2016 Planning Board Minutes (729.81KB)

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

2016 Planning Board Minutes (729.81KB) Planning Board TOWN OF BRUNSWICK 336 Town Office Road Troy, New York 12180 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING HELD JANUARY 7, 2016 PRESENT were RUSSELL OSTER, CHAIRMAN, TIMOTHY CASEY, MICHAEL CZORNYJ, FRANK ESSER, KEVIN MAINELLO, DAVID TARBOX, and VINCE WETMILLER. ALSO PRESENT was WAYNE BONESTEEL, P.E., Review Engineer to the Planning Board. Chairman Oster welcomed the members to the 2016 term of the Brunswick Planning Board, and also congratulated Member Wetmiller on being appointed to an additional seven year term on the Planning Board. The draft minutes of the November 19, 2015 meeting were reviewed. Upon motion of Member Czornyj, seconded by Member Wetmiller, the minutes of the November 19, 2015 meeting were unanimously approved without amendment. Chairman Oster noted that the Planning Board meetings that had been scheduled for December 3 and December 17, 2015 were cancelled due to lack of agenda items, and therefore no minutes of those meetings will be prepared. The first item of business on the agenda was the site plan application submitted by PF Management Group for property located at 668 Hoosick Road. The applicant is seeking to demolish two existing buildings and construct two new commercial buildings for an Aldi grocery store and a Taco Bell restaurant at this location. Chairman Oster noted for the record that the 1 applicant had contacted the Town, indicating that it was completing all of the application documents, including any updates to the site plan together with the full environmental assessment form and other application documents, and will be submitting those documents within the next day or so, and that the applicant has requested that the matter be placed on the January 21 agenda for consideration. It is also noted for the record that the Brunswick Zoning Board of Appeals did grant the area variances for parking in connection with this project, both in terms of total number of parking spaces as well as parking space size. The Zoning Board of Appeals granted these variances at its meeting held December 21, 2015. It was also noted that the sign variance applications for this project pending before the Zoning Board of Appeals were adjourned without date at the consent of the applicant, subject to action on the site plan by the Planning Board. It is also noted that the applicant has requested that at the January 21 meeting, if the Planning Board deems the application materials to be complete and adequate, that a public hearing be scheduled for the February 4 meeting of the Planning Board on this site plan application. That request will be considered by the Planning Board at the January 21 meeting. The next item of business on the agenda was a sketch plan submittal for a major subdivision submitted by Henry Reiser for property located at 10 Plante Lane (Tax Map No. 104.-3-14). The total size of this parcel is 371 acres, and the applicant is seeking approval for a total of 13 lots, with 12 residential lots, including 11 new building lots ranging in size from approximately 5 acres to approximately 5.5 acres, with 1 residential lot of approximately 60 acres on which an existing house is located, with a remaining undeveloped lot totaling approximately 258 acres. Access to the new residential building lots is proposed off Penny Royal Lane and Plante Lane. The Planning Board members generally reviewed the sketch plan layout, noting that the Board will need to address the issue of driveway access onto the proposed residential lots from both Penny Royal 2 Lane and Plante Lane. The Planning Board will also need to determine whether Plante Lane and Penny Royal Lane are Town roads that are owned by the Town or constitute user roads. The Planning Board noted that the issue of non-realty subdivision lots will need to be addressed. The Planning Board also noted that it will need to address a 60 foot reserved access on lot 11 to adjacent property as noted on the sketch plan. This matter is tentatively placed on the January 21 meeting, subject to receipt of all required application fees. Chairman Oster updated the Planning Board members on the status of the consultant analysis on the issue of a proposed emergency access road in connection with the Oakwood Property Management PDD site plan. Chairman Oster noted that the Planning Board’s consultant on this issue is now working directly with the applicable fire departments and is hopeful that the consultant’s report will be completed within the next few weeks. Member Czornyj updated the Planning Board members on the use of computer software in the Brunswick Building Department to monitor project conditions which the Planning Board attaches to site plans and subdivisions, to ensure that these conditions are being complied with during construction. The index for the January 7, 2016 meeting is as follows: 1. PF Management Group – site plan – 1/21/2016 2. Resier – major subdivision sketch plan – 1/21/2016 (tentative) The