Evidence of Breach of Condition 2 - Planning Applications: HS/FA/12/00952
|
|
- Sharleen Harvey
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Evidence of Breach of Condition 2 - Planning Applications: HS/FA/12/ The development hereby permitted shall be carried out in accordance with the following approved plans: 11/396/1/A, 11/396/2 1. Enforcement on this area would depend ultimately on a standard of evidence sufficient to satisfy a court. The view of our Legal Service is that this may be challenging. Could you please forward your evidence to Mrs Barkshire-Jones so she can assess it in this context. The normal course of events in a case like this is to request reinstatement. Introduction: This document has been produced at the request of Hastings Borough Council, as it has been stated that the Council cannot make enforcement action stand without sufficient evidence of breaches of planning conditions that would stand up in Court. This document covers the breach of Condition 2 that was attached to planning permission HS/FA/12/ It has been confirmed that the proposed development to build a two storey holiday let, on the site of a previously demolished bungalow, does not conform to the approved plans. A retrospective planning application to regularise the building was submitted on 15 May 2014 and in spite of the case officer s recommendation for approval, was refused unanimously by members of the planning committee on 18 June Since the planning committee meeting it has been determined that the building does not even conform to the amended plans and is in fact 55 cm taller than the revised plans. It has been stated by the Development Control Manager that the amendments outlined on drawing number /06A were in his opinion truly minor but the undisclosed height difference from the revised plans cannot be classed as minor and a Planning Contravention Notice was issued on 1 July The site owners, Mr and Mrs Guilliard, were given 21 days to respond to the notice and at this stage it is unknown what their response has been. We have been informed that the site owners have two options open to them to regularise the building: 1. To take the refused application, HS/FA/14/00406 to appeal, and to let the Secretary of State determine whether the application should have been approved. 2. To submit another retrospective planning application for the height difference that was not outlined in the previously refused retrospective planning application. It is our opinion, after taking external advice, that a further retrospective planning application, to address the height difference only, will not regularise the other amendments to the building that have been completed without planning permission. A retrospective planning application for all amendments, including the height difference could be submitted as it is a revised plan, but it could not be classed as a minor amendment. It is our opinion that the developers had no intention of conforming to the approved plans (11.396/1/A) and that amended plans, submitted with planning application: HS/CD/13/00792, was always intended to be their baseline. A revised drawing, /03, dated March 2013, was submitted on 8 October 2013 with a Discharge of Condition Application in respect of Conditions 4 and 5 of planning application: HS/FA/12/
2 Application: HS/CD/13/00792 Discharge of Condition 4 (colour and render) and Condition 5 (screening) of application HS/FA/12/00952 Paid: Application Dated: 8 Oct 2013 Application Received: 9 Oct 2013 Application not validated until 31 Dec 2013 as there was no submitted evidence regarding tree screening and no sample of render included. Not sure why the application was submitted for discharge other than they had already started the development 1 October Drawing dated March 2013 Amendments marked in red wiggly lines. Proposed dedicated parking Space New foul drainage to be connected to existing system Rainwater harvesting system to be connected to existing rainwater waste system incase [sic] of overflow Proposed refuse storage area Proposed ramped access approach to principal entrance Paved area serving disabled access and refuse collection to be drained into new surface water system via gulleys Proposed refuse storage area Where access ramps are provided ensure ramps are laid to a fall of no greater than 1:12 and individual flights no longer than 5m for gradients. Ramp is to have an unobstructed width of at least 900mm. Finished surface to be firm and even and finished in a non-slip material 2
3 Only one tree is shown on North East corner. Amendment proposals are already shown on the new plans, and the balcony area has been extended. South West Elevation Balcony Extended North West Elevation Balcony Extended North East Elevation Balcony Extended South East Elevation Balcony Extended Car parking space included on corner of existing building Approved Drawing /1/A has been marked as Superseded ; this is incorrect as drawing number: /03 had not been approved through the planning process. 3
4 Drawing B - Dated March 2013 Amended as per LABCO requirements Jan 14. Amendments marked in red wiggly lines. Additional amendments that are outside of the redline area of the proposed two storey holiday let are included on this drawing. Existing FW & SW system connected to existing sewer - not included on /03 Proposed paved area serving route from dedicated parking space to building entrance to be laid to a maximum gradient no greater than 1:12 and individual flights no longer than 5m for gradients. All routes to have an unobstructed width of at least 900mm. Finished surface to be firm and even and finished in a non-slip material not included on /03 Paved access to Holiday Let shaded in green - not included on /03 Proposed tree and foliage screening as per Planning Officers requirements - not included on /03 South West Elevation Windows Removed. Parking space as /03 Additional tree screening is included on this drawing but they do not relate to the garden area of the proposed property and relate to additional screening on an adjacent site. The disabled access has not been approved but the case officer has agreed that the screening proposal is acceptable. The proposed tree and hedge screening is not within the redline area of the site and is not part of the approved plan: /1A. 4
5 HS/FA/14/ Variation of condition 2 (approved plans) of planning permission HS/FA/12/ Minor amendment showing change of ground floor plan, additional & altered window positions & extended balcony. (Retrospective) Rocklands Private Caravan Park, Rocklands Lane, Hastings, TN35 5DY Application Dated: 14 May 2014 Application Received: 15 May 2014 Consolation Period: 16 May June 2014 Application Fee: Neighbour Notification List: 2 Households; 36 Collier Road, Rocklands Cottage (which is owned by the Guilliards) Consultees: Highways, Bins HWAONB, Arch, Natural England, English Heritage Application Validated: Notes: 2 nd Neighbour Notification List: 2 Households; 36 Collier Road, Rocklands Cottage (which is owned by the Guilliards) plus the 25 people who had written in prior to the drawings being changed. Consultation Period: 21 May June 2014 later confirmed to be 13 June 2014 Drawing number: /06, dated May 2014, was originally submitted with planning application HS/FA/14/00406 The following amendments were marked in red wiggly lines and were outside of the redline area of the planning application to be determined: Existing FW Flow connected to twin pumping system (4300L) with 24hr backup system connected to existing sewer Proposed dedicated parking space Rainwater harvesting system overflow to be connected to mains sewerage system as land deemed unsuitable for soakaways wording revised from connection to rainwater waste system to mains sewerage system 5
