Laserfiche WebLink
r - — -- '--� -- — <br /> �, c <br />� " � �. � <br /> Jac ueline Bo es �� � � <br /> q <br /> From: Rodney Carriveau <br /> Sent: Tussday, March 27, 20'I8 4:94 PM <br /> To: Jacque(ine Boges <br /> Cc: Bill Burgess;Audrey McGuire; Todd Vandeberg; Shane LeBlanc; <br /> barrett.shadel c�tarmulaconstruction.com;tim.ragers�a fl.usda.gov; info@hallmarkco.com <br /> Subject: RE: village walk , <br /> Attachrtients: Hallmark Village Walk�LC.pdf <br /> Hi Jackie, <br /> I am capying Tim Rogers on this emai(from the USDA,the entity responsible for lending money to the property owner of <br /> this low income praperty. I have put him an alert that this praject is not acceptable to the City. I am also copying the <br /> contractor. Martin Petersen, registered agent of Nallmark Companies that operates Na(Imark Village Wa(k, LLC wil( be <br /> mailed this information and the general informatian email for Hallmark Campanies is copied on this as well. <br /> Below is a list of items that need to be addressed at the above-referenced property prior to Planning signing off on the <br /> project. <br /> 1} What very littie landscaping that was actually planted had died. All deac! Iandscaping shall be replaced and a <br /> ONE YEAR WARRANTY on the landscaping will be provided in order to ensure the plantings are well rooted. <br /> 2} All landscaping that was to be pravided around each of the ajc condenser units shail be installed and,as above, <br /> a ONE YEAR WARRANTY shall be provided by the contractor to ensure they are well raoted. <br /> 3} The parking spaces need ta be repainted, as indicated on site plat� <br /> 4) Some of the ADA accessible ramps are not painted praperly <br /> 5} An ADA ramp is improperly installed and not to accessibility standards <br /> 6) New curbing installed at the dumpster area are broken up at several areas. (I am copying Shane an this email.) <br /> 7} There is a tree stump leaning aver at the entrance ta the community on I�arth Ave. It needs ta be completely <br /> removed and the stump ground down and completely removed. <br /> Numbers listed above have corresponding photos numbered as such and can be located by accessing the link below. All I� <br /> numbers abave with the exception of n�mber 7 were part af the approved site plan dated 20 July 2016. Contractor ( <br /> may need to go back to property owner for this work as it was not noted on the plans, but is necessary. <br /> Please note This is the third time Plannin�has been out to the site, and newly installed items such as the curbing is <br /> � aetuaEly already broken�The site has not been found in conformance with the appraved site plan,and iterris <br /> previously addressed by Staff have not been remedied (landscaping and tree stump, Therefore the applicant is <br /> incurrin�additional review charges from the Citv. <br /> � At this point, Planning has an additiana) 1S ha�rs o�review time, {1.5 x$1�0.00=$225.OtJ} invested in re- <br /> reviewing paor workmanship. Once this project is actually clear from Planning, total hours will be tallied <br /> artd the confiractor�rill be billecf. {$150.00 is stancfard due diligence StafF�vork abov�the site plan review <br /> fees included in the original application.) <br /> I <br /> Thanks, Rod <br /> https:�/www.dropbox.comishlem�9rodkait52czjAAA�leiVtKIV17cF2qtxT9oQYbXa?d1=0 <br /> 1 <br /> � <br />