN A ?FAIL? IN THE SYSTEM. |
| | |
| | * PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN |
| | WRITTEN FORMAT. |
| | |
| | * WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDED A MINIMUM OF FOUR |
| | (4) PAPER COPIES, ONE (1) REDUCED COPY IN 11 INCHES X |
| | 17 INCHES, AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY OF ALL PLANS AND |
| | DOCUMENTS. |
| | |
| | * ANY CHANGES ON THE RESUBMITTED PLANS MAY RESULT IN |
| | ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. |
| | |
| | * PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU WILL BE PERMITTED ONE (1) |
| | RESUBMITTAL AT NO ADDITIONAL COST. IF PREVIOUSLY-ISSUED |
| | COMMENTS CONTINUE TO NOT BE SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED, THE |
| | APPLICANT WILL BE ASSESSED A RESUBMITTAL FEE. SUCH FEE |
| | WILL BE 20 PERCENT OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FEE |
| | ($60.00 WHICH WILL BE DUE WITH THE NEXT RESUBMITTAL.) |
| | |
| |
Print |