6 Proposed paved area serving route from dedicated parking space to building entrance to be laid to a maximum gradient no greater than 1:12 and individual flights no longer than 5m for gradients. All routes to have an unobstructed width of at least 900mm. Finished surface to be firm and even and finished in a non-slip material Proposed area provided for emergency service vehicle - not included on /03 or 03B South West Elevation French Doors changed to Windows; Windows Overlooking Hastings Country Park Removed this appears to be incorrect as recent photographs show that there are definitely two windows facing the East Hill. This conforms to the approved plans, so it is unknown why the subsequent amended plans removed the window from the plans when it is evidentially still there. North West Elevation New Windows Installed to Overlook Rocklands Park The recess to the south west elevation of the ground floor has been squared off, enlarging bedroom 2. The previously approved French doors leading out onto a terraced area have now been replaced with a window and the terraced area has been deleted. Even though planning regulation has been updated, and new legislations have been brought in that make the planning procedures simpler and allow a previously approved planning permission to be varied, or amended, the local planning department still has to make regard to published government guidelines. It was obvious from this retrospective planning application, to vary Condition 2 of the Planning Approval HS/FA/12/00952, that government guidelines had not being followed and that this application should have been submitted as a new standalone planning application albeit to be decided under section 73A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 as it was a retrospective planning application. There is no record of its consideration of the proposed amendment and how the Local Planning Authority reached the conclusion that it should have been treated as minor? The application had been submitted retrospectively, and there was no record of a pre-application consultation taking place prior to the application being registered. The Local Planning Authority stipulate that pre-application discussion are mandatory, between the applicant and the planning department, so it can be determined whether the amendments are non material or material or whether an application for full planning permission should be sought. There were amendments included on the plans that were included on the previously submitted Discharge of Conditions application HS/CD/13/00792 that were irrelevant to the application on the table. These amendments, some of which were highlighted with red wiggly lines, were not included within the application description and were not noted on any documentation. At the time of the application being submitted it was not understood whether these amendments were requested retrospectively or whether they were additional amendments to be considered as part of this application HS/FA/14/ The submitted plans were unclear, and did not contain either text on the drawing or additional documentation that explained what the exact changes were that differed from the approved plans. The significance of the changes was played down as being insignificant when they were significant increases which would have taken them out of the remit of minor material amendments. There were no exact measurements on the drawings only scale drawings which were measured with a scale ruler. Location plan This should be based on an up-to-date map at an identified standard metric scale (typically 1:1250 or 1:2500, but wherever possible the plan should be scaled to fit onto A4 or A3 size paper) and detailed enough to identify sufficient roads and/or buildings on land adjoining the application site to ensure that the exact location of the application site is clear. The site of the development must be edged or shaded in red 6
7 and any other adjoining land owned or controlled by you edged or shaded blue. A north point must be shown on the plan. Block plan (the same as the location plan but on a larger scale) A block plan should be submitted. The legislation requires three copies plus the original (unless submitted electronically). The block plan should be drawn at an identified standard metric scale (1:200-1:500). It should accurately show: a) The direction of North b) The proposed development in relation to the site boundaries and other existing buildings on the site, with written dimensions including those to the boundaries and the following, unless these would NOT influence or be affected by the proposed development: 1) All the buildings, roads and footpaths on land adjoining the site including access arrangements 2) All public rights of way crossing or adjoining the site 3) The position of all trees on the site, and those on adjacent land 4) The extent and type of any hard surfacing and 5) Boundary treatment including walls or fencing where this is proposed Floor plan and elevations These plans should be at a scale of not less than 1:100. They should indicate clearly what is proposed and how it relates to the existing dwelling. The elevation drawings should show: What each side of the newly altered building would look like (known as the elevations) Indicate the size and type of windows, doors etc The external building materials to be used The extension must be highlighted by colour or shading The floor plans should: Identify the existing uses of the rooms in the building, e.g. lounge, kitchen, bedroom etc. and also the intended use of the new room(s) Dimensions (external) are only required for the extension Where a single storey extension is to be added to a two-storey building, only the floor with the extension need be detailed The extension must be highlighted by colour or shading The materials to be used (roof, elevation, windows and doors) must be described by type and colour; the easiest way is just by 'Roof to be tiles to match existing' or 'Windows to be painted soft wood'. In certain circumstances, such as an extension on the side of a building, it may be necessary to produce a 'street scene' (i.e. a drawing showing the original property, the extension and the adjoining buildings as viewed from the road) so that the impact of the new extension on the street can be considered. For some simple extension, a single drawing showing both the existing and the new works may be acceptable, but it is probable easier to produce separate drawings so there is no confusion. The only mention to the dimensions of the amendments submitted for approval was in the case officer s committee report. It is not known how these dimensions were determined as there is no covering letter or from the applicants, and there are no dimensions on any of the submitted drawings. It is also not known whether the sizes were submitted by the applicant or whether they were calculated by the case officer prior to compiling their report. 7
8 Alterations to the previously approved scheme include the following amendments: The ground floor window to the south west elevation, serving bedroom 1 (master bedroom), is to be blocked up and a new window is to be installed at first floor level in the north east elevation. The recess to the south west elevation of the ground floor is to be squared off, infilling an area measuring 1105mm x 3400mm and enlarging bedroom 2. The previously approved French doors leading out onto a terraced area have now been replaced with a window and the terraced area deleted. The balcony to the south west elevation is to be extended by 3.4m, over the enlarged bedroom and it will meet the rear elevation corner. The balcony will now extend along the full depth of the south west elevation. The depth of the balconies to the south east and south west elevations is to be increased in depth from 2m to 2.9m. Additional screening is to be planted to the north west of the building and to sections of the south west boundary. The drawing reflected additional changes from the drawing submitted with application HS/CD/13/00792; an additional window had been installed in the north-east elevation; the ground floor bedroom, on the south-west elevation has been extended and the terrace area removed. The originally proposed French doors had been replaced by a window. Drawing indicated that a window in the south-west elevation on the ground floor was to be negated but in recent photographs taken it is evident that the window is still there. This window conforms to the approved plans, but if the amended planning application had been approved then it would have been unauthorised. South-west Elevation Showing Two Windows 8
