DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM
|
|
- Joan Nash
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: MAY 17, 2017 TO: THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Chair Imboden and Members of the Design Review Committee Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Director of Community Development Anne Fox, Contract Staff Planner DRC NO Orange Art of Dentistry SUMMARY The applicant proposes to demolish an existing 2,000 square foot office building and related site improvements to construct a 2,565 square foot office building including related site improvements to establish a dental office. This project was continued from the Design Review Committee (DRC) meeting of January 18, 2017 where comments were provided to the applicant suggesting design changes. RECOMMENDED ACTION RECOMMENDATION TO ZONING ADMINISTRATOR Staff recommends that the DRC recommend approval of the proposed project subject to conditions of approval contained in the Staff Report and any conditions that the DRC determines appropriate to support the required findings. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Project Contact: Applicant/Owner: Property Location: General Plan Designation: Zoning Classification: Existing Development: Property Size: Associated Applications: PUBLIC NOTICE James Le, Coastal Estates & Development Dr. Kha Le 2006 West Chapman Avenue General Commercial Max 1.0 FAR (GC) C2 (General Business) 2,000 square foot office (veterinary clinic) building with six parking spaces and related site improvements Acres (10,530 SF) Minor Site Plan Review No & Administrative Adjustment No No Public Notice was required for this level of review of the project.
2 Page 2 of 8 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW Categorical Exemption: The proposed project is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per State CEQA Guidelines (Class 3 - New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures) because it consists of the construction of a new, small (< 10,000 SF in urbanized area) structure zoned for such use, not involving the significant use of hazardous substances, where all necessary public services are available and where the area is not environmentally sensitive. PROJECT DESCRIP TION The applicant proposes the demolition and removal of the existing veterinary clinic building and the existing on-site improvements (parking and landscaping) on a 10,530 square foot, mid-block lot located on the south side of West Chapman Avenue between South Marks Way to the east and South Flower Street to the west. The current ingress/egress to/from the site is via two 30-foot wide driveways along West Chapman Avenue that will be removed, and is proposed to be replaced with a single driveway with a 27-foot wide entry aisle leading to 12 parking spaces. An additional five feet of right-of-way will be dedicated and the reconstruction of the off-site improvements will provide a driveway to current City standards that is ADA compliant and restores all brick banding within the eight-foot sidewalk area, including two new street trees. The project was originally presented to the DRC at the meeting of January 18, At that meeting, the applicant was directed to refine their proposal. Key issues included the following: Concern that the building wasn t buildable as shown conceptually. It was recommended that a licensed professional review the plans for basic conformance with Building Code requirements interlacing building systems. Building exterior should take on a simpler form, appear as an office rather than retail use, which will translate to a simpler landscape palette modern design approach. It was suggested that the design incorporate a flat roof with raised parapet, asymmetrical façade and building mass, with pitch or raised portion to give prominence to the building entrance. Requested that plan sheets and drawings be consistent as there were discrepancies between site plan, floor plan, landscaping, lighting and elevations. Asked for the landscape plan to be more considerate of tree sizes, placement as they relate to parking lot striping, and a simpler palette with a more thoughtful distribution of shrubs and groundcover. Attachment 3 contains a point-by-point response from the applicant to all of the DRC comments. The revised plans propose construction of a new 2,565 square foot, one-story, office building on the most southern portion of the site, with zero-foot setbacks along the rear and side yards. The building is rectangular in shape with a three-foot-high raised parapet surrounding a flat roof at an overall height of 14 feet, six inches, with a raised centered parapet, flat roof at an overall height of 20 feet, six inches. Plans do not specifically call out a cap or trim piece at the parapet edge. The parapet roof design architecturally screens the roof skylights and the mechanical equipment. The exterior walls are proposed to be finished with a smooth stucco painted gray. Trim and two column
3 Page 3 of 8 elements on the north façade are proposed to also be finished in a smooth stucco, painted a rust color. Metal trimmed commercial storefront windows, including clearstory, and doors using nonreflective bronze glass are also proposed on the building, north façade. Six decorative black wall sconces adorn the building exterior s front (north) facade. Supporting site improvements include a trash enclosure located within northeast corner of the site, setback approximately 14 feet from the West Chapman Avenue right-of-way. Elevations of the enclosure were not included in the revised plans, but notes on the Site Plan indicates that it would masonry block, conform to the City Standard Plans and Specifications No. 409, and have vines planted to help with softening its appearance. Further, the Perspective Plan shows the enclosure in a color that appears to match the field color proposed for the building. An existing six-foot high block wall located on the westerly property line will remain. The parking lot area also includes the installation of four light poles at a height of 23 feet. A Conceptual Landscape and Irrigation Plan shows that a total of 15 new trees, one 36-inch boxed sized Strawberry Tree, and seven 24- inch boxed and seven 15-gallon sized Crape Myrtle Trees are proposed. A mix of shrubs that include Blue Hibiscus, Flax, Kangaroo Paw, Rhaphiolepis, Euonymos, Daisy, Compact Myrtle, Spanish Lavender, and Liriope are located throughout the planter areas of the parking lot and front yard setback area. EXISTING SITE The 0.24-acre site is improved with a one-story, 2,000 square foot office building that previously served as a veterinary clinic, surrounded by parking and landscaping areas. Although there are no physical obstructions to the parking lots and drive-aisles between the subject property and properties abutting on the east and south side, no formal reciprocity agreements or restrictions are in place that would limit redevelopment of the subject property. EXISTING AREA CONTEXT The project site is located within the former Southwest Redevelopment Project Area. Surrounding properties to the north, south, east and west all maintain similar zoning and land use designations. The site is located in an urbanized area of the City that is in transition. Staff is currently evaluating or has evaluated several proposals for property redevelopment, façade improvements, and overall site improvements along this stretch of West Chapman Avenue. The area consists of commercial uses such as retail commercial centers, office buildings, and food establishments. The properties immediately abutting the subject property on the south, east and west sides each have one-story commercial structures. Properties to the north across West Chapman Avenue are developed with two-story office buildings. There is no predominant architectural style and new development within this area of West Chapman Avenue are guided by the Design Standards for the former Southwest Redevelopment Project Area, Thematic District #2 transition linking historic Old Towne and the contemporary developments further west. EVALUATION CRITERIA Orange Municipal Code (OMC) Section establishes the general criteria the DRC should use when reviewing the project. This section states the following:
4 Page 4 of 8 The project shall have an internally consistent, integrated design theme, which is reflected in the following elements: 1. Architectural Features. a. The architectural features shall reflect a similar design style or period. b. Creative building elements and identifying features should be used to create a high quality project with visual interest and an architectural style. 2. Landscape. a. The type, size and location of landscape materials shall support the project s overall design concept. b. Landscaping shall not obstruct visibility of required addressing, nor shall it obstruct the vision of motorists or pedestrians in proximity to the site. c. Landscape areas shall be provided in and around parking lots to break up the appearance of large expanses of hardscape. 3. Signage. All signage shall be compatible with the building(s) design, scale, colors, materials and lighting. 4. Secondary Functional and Accessory Features. Trash receptacles, storage and loading areas, transformers and mechanical equipment shall be screened in a manner, which is architecturally compatible with the principal building(s). ANALYSIS/STATEMENT OF TH E ISSUES Issue 1: Integrated Design Theme Architectural Features The architectural features of the proposed building have been revised to simplify the form and mass of the building. However, the window and door elements do not seem to complement the revised building form and lack a comfortable rhythm. The clearstory windows appear too large and square; and there is no alignment with the more vertical, rectangular shaped windows below. The north façade is still attempting to combine symmetrical and asymmetrical elements window sizes and lack of a defined entry point to the building. The design concept still seems to be somewhat incomplete and needs some further refinement to completely resolve the issue of aesthetics. Landscape The type, size and location of the proposed landscaping has again been revised to comply as much as possible with the minimum requirements for number of trees, sizing and reduced irrigation use. However, the total number of trees required based upon the City s formula outlined for development of a C2 Zoned parcel is still deficient by one tree. Therefore, the applicant is seeking Administrative Adjustment approval from this requirement (Issue 2). Secondary Functional and Accessory Features The trash enclosure is proposed to be located in an area of the site that is highly visible from West Chapman Avenue. This is not an optimum location for such an accessory structure, particularly when there are still no elevations provided to
5 Page 5 of 8 determine if it is architecturally compatible with the building. This issue could be resolved through conditions regarding finishes and colors. Mechanical equipment is anticipated to be located on the flat portion of the roof, surrounded by a three-foot parapet and appears to be architecturally screened, although equipment sizes and a cross-section were not provided. The photometric plan was not revised with this submittal and shows that the proposed light poles and fixtures within the parking lot area present a very high foot-candle measurement on the paved surfaces directly under the light source. The fixture is compatible with the revised building form; however, the six building mounted fixtures should be changed to a more modern or streamlined appearance to better coordinate with the revised building architecture. The above issues need to be resolved in order to support the finding of an internally consistent and integrated design theme that upholds community aesthetics. Staff is requesting that the DRC add conditions of approval to address the specifics of some of the yet defined project elements to gain a more cohesive aesthetic. Issue 2: Number of Trees (Landscape Design) The City s formula for calculating the number of trees is based upon combining the project site s perimeter measurements, building perimeter and parking lot drive aisles and then dividing by 36. Based upon Staff s calculation of the measurement, which does not duplicate the linear measurement of the building perimeter where it is at zero setback; the project should show a total of 16 trees being provided. The proposed design indicates a total of 15 trees, one of which is 36- inch box, seven of which are 24-inch box size, with the remaining seven at 15-gallon. Overall, this deficiency in the number of tree is less than ten percent. A deviation from a required development standard that is ten percent or less is subject to approval of an Administrative Adjustment by the Zoning Administrator. Therefore, the DRC is acting as a recommending body for the Administrative Adjustment for the reduced number of trees related to the appropriateness of the landscape design. While Staff believes that this minor deviation from the number of required trees can be supported, the DRC had previously expressed concern regarding the spacing, sizes and variety of the trees. The sizes of some of the trees has been increased, but the spacing still does not align with the parking lot striping and the planter depths may not accommodate the initial planting. The DRC also expressed a concern for the distribution and palette selected for the shrubs and groundcover in the planters. This issue appears to have not been resolved with the revised plan. Staff requests that the DRC provide some additional direction to the applicant regarding the landscape material and coordination with the building architecture. This issue can also be resolved by requiring the applicant to provide a final landscape plan review to the DRC prior to issuance of building permits. With the recommendation for approval of an Administrative Adjustment and the imposition of the condition, the issue would be resolved. ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMENDATION The Streamlined, Multi-Disciplinary, Accelerated Review Team (SMART) considered the submittal and resubmittals over the course of five meeting agendas and at its October 12, 2016 ultimately decided to recommend that the application be scheduled for review by the DRC. The SMART recommended conditions of approval related to design have been included.
