| 2 |
|
6/9/2022 |
Brandon Pike |
|
Hi Brandie,
We have reviewed the newest sets of plans. Here are the remaining items to address by my estimation:
" Gross floor area by use (e.g., manufacturing, office, retail, storage) for the development site (Per SRC 220.005(e)(2)(G)). I understand a lease agreement is in place for the entire development site, but we still need to see how the proposal adheres to the parking minimums and maximums of SRC 806. Youll need to provide speculative tenants/uses for the new commercial space.
" Condition 3 / Windows: I still dont see windows on some of the bedrooms. On sheet A1.37, for instance, the bedroom in the top righthand corner of the building doesnt have a window on one of the walls. This can be conditioned, if needed.
" Condition 4 / Offset: I still dont see this reflected on the site plan or building floor plans. The faades, except for exterior balconies, seem to be straight lines with no offsets.
" Condition 5 / awnings:
o East faade: I measure a faade length of 302.33 feet, requiring a minimum awning coverage of 226.75 feet. Looks like 186.5 feet of coverage is proposed.
o North faade: I measure a faade length of 71.16 feet, requiring a minimum awning coverage of 53.4 feet. Looks like 44.75 feet of coverage is proposed.
This can also be conditioned, if you prefer.
" Pedestrian access:
o The revised plan still doesnt show adherence with the three standards identified within the incomplete letter. A condition of approval requiring the development to adhere to these standards likely wont work, since connections between the building and Commercial Street, between each building on the development site, and through the off-street parking areas would all be required. This would require significant changes to the design and existing parking areas.
o If you could connect the new building to the existing paths adjacent to 5765 Commercial Street (the building with the Subway restaurant), and then provide a short connection out to the sidewalk along Commercial Street, that would provide your needed connection to Commercial Street. That, along with upgrading some of the existing ped crossings in the development (with speedbumps or concrete), seems like a reasonable compromise in my mind. You could request Adjustments to eliminate the requirement to provide a path through the parking lot, and to connect to each building on site.
o If this sounds feasible to you, we could condition it.
Let me know your thoughts and well try to get this over the finish line as soon as possible.
Best,
Brandon Pike |
| 3 |
|
8/10/2022 |
Aaron Panko
|
Info Requested |
Hi Brandie,
Following up on the conversation from yesterday regarding removing a condition of approval from CU20-08, removing condition 4 requiring a four foot offset along the exterior wall will require a Variance application. Staff would likely be supportive of the Variance if you can demonstrate that alternative methods such as change in materials, contrasting colors and/or horizontally-distinguishing transitions are provided to visually break up the buildings vertical mass.
In addition, please make sure the following items are addressed in the SPR application materials before we deem the application complete:
1) Per Condition 3, provide windows in all habitable rooms of the dwellings on each wall that faces common open space, parking areas, and pedestrian paths.
2) Per Condition 5, please demonstrate that the weather protection provided along the ground floor building faade is a minimum of 75 percent of the length of the building faade.
3) Solid waste enclosure needs to be adjusted to comply with requirements of SRC Chapter 800.
4) A loading space 12 feet wide, 30 feet in length, and with 14 feet of unobstructed overhead clearance is required per SRC Chapter 806. Please see SRC 806.075(a) and provide findings if a full size loading space is not needed for the anticipated uses in this building.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Aaron Panko |