9 Text states Window Overlooking Country Park to be Removed The balcony size has been increased to 2.9 metres but the balcony did not extend the full width of the property on the south-west elevation. The property appears to have been cut into the bank and supports installed into the position of the Iron Age Hill Fort. There was no Design and Access Statement submitted with this application, and the original plan /1A, approved under application: HS/FA/12/00952 was not submitted showing the amended changes marked in red. This is the usual practice with amended plans so that the case officer, or interested parties, can see at a glance what changes are to be made that deviate from the approved plans. A new drawing was submitted with the application, drawing number: /06, which was supposedly replaced on 21 May 2014, as the drawing was submitted with errors. The application form, dated 14/05/2014, Section 6 Condition(s) Removal stated: Please state why you wish the condition(s) to be removed or changed: Retrospective Change of Ground Floor Plan, Additional and Altered Window and Extended Balcony If you wish the existing conditions to be changed, please state how you wish the conditions to be varied: To be carried out in Accordance with Amended Plans /6 Drawing: /06 showed additional changes to drawing number /03B dated March North East Elevation shows an additional window with text stating New Window Installed to Overlook Rocklands Park South West Elevation shows existing French doors to be replaced with window Approved French Doors Omitted and New Windows Installed /06 shows the proposed ground floor plan where the terrace area outside of bedroom two has been omitted and bedroom two has been extended on the south-west corner. The area has been marked as a revision but was not clear what the revision were other than it is an extension that does not appear on /1A. The window in bedroom one seems to have been bricked up. The proposed first floor plan shows the increased balcony size. The proposed car parking space has moved to be in line with the existing building Rocklands House. On 21 May 2014, five days into the consultation period, a further drawing was submitted by the applicants as it was discovered that the drawings submitted with the application pack were incorrect and did not reflect the changes to the original approval that needed ratifying. Drawing number: /06A was 9
10 submitted for approval on 21 May 2014, but was not shown on the online system until 10 June 2014 when the officer s committee report was published. This left the objector s at a disadvantage as they were unable to make comments on the new plans as the officer s decision had already been made. The revised drawing shows the amendments to the property marked in red wiggly lines, but there were still no clear descriptions on what was actually proposed. There is a red wiggly line around an opening on the north-west elevation but it is not clear whether it is a door or a window. The drawing showing the north-west elevation seems to show a double door opening but this is not included as an amendment. Recent photographs taken seem to show it as a single door opening and not a double door. Drawing Number: /06 shows the door to be a double door and not a single door The balcony area is shown to extend the whole of the south-east elevation, which was not shown on drawing /06 the balcony on the previous drawing stopped at the position of bedroom 2 on the ground floor and the kitchen on the first floor. This is in the position that the original terrace was before bedroom 2 was extended. There is a balcony support in the south-east corner, which is obviously encroaching on the Iron Age Hill Fort. The trees and shrubs that were on the south-west boundary and to the rear of the property have been stripped bare and there is evidence from Clive Mayhew, the tree specialist that the developers have cut into the bank, and have installed a retaining structure. There was a mention to the developers cutting into the bank on the officer s committee report. 10
11 Drawing Number: /06A, dated May 2014, Showing Extended Balcony There is another amendment to the approved plans which does not seem to have been mentioned or address but the site levels between the existing property Rocklands House and the old bungalow site seems to have been lowered to provide an access route for site machinery. HS/FA/12/ Proposed Demolition of current holiday let and replacement of a new holiday let REFUSED: 19 July 2012 Case Officer: Mrs R Bishop Application Dated: 28 May 2012 Application Received: 29 May 2012 Advertisement Date: 22 June 2012 Consolation Period: 14 Jun Jul 2012 Application Fee: Neighbour Notification List: Rocklands Cottage (which is owned by the Guilliards) Consultees: High Weald AONB; County Archaeology Application Validated: 8 June 2012 Conservation Area: Yes Old Town Policies and Constraints: Ancient Monument East Hill Iron Age Hill Fort High Weald AONB Country Park Planning Portal Reference Number: PP Comment: PP Design and Access Statement mentioned in Application Form not in pack AONB 29/05/12 ok and plotted Julie Site Visit Note Check planning history re higher roof (DCQ?) main building (TT) Check from CP footpath below site Site: Boundary treatment: Level of adjacent property: Hedge to side garden m Shrubs to rear Back/shrubs/trees to north side Back/hedge C2m to front and shrubs Steps from office site' The case officer during a site visit stated that there was a hedge to the side garden that was between 1 and 1.5 metres wide and that there were steps from the office site (Rocklands House). 11
12 The old bungalow was accessed up a flight of five steps, which can be seen in the above drawing numbered: 3318/200.EX, submitted with planning application: HS/FA/08/ It is estimated that the height difference between the two ground levels is between 120 cm to 150 cm. It has to be noted that this is not in fact the rear elevation of the property it is in fact the front elevation of the property. The case officer, when determining this application, was confused as she thought that the secluded garden area was to the rear of the property. An identical drawing to the one above and numbered: 3647-EX was submitted with planning application HS/FA/10/00492, but this time was published in colour. The drawing still states that it is the Rear Elevation and not the front of the property. 12
13 This drawing also numbered: EX was submitted with planning application HS/FA/10/00492 and describes, what was previously recorded as being the Rear Elevation, as being the Front Elevation. Two completely contradicting drawings were submitted with the same application. The above drawing is /2A, which was submitted with planning application: HS/FA/12/00952 and is included on the Decision Notice. This is one of the approved plans. This drawing also shows the ground levels between the two properties to be about 120 cm, which would conform to plan number: EX. 13
14 Above is a photograph of the old bungalow showing the steps leading down to the adjacent property. These steps are mentioned in the officer s delegated report for application: HS/FA/12/00952 To the west of the parking/turning area is a path which leads to a set of steps which give access to the site single storey building which is the subject of this application. Drawing number: /03B shows a disabled access to the new storey property which runs from a proposed dedicated car parking space at the corner of the existing building, Rocklands House. The proposed disabled access is a series of ramps laid to a maximum gradient no greater than 1:12 and that the individual flights are no longer than 5 metres for gradients. It is obvious that these gradients were to accommodate a difference in site levels between the two properties. Recent photographs show that the difference in height levels has been reduced. An eye witness account states that the difference in levels between the two properties to be a slight gradient. There was a gentle gradient running down from the building site to the area outside the Victorian house. It would appear that the height levels between the two properties have been reduced by removing soil from the higher level of the old bungalow and reducing the levelling the Site so that the two properties are 14
