| Date |
Text |
| 2022-05-05 16:37:35 | GENERAL COMMENTS: |
| | |
| | 1.) THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO INCREASE THE |
| | DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL ON THE SUBJECT PROPERTY FROM 0.75 |
| | TO 1.5 F.A.R.. HAS THERE BEEN ANY PUBLIC OUTREACH |
| | WITHIN THE NEIGHBORHOOD? IT IS ADVISED THAT THE |
| | APPLICANT REACH OUT TO THE NEIGHBORING |
| | PROPERTIES/NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION(S) FOR PUBLIC INPUT |
| | ON THE PROPOSAL. |
| | |
| | 2.) UPDATED SIGNED AND SEALED SURVEY IS REQUIRED. |
| | SURVEY PROVIDED IS NOT SIGNED AND SEALED AND IT IS OVER |
| | 2 YEARS OLD. THE PROVIDED SURVEY IS NOT ACCEPTABLE. |
| | PLEASE REFER TO PAGE 5 OF THE 2022 DEVELOPMENT |
| | APPLICATION FOR THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS ON THE SURVEY. |
| | |
| | 3.) WHAT IS THE PURPOSE FOR THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND |
| | USE (FLU) MAP AMENDMENT FROM COMMERCIAL (C) TO |
| | COMMERCIAL EAST (CE)? IS THERE A CONCEPTUAL PLAN AND/OR |
| | MASSING STUDY FOR THE SITE? DOES THE CONCEPTUAL/MASSING |
| | PLAN FIT WITH THE PROPOSED FLU CHANGE TO CE AND THE |
| | CONTEXT OF THE SURROUNDING AREA? CAN THE CONCEPTUAL |
| | PLAN MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING AND |
| | LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS (ZLDRS)? ASIDE FROM THE |
| | CONTEXT OF THE SURROUNDING AREA, THE APPLICANT MUST BE |
| | ABLE TO PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION AND JUSTIFY WHY THE CE |
| | FLU IS DESIRED AND APPROPRIATE FOR THE SITE AND |
| | SURROUNDING AREA (I.E. THERE HAS TO BE A PURPOSE FOR |
| | THE FLUMA). A CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN AND MASSING STUDY |
| | DEMONSTRATING THAT THE DESIGN/MAXIMUM MASSING OF THE OF |
| | THE SUBJECT PROPERTY CAN BE ACCOMMODATED AND FITS WITH |
| | THE CHARACTER AND CONTEXT OF THE SURROUNDING AREA WITH |
| | THE PROPOSED FLUMA SHOULD BE SUBMITTED TO SUPPLEMENT |
| | THE APPLICATION. THIS IS CRITICAL INFORMATION FOR STAFF |
| | TO ANALYZE IN DETERMINING IF THE FLUMA SHOULD BE |
| | SUPPORTED. |
| | |
| | 4.) THE SUBJECT PROPERTY APPEARS TO HAVE A SPLIT FLU |
| | DESIGNATION OF CE AND C. THROUGH DATA AND ANALYSIS, THE |
| | APPLICANT MUST BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY HOW MUCH OF THE |
| | OVERALL 1.0-ACRE SUBJECT SITE (IN ACRES/SQUARE FEET) IS |
| | PROPOSED FOR THE FLU CHANGE TO CE. ONLY THE PORTION OF |
| | THE SITE THAT IS SUBJECT TO THE FLU MAP AMENDMENT WILL |
| | BE UTILIZED TO DETERMINE THE MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT |
| | POTENTIAL AND ANALYZED FOR LEVEL-OF- SERVICE (LOS). |
| | |
| | 5.) IN THE LOS ANALYSIS, THE MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT |
| | POTENTIAL STATES THAT THE ACREAGE IS 0.6-ACRE. THERE IS |
| | NO EXPLANATION/BACK-UP INFORMATION/DOCUMENTATION TO |
| | WHERE THIS NUMBER CAME FROM (I.E. IT IS NOT MENTIONED |
| | IN THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT, NO SURVEY/ANALYSIS TO |
| | SHOW WHY 0.6-ACRE IS USED IN THE ANALYSIS FOR THE |
| | MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL, ETC.). PLEASE CLARIFY IN |
| | THE APPLICATION. |
| | |
| | 6.) THE LOS CALCULATIONS/ANALYSIS IS BASED ON THE MOST |
| | INTENSIVE USE AND MOST INTENSIVE IMPACT (BASED ON THE |