6 Page 6 of 8 STAFF RECOMMENDATION AND REQUIRED FINDINGS The courts define a Finding as a conclusion which describes the method of analysis decision makers utilize to make the final decision. A decision-making body makes a Finding, or draws a conclusion, through identifying evidence in the record (i.e., testimony, reports, environmental documents, etc.) and should not contain unsupported statements. The statements which support the Findings bridge the gap between the raw data and the ultimate decision, thereby showing the rational decision making process that took place. The Findings are, in essence, the ultimate conclusions which must be reached in order to approve (or recommend approval of) a project. The same holds true if denying a project; the decision-making body must detail why it cannot make the Findings. Staff recommends that the DRC provide direction and guidance to the applicant concerning the issues as outlined in the Analysis/Statement of the Issues Section of this Report through the addition of conditions or continue any action to a future DRC meeting on the project if necessary to review revisions. If conditions can be applied to address architectural elements, Staff recommends the DRC recommend approval of the project to the Zoning Administrator based upon the following: 1. In the Old Towne Historic District, the proposed work conforms to the prescriptive standards and design criteria referenced and/or recommended by the DRC or other reviewing body for the project (OMC F.1). This project site is not within the Old Towne Historic District; therefore, this finding is inapplicable. 2. In any National Register Historic District, the proposed work complies with the Secretary of the Interior s standards and guidelines (OMC F.2). This project site is not within the National Register Historic District; therefore, this finding is inapplicable. 3. The project design does not uphold community aesthetics through the use of an internally consistent, integrated design theme and is inconsistent with all adopted specific plans, applicable design standards, and their required findings (OMC F.3). The existing area of the City is characterized by a variety of architectural styles, ages of buildings, and sizes. The project, with implementation of DRC recommended refinement to the overall design, would incorporate specific architectural features, details and materials that complement the community aesthetics while creating an internally balanced design. The site is located in the former Southwest Redevelopment Project Area and is subject to the City s Southwest Design Standards, which identifies four thematic districts. Buildings within Thematic District #2 should be consistent with suitable architectural style of buildings within proximity and those that are more modern in design further west on Chapman Avenue. With the DRC recommended refinements, the proposed improvements will satisfy the objectives for transitional design to the central portion of District #2.
7 Page 7 of 8 4. For infill residential development, as specified in the City of Orange Infill Residential Design Guidelines, the new structure(s) or addition are compatible with the scale, massing, orientation, and articulation of the surrounding development and will preserve or enhance existing neighborhood character (OMC F.4). This project is not an infill residential development; therefore, this finding is inapplicable. CONDITIONS The following conditions are applicable to the approval of the project design: General 1. All construction shall conform in substance and be maintained in general conformance with plans and exhibits labeled as Attachment 2 of this Staff Report (label dated ), including modifications required by the conditions of approval, and as recommended for approval by the Design Review Committee. Further, exterior building color and materials shall substantially conform to the plans and color and materials board approved by the Design Review Committee on. Any change to the exterior of the building from the approved plans shall be subject to subsequent review and approval by the Design Review Committee. 2. The applicant agrees to indemnify, hold harmless, and defend the City, its officers, agents and employees from any and all liability or claims that may be brought against the City arising out of its approval of this permit, save and except that caused by the City s active negligence. 3. The applicant, business owner, managers, successors, and all future assigns shall comply with all Federal, State and local laws, including all City regulations. Violation of any of those laws in connection with the use will be cause for revocation of this permit. 4. Except as otherwise provided herein, this project is approved as a precise plan. If changes are proposed regarding the location or alteration of any use or structure, a changed plan may be submitted to the Community Development Director for approval. If the Community Development Director determines that the proposed change complies with the provisions and the spirit and intent of the approval action, and that the action would have been the same for the changed plan as for the approved plot plan, the Community Development Director may approve the changed plan without requiring a new public hearing. 5. Construction permits shall be obtained for all construction work, as required by the City of Orange, Community Development Department s Building Division and Public Works Grading Division. Failure to obtain the required building permits will be cause for revocation of this permit. 6. If not utilized, project approval expires twenty-four months from the approval date. Extensions of time may be granted in accordance with OMC Section The Planning entitlements expire unless Building Permits are pulled within 2 years of the original approval.