15 accessible by a sloped access from the car parking area of the original house. This would explain the reason for the 1 metre/1.5 metre width hedge that was to be increased in Condition 5 of planning approval HS/FA/12/00952, being removed completely. The attached photograph shows that the hedge to be a significant height to stop overlooking from the old bungalow to the existing property. It is stated in a statement made by Mrs Guilliard that her holiday guests liked the secluded garden area and the privacy. This statement is no longer applicable as the garden area is now in full view from the existing property and the adjacent caravan park. The windows on the new property do not conform to the approved plans as it is stated that they are bifolding doors. The design is not considered to be overbearing, and it is considered that the contemporary building with rendered walls and bi-fold doors would be in keeping with the character and appearance of the surrounding area. There is a tree lined bank to the rear and mature dense hedges around and in line with the recommendation in the Heritage Statement a condition has been added to improve screening by planting. This would provide further screening in relation to the existing footpaths. This drawing numbered: /06. The windows in this drawing bear no relationship to what is actually there, see previous drawing. There are 11 sections to the windows on the upper storey and 7 sections on the lower level. The windows actually installed show four sections in each and do not appear to be bifolding doors. 15
16 Above is a photograph showing the hedge screening that separated the existing properties from the old bungalow. It is evidence that the hedge screening was significant to screen the bungalow from the existing properties creating privacy which was enjoyed by Rocklands private holiday guests. The screening to the rear seems to be at the height of the second storey on the adjacent property. This levelling must have involved removing a great deal of soil from the site of the proposed new building, and must have entailed some sort of encroaching on the Scheduled Ancient Monument and interfered with potential archaeologic artefact. Scheduled Ancient Monument - (Iron Age Cliff Castle and site of St George s Churchyard on East Hill SAM 12870) extends from the south-west boundary and across the garden area of the proposed property. Planning application: HS/FA/12/00952 was approved as it was stated by the applicants that the property was to be on the same footprint as the original bungalow and that no landscaping proposals were to be made to the garden area. This is incorrect as the property has been extended significantly and has encroached onto the Scheduled Ancient Monument ; a significant hedge was removed during construction without the benefit of a licence from English Heritage and now there is evidence of a levelling of the site. The unauthorised Solar Panels, installed onto the Scheduled Ancient Monument can be viewed through the hedge. Standalone solar panels installations (panels not on a building) All the following conditions must be observed: Panels on a building should be sited, so far as is practicable, to minimise the effect on the amenity of the area. When no longer needed for microgeneration panels should be removed as soon as reasonably practicable. All the following limits must be met: Only the first standalone solar installation will be permitted development. Further installations will require planning permission. No part of the installation should be higher than four metres The installation should be at least 5 m from the boundary of the property The size of the array should be no more than 9 square metres or 3 m wide by 3 m deep Panels should not be installed within boundary of a listed building or a scheduled monument 16
17 If your property is in a conservation area, or in a World Heritage Site, no part of the solar installation should be nearer to any highway bounding the house than the part of the house that is nearest to that highway. Google Earth Map showing the Solar Panels installed to the north of the old bungalow site. These solar panels were installed without planning permission. Planning Strategy Policies Map The Hastings Local Plan (emerging) Policies map for Rocklands Caravan Park shows the Scheduled Ancient Monument to extend across the garden area of the now demolished bungalow and into the garden area of the existing property, Rocklands House. This is where the row of unauthorised solar panels have been installed. 17
18 This is the Planning Map for Rocklands Caravan Park overlaid onto a Google Earth image. Drawing Number: /06A dated May The red wriggly lines have been removed from the additional amendments proposed within this application. It was stated by the Development Control Manager that these amendments were to be ignored by the planning committee members when forming their decision. This was confirmed by the Borough Solicitor. This advice goes against previous legal opinions from the Council s Counsel, Robert Walton and Planning Consultant, Dick Harman that it is not how the development is described it is what is on the approved plans that matter. 18
19 Richard Harman, Planning Consultant, dated 16 November 2009 My understanding has always been that what is important is what is shown on the approved plans not the description of the development When planning applications in Hawthorn Road, Hastings, TN35 5HW were presented as amendments to a previously approved plan the council s barrister and the council s planning consultant both stated that the FA in the title meant that it had been treated, not as an amendment but as a free standing planning application to be judged in its own right against the Development Plan and other relevant policies. Land at Hawthorn Road, Hastings, Hastings Borough Council - Robert Walton, Landmark Chambers, dated 24 February 2010 In my view, permission HA/FA/08/868 is (like the three other amendment permission referred to under issue 1 above) a free-standing permission capable of implementation. It authorises the development shown on the plans, which are incorporated by reference into the permission. I do not consider the fact that the application was promoted as an amendment to a previous scheme alters this analysis. An additional amendment is proposed in the form of a Proposed area provided for the emergency service vehicle. This amendment is not on the site of the proposed holiday let and is outside of the redline area of the application site. The proposed car parking space has been moved to be in line with the existing property Rocklands House. The revised drawing showed the balcony area to be increased the whole width of the south-west elevation, which was not evident on the previously submitted plan /06. Nowhere within the submitted documentation does it state what type of surface is to be installed under the balcony area on the ground floor level, whether it is to be grassed or have a hard surface of some kind. Archaeology South East did not object to this planning application as they believed that the landscaping to the garden area had been negated. This is obviously incorrect as the ground levels between the two properties have been reduced and the hedgerows on the south-west and north-east boundaries removed. There must have been significant excavations to remove the mature hedgerows and trees. Lynne Okines Save Ecclesbourne Glen Campaign Group 15 September
Rezoning/OCP Amendment Application. Current OCP Designation. Proposed OCP Designation
Development Permit Application Rezoning/OCP Amendment Application Zoning DP Area yes no Variances Requested Development Details Property Size (m² or ha) Current Zoning Current OCP Designation Proposed
More informationCERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS AND CHECK LIST
Certificate of Appropriateness Instructions and Checklist (revised 1/18) SYRACUSE LANDMARK PRESERVATION BOARD CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS APPLICATION INSTRUCTIONS AND CHECK LIST INSTRUCTIONS: Please
More informationSMALL PROJECTS & IMPROVEMENTS: DOG RUNS, PATIO ENCLOSURES & FENCES, EXTERIOR IMPROVEMENTS (Abbreviated Design Review Application)
REVIEW TYPE: PRELIMINARY FINAL LANDSCAPE ABBREVIATED ADDITION COLOR BOARD Application Form* X X X X X Design Review Fee* X X X Registered Survey** X Site Plan X X X X X Floor Plans X X X Elevations X X
More informationAPPENDIX A See rule 3(1) þþ APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 217-C OF THE TAMIL NADU DISTRICT MUNICIPALITIES ACT 1920 TAMIL NADU ACT V OF 1920.
