| Date |
Text |
| 2017-12-14 16:00:32 | 1) THE STANDARD PARKING STALL DETAILS ON THE PLANS DO |
| | NOT COMPLY WITH THE CITY'S PARKING STALL STANDARDS? |
| | DIMENSIONS OR STRIPING REQUIREMENTS IN THE ZONING CODE |
| | OR WITH THE PARKING STALL DETAILS IN THE APPROVED SITE |
| | PLAN. |
| | |
| | 2) SHEET SP-2 IN THE SUBMITTAL INCLUDES SEVERAL PARKING |
| | STRIPING AND BIKE RACK DETAILS WHICH WERE NOT PART OF |
| | THE APPROVED SITE PLAN AND WHICH DO NOT COMPLY WITH |
| | CITY STANDARDS. |
| | |
| | 3) THE BIKE RACK PLAN VIEW SHOWN ON SHEET C12 HAS |
| | MINIMUM DIMENSIONS OF 12" BETWEEN THE RACKS AND THE |
| | EDGE OF THE PAD. THESE DIMENSIONS DO NOT COMPLY WITH |
| | MINIMUM BIKE RACK PAD DIMENSIONS INCLUDED IN APPROVED |
| | SITE PLAN. |
| | |
| | 4) THE DIMENSIONS FOR THE PARALLEL PARKING SPACES |
| | IDENTIFIED ON THE BUILDING PLANS ARE DIFFERENT FROM |
| | THOSE IN THE APPROVED SITE PLAN. THE WIDTHS OF THE |
| | PARALLEL SPACES ON THE BUILDING PLANS ARE OF 8.5 FEET |
| | AND 10 FEET COMPARED TO 8 FEET ON THE SITE PLAN. THE |
| | APPLICANT NEEDS TO PROVIDE AN EXPLANATION OF HOW THIS |
| | ADDITIONAL SPACE ON THE PARKING SPACES IMPACTS OTHER |
| | COMPONENTS OF THE PLAN. THIS EXPLANATION SHOULD INCLUDE |
| | AN EAST-WEST CROSS SECTION OF THE SITE IN THE AREA |
| | AROUND BUILDINGS 2 AND 5 THAT COMPARES DIMENSIONS |
| | BETWEEN THE PROPOSED BUILDING PLAN AND THE APPROVED |
| | SITE PLAN. |
| | |
| | 5) THE BIKE RACK DEPICTED ON THE SITE PLAN ON THE NE |
| | SIDE OF THE PUPPY PARK IS NOT SHOWN ON THE PAVING AND |
| | STRIPING PLAN INCLUDED IN THIS SUBMITTAL. |
| | |
| | 6) PLEASE VERIFY THAT THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES ON |
| | THE PLANS ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE PARKING SPACES ON THE |
| | SITE PLAN. STAFF NOTED SOME INCONSISTENCIES BETWEEN THE |
| | NUMBER OF SPACES ON SECTIONS OF BOTH PLANS. FOR |
| | EXAMPLE, THE PAVING AND STRIPING PLAN DEPICTS FIVE (5) |
| | PARALLEL PARKING SPACES ON THE SE AREA OF THE SITE TO |
| | THE EAST OF BUILDING 3 WHILE THE SITE PLAN SHOWS SIX |
| | (6) PARALLEL SPACES ON THIS AREA. IN ADDITION, THE |
| | PAVING AND STRIPING PLAN SHOWS SIX (6) SPACES ON THE |
| | ROW LOCATED ON THE SW CORNER OF THE SITE WHILE THE SITE |
| | PLAN SHOWS FIVE (5) SPACES FOR THIS SAME PARKING ROW. |
| | SIMILAR TO THE COMMENT ABOVE, THE APPLICANT NEEDS TO |
| | EXPLAIN HOW THESE DISCREPANCIES IN THE PARKING AREAS |
| | IMPACT OTHER COMPONENTS OF THE PLAN. |
| | |
| | 7) THE APPROVAL LETTER FOR THE BELLA VITA MINOR SITE |
| | PLAN AMENDMENT ISSUED ON OCTOBER 26, 2017 INCLUDES THE |
| | FOLLOWING CONDITION OF APPROVAL: |
| | "5. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST BUILDING PERMIT |
| | FOR THE PROJECT, THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, SITE PLAN, AND |
| | ENGINEERING PAVING AND DRAINAGE PLANS SHALL BE REVISED |
| | TO RELOCATE THE CURBS TO THE POSITION OF THE WHEEL |
| | STOPS AND PROVIDE A LANDSCAPED OVERHANG WHERE POSSIBLE |
| | WITHIN THE PARKING AREAS TO PROVIDE MORE PERVIOUS |
| | LANDSCAPE AREA. THE DESIGN SHALL FOLLOW THE TYPICAL |
| | PARKING STALL LAYOUT AS SHOWN ON THE APPROVED PLANS. A |
| | MINOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT WILL BE REQUIRED TO |
| | REFLECT ANY REVISIONS TO THE PLANS." SINCE NO REVISED |
| | SITE PLAN, LANDSCAPE PLAN, AND ENGINEERING PAVING AND |
| | DRAINAGE PLANS CONSISTENT WITH THE ABOVE CONDITION HAVE |
| | BEEN SUBMITTED, THE BUILDING PLANS INCLUDED IN THIS |
| | PERMIT CANNOT BE APPROVED. |
| | |
| | |