| | MOST INTENSIVE USE) TO THE VARIOUS PUBLIC FACILITIES |
| | (I.E. IT COULD BE EITHER COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL). |
| | THE LOS ANALYSIS SHALL BE REVISED TO: A) CALCULATIONS |
| | MUST BE BASED ON THE MAXIMUM DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL FOR |
| | ONLY THE AREA SUBJECT TO THE FLUMA. CHECK THE CITY'S |
| | COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR THE MAXIMUM DENSITY/INTENSITY |
| | FOR THE CE FLU (32.27 DU/ACRE OR 1.5 FAR). B) DATA AND |
| | LOS CALCULATIONS FOR EACH PUBLIC FACILITY MUST BE BASED |
| | ON THE MOST INTENSIVE USE/IMPACT GENERATED. C) FOR |
| | SANITARY SEWER: WHERE DID THE 0.20 GPD STANDARD COME |
| | FROM? CONTACT THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT FOR |
| | RATE THAT SHOULD BE USED. D) FOR POTABLE WATER: WHERE |
| | DID THE 0.24 GPD STANDARD COME FROM? CONTACT THE |
| | ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT FOR A RATE THAT SHOULD |
| | BE USED. E) FIGURE 1 PROVIDED IN THE LOS ANALYSIS |
| | DEPICTS THE WRONG PARCEL (I.E. IT IS NOT THE PARCEL |
| | LOCATED AT 319 BELVEDERE ROAD). PLEASE ADDRESS FOR |
| | CONSISTENCY. F) WHERE DID THE INFORMATION FROM |
| | ATTACHMENTS 1 AND 2 COME FROM? THE ANALYSIS DOES NOT |
| | REFERENCE WHERE THIS INFORMATION CAME FROM. G) THE LOS |
| | ANALYSIS SUMMARY TABLE AND SUMMARIES WILL NEED TO BE |
| | REVISED BASED ON THE CORRECTED INFORMATION. |
| | |
| | 7.) THE PROPOSED FLU CHANGE IS EXPECTED TO INCREASE THE |
| | DEMAND ON PUBLIC FACILITIES. ANY INCREASE IN DEMAND ON |
| | ANY OF THE PUBLIC FACILITIES AS A RESULT OF THE |
| | PROPOSED FLU CHANGE SHALL ALSO PROVIDE WRITTEN |
| | CONFIRMATION FROM THE APPLICABLE SERVICE AGENCY |
| | INDICATING THAT SUFFICIENT CAPACITY/RESERVE CAPACITY |
| | EXISTS TO ACCOMMODATE THE BUILD-OUT OF THE PROPOSED FLU |
| | DESIGNATION. CERTIFICATION LETTERS WILL BE REQUIRED FOR |
| | THE FOLLOWING: DRAINAGE, WATER, WASTEWATER (SEWER) |
| | SOLID WASTE, SCHOOLS AND TRAFFIC. PLEASE NOTE THAT A |
| | GENERAL STATEMENT STATING THAT THE CITY HAS SUFFICIENT |
| | CAPACITY AVAILABLE FOR THE FLUMA IS INSUFFICIENT (AS |
| | NOT ALL SERVICES ARE PROVIDED BY THE CITY AND CAPACITY |
| | MUST BE VERIFIED BY THE VARIOUS SERVICE PROVIDERS.). |
| | |
| | 8.) THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT MUST BE CLEAR ON THE |
| | REQUEST. PLEASE REVISE THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT TO |
| | SPECIFY/EXPAND ON THE RELATED BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON |
| | THE PROJECT SITE; JUSTIFICATION, SPECIAL REASONS, OR |
| | BASIS FOR THE REQUEST; VISION/CONCEPTUAL PROPOSED FOR |
| | THE SUBJECT SITE AND MASSING STUDY; AMOUNT OF AREA OF |
| | THE OVERALL PARCEL SUBJECT TO THE FLUMA, ETC. |
| | |
| | |
| | |
| | INSTRUCTIONS FOR RESUBMITTAL: |
| | |
| | * PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN |
| | WRITTEN FORMAT. |
| | |
| | * WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE TWO (2) PAPER |
| | COPIES AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY OF ALL PLANS/DOCUMENTS IN |
| | THE RESUBMITTAL. PLEASE NOTE THAT CHANGES ON THE |
| | RESUBMITTED PLANS MAY RESULT IN ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. |
| | |
| | * 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 ($600.00). |
| | |
| |
Print |