APPENDIX A See rule 3(1) þþ APPLICATION UNDER SECTION 217-C OF THE TAMIL NADU DISTRICT MUNICIPALITIES ACT 1920 TAMIL NADU ACT V OF 1920. From To Sir I intend to construct/reconstruct a building or to put
More informationSITE PLAN, SUBDIVISION & EXTERIOR DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS
INCORPORATED VILLAGE OF ROCKVILLE CENTRE BUILDING DEPARTMENT SITE PLAN, SUBDIVISION & EXTERIOR DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS Presubmission - Prior to a formal submission, the applicant should meet in person with
More informationPlanning Department APPLICANT S CHECKLIST
Planning Department A GUIDE TO LODGING PLANNING APPLICATIONS APPLICANT S CHECKLIST You are advised to complete and submit this checklist in conjunction with your planning application form. It is important
More informationCity of Hamilton INFORMATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
City of Hamilton INFORMATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT There is a $200.00 non-refundable fee for each request. Requests must be completed and submitted to the Public Works Department, City of Hamilton,
More informationPLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
OVERVIEW Effective January 1, 1992 all applications for multi-family residential and all non-residential building permits require site plan approval before permit issuance. All new developments and existing
More informationMailing Address: Fax number: City: State: Zip: Property Owner: City: State: Zip: City: State: Zip:
/ Department of Community Development ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW APPLICATION 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert California 92260 (760) 346-0611 Fax (760) 776-6417 Applicant: Telephone: Mailing Address: Fax
More informationLast Name: First Name: M.I:
ARCHITECTURE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPLICATION OFFICE USE ONLY APPLICATION # Permit # Fee Collected $ 1. Filing Status Initial Submission Amendment Withdrawal 2. Cost of Construction (Industry Standards)
More informationCommunity & Economic Development Department Planning Division Frederick Street PO Box 8805 Moreno Valley, CA SUBMITAL REQUIREMENTS
Community & Economic Development Department Planning Division 14177 Frederick Street PO Box 8805 Moreno Valley, CA 92552-0805 (951) 413-3206 Fax (951) 413-3210 SECOND UNITS Completed and Signed Project
More informationA Householder s Planning Guide for the Installation of Antennas, including Satellite Dishes
A Householder s Planning Guide for the Installation of Antennas, including Satellite Dishes Introduction This booklet is an outline of the planning regulations for antennas in England, and includes the
More informationLARAMIE COUNTY PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT OFFICE 3966 Archer Pkwy Cheyenne, WY Phone (307) Fax (307)
3966 Archer Pkwy Cheyenne, WY 82009 planning@laramiecounty.com Phone (307) 633-4303 Fax (307) 633-4616 SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS 1. Pre-Application Meeting: The applicant shall meet with a Laramie County
More informationAPPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMITS
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY APPLICATION FOR COMMERCIAL/OFFICE/INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PERMITS Fee Submitted File Number Date of Receipt Receipt # Name of Email Mailing Address Postal Code Telephone (B) (H) Fax
More informationSite Plan/Building Permit Review
Part 6 Site Plan/Building Permit Review 1.6.01 When Site Plan Review Applies 1.6.02 Optional Pre- Application Site Plan/Building Permit Review (hereafter referred to as Site Plan Review) shall be required
More informationList of Figures. List of Forms
City of Columbia Engineering Regulations PART 1: SUBMISSION OF PLANS Table of Contents Paragraph Description Page No. 1.1 General 1-1 1.2 Engineer s Report 1-1 1.3 Plans 1-3 1.4 Revisions to Approved Plan
More informationMapping Guidelines - Appendix 5(a)
Mapping Guidelines - Appendix 5(a) Mapping Procedure for Registration of Multistorey Developments Table of Contents 1. Procedure prior to first application for registration... 2 2. Registration of Title
More informationA guidance note on the national standards for the validation and determination of planning applications and other related consents in Scotland
HO OS Heads of lanning Scotland A guidance note on the national standards for the validation and determination of planning applications and other related consents in Scotland Reviewed by Contents 1. Background
More informationYOU ARE ADVISED TO SUBMIT THIS CHECKLIST IN CONJUNCTION WITH YOUR PLANNING APPLICATION
A Guide To Lodging Planning Applications Applicant s Checklist YOU ARE ADVISED TO SUBMIT THIS CHECKLIST IN CONJUNCTION WITH YOUR PLANNING APPLICATION It is important to note that this is for information
More informationTHIRD SCHEDULE Form of Application For A Revised Disability Access Certificate Article 20E(2)
THIRD SCHEDULE Form of Application For A Revised Disability Access Certificate Article 20E(2) Building Control Acts 1990 and 2007 Application for a Revised Disability Access Certificate Building Control
More informationHAMILTON TOWNSHIP Department of Planning and Zoning Application for a Commercial / Industrial Site Plan Review
HAMILTON TOWNSHIP Department of Planning and Zoning Application for a Commercial / Industrial Site Plan Review Date: Application is hereby made for a Site Plan Review for a commercial or industrial use.
More informationProcedure to Petition for Plat Review and Site Plan Review
Economic Development Department (734) 676-7104 or (734) 676-7109 Procedure to Petition for Plat Review and Site Plan Review All site plans shall be submitted to the Economic Development Department to be
More informationCHECKLIST PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION AND PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN
N/A Waiver (1) Four (4) copies of application form. (2) Fifteen (15) copies of plan (3) Subdivision/site plan application fee & professional review escrow deposit (4) Variance application fee & professional
More informationCertificate of Appropriateness (CoA) Checklist
Certificate of Appropriateness (CoA) Checklist This Checklist is intended to assist you in preparing a complete application for submittal. Occasionally, additional items may be required to complete the
More informationApplying for a Site Development Review
Guide What is it? Applying for a Who approves it? ensures that new buildings or land uses are compatible with their sites and with the surrounding environment, other development, and traffic circulation.
More informationPacific Avenue Design Rationale 1155 Pacific Avenue, Kelowna, BC
Design Rationale On behalf of our client, Necessary Homes Inc, we have prepared a Development Permit application for a unit rental multi-family building at The site area of the property is 9 SM and is
More informationPLANNING DEPARTMENT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS CLASS 4 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS. A. Written Material
PLANNING DEPARTMENT 970.668.4200 0037 Peak One Dr. PO Box 5660 www.summitcountyco.gov Frisco, CO 80443 SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS CLASS 4 DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS Per the provisions
More informationC I T Y O F M c K I N N E Y PLANNING
C I T Y O F M c K I N N E Y PLANNING 221 N. TENNESSEE STR EE T, McKI NNEY, TEXA S 75069 CONTENTS Approval Process Flowchart FAQs Letter of Intent Requirements Façade Plan Submittal Checklist Non-Residential
More informationConceptual, Preliminary and Final Site Plan Review in Holladay City
Conceptual, Preliminary and Final Site Plan Review in Holladay City The City of Holladay incorporated in December, 1999 and adopted its own zoning ordinance in May, 2000. All land use decisions are made
More informationWILTON MANORS, Island City 2020 WILTON DRIVE, WILTON MANORS, FLORIDA 33305
WILTON MANORS, Island City 2020 WILTON DRIVE, WILTON MANORS, FLORIDA 33305 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SERVICES (954) 390-2180 FAX: (954) 567-6069 This package includes: General Submittal Procedures Submittal
More informationSITE STATISTICS SQ.FT [ SQ.M.]