proposed agenda for the January 21, 2016 currently is as follows: 1. PF Management Group - site plan 2. Reiser - Major subdivision sketch plan (tentative) 3 Planning Board TOWN OF BRUNSWICK 336 Town Office Road Troy, New York 12180 MINUTES OF THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING HELD JANUARY 21, 2016 PRESENT were RUSSELL OSTER, CHAIRMAN, MICHAEL CZORNYJ, FRANK ESSER, KEVIN MAINELLO, DAVID TARBOX, and VINCE WETMILLER. ABSENT was TIMOTHY CASEY. ALSO PRESENT was WAYNE BONESTEEL, P.E., Review Engineer to the Planning Board. Chairman Oster reviewed the agenda for the January 21 meeting. The draft minutes of the January 7, 2016 meeting were reviewed. Upon motion of Member Czornyj, seconded by Member Wetmiller, the minutes of the January 7, 2016 meeting were unanimously approved with no amendment. The first item of business on the agenda was a site plan application submitted by PF Management Group for property located at 668 Hoosick Road. The applicant is seeking to demolish two existing buildings at this location, and construct two new commercial buildings to be used as an Aldi grocery store and a Taco Bell restaurant. David Leon of PF Management Group was present. The Planning Board noted that it had received a response from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation to the lead agency coordination notice that had been circulated. The response from the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation stated that NYSDEC had no objection to the Brunswick Planning Board serving as SEQRA lead agency on this action. The Planning Board noted that no response had been received from the 1 New York State Department of Transportation or the Rensselaer County Department of Health to the SEQRA lead agency coordination notice, and that more than 30 days has elapsed since the service of that SEQRA lead agency coordination notice, so that no other involved agency has objected to the Brunswick Planning Board serving as SEQRA lead agency on this action. Chairman Oster asked Mr. Bonesteel to discuss the status of his review of the application documents. Mr. Bonesteel stated that the Town received additional application documents on January 11, 2016, including updated site plans, a long Environmental Assessment Form, highway plans, a stormwater pollution prevention plan, a traffic report, geotechnical information, and a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment Report. Mr. Bonesteel stated that he has begun the review of all of these documents, and that he is still in the process of completing his review. Mr. Bonesteel stated that he has been corresponding with the project engineer, Chris Kambar of APD Engineering, and that full written comments on the application materials will be completed before the next Planning Board meeting in February. Mr. Bonesteel did note that the traffic study is being reviewed by the New York State Department of Transportation. Mr. Leon stated that the NYSDOT was not continuing its review of the traffic study and proposed traffic improvements until a SEQRA lead agency has been declared. Chairman Oster stated that the Planning Board could proceed to declare SEQRA lead agency status at this meeting. Chairman Oster wanted to review the variances which have been granted by the Brunswick Zoning Board of Appeals regarding the parking spaces. Mr. Leon confirmed that the Brunswick Zoning Board of Appeals had granted variances both with respect to the total number of parking spaces, as well as the size of the parking space. The Zoning Board of Appeals approved a parking space of 9 feet by 18 feet in size, rather than 200 square feet, or 10 feet by 20 feet, as set forth in the Brunswick Zoning Code. Mr. Leon noted that the cross-easements for parking and traffic circulation between this project site and the 2 existing Planet Fitness site was considered by the Brunswick Zoning Board of Appeals, and is provided in the application documents. Mr. Bonesteel stated that the cross-easements are noted on the project plans, but the easement documents themselves had not been provided. Attorney Gilchrist requested that Mr. Leon provide the Planning Board with copies of the easement documents. Member Czornyj asked about fill material which had been brought to the project site in the area of the proposed Aldi grocery store and whether any core drilling had been completed. Mr. Bonesteel stated that the geotechnical report did describe fill in the area of the proposed Aldi grocery store, including loose fill, bricks, and cinder block materials. Mr. Bonesteel also stated that the geotechnical report did provide recommendations on compaction requirements prior to construction in this location. Mr. Bonesteel also noted that the geotechnical report identified the soils classification for this fill material as “landfill” material. Member Wetmiller commented that he remembered materials being deposited to the rear of that site when it was used as a gas station back in the 1970s, and thought that the material was from demolition work associated with constructing the Collar City bridge.
