1359 BEACH AVE RESO23-0118 ARCH LETTERFrom: archfsa@gmail.com
Date: February 28, 2024 at 11:52:37 AM EST
To: Michael Munn <michael@teammunn.com>, John Goelz <johnhgoelz@gmail.com>, Patricia Goelz
<goelz1359@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: Public Works site meeting
Michael, et al:
The impervious areas were carefully measured and are shown on the site plan. The new impervious areas are equal to the
pre-project existing impervious areas as the City said that the impervious area cannot be increased. This is also the case of
the original submitted site plan which was based on an earlier survey. A revised site plan based on the updated survey
was submitted to replace the original with the new impervious areas again equal to the existing impervious areas. The
runoff calculations (Delta volume calculations) are also shown below the site plan. The site plan as revised shows the
”net zero pervious coverage” he is requesting.
The site plan submitted was a pdf which he can print at any size or enlarge on his computer screen. We never received a
request for a full size site plan. He will have to advise on what scale he wants the full-size site plan to be. The 1”=20’
scale site plan submitted is the typical scale for residential site plans. We can provide one if necessary.
A site plan was never submitted for this project showing an increase in the net impervious coverage.
We really hope this helps.
From: Michael Munn <michael@teammunn.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2024 7:53 AM
To: John Goelz <johnhgoelz@gmail.com>; Patricia Goelz <goelz1359@gmail.com>; Terry Simmons
<archfsa@gmail.com>
Subject: Public Works site meeting
Good morning team,
I got the below review notes back from Public Works. Essentially he is looking for a net zero pervious coverage
calculation on the site plan OR a plan for keeping surface water on property (you have probably seen some of
these tiny retention ponds in people’s front yards…they are silly and do not actually work in the real world.).
I have a call-in to Derrick Martin, the public works guy, requesting a site meeting to work through a realistic
plan and get past his approval process. Go to Field measure all of the existing paving out by the street so that we
are certain we are getting mitigation credit for any of that that gets removed. I would love for all of us to be
there for the site meeting if that is in any way possible but we also want to push to get this meeting done as soon
as possible. I will keep you all posted as soon as I have something set so that we can all try to be there. The
ultimate solution may require reducing some of the paver area in the courtyard between the buildings but we
want to be sure he has accounting for the entire site. There is no practical way to have a retention area between
the cottage and the street, the street sits lower than the rest of the property. to come to some kind of accord with
this guy and he is not picking up what we are putting down with the current site plan. Ultimately, I think we will
need to do an overlay site plan strictly to demonstrate the previous ratio and a high-level surface water sketch. I
know we are wearing you out Terry and I truly appreciate your patience and responsiveness. As soon as we
have an idea of what this guy will approve, I will do a sepia overlay sketch and send it to you so we can get
your blessing and stamp.
Just so you know, the two triggers for this requirement are if we are pushing past the previous coverage, ratios,
and/or if the overall improvement is more than 50% of the value of the structure. The problem in this case is
they are only calculating the value of the structure and not the land. so it is easy to argue that the cost of the
improvement is more than 50% of the value of the cottage structure alone. It would not be the case if you were
taking the value of both structures, but that is not how they are interpreting it.
I really thought we were past all this, but it’s going to take a face-to-face meeting with Derek Martin to get us
on the same page. I will let you all know as soon as I reign him in and get a site meeting appointment so that we
can tackle him if possible. Also print out full size sheets for us to reference and bring them for the meeting.
Best,
Michael