SITE PLAN :00 No. 66 ADJACENT STOREY DWELLING LOT AREA GFA SITE STATISTICS 870.77 SQ.FT [777.67 SQ.M.] N 8 00'" E OVERHEAD WIRE '-7 " [760] EXISTING PRIVATE TREE TO BE REMOVED '-" [680] 9'-7" [90] 9'-7
More informationCITY OF MERCER ISLAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES GROUP 9611 SE 36 th Street, Mercer Island, WA (206)
CITY OF MERCER ISLAND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES GROUP 9611 SE 36 th Street, Mercer Island, WA 98040 (206) 275-7605 SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR DESIGN COMMISSION APPROVAL & SIGNAGE APPROVAL PURPOSE: Design Commission
More informationRadiocommunication Facility Review Protocol
Radiocommunication Facility Review Protocol 1.0 PURPOSE 1.1 The purpose of this protocol is to outline the guidelines and review process through which Radiocommunication Facilities are evaluated within
More informationCHAPTER 26 SITE PLAN REVIEW
CHAPTER 26 SITE PLAN REVIEW Section 26.1. Committee. The Planning Commission shall appoint three members of the Planning Commission to the site plan review committee which shall be responsible for site
More informationApplying for a Site Development Review (Sign CVCBD only)
Guide Applying for a Site Development Review (Sign CVCBD only) What is it? Site Development Review ensures that new buildings or land uses are compatible with their sites and with the surrounding environment,
More informationCity of Lompoc Building & Safety Services Section 100 Civic Center Plaza Lompoc, CA Phone: Fax:
City of Lompoc Building & Safety Services Section 100 Civic Center Plaza Lompoc, CA 93436 Phone: 805-875-8220 Fax: 805-875-8198 RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PLANS SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A. APPLICATION PROCESS
More informationSVRA ARCHITECTURAL PERMIT
SVRA ARCHITECTURAL PERMIT NEW HOME, REMODEL, & LANDSCAPING Documents provided by SVRA: Improvement Request Form Materials Description/Certification and Agreement of Owner Sample Plot Plan Current SVRA
More informationDiocese of Down and Dromore REGULATIONS AND CHARGES FOR BURIAL GROUNDS AND GARDENS OF REMEMBRANCE
Diocese of Down and Dromore REGULATIONS AND CHARGES FOR BURIAL GROUNDS AND GARDENS OF REMEMBRANCE These general Diocesan Guidelines will be reviewed triennially by the Diocesan Council. DIOCESAN COUNCIL
More informationLodgement checklist: water heater (solar or heat pump)
Lodgement checklist: water heater (solar or heat pump) GUIDANCE INFORMATION Please provide this checklist with your application Documentation must cover all aspects identified in this lodgement checklist.
More informationOperating Standards Attachment to Development Application
Operating Standards Attachment to Development Application Planning & Development Services 2255 W Berry Ave. Littleton, CO 80120 Phone: 303-795-3748 Mon-Fri: 8am-5pm www.littletongov.org SITE DEVELOPMENT
More informationSite Plan Review Application. Interest in the Property (e.g. fee simple, land option, etc.)
1. Identification CITY OF FENTON 301 South Leroy Street Fenton, Michigan 48430-2196 (810) 629-2261 FAX (810) 629-2004 Site Plan Review Application Project Name Applicant Name Address City/State/Zip Phone
More informationGENERAL REQUIREMENTS (Print or Type) PROJECT DESCRIPTION OWNER CERTIFICATION
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS (Print or Type) Name of Proposed Project: Location of Project: Legal Description of Project (Assessor s Parcel No. or T, R S,): Staff Use Only CASE NO.: RELATED FILES: Applicant s
More informationChecklist for Minor Plan Modification
Checklist for Minor Plan Modification All submittal information shall be provided to the Community Development Department. All submittal information shall be presented along with the Uniform Application,
More informationChecklist for Tentative Subdivision Map
Checklist for Tentative Subdivision Map All submittal information shall be provided to the Community Development Department. All submittal information shall be presented along with the Uniform Application,
More informationTelecommunication Application Form
Page 1 of 5 Fees Total Fee $1130.00 Processing Fee $330.00 *Advertising Deposit $800.00 *Where costs differ from the deposit, the balance will be charged or refunded to the applicant. Description of proposed
More informationARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES
ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES The Providence Series April 2011 **Addendums at the end of document** 6.1m. Houses are to have a consistency of apparent volume. As such, house widths and sizes musht relate
More informationAPPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IN THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW DISTRICT
209 South Main Street Marysville, Ohio 43040 Phone: (937) 645-7350 Fax: (937) 645-7351 www.marysvilleohio.org APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IN THE HISTORIC DESIGN REVIEW DISTRICT *** IMPORTANT
More informationMULTIPLE-FAMILY DESIGN REVIEW SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST
MULTIPLE-FAMILY DESIGN REVIEW SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST This application lists the content and format of the submittal requirements to initiate the Design Review process. An incomplete application will not be
More informationD I O C E S E O F T H E M U R R A Y REGULATION FOR CEMETERIES 2017
D I O C E S E O F T H E M U R R A Y REGULATION FOR CEMETERIES 2017 The list of approved documents are APPROVED DOCUMENTS Lease document to be printed on acid free legal blue paper. Lost Licence Declaration
More informationOperating Standards Attachment to Development Application
Planning & Development Services 2255 W Berry Ave. Littleton, CO 80120 Phone: 303-795-3748 Mon-Fri: 8am-5pm www.littletongov.org Operating Standards Attachment to Development Application 1 SKETCH PLANS
More informationArchitectural Review Application
Architectural Review Application City of Beverly Hills Planning Division 455 N. Rexford Drive Beverly Hills, CA 90210 Tel. (310) 285 1141 Fax. (310) 858 5966 Architectural Review Overview: The Architectural
More informationPromontory Architectural Review Committee
Promontory Architectural Review Committee Design Review Application Purpose The Design Review Process and Application have been established to insure that a proposed project is compatible with historical,
More information1.1 Architectural Drawing No Title Rev
1.0 Drawings 1.1 Architectural Drawing No Title Rev BA2129 PL-001 Site Location Plan - BA2129 PL-002 Existing Site Plan - BA2129 PL-003 Proposed Site Plan - BA2129 PL-004 Proposed Unit Type A - BA2129
More informationDESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPLICATION EXTERIOR PLAN / LANDSCAPE PLAN
209 S. Main Street Marysville, Ohio 43040 Phone: (937) 645-7350 Fax: (937) 645-7351 www.marysvilleohio.org DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPLICATION EXTERIOR PLAN / LANDSCAPE PLAN *** IMPORTANT INFORMATION Please
More informationINTENT An Administrative Site Plan is required for the following situations, excluding single-family detached development:
SECTION 13-400 ADMINISTRATIVE SITE PLAN 13-401 INTENT An Administrative Site Plan is required for the following situations, excluding single-family detached development: A. All development on vacant land
More informationCITY OF EL MIRAGE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PROCESS
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PROCESS Development Applications are reviewed by the El Mirage Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) to ensure Building, Engineering and Zoning compliance before scheduling public
More informationAPPLICATION DESIGN REVIEW Please Print or Type
www.srcity.org ZONING ADMINISTRATOR (ZA) APPLICATION DESIGN REVIEW Please Print or Type DESIGN REVIEW BOARD File # Related Files: LOCATION OF PROJECT (ADDRESS) ASSESSOR S PARCEL NUMBER(S) EXISTING ZONING
More informationAPPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN CONTROL
APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN CONTROL Section 41 of the Planning Act, RSO 1990, as amended A Pre-Application Consultation with City staff is encouraged prior to submission of this application. This application
More information2. As such, Proponents of Antenna Systems do not require permitting of any kind from the Town.