Recommended publications
  • Trends and Challenges in Brownfield Revitalization: a Gis Based Approach
    XVII International Scientific Conference on Industrial Systems (IS'17) Novi Sad, Serbia, October 4. – 6. 2017. University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Technical Sciences, Department for Industrial Engineering and Management Available online at http://www.iim.ftn.uns.ac.rs/is17 TRENDS AND CHALLENGES IN BROWNFIELD REVITALIZATION: A GIS BASED APPROACH Jelena Ignjatić (Urban and Spatial Planning Institute of Vojvodina, Železnička 6/III, Novi Sad, 21000 Serbia, [email protected]) Bojana Nikolić (University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Technical Sciences, Trg Dositeja Obradovića 6, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia, [email protected]) Aeksandar Rikalović (University of Novi Sad, Faculty of Technical Sciences, Trg Dositeja Obradovića 6, 21000 Novi Sad, Serbia, [email protected]) Abstract Brownfield sites have negative effects on the spatial, economic, environmental and social aspects of community life. During the past decades, examples of good practice around the world showed that the revitalization of brownfields contributed to material and non-material prosperity, and the realization of a sustainable economic and social development. Once large corporations, who represented the foundation of economic development of Vojvodina, Serbia, are now mainly devastated and powerless to independently find a solution for revitalization. Investors are faced with the problem of non-defined, disorganized and unregulated locations, but primarily with the lack of associated database, which would shorten the process of selecting the most suitable location. To activate brownfield sites, it is necessary to pinpoint these locations, and conduct a detailed analysis. When it comes to trends in revitalization of brownfields in the practice of other countries, the use of geographic information systems (GIS) has proven to be one of the most effective tools for visualization of attributes of the brownfields in terms of socio-economic factors, the environment, and the immediate surrounding of the location.
    [Show full text]
  • Growing Smarter in Plymouth's Fifth Century; Master Plan 2004-2024
    i PLYMOUTH PLANNING BOARD LORING TRIPP, Chair PAUL MCALDUFF NICHOLAS FILLA, Vice Chair WENDY GARPOW, ALTERNATE LARRY ROSENBLUM MALCOLM MCGREGOR PLYMOUTH MASTER PLAN COMMITTEE (2004) ENZO MONTI, Chair JOHN MARTINI RUTH AOKI, Vice Chair LARRY ROSENBLUM AILEEN DROEGE IRA SMITH SASH ERSKINE LORING TRIPP ELAINE SCHWOTZER LUTZ CHARLES VANDINI PREVIOUS MEMBERS OF THE MASTER PLAN COMMITTEE THOMAS BOTT JAMES MASON TERRY DONOGHUE MARY MULCAHY WILLIAM FRANKS DON QUINN ROBERTA GRIMES ROBERT REIFEISS REBECCA HALL TOM WALLACE GERRE HOOKER BRIAN WHITFIELD LOUISE HOUSTON MARK WITHINGTON TOM MALONEY DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT LEE HARTMANN, AICP MASTER PLAN CONSULTANT MICHAEL PESSOLANO EDITING AND GRAPHIC DESIGN: GOODY, CLANCY & ASSOCIATES Photos: Larry Rosenblum Paul McAlduff Goody Clancy Thanks to everyone in Plymouth who helped create the Master Plan. GROWING SMARTER IN PLYMOUTH’S FIFTH CENTURY Town of Plymouth, Massachusetts Master Plan, 2004–2024 Plymouth Planning Board Master Plan Committee August 2006 Table of Contents VISION STATEMENT FOR PLYMOUTH, MASSACHUSETTS MASTER PLAN OVERVIEW 1. LAND USE 2. NATURAL RESOURCES 3. OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION 4. HISTORIC AND CULTURAL RESOURCES 5. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 6. PUBLIC FACILITIES/SERVICES 7. TRANSPORTATION APPENDIX: MAPS vi Vision Statement for Plymouth, Massachusetts In 20 years, the Town of Plymouth will be a beautiful, maturing community with vibrant and pleasant village centers, a preserved and enhanced historic heritage, long stretches of accessible coastline, integrated areas of commerce and compact housing, and vast, connected areas of open space set aside for preservation, outdoor activities, and appreciation of nature. Plymouth will retain its outstanding visual character, de- fined by clean ponds, rivers, wetlands, coastline, and forests.