8 Page 8 of 8 Community Services 7. Prior to building permit issuance, the applicant shall prepare a final landscaping and irrigation plan consistent with the grading plans, site plans, and the conceptual landscaping plan as proposed for the project for the review and approval of the Design Review Committee. 8. Prior to building permit issuance, City required irrigation and landscape inspection notes shall be placed on the final landscape plan, to the satisfaction of the Community Services Director. Public Works Water Quality 9. Prior to City approval of the landscape plans, the applicant shall review the approved Water Quality Management Plan to ensure the proposed landscape plans are consistent with the project grading plans and that they show the proposed storm water infiltration devices and other treatment BMPs affecting landscaping areas. A copy of the proposed landscape plans shall be submitted to the Public Works Surface Water Quality Section for review and comment. Building 10. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall pay all applicable development fees including but not limited to: City sewer connection, Orange County Sanitation District Connection Fee, Transportation System Improvement Program, Fire Facility, Police Facility, Park Acquisition, Sanitation District, and School District, as required. 11. All structures shall comply with the requirements of Municipal Code Chapter (Building Security Standards), which relates to hardware, doors, windows, lighting, etc. (Ord. 7-79). Approved structural drawings shall include sections of the security code that apply. Specifications, details, or security notes may be used to convey the compliance. 12. The final approved conditions of approval shall be reprinted on the first or second page of the construction documents when submitting to the Building Department for the plan check process. ATTACHMENTS 1. Vicinity Map 2. Landscape Plan and Elevation Sheet from January 18, 2017 Plan Submittal Set 3. Final DRC Minutes for January 18, 2017 with Applicant Responses 4. Revised Plans (label-dated ) cc: James Le Dr. Kha Le Coastal Estates & Development 1176 Skyline Drive El Campo Avenue Laguna Beach, CA Fountain Valley, CA N:\CDD\PLNG\Applications\Design Review\DRC Orange Art of Dentistry\DRC May 2017\DRC Staff Report _Art of Dentistry_ docx
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: OCTOBER 3, 2012 TO: Chair Woollett and Members of the Design Review Committee THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Leslie Aranda Roseberry, Planning Manager Daniel Ryan,
More informationDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: DECEMBER 16, 2015 TO: THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Chair McCormick and Members of the Design Review Committee Leslie Aranda Roseberry, Planning Manager Kelly Christensen
More informationDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: OCTOBER 17, 2012 TO: Chair Woollett and Members of the Design Review Committee THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Leslie Aranda Roseberry, Planning Manager Daniel Ryan,
More informationDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: NOVEMBER 5, 2014 TO: THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Chair Imboden and Members of the Design Review Committee Leslie Roseberry, Planning Manager Lucy Yeager, Contract
More informationDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: APRIL 1, 2015 TO: THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Chair McCormack and Members of the Design Review Committee Leslie Aranda Roseberry, Planning Manager Jeff Borchardt,
More informationDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: AUGUST 2, 2017 TO: THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Chair Imboden and Members of the Design Review Committee Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Community Development Director
More informationDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: FEBRUARY 19, 2014 TO: THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Chair Imboden and Members of the Design Review Committee Leslie Roseberry, Planning Manager Lucy Yeager, Contract
More informationDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: APRIL 5, 2017 TO: THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Chair Imboden and Members of the Design Review Committee Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Community Development Director
More informationDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: APRIL 19, 2017 TO: THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Chair Imboden and Members of the Design Review Committee Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Community Development Director
More informationDesign Review Commission Report
City of Beverly Hills Planning Division 455 N. Rexford Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90210 TEL. (310) 285-1141 FAX. (310) 858-5966 Design Review Commission Report Meeting Date: Thursday, March 2, 2017 Subject:
More informationDESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE AGENDA ITEM AGENDA DATE: APRIL 5, 2017 TO: THRU: FROM: SUBJECT: Chair Imboden and Members of the Design Review Committee Anna Pehoushek, Assistant Community Development Director
More informationSUBJECT: PREDEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW OF PROJECT LOCATED AT 2632 EAST WASHINGTON BOULEVARD ('ST. LUKE MEDICAL CENTER')
TO: FROM: Honorable Mayor and City Council Planning & Community Development Department SUBJECT: PREDEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW OF PROJECT LOCATED AT 2632 EAST WASHINGTON BOULEVARD ('ST. LUKE MEDICAL CENTER')
More informationCity of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report
ITEM F1 City of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Development Services Department Submitted and Reviewed by Sergio Klotz, Al~ rector~ Prepared by Mathew Evans,
More informationD1 September 11, 2013 Public Hearing APPLICANT:
D1 September 11, 2013 Public Hearing APPLICANT: BEACH MUNICIPAL FEDERAL CREDIT UNION PROPERTY OWNER: SISTERS II, LLC STAFF PLANNER: Karen Prochilo REQUEST: Conditional Change of Zoning (AG-2 Agriculture
More informationMIDTOWN MIXED-USE VILLAGE. TECHNICAL DATA SHEET COMPONENT C-1 FOR PUBLIC HEARING - PETITION NUMBER Project No RZ1.1. Issued.
N MIDTOWN MIXED-USE VILLAGE TECHNICAL DATA SHEET COMPONENT C- FOR PUBLIC HEARING - PETITION NUMBER 04-00 Project No. 496 Issued Revised SCALE: " = 0' N 0 0 0 40 RZ. c GENERAL PROVISIONS: a. SITE LOCATION.
More informationArchitectural Review Board Report
Architectural Review Board Report Architectural Review Board Meeting: February 3, 2014 Agenda Item: 7.9 To: From: Subject: Architectural Review Board Steve Traeger, Principal Urban Designer Scott Albright,
More informationREQUEST Current Zoning: O-15(CD) (office) Proposed Zoning: TOD-M(CD) (transit oriented development mixed-use, conditional)
Rezoning Petition 2016-117 Zoning Committee Recommendation January 4, 2017 REQUEST Current Zoning: O-15(CD) (office) Proposed Zoning: TOD-M(CD) (transit oriented development mixed-use, conditional) LOCATION
More informationCITY OF PLACERVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
CITY OF PLACERVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ITEM 4.1 APPLICATION Special Temporary Use Permit (TUP) 17-04 PUBLIC HEARING DATE December 19, 2017 SUMMARY OF REQUEST Applicant seeks approval from
More informationCITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD Draft RESOLUTION
CITY OF ALAMEDA PLANNING BOARD Draft RESOLUTION A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING BOARD OF THE CITY OF ALAMEDA APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW AND DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT APPLICATION PLN13-0157 TO CONSTRUCT ELEVEN
More informationInfill Residential Design Guidelines
Infill Residential Design Guidelines Adopted March 23, 2004 Amended September 10, 2013 City of Orange Community Development Department Planning Division Phone: (714) 744-7220 Fax: (714) 744-7222 www.cityoforange.org
More informationUrban Planning and Land Use
Urban Planning and Land Use 701 North 7 th Street, Room 423 Phone: (913) 573-5750 Kansas City, Kansas 66101 Fax: (913) 573-5796 Email: planninginfo@wycokck.org www.wycokck.org/planning To: From: City Planning
More informationPlanning Commission Staff Report June 5, 2008
Owner/Applicant Taylor Village Sacramento Investments Partners, LP c/o Kim Whitney 1792 Tribute Road #270 Sacramento, CA 95815 Staff Recommendation Planning Commission Staff Report Project: File: Request:
More informationCITY OF LOMPOC PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
CITY OF LOMPOC PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT DATE: January 11, 2017 TO: FROM: Members of the Planning Commission Sara Farrell, Assistant Planner RE: Development Plan Review DR 16-05 The Laundry Room
More informationPlanning Commission Staff Report February 19, 2009
Planning Commission Staff Report February 19, 2009 Project: Warda Warehouse File: EG-08-051 Request: Design Review Location: 9260 Bendel Place APNs: 134-0660-004 Planner: Gerald Park Property Owner/Applicant
More informationORDINANCE WHEREAS, this Ordinance is consistent with the City of Winter Garden Comprehensive Plan; and
ORDINANCE 17-06 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF WINTER GARDEN, FLORIDA, CREATING ARTICLE XIV OF CHAPTER 118 OF THE CITY OF WINTER GARDEN CODE OF ORDINANCES PROVIDING FOR THE EAST PLANT
More informationUrban Planning and Land Use
Urban Planning and Land Use 701 North 7 th Street, Room 423 Phone: (913) 573-5750 Kansas City, Kansas 66101 Fax: (913) 573-5796 Email: planninginfo@wycokck.org www.wycokck.org/planning To: From: City Planning
More informationRequest Alternative Compliance to the prescribed criteria of the Oceanfront Resort District Form- Based Code. Staff Recommendation Approval
Applicant Property Owner Steven H. Murden Public Hearing June 14, 2017 City Council Election District Beach Agenda Item 8 Request Alternative Compliance to the prescribed criteria of the Oceanfront Resort
More informationCITY OF CYPRESS 5275 Orange Avenue Cypress, California (714) DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PERMIT PROCESS
CITY OF CYPRESS 5275 Orange Avenue Cypress, California 90630 (714) 229-6720 DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE PERMIT PROCESS 1. Discuss project with Planning staff to determine zoning regulations, any unusual characteristics
More informationPC RESOLUTION NO ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL (AC)
PC RESOLUTION NO. 16-07-26- ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL (AC) 15-035 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SAN JUAN CAPISTRANO, CALIFORNIA APPROVING ARCHITECTURAL CONTROL (AC) 15-035, INN AT
More informationCITY OF FORT COLLINS TYPE 1 ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING FINDINGS AND DECISION. CS Commercial, LLC 1337 Riverside Avenue, Unit 1 Fort Collins, CO 80524
CITY OF FORT COLLINS TYPE 1 ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING FINDINGS AND DECISION HEARING DATE: January 7, 2016 PROJECT NAME: Caring Smiles Dental Clinic CASE NUMBER: FDP #150010 APPLICANT: OWNER: HEARING OFFICER:
More information14 October 10, 2012 Public Hearing APPLICANT: MPB, INC
14 October 10, 2012 Public Hearing APPLICANT: MPB, INC PROPERTY OWNER: MUNDEN & ASSOCIATES, LP STAFF PLANNER: Karen Prochilo REQUEST: Conditional Change of Zoning (AG-1 & AG-2 to Conditional O-2) ADDRESS
More informationRequest Alternative Compliance to the prescribed criteria of the Oceanfront Resort District Form-Based Code. Staff Planner Kristine Gay
Applicant/Owner Ocean Rental Properties, LLC Public Hearing April 13, 2016 City Council Election District Beach Agenda Item 1 Request Alternative Compliance to the prescribed criteria of the Oceanfront
More informationCity of Placerville Planning Commission AGENDA REPORT ITEM 7
Placerville, a Unique Historical Past Forging into a Golden Future City of Placerville Planning Commission REPORT ITEM 7 MEETING DATE: September 1, 2015 APPLICATION NO: 225 Placerville Drive Site Plan
More informationGlenborough at Easton Land Use Master Plan
Implementation 114 9.0 IMPLEMENTATION 9.1 OVERVIEW This chapter summarizes the administrative procedures necessary to implement the proposed land use plan, infrastructure improvements, development standards,
More informationCity of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report
ITEM E2 City of San Juan Capistrano Agenda Report TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Planning Commission Development Services Department Submitted by: Sergio Klotz, AICP, Assistant Director ~ Prepared by: Laura
More informationRequest Conditional Use Permit (Automobile Service Station) Staff Recommendation Approval. Staff Planner Bill Landfair
Applicant Property Owner RTR Real Estate Associates, Tidewater Investments, LLC, Bruce Ranomski Public Hearing December 12, 2018 City Council Election District Centerville Agenda Item 7 Request Conditional
More informationRequest Change in Nonconformity. Staff Recommendation Approval. Staff Planner Jonathan Sanders
Applicant & Owner Public Hearing April 11, 2018 City Council Election District Beach Agenda Item 5 Request Change in Nonconformity Staff Recommendation Approval Staff Planner Jonathan Sanders Location
More information6 November 13, 2013 Public Hearing APPLICANT: CAH HOLDINGS, LLC
6 November 13, 2013 Public Hearing APPLICANT:, LLC PROPERTY OWNER: LC REALTY, LLC STAFF PLANNER: Kevin Kemp REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit (Automated Car Wash) ADDRESS / DESCRIPTION: 3565 Holland Road
More informationPrepared by: Casey Kempenaar, Senior Planner
CITY OF CITRUS HEIGHTS PLANNING DIVISION STAFF REPORT PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING September 13, 2017 Prepared by: Casey Kempenaar, Senior Planner REQUEST The applicant requests a Design Review Permit Modification
More informationBuilding & Site Design Standards Application
