| Date |
Text |
| 2014-07-28 15:34:15 | FAILED |
| | |
| | PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO THE COMMENTS IN WRITING. |
| | |
| | 1) REPEAT COMMENT:THE MODIFICATIONS SHOWN ON THIS |
| | PERMIT REQUIRE THE PRIOR APPROVAL OF A MINOR PD |
| | AMENDMENT BY THE PLANNING DIVISION. THERE HAS BEEN NO |
| | RESUBMITTAL FOR THE OPEN MINOR PD AMENDMENT SINCE THE |
| | LATEST COMMENTS WERE ISSUED JUNE 6, 2013. COMMENTS |
| | OUTSTANDING FROM THAT REVIEW INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT |
| | LIMITED TO: |
| | |
| | A. REPEAT COMMENT: PROVIDE FULL, TO SCALE, DETAILS ON |
| | HOW THE SIDEWALK WILL FUNCTION, INCLUDING DIMENSIONS. |
| | THE BASE SITE PLAN THAT HAS BEEN USED TO SHOW THE NEW |
| | WALKWAY CONTINUES TO BE A COPY OF A SURVEY THAT IS NOT |
| | TO SCALE. THE BASE SITE PLAN (OR SURVEY) SHALL BE TO |
| | SCALE WITH THE WALKWAY INFORMATION DRAWN ON IT AT THE |
| | SAME SCALE AS THE BASE SITE PLAN. SCALED DIMENSIONS |
| | SHALL BE INCLUDED ON THE PLAN. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE |
| | BASE LIGHTNING PLAN IS SUBMITTED TO SCALE. |
| | |
| | EXAMPLES OF SCALE INCONSISTENCIES: |
| | |
| | I. THE PATH IS LISTED AT 3 FEET WIDE. USING THIS AS A |
| | BASE, THE VEHICLE SHOWN IS 6 FEET, NOT 7 FEET WIDE AND |
| | THE TURNING RADIUS DETAILS ARE NOT THE LENGTH LISTED, |
| | THEREFORE, THE TURNING RADIUS AS SHOWN IS NOT |
| | ACCEPTABLE AS STAFF CAN NOT VERIFY THAT THE VEHICLES |
| | WILL NOT SWING INTO THE ADA PATH. |
| | |
| | II. THE EXPANDED CROSS HATCHED AREA WHERE THE ADA PATH |
| | MEETS THE BASE OF THE STEPS IS SHOWN AS 5 FEET SQUARE, |
| | YET WHEN USING THE 3 FOOT WIDE PATH AS A BASE, THE AREA |
| | MEASURES 8 FEET ON A SIDE. |
| | |
| | B. REPEAT COMMENT: ADDRESSING WHY THE WALKWAY CANNOT BE |
| | A MINIMUM OF SIX (6) FEET IN WIDTH TO ALLOW ADEQUATE |
| | ROOM FOR TWO PEOPLE WITH BAGS CONTAINING WORKOUT GEAR |
| | TO PASS EACH OTHER WITHOUT FORCING ONE OF THE PEOPLE |
| | INTO THE VEHICLE TRAVEL LANE. |
| | |
| | 2) REPEAT COMMENT: UPON SUBMITTAL OF PLANS COMPLYING |
| | WITH COMMENT NO. 1, ZONING STAFF WILL PROVIDE A FULL |
| | PLAN REVIEW. STAFF HAS NOTED THAT THERE IS A DIMENSION |
| | LINE INCLUDED FOR A 21 FOOT DRIVE, WHICH INCLUDES A |
| | PORTION OF THE CURB. CURBS MAY NOT BE SHOWN AS PART OF |
| | THE DRIVE AISLE. |
| | |
| | 3) REPEAT COMMENT: PLEASE PROVIDE A COPY OF A RECORDED |
| | CROSS ACCESS AGREEMENT/EASEMENT FOR THE PORTIONS OF THE |
| | ACCESS AND EGRESS ROUTES WHICH CROSS ONTO THE OFFICE |
| | TOWER PARCEL. |
| | |
| | 4) IT APPEARS THAT THE LIGHTING, MOUNTED 1 FOOT OFF OF |
| | THE 6 FOOT TALL WALL, WILL ENCROACH INTO THE ALREADY |
| | NARROW PEDESTRIAN PATH AND PRESENT OBSTRUCTIONS FOR |
| | TALL PEDESTRIANS. ADDITIONALLY, THE LIGHTS SEEM TO BE |
| | AROUND EYE LEVEL FOR MANY PEDESTRIANS, WHICH CAN CREATE |
| | AN UNSAFE NIGHT BLINDNESS CONDITION. PLEASE PROVIDE A |
| | CROSS SECTION OF THE LIGHTS MOUNTED TO THE WALL TO |
| | VERIFY THAT THE PROPOSED LIGHTING WILL NOT NEGATIVELY |
| | IMPACT PEDESTRIANS. |
| | |
| | 5) SEPARATE PERMITS, WITH PLANS, WILL BE REQUIRED FOR |
| | THE NEW FENCING AND LIGHTING SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN. |
| | |
| | CONTACT ERIC SCHNEIDER @ (561) 822-1446. |
| | |
| 2014-07-09 09:41:27 | 7/9/14 ZONING SENT TO ES. SG |