    [Show full text]
  • An Exploratory Study of Awareness and Perceived Relevance of Gis Among General Contractors in the Usa
    www.itcon.org - Journal of Information Technology in Construction - ISSN 1874-4753 AN EXPLORATORY STUDY OF AWARENESS AND PERCEIVED RELEVANCE OF GIS AMONG GENERAL CONTRACTORS IN THE USA SUBMITTED: November 2018 REVISED: June 2019 PUBLISHED: July 2019 at https://www.itcon.org/2019/18 EDITOR: Amor R. Anne Arendt, Associate Professor; Utah Valley University, Department of Technology Management [email protected] Armen Ilikchyan, Assistant Professor; Utah Valley University, Department of Technology Management [email protected] Robert Warcup, Associate Professor; Utah Valley University, Department of Construction Technologies [email protected] SUMMARY: This document analyzes the awareness and perceived relevance of geographic information systems and related technologies by construction industry general contractors via an exploratory survey of individuals in the field. A quantitative survey was developed based on an extensive literature review and meta-analysis. The survey was then administered at the Association of General Contractors (AGC) 2018 convention in New Orleans, LA. Eighty-eight construction industry related individuals participated. When asked if they were familiar with GIS, a tool for organizing data so it can be displayed and analyzed based on its geospatial characteristics, 32.95% (n=29) said they were not, 57.95% (n=51) said they were, and 9.09% (n=8) did not respond to the question. The researchers further assessed respondents who stated yes to familiarity with GIS or left it blank in depth. Within this group, the greatest perceived relevance was in property and site survey maps (4.37 average), digital mapping (4.22 average), engineering surveys (3.95 average), and topographic or planimetric mapping (3.95 average).
    [Show full text]
  • HAILEY WOODS Urban Planning Portfolio
    HAILEY WOODS Urban Planning Portfolio 1 Hailey Woods CONTACT INFORMATION EDUCATION JOB EXPERIENCE 1212 W. Rex Street Bachelors of Urban Planning Muncie, Indiana 47304 and Development Chillers Microcreamery [email protected] Ball State University May 2011-August 2016 - Shift Manager (502) 468-2030 Historic Preservation Minor Responsibilities include overseeing co-workers, customer service, handling complaints and solving problems, and training new employees SKILLS RELEVANT EXPERIENCE Emens Auditorium Software Floyd County Planning Office August 2014-Current - Ticket Sales Associate • ArcGIS May 2016-August 2016 Responsibilities included interacting with the • InDesign Planning Intern community, customer service, answering phones, and sales • Photoshop • Contributed demographic • Microsoft Office research and analysis for updated • Community Analyst by ESRI comprehensive plan REFERENCES • SketchUP • Designed document template using InDesign for the Comprehensive Don Lopp Plan Urban Planning Director of Planning and Operations • Developed alternative site plans for • Conducting site analysis a community center and baseball (812) 948-4110 • Researching and analyzing park [email protected] census data • Developing alternative Bachelors of Urban Planning and Trevor Young solutions Development Capstone Project Owner of Chillers Microcreamery August 2016-December 2016 (812) 987-1298 • Writing initiatives, memos, PLAN 401 Field Studio [email protected] and reports • Creating goals and • Served on a team of students to Lisa Dunaway, AICP, LEED AP objectives create an Urban Redevelopment Instructor of Urban Planning • Collaborating with Plan for the City of Portland, Indiana (765) 285-1906 • Conducted surveys and interviews [email protected] community members with residents • Public Participation • Participated in 4 community • Public Speaking meetings throughout the semester 2 3 CONTENTS 01. Urban Infill Project Phase 1: Analysis | 8 Phase 2: Alternatives | 10 Phase 3: Final Proposal | 12 02.