Subject: Antenna Systems Policy Number: Date Developed: 2008/09 Date Approved: April 8, 2009 Lead Department: Planning and Development Date Modified: (if applicable) November 26, 2014 A. PROTOCOL STATEMENT:
More informationCITY OF EL MIRAGE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PROCESS
DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PROCESS I. Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) 1. Submit TAC Review Application (See Page 3 for TAC Review Application Requirements) 2. Review of TAC Review Application by Technical
More informationModifications Committee Guidelines
Modifications Committee Guidelines Changed Jul 13, 10 Changed Apr 12, 11 1 WYNLAKES MODIFICATIONS COMMITTEE Modifications Review Guidelines I. Purpose II. III. IV. Submittal Process A. One step minor work
More informationDESIGN REVIEW PROCESS AND APPLICATION
DESIGN REVIEW PROCESS AND APPLICATION Design review is the first step in the process of any construction project requiring permits. The Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Board is responsible for ensuring
More informationADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
ADMINISTRATIVE PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS DEVELOPMENT DESIGN REVIEW (DDR) Number of Copies Application Form 1 Supplemental Project Information Questionnaire 1 Assessor s Parcel Map (with property outlined)
More informationA GUIDE TO APPLYING FOR A BUILDING PERMIT FOR A DETACHED GARAGE OR ACCESSORY BUILDING
January, 2013 BUILDING DIVISION A GUIDE TO APPLYING FOR A BUILDING PERMIT FOR A DETACHED GARAGE OR ACCESSORY BUILDING This bulletin is for general guidance only. It does not replace by-laws or other legal
More informationNiguel Shores Community Association Architectural Committee (AC) EXTERIOR MODIFICATION SUBMITTAL (EMS) FINAL APPLICATION
Niguel Shores Community Association Architectural Committee (AC) EXTERIOR MODIFICATION SUBMITTAL (EMS) FINAL APPLICATION / / Date Received by NSCA Office / / Submittal Expiration Date Owner s Name: Tract:
More informationSECTION II PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS
SECTION II PLAN SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS A OVERVIEW All plans for construction within the Discovery Bay Property Owners Association DBPOA jurisdiction must be approved by DERC Design Environmental Review
More informationCHICAGO LANDMARKS PERMIT APPLICATION AND PRE-PERMIT SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
CHICAGO LANDMARKS PERMIT APPLICATION AND PRE-PERMIT SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS The Commission on Chicago Landmarks reviews all permit applications for work to designated and proposed Chicago Landmarks and
More informationTOWN OF CLINTON PLANNING BOARD MEETING FINAL MINUTES December 15, 2015
MEMBERS PRESENT Mike McCormack, Chairman Gerald Dolan Tracie Ruzicka Paul Thomas Eliot Werner Secretary Arlene Campbell MEMBERS ABSENT Art DePasqua Robert Marrapodi ALSO PRESENT Dean Michael, Liaison Officer
More informationCity of Massillon Site Plan Checklist
City of Massillon Site Plan Checklist The following information MUST be included with all Site Plans submitted for review and processing in order to constitute a complete Site Plan Package. Incomplete
More information1 copy of all plans in pdf format and I copy of this form must be submitted, or it will be returned because it is an incomplete submittal.
CERTIFIED MANAGEMENT OF AUSTIN 9600 Great Hills Trail, Suite 100E Austin, Texas 78759 (512) 339-6962 frontdesk@cmaaustin.com RIVER PLACE ARCHITECTURAL COMPLIANCE SUBMITTAL ADDITIONS/MODIFICATIONS Date
More informationMinutes of the Meeting Of the Design Review Committee of the Cotton Ranch Homeowners Association March 9, 2016
Minutes of the Meeting Of the Design Review Committee of the Cotton Ranch Homeowners Association March 9, 2016 A Meeting of the Design Review Committee of the Cotton Ranch Homeowners Association, Eagle
More informationModule 5: Plans, dimensions and tolerances
Module 5: Plans, dimensions and tolerances Module Objectives: By the end of this session, participants will understand: 1. Why building plans are necessary and what plans consist of 2. How to read a plan
More informationCITY OF OLIVETTE SITE PLAN AND COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW INFORMATION PACKET
CITY OF OLIVETTE SITE PLAN AND COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW INFORMATION PACKET THE FOLLOWING PACKET CONTAINS: PETITION FOR NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN AND COMMUNITY DESIGN REVIEW SCHEDULE OF DATES
More informationPROJECT ENTITLEMENT APPLICATION
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS (Print or Type) Name of Proposed Project: Location of Project: Legal Description of Project (Assessor s Parcel/Allotment No., Township/Range/Section): Staff Use Only CASE NO.: RELATED
More informationSECTION 2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
SECTION 2 GENERAL REQUIREMENTS 2-1 ENGINEER REQUIRED: All plans and specifications for Improvements which are to be accepted for maintenance by the County and private, on-site drainage and grading shall
More informationContact for the Cemetery: Cllr Dave Bennett: Tel:
Nicky Ashton Clerk to the Parish Council Email: clerk@redlynchparishcouncil.org Tel: 01725 513245 Contact for the Cemetery: Cllr Dave Bennett: e-mail:db.bennett@btinternet.com Tel: 01725 510195 REGULATIONS
More informationFitzherbert Street Mudge Mural Preservation
Appendix 3 16 287 Title: Section: Prepared by: Fitzherbert Street Mudge Mural Preservation Chief Executive's Office Paul Naske (Programme Manager) Meeting Date: 30 June 2016 Legal Financial Significance
More informationApplication for Site Plan Review
Application for Site Plan Review 3275 Central Blvd., Hudsonville, Michigan 49426-1450, 616.669.0200 fax 616.669.2330 It is STRONGLY recommended that any application that must go before the Planning Commission
More informationSITE PLAN APPLICATION
SITE PLAN APPLICATION SECTION 1. APPLICANT/OWNER INFORMATION Please Print or Type Applicant/Developer: City: State: Zip: Telephone: Fax: E-mail: Applicant s Status: (Check One) Owner Tenant Prospective
More informationCity of Miami Planning and Zoning Department UDRB SUBMITTAL CHECK LIST
City of Miami Planning and Zoning Department UDRB SUBMITTAL CHECK LIST One 11 x 17 signed and sealed original set and 11 copies must be submitted to the Planning and Zoning Department inclusive of all
More information5.7 Plan Documentation and Supporting Information.