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Design standards plan review fee Building & Site Design Standards Application Phone: 208-468-5406 Fax: 208-468-5439 411 3rd Street South Nampa, Idaho 83651 5,000
More informationIncentive Zoning Regulations Florida Municipal City of Orlando
Topic: Resource Type: State: Jurisdiction Type: Municipality: Year (adopted, written, etc.): 2002 Community Type applicable to: Title: Incentive Zoning Regulations Florida Municipal City of Orlando Document
More informationCITY OF KEIZER MASTER PLAN APPLICATION & INFORMATION SHEET
CITY OF KEIZER MASTER PLAN APPLICATION & INFORMATION SHEET PRE-APPLICATION CONFERENCE Prior to the actual filing of a Master Plan application, it is strongly recommended that the applicant contact Planning
More information12 January 12, 2011 Public Hearing APPLICANT: TAILWIND DEVELOPMENT GROUP,LLC PROPERTY OWNER: CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
12 January 12, 2011 Public Hearing APPLICANT: TAILWIND DEVELOPMENT GROUP,LLC PROPERTY OWNER: CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH STAFF PLANNER: Faith Christie REQUEST: Conditional Change of Zoning (from PD-H1 Planned
More informationCITY OF MERCER ISLAND DESIGN COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
CITY OF MERCER ISLAND DESIGN COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Agenda Item: 2 March 9, 2011 Project: Description: Applicant: DSR11-004 The applicant is requesting approval to replace the existing exterior wood framed
More informationI Street, Sacramento, CA
REPORT TO PLANNING COMMISSION City of Sacramento 12 915 I Street, Sacramento, CA 95814-2671 To: Members of the Planning Commission PUBLIC HEARING March 10, 2011 Subject: El Dorado Savings Sign Variance
More informationRESOLUTION NO
RESOLUTION NO. 2018- RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BELMONT APPROVING A SINGLE-FAMILY DESIGN REVIEW AND TREE REMOVAL PERMIT FOR A VACANT LOT ON LOWER LOCK AVENUE (APN: 043-042-750,
More informationPLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT APRIL 7, 2016
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT APRIL 7, 2016 TO: FROM: Members of the Planning Commission Talyn Mirzakhanian, Senior Planner FILE NO.: 160001710 PROPOSAL: APPLICANT: RECOMMENDATION: A request for a
More informationCITY OF LAGUNA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT DESIGN REVIEW BOARD IBOARD OF ADJUSTMENT Coast Highway APN
CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT HEARING DATE: October 13,2011 TO: DESIGN REVIEW BOARD IBOARD OF ADJUSTMENT CASE: Variance 7717 Design Review 11-163 Coastal Development
More informationAgenda Report Meeting Date 11/02/16. Architectural Review (Wildwood Estates Townhomes)
Architectural Review and Historic Preservation Board Agenda Report Meeting Date 11/02/16 REPORT DATE: October 24, 2016 File: AR 16-19 TO: FROM: RE: Architectural Review and Historic Preservation Board
More information4030 COMMERCIAL (C AND CM)
4030 COMMERCIAL (C AND CM) 4030.10 Intent and Purpose The C and CM districts are intended to permit the range of commercial uses in areas which are appropriate for such uses consistent with the General
More informationDesign Review Application *Please call prior to submittal meeting to determine applicable fees*
CITY OF EAGLE 660 E. Civic Lane, Eagle, ID 83616 Phone#: (208) 939-0227 Fax: (208) 938-3854 Design Review Application *Please call prior to submittal meeting to determine applicable fees* FILE NO.: CROSS
More informationThe broad range of permitted and special uses allowed in the district remain, but some descriptions have been clarified.
Memorandum To: Emily Fultz, AICP City Planner, City of Edwardsville From: Michael Blue, FAICP Principal, Teska Associates Date: January 24, 2019 RE: B-1 Zoning District Update A draft, updated B-1 Central
More informationUrban Design Brief December 23, 2015 Southside Construction Group Official Plan & Zoning By-Law Amendment
Urban Design Brief Proposed Official Plan & Zoning By-Law Amendment 3244, 3263 and 3274 Wonderland Road South Southside Group December 23, 2015 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page No. INTRODUCTION... 1 SECTION 1 LAND
More informationRezoning Petition Zoning Committee Recommendation August 1, 2017
Rezoning Petition 2017-090 Zoning Committee Recommendation August 1, 2017 REQUEST LOCATION SUMMARY OF PETITION PROPERTY OWNER PETITIONER AGENT/REPRESENTATIVE COMMUNITY MEETING STATEMENT OF CONSISTENCY
More informationThe Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission Prince George's County Planning Department Development Review Division
The Maryland-National Capital Park and Planning Commission Prince George's County Planning Department Development Review Division 301-952-3530 Note: Staff reports can be accessed at www.mncppc.org/pgco/planning/plan.htm.
More informationAWH REPORT OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR APPLICATION FOR REZONING ORDINANCE TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT
AWH REPORT OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT FOR APPLICATION FOR REZONING ORDINANCE TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT MAY 8, 2014 The Planning and Development Department hereby forwards to the Planning
More informationARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA
ARLINGTON COUNTY, VIRGINIA County Board Agenda Item Meeting of October 23, 2004 DATE: October 6, 2004 SUBJECT: SP #106-3 Site Plan Amendment for changes to façade, plaza deck, landscaping, number of units,
More informationHarmony Technology Park Third Filing, Second Replat Custom Blending, Project Development Plan/Final Development Plan - FDP #130021
ITEM NO FDP #130021 MEETING DATE July 23, 2013 STAFF Pete Wray ADMINISTRATIVE TYPE I HEARING STAFF REPORT PROJECT: APPLICANT: OWNER: Harmony Technology Park Third Filing, Second Replat Custom Blending,
More informationResolution : Exhibit A. Downtown District Design Guidelines March 2003
Resolution 03-011: Exhibit A Downtown District Design Guidelines March 2003 DOWNTOWN DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES CITY OF SOUTHLAKE, TEXAS Adopted March 2003 1 DOWNTOWN DISTRICT DESIGN GUIDELINES Adopted
More informationMayor Leon Skip Beeler and Members of the City Commission. Anthony Caravella, AICP, Director of Development Services
CITY COMMISSION BRIEFING & Planning Board Report For Meeting Scheduled for June 7, 2012 Inner Room Cabaret Site Plan/Architectural Review Downtown Overlay District/Primary Downtown Area Site Plan Consent
More information5.7 Design Criteria for the Private Realm Organization of Private Realm Design Standards and Guidelines Guidelines vs.