    [Show full text]
  • Site Plan Instructions P1
    Planning Division Submittal Requirements PLAN INSTRUCTIONS PROJECT DRAWINGS: The following drawings and information must be included with your application submittal. Note that in the City of West Hollywood, drawings must be prepared and certified by licensed design professionals (Architect and Landscape Architect) and engineering professionals (Surveyor, Civil Engineer, Structural Engineer, Soils/Geotechnical Engineer, Seismic Engineer, etc.) In accordance with State Law, professionals are not permitted to stamp and sign documents or drawings that have not been prepared by them under their direct supervision. Please note that larger projects are subject to the Concurrent Plan Check Process. 1. ARCHITECTURAL DRAWING CONVENTIONS a. Provide north indication arrow, and orient plans with north toward the top (if possible); b. Plan must be drawn to scale, with scale indicated. Use Engineer’s or Architect’s scale: 1” = 10’, 1/4” = 1’, etc.; c. Indicate demolished walls with dashed lines, walls to remain as solid lines and new walls filled; d. Provide correct submittal date on all drawing sheets; e. Use line weights properly-(i.e. heaviest for elements that are cut through, lightest for transparent elements, door swings, etc.); f. Show stairs accurately with arrows indicating direction; g. Show all property lines. Do not use edge of paper for property lines. 2. PROJECT DATA (should be included on cover sheet or site plan sheet) a. Include Index Sheet with all plan sets; b. Address and legal description of subject property; c. Name, address and phone number of the applicant, owner and architect; d. Existing and proposed land use and number of stories; e. Building square footage ; f.
    [Show full text]
  • A History of Residential Development, Planning, and Zoning in Arlington County, Virginia
    A History of Residential Development, Planning, and Zoning in Arlington County, Virginia April 2020 Acknowledgements This report would not have been possible without the guidance and feedback from Arlington County staff, including Mr. Russell Danao-Schroeder, Ms. Kellie Brown, Mr. Timothy Murphy, and Mr. Richard Tucker. We appreciate your time and insights. Prepared by Dr. Shelley Mastran Jennifer Burch Melissa Cameron Randy Cole Maggie Cooper Andrew De Luca Jose Delcid Dinah Girma Owain James Lynda Ramirez-Blust Noah Solomon Alex Wilkerson Madeline Youngren Cover Image Source: https://www.flickr.com/photos/arlingtonva/29032004740/in/album-72157672142122411/ i Table of Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................................................................................ i Prepared by ......................................................................................................................................................................................................... i Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................................................................................. ii Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................................................................................... iii Key Findings ...............................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Recommended Drawing Numbering, Scales and Dimensioning 1 / 3