5.7 and Supporting Information. In any case where the and Supporting Information for a Development Plan requires the submission of a Site Plan, Overall Plan, Landscape Plan, Building Elevations, Sign Plan
More informationArticle 4 PROCEDURES for PLOT PLAN and SITE PLAN REVIEW
Article 4 PROCEDURES for PLOT PLAN and SITE PLAN REVIEW Section 4.01 Purpose It is the intent of this Article to specify standards, application and data requirements, and the review process which shall
More informationPlanning and Zoning Application & Checklist
City of Driggs, Idaho Planning & Zoning 60 S. Main Street PO Box 48 Driggs, ID 83422 Ph: (208) 354-2362 Fax: (208) 354-8522 www.driggs.govoffice.com Planning and Zoning Application & Checklist DESIGN REVIEW
More informationCHAPTER 11 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS
CHAPTER 11 PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS 11.01.00 Preliminary Site Plan Approval 11.01.01 Intent and Purpose 11.01.02 Review 11.01.03 Application 11.01.04 Development Site to be Unified 11.01.05
More informationSUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR USE PROCESS III OR PROCESS IV
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 33325 8 th Avenue South Federal Way WA 98003 253-835-2607; Fax 253-835-2609 www.cityoffederalway.com SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS FOR USE PROCESS III OR PROCESS IV USE PROCESS
More informationMinor Site Plan Review Process
Minor Site Plan Review Process Pre-Application Conference Community Meeting (optional) Submit Application Determination of Completeness Staff Report (optional) Technical Review Committee Decision Notice
More informationArchitectural Review Board Application For Modifications & Renovations
4110 Club Course Drive ~ N. Charleston, SC 29420 Phone: 843-767-9000 ext. 223 Fax: 843-207-7438 poaofficemanager@coosawcreek.com Architectural Review Board Application For Modifications & Renovations Homeowners
More informationPROGRAMMING SCHEMATIC DESIGN DESIGN DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. room) Scalable bubble diagrams schedules describing programmatic
GENERAL SITE PROGRAMMING SCHEMATIC DESIGN DESIGN DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS Scope of work narrative Building code review Description of construction Documentation on drawings as List of applicable
More informationChapel Farm House OAKHANGER I HAMPSHIRE I GU35 9JB
Chapel Farm House OAKHANGER I HAMPSHIRE I GU35 9JB 6 Bedrooms 2 Bathrooms Shower Room Drawing Room Dining Room Family Room Study Barn Room Kitchen/Breakfast Room Laundry/Boot Room Cellar Garden Store Extensive
More information580 - NOISE BARRIERS OPSS 580 INDEX
580 - OPSS 580 INDEX 580.1 GENERAL 580.1.1 Noise Barrier Design Elements 580.1.1.1 Wind-Load Designs 580.1.1.2 Sound-Absorptive Barriers 580.1.1.3 Noise Barrier Colour, Pattern and Texture 580.1.2 Grading
More informationBurial Policies and Procedures 1 Background
Cyngor Cymdeithas NANTGLYN Community Council Burial Policies and Procedures 1 Background Nantglyn Community Council is a burial authority as defined in the Burials Acts 1852-1906 and the Local Authorities
More informationAPPLICATION FOR SITE PREPARATION PERMIT
Engineering Division 550 Landa Street New Braunfels, Texas 78130 (830) 221-4020 1. Subdivision/Plat Name: Location Description/ Nearest Intersection: Acreage: APPLICATION FOR SITE PREPARATION PERMIT No.
More informationCITY OF BURLINGAME - PLANNING COMMISSION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW
CITY OF BURLINGAME - PLANNING COMMISSION SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW Application to the must include certain minimum information before a project can be scheduled for a hearing. The
More informationREPORT OF DIRECTOR OF CITY OPERATIONS AGENDA ITEM: 7 PORTFOLIO: TRANSPORT, PLANNING & SUSTAINABILITY (COUNCILLOR RAMESH PATEL)
CITY OF CARDIFF COUNCIL CYNGOR DINAS CAERDYDD CABINET MEETING: 14 JULY 2016 CARDIFF STATUE AND MONUMENT PROTOCOL REPORT OF DIRECTOR OF CITY OPERATIONS AGENDA ITEM: 7 PORTFOLIO: TRANSPORT, PLANNING & SUSTAINABILITY
More informationNON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS (Print or Type) Name of Proposed Project: Location of Project: Legal Description of Project (Assessor s Parcel No. or T, R,S): Staff Use Only FILE NO.: RELATED FILES: Applicant s Name:
More informationFOUR MARKS PARISH COUNCIL BURIAL GROUND REGULATIONS
FOUR MARKS PARISH COUNCIL BURIAL GROUND REGULATIONS a. These regulations are for the management and control of Four Marks Burial Ground, Brislands Lane, Four Marks, Hampshire GU34 5AF as agreed by the
More informationPLANNING Development Services Department
PLANNING Development Services Department Date Stamp APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CHECKLIST for Design Review Case Number: I acknowledge that the City of Glendale requires the following items be submitted before
More informationPEL CROFT. Hillside. Building. Ridge= Eaves= Building. Ridge= Eaves= Stone wall
207.79 207.67 207.75 207.86 A R R S E N D L A N E 208.00 208.07 207.92 207.89 207.90 207.91 208.08 207.96 208.01 207.95 207.99 CSL101 208.00 208.01 208.16 rass verge Edge of driveway 208.07 Hedge 208.06
More informationPlanning Permission. A Guide: for New Sites for Gypsies & Travellers
Planning Permission A Guide: for New Sites for Gypsies & Travellers Do I need Planning Permission? Planning permission is usually needed for all new homes even if you are not actually intending to build
More informationCITY OF DES MOINES, IA PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER 602 Robert D Ray Drive Des Moines, IA Phone:
CITY OF DES MOINES, IA PERMIT AND DEVELOPMENT CENTER 602 Robert D Ray Drive Des Moines, IA 50311 Phone: 515-283-4200 Minor Site Plan list This checklist should be used as a guide in the preparation of
More information