5.7 Design Criteria for the Private Realm The Private Realm (shown in Exhibit 5.7a) includes the privately owned property not included in the Setback Realm described in the previous section. It encompasses
More informationPLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT NOVEMBER 15, 2012
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT NOVEMBER 15, 2012 TO: FROM: Members of the Planning Commission Michael Klein, Associate Planner FILE NO.: 120000890 PROPOSAL: APPLICANT: Request for an Administrative
More informationAgenda Item. Applicant Logan Virginia Properties, LLC Property Owners Byler Azalea, LLC & Gateway Free Will Baptist Chuch
Applicant Property Owners Byler Azalea, LLC & Gateway Free Will Baptist Chuch Public Hearing March 14, 2018 City Council Election District Kempsville Agenda Item 6 Request Conditional Rezoning (B-2 Community
More informationArchitectural Review Board Report
Architectural Review Board Report To: From: CC: Subject: Architectural Review Board Architectural Review Board Meeting: May 21, 2018 Agenda Item: 8-A Grace Page, Senior Planner Stephanie Reich, AIA, LEED
More informationKASPER. City of Georgetown, Texas PUD Planned Unit Development. December 30, 2015 Revised January 27, 2016
KASPER City of Georgetown, Texas PUD Planned Unit Development December 30, 2015 Revised January 27, 2016 Applicant: Sentinel Land Company, LLC 4910 Campus Drive Newport Beach, CA Prepared by: SEC Planning
More informationCHAPTER ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS IN THE NC, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONE
CITY OF MOSES LAKE MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 18.31 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS IN THE NC, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONE Sections: 18.31.010 Purpose 18.31.020 Minimum Lot Area 18.31.030 Setbacks 18.31.040 Maximum
More informationPLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT Date: June 2, 2016
# 9 ZON2016-01032 PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT Date: June 2, 2016 DEVELOPMENT NAME JJT Properties LLC LOCATION 1147 & 1151 East I-65 Service Road South and 1180 Sledge Drive (Southeast corner
More informationChapter 11. Industrial Design Guidelines 11.1 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE 11.3 SITE PLANNING GUIDELINES 11.2 GENERAL DESIGN OBJECTIVES
Chapter 11 Industrial Design Guidelines 11.1 INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE The following industrial/design guidelines seek to assure high quality development in Santa Ana s industrial districts by: The design
More information7 November 12, 2014 Public Hearing
7 November 12, 2014 Public Hearing APPLICANTS & PROPERTY OWNERS: DAVID C. & JUDITH L. MARTIN STAFF PLANNER: Graham Owen REQUEST: Change of Zoning from AG-2 Agricultural to Conditional B-2 Community Business
More informationCHAPTER 13 DESIGN GUIDELINES
CHAPTER 13 DESIGN GUIDELINES Section 1300.00 Section 1300.01 Design Guidelines Purpose The purposes of this section are to: A. The purpose of this Section is to establish procedures and standards to serve
More informationCITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G.3 STAFF REPORT August 18, 2015 Staff Contact: Peyman Behvand (707)
CITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G.3 STAFF REPORT August 18, 2015 Staff Contact: Peyman Behvand (707) 449-5140 TITLE: REQUEST: VISTA CROSSINGS PLANNED SIGN PROGRAM AMENDMENT PLANNED
More information4 January 11, 2012 Public Hearing APPLICANT:
. 4 January 11, 2012 Public Hearing APPLICANT: MID-ATLANTIC AUTO PROPERTY OWNER: DZR, LLC STAFF PLANNER: Leslie Bonilla REQUEST: Conditional Use Permit (truck rental, automobile service, and automotive/bulk
More informationVILLAGE OF CLEMMONS PLANNING BOARD DRAFT STAFF REPORT
VILLAGE OF CLEMMONS PLANNING BOARD DRAFT STAFF REPORT PETITION INFORMATION Docket # C-226 Staff Megan Ledbetter Petitioner(s) JBJH Properties, LLC Owner(s) JBJH Properties, LLC Subject Property 5892-49-1766
More information13. New Construction. Context & Character
13. New Construction Context & Character While historic districts convey a sense of time and place which is retained through the preservation of historic buildings and relationships, these areas continue
More informationHistoric District Commission Staff Report November 4 th & 18 th, 2015
Historic District Commission Staff Report November 4 th & 18 th, 2015 Page 1 of 36 8. 54/58 Ceres Street (Minor HVAC units (roof-mounted)) 9. 67-77 State Street (Minor Revise windows and doors) 10. 143
More informationPLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Date: April 5, 2018
PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT Date: April 5, 2018 DEVELOPMENT NAME SUBDIVISION NAME LOCATION Robert Myers Robert Myers 2955 and 2989 Dauphin Street (Southeast corner of Dauphin Street and Sage Avenue) CITY
More informationHighway Oriented Commercial Development Criteria
7.6 HOC-1 Highway Oriented Commercial District A. Statement of Purpose The Highway Oriented Commercial District (HOC-1) is intended to provide for the development of high density retail and service businesses
More informationMONTGOMERY COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT
MONTGOMERY COUNTY PLANNING DEPARTMENT THE MARYLAND-NATIONAL CAPITAL PARK AND PLANNING COMMISSION MCPB Item No.: Date: 5-03-18 Pike and Rose, Phase I: Site Plan Amendment No. 82012002D Rhoda Hersson-Ringskog,
More informationARTICLE 9: LANDSCAPING AND FENCING REQUIREMENTS
ARTICLE 9: LANDSCAPING AND FENCING REQUIREMENTS Section 9.01 Intent The intent of the landscaping requirements are to improve the appearance of lot areas and soften paved areas and buildings; to provide
More informationFLORIN ROAD CORRIDOR Site Plan and Design Review Guidelines Checklist
FLORIN ROAD CORRIDOR Site Plan and Design Review Guidelines Checklist Applicant s Name: Project Address: Phone: Email: Applicant shall fill out the design guidelines checklist for all guidelines applicable
More informationU.S. Highway 377 North Overlay District. 1. General Purpose and Description