    Recommended Drawing Numbering, Scales and Dimensioning 1 / 3 Architectural Drawings: General: G101 Cover Sheet G102 General Information G201 Live Safety Plan Civil: C100 Site Topo Plan C200 Demolition Plan C300 Site Staking/Signing/Striping/Erosion Control Plan C400 Grading & Drainage Plan C500 Utility Plan Landscape: I‐1 Irrigation Plan I‐2 Irrigation Details L‐1 Landscape Plan L‐2 Landscape Details Architectural: AC01 Overall Architectural Site Plan AC02 Enlarged Architectural Site Plan AC03 Site Plan Details A001 Finish Schedule & Legend A002 Opening Schedule, Elevations A101 Floor Plan A102 Dimension Plan A103 Lower Roof Plan A104 Upper Roof Plan A105 Canopy Plan and Details A111 Enlarged Floor Plans A201 Exterior Elevations A201 Exterior Elevations A301 Building Sections A302 Building Sections A311 Wall Sections A312 Details – Curved Roof A313 Details – Curved Roof A316 Wall Partition Types A321 Plan Details A331 Section Details A332 Typical Details and Profiles A341 Roof Details A351 Interior Column Details A401 Interior Elevations A402 Interior Elevations A501 Reflected Ceiling Plan A601 Equipment Plan Recommended Drawing Numbering, Scales and Dimensioning 2 / 3 The recommendation scales* for key architectural drawings are as follows: Site plan – engineering scale 1:20 or similar, depend upon size of site Arch Floor Plan – 1/8” Arch Ceiling Plan – 1/8” Arch Roof Plan – 1/8” or 1/16” – (try to show roof as one drawing view) Interiors Floor Finish Plan – 1/8” Interiors Furniture Plan – 1/8” Enlarged Arch Floor Plans – ¼” or larger as needed (typically the toilet rooms) Arch Exterior Elevations – 1/8” Arch Building Section – ¼” or ½” if needed for a specialty area (ie lobby) Arch typical wall sections – ¾” Wall types (wall sections or plan views) – 1 ½” Details ‐ Plan and Section – 1 ½” or 3” Interior Elevations – ¼” or 3/8” as needed *Note: set up each drawing on a 42” x 30” page.
    [Show full text]
  • How to Create a Site Plan Site Plan: a Drawing of a Property As Seen from Above, Including, but Not Limited to a North Arrow, Grand Tree Locations, and Date
    How to create a Site Plan Site Plan: A drawing of a property as seen from above, including, but not limited to a north arrow, grand tree locations, and date. Show proposed improvements with exact size, shape and location of all existing and proposed buildings and structures, parking areas, driveways, walkways and patios. 1 Use a Scale Choose a standard scale, either an Architectural or Engineering Scale and note the numeric scale used on plan (i.e. 1 inch = 20 feet). Draw Property Lines 2 Label all dimensions in feet. A plat of the neighborhood may help you in determining the dimensions of the parcel. This may be available Show the property lines from the RMC office of the county in and note the dimensions. which the property is located. Draw all Buildings and Structures on the Plan 3 • Show existing buildings and structures as a solid line and all additions as a dashed line. • Be sure to show the precise footprint of all buildings or structures including, but not limited to steps, decks, porches, fences, bay windows and HVAC platforms. Draw Driveway and Parking on the Plan 4 Show all parking areas, driveways, walkways and patios in their precise locations in relation to your property lines and with their accurate foot- print. Show proposed paved areas with a dashed line. Locate Grand Trees 5 • A Grand Tree is a tree with a diameter at 4 1/2 feet above grade that is 24 inches or greater. • Use a dot to indicate the precise location of the center of the tree.
