| 1 |
|
10/12/2022 |
Jamie Donaldson |
Info Requested |
Good afternoon,
Please see the attached markup of the last incomplete letter for the items still outstanding. In addition, it appears that the location of the bike parking is not being provided on the site plan, so please indicate where that will be. The bike rack details provided also do not meet the allowed design standards in SRC 800.060. Lastly, it seems you were previously told to provide 4 bike spaces under the warehousing use, but vehicle restoration would be a motor vehicle services use, requiring only one bike parking space per Table 806-9. Please indicate where the one bike parking space will be located, as well as indicate a rack design allowed by code, as outlined in Figure 806-11.
[image]
[image]
To answer the question on street opening, yes, when all alternatives have been considered, a street cut can be permitted with conditions. However, a formal request to the City Engineer will be required with the BP/CO pursuant to PWDS 1.18. I have ccd Laurel on this email to help you further with this and the floodway issue we discussed on the phone.
Your application, which is incomplete, will be deemed complete upon receipt of one of the following:
(1) All of the missing information.
(2) Some of the missing information and written notice from you (the applicant) that no other information will be provided.
(3) Written notice from you (the applicant) that none of the missing information will be provided.
You have 180 days from the date the application was first submitted to respond in one of the three ways listed above, or the application will be deemed void.
Thank you, |
| 2 |
|
10/27/2022 |
Jamie Donaldson |
Info Requested |
Hi Paul,
Please note that only the items with the red X are the ones that require additional information. Youll notice that I wrote OK on some items, meaning that we can move forward even though they do not have a green check mark. Generally there are items that may not be clear that are met in the preliminary plans, but will be conditioned in the decision to ensure it meets standards this is the case with the trees. It was not explicitly made clear that no trees will be removed or disturbed with any grading activity, but it will be conditioned at the time of decision to ensure their protection and will not hold up the completeness review. Same for the pedestrian connection(s); it was not made clear that they will meet design standards as requested, but it will be conditioned as part of the decision and verified for conformance at the time of building permit.
For the trash enclosure, I made specific notes as to why it does not meet standards: Enclosure does not meet pad area, separation, screening, gate or vehicle access standards. These are the only details provided for the enclosure:
Please read through the associated code section SRC 800.055 for all applicable standards. Some items pertaining to the design (i.e. screening, pad area, etc.) can be conditioned as part of the decision, but I think the major issue here is providing the vehicle access for the solid waste services under SRC 800.055(f) this would hold up completeness as it could potentially affect the design of your proposal. Please also note that the applicability of this chapter is specific to all new solid waste, recycling, and compostable service areas, where use of a solid waste, recycling, and compostable receptacle of one cubic yard or larger is proposed. It was not made clear on the plans what type of receptacle would be used inside the enclosure, but access for a service vehicle does need to be provided for a receptacle one cubic yard or more you may need to contact waste services to determine what receptacle would be required for the type of business.
I hope this answers your questions, please feel free to call me if you would like to discuss it further. |