U.S. Highway 377 North Overlay District 1. General Purpose and Description The purpose of the U.S. Highway 377 North Overlay District is to implement the recommendations within the U.S. Highway 377 North
More informationREZONING APPLICATION MPD SUPPLEMENT
REZONING APPLICATION MPD SUPPLEMENT For Staff Use Only: DATE/TIMESTAMP: ZA# RECEIVED BY: The intent of the Master Planned District (MPD) designation is to allow flexibility in the design and construction
More informationPLANNING APPROVAL & SIDEWALK WAIVER STAFF REPORT Date: December 1, 2016
PLANNING APPROVAL & SIDEWALK WAIVER STAFF REPORT Date: December 1, 2016 NAME Dennis P. Wilkins LOCATION. CITY COUNCIL DISTRICT District 6 7078 Bruns Drive (Northeast corner of Bruns Drive and Cody Road)
More information8 October 14, 2015 Public Hearing
8 October 14, 2015 Public Hearing APPLICANT & PROPERTY OWNER: PRICE S HOLDINGS, LLC STAFF PLANNER: Karen Lasley REQUEST: A. Conditional Use Permit (Automobile Repair Garage) B. Change in Nonconforming
More informationDEVELOPMENT CONTROLS MEDICAL DISTRICT
6.01. GENERAL DESIGN GUIDELINES A. Site Planning B. Architectural Design C. Medical Facility Signage & Lighting D. Exhibit 48. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN CONCEPTS 6.02. MEDICAL FACILITY STANDARDS & GUIDELINES
More informationUrban Planning and Land Use
Urban Planning and Land Use 701 North 7 th Street, Room 423 Phone: (913) 573-5750 Kansas City, Kansas 66101 Fax: (913) 573-5796 Email: planninginfo@wycokck.org www.wycokck.org/planning To: From: City Planning
More informationCITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G. 1 STAFF REPORT August 4, Staff Contact: Tricia Shortridge (707)
CITY OF VACAVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION Agenda Item No. G. 1 STAFF REPORT August 4, 2009 Staff Contact: Tricia Shortridge (707) 449-5140 TITLE: REQUEST: LONGS / CVS DRIVE-THRU PHARMACY & REMODEL TIME EXTENSION
More informationChapter 4: Jordan Road Character District
4: Jordan Road Character District 4.1 Introduction The Jordan Road character district encompasses much of the former Jordan orchard and farmstead, which was a significant part of Sedona s history. The
More informationWatertown City Council
City of Watertown Watertown City Council April 14 th, 2015 Agenda Item: City Comment on Sun Share CUP Application Request for Action: Motion to Approve City Comments regarding CUP Application Department:
More informationHistoric District Commission Staff Report May 3 rd, 2017
Historic District Commission Staff Report May 3 rd, 2017 Page 1 of 26 ADMINISTRATIVE ITEMS / OLD BUSINESS: Administrative Approvals: 1. 39 Mount Vernon Street (HVAC) - Approved 2. 133 Islington Street
More informationRequest Modification of Conditions (Automobile Service Station) Staff Recommendation Approval. Staff Planner Jimmy McNamara
Applicant Larae Tucker Property Owner Doswell Ventures, LLC Public Hearing May 10, 2017 City Council Election District Princess Anne Agenda Item 3 Request Modification of Conditions (Automobile Service
More informationRequest Modification of Proffers Approved by City Council on May 8, 2012 Modification of Conditions (Mini- Warehouse) Staff Recommendation Approval
Applicant & Property Owner Salem Lakes Storage, LLC, a VA Limited Liability Company Public Hearing February 8, 2017 City Council Election District Centerville Agenda Item 4 Request Modification of Proffers
More informationApproved: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5, :30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL
Approved: CITY OF ARDEN HILLS, MINNESOTA PLANNING COMMISSION WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 5, 2015 6:30 P.M. - ARDEN HILLS CITY HALL PLANNING CASES A. Planning Case 15-016; Final Planned Unit Development Arden Plaza;
More informationSTAFF REPORT FOR STANDARD COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT #CDP FEBRUARY 26, 2015 CPA - 1 PO BOX 238 APTOS, CA 94001
STAFF REPORT FOR STANDARD COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT #CDP 2014-0030 FEBRUARY 26, 2015 CPA - 1 OWNER/APPLICANT: AGENT: REQUEST: HANS HEIM PO BOX 238 APTOS, CA 94001 JAMES HAY PO BOX 762 MENDOCINO, CA 95460
More information14825 Fruitvale Ave.
REPORT TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION Meeting Date: August 26, 2015 Application: PDR14-0017 Location/APN: 14825 Fruitvale Ave. / 397-18-028 Applicant/Owner: Staff Planner: Sin Yong Michael Fossati 14825 Fruitvale
More informationPrepared by: LCT Design Group, LLC 401 North Franklin Street, Suite 5S Chicago, Illinois 60610
Prepared by: LCT Design Group, LLC 401 North Franklin Street, Suite 5S Chicago, Illinois 60610 Existing Conditions Residential Guidelines Future Land Use -East Study Area - West Study Area Existing Conditions
More informationRequest Alternative Compliance to the prescribed criteria of the Oceanfront Resort District Form-Based Code. Staff Recommendation Approval
Applicant & Property Owner Public Hearing February 8, 2017 City Council Election District Beach Agenda Item D1 Request Alternative Compliance to the prescribed criteria of the Oceanfront Resort District
More informationD3 January 14, 2015 Public Hearing
D3 January 14, 2015 Public Hearing APPLICANT: DONALD J. BOUCHER, JR. PROPERTY OWNER: D.J.B. SERVICE CENTER, LLC STAFF PLANNER: Kristine Gay REQUEST: A. Conditional Change of Zoning (I-1 to B-2) B. Conditional
More information1. Consideration of a Notice of Exemption pursuant to Section 15301(e) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.
IV.E. WATERPARK VENTURES, LLC (PROJECT PLANNER: CHRIS BOATMAN) 1. Consideration of a Notice of Exemption pursuant to Section 15301(e) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines. 2. PUBLIC HEARING
More informationR E S O L U T I O N. Single-Family Residence/ Church. 2,488 sq. ft. 2,488 sq. ft. Area Parking Required: Church
R E S O L U T I O N WHEREAS, the Prince George s County Planning Board is charged with the approval of Detailed Site Plans pursuant to Part 3, Division 9 of the Zoning Ordinance of the Prince George s
More information