    [Show full text]
  • Maps and Meanings: Urban Cartography and Urban Design
    Maps and Meanings: Urban Cartography and Urban Design Julie Nichols A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy The University of Adelaide School of Architecture, Landscape Architecture and Urban Design Centre for Asian and Middle Eastern Architecture (CAMEA) Adelaide, 20 December 2012 1 CONTENTS CONTENTS.............................................................................................................................. 2 ABSTRACT .............................................................................................................................. 4 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ....................................................................................................... 6 LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................................. 7 INTRODUCTION: AIMS AND METHOD ........................................................................ 11 Aims and Definitions ............................................................................................ 12 Research Parameters: Space and Time ................................................................. 17 Method .................................................................................................................. 21 Limitations and Contributions .............................................................................. 26 Thesis Layout ....................................................................................................... 28
    [Show full text]
  • Site Plan for Central Park and Field
    Response to Request for Proposals Glencoe Park District Site Plan for Central Park and Field in collaboration with: Primera Engineers, Ltd.; Nova Engineering and FRS Design April 1, 2015 McCaslin Park: West Chicago, Illinois April 1, 2015 Board of Commissioners c/o Lisa Sheppard, Executive Director Glencoe Park District 999 Green Bay Road Glencoe, Illinois 60031 RE: Central Park and Field Dear Lisa, The Central Park and Field initiative is an amazing opportunity to create local-pride, community nostalgia and a sports-legacy for many generations! Central Park is one of Glencoe Park District’s “beating-hearts” in your open-space system, and soon to be a renewed contributor to the quality of life in Glencoe! We want to help your leadership team achieve this important goal. Consequently, we hope you will find that, in close collaboration with our engineering partners, the Hitchcock Design Group team has a better approach, better resources and better experience necessary to accomplish your vision. Better Approach Our entire team is dedicated to Creating Better Places® to play for the Glencoe Park District. Now that your Comprehensive Master Plan is completed, we will maintain our team’s strong commitment to the implementation of your objectives and deliver a consistent look, feel, brand and quality level, in a community-driven fashion, to your high-priority capital improvements. Specifically, we want to help you create Central Park and Field improvements that are not only more 225 W. Jefferson Avenue attractive, but are genuinely sustainable – not just environmentally, but functionally, culturally and Naperville, Illinois 60540 economically, as well.
    [Show full text]
  • I. What Is a Site Plan Review? Site Plan Review Is a Process Where the Construction of New Buildings, New Additions, and Certain
    I. What is a Site Plan Review? Site Plan Review is a process where the construction of new buildings, new additions, and certain types of canopies and/or tax-exempt institutions are reviewed by the City Planning staff and the City Council. The City reviews the new site in order to improve the functionality or mitigate any potential adverse impacts of the proposed development on neighboring properties. The end result of the process is for the applicant to obtain a special use permit. II. What Type of Development Requires Site Plan Review? There are five situations where a site plan review is required: All New Developments This does not include single or two-family dwellings. Substantial Additions Additions to buildings, or new accessory buildings, when a) the addition or new accessory building is greater than 25% of the existing principal building; b) the addition or new accessory building exceeds 1,000 square feet in gross floor area; c) curb cuts are required; or d) when such new construction reduces existing parking or significantly modifies existing on-site circulation (this does not include single or two-family dwellings). Canopies Canopies constructed over existing walkways, loading docks, or pump islands, where such new construction reduces existing parking or significantly modifies existing on-site circulation. Tax Exemption Person, association, corporation, religious institution, charity or foundation that has been designated by any governmental entity as exempt from payment of any tax levied by the city seeking to purchase or occupy real property in University City per the Municipal Code. Amendments Amendments to any of the above.
    [Show full text]
  • Site Plan Checklist
    HOW TO PREPARE YOUR SITE PLAN The #1 reason for delays in approving permit applications is incomplete Site Plans. Please refer to checklist inside. A site plan is needed to review your development proposal for zoning, addressing, sanitation, and building requirements. Producing a complete site plan will take a little time, but time spent now will speed up your application process later. YOUR SITE PLAN MUST BE ON AN 11” X 17” SHEET OF PAPER. ALL OTHER SIZES WILL BE REJECTED. (No blue print stock) • Please, use the blank form provided in this guide • I Five Tips Before You Start N 1 Talk to a Planner Prior to submitting a development application, meet with a planner to discuss potential land use issues and required setbacks. F • Planners are available from 9:00 am to 4:00 pm Monday thru Friday, or you can call 682-3577. O 2 Check Your Records To help you create your site plan, get a copy of the Assessor’s tax map that shows your property configuration, as well as other sources of information such as aerial photos, deed and title records, an appraiser’s report, or surveys. 3 Tools You Will Need G Before beginning, you will need an engineer’s scale, for measuring distances, scaling your site plan and to serve as a straightedge. An engineer’s scale can be purchased at an office supply store. Use a pencil or pen. U 4 Draw to a Scale Divisible by 10 I A uniform drawing scale is important to accurately display how various elements of your development proposal fit together.
    [Show full text]