City of West Palm Beach eGovPlus

Plan Review Details - Project Z13080024

Plan Review Stops For Project Z13080024

Review Stop	B			BUILDING (STRUCTURAL)
Rev No	2	Status	F	Date	09-25-2013			Cont ID
Sent By	rbrown			Date	09-25-2013	Time	17:55	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	rbrown			Date	09-25-2013	Time	17:55	Sent To

Notes

2013-09-25 17:57:32	DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, BUILDING DIVISION,
	COMMENTS:

	COMMENTS FROM PREVIOUS REVIEW HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED
	AT THIS STAGE, BUT MUST ADDRESSED WHEN THE PLANS ARE
	SUBMITTED FOR BUILDING PERMIT. IT IS NOTED THAT THE
	PLANS ARE VERY PRELIMINARY AT THIS STAGE AND ARE NOT
	INTENDED TO SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS BUILDING CODE
	REQUIREMENTS YET. THIS IS NOT A REVIEW FOR FULL
	COMPLIANCE WITH FLORIDA BUILDING CODE.

	ROBERT BROWN
	BUILDING OFFICIAL
	TEL: 561 805 6652
	EMAIL: [email protected]

Review Stop	B			BUILDING (STRUCTURAL)
Rev No	1	Status	F	Date	09-11-2013			Cont ID
Sent By	pleduc			Date	09-06-2013	Time	15:17	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	rbrown			Date	09-11-2013	Time	09:07	Sent To

Notes

2013-09-11 09:28:30	DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, BUILDING DIVISION,
	COMMENTS:

	1. IT IS NOTED THAT THE PLANS ARE VERY PRELIMINARY AT
	THIS STAGE AND ARE NOT INTENDED TO SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS
	BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS YET. THIS REVIEW IS A
	CURSORY REVIEW AS IT RELATES TO THE SITE. IT IS NOT A
	REVIEW FOR FULL COMPLIANCE WITH FLORIDA BUILDING CODE.
	THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS ARE TO BE ADDRESSED FOR
	PERMITTING.

	2. THE PROPOSED BUILDING WILL BE IN A FLOOD ZONE. THE
	LOWEST FLOOR OF THE BUILDINGS AND ALL ASSOCIATED
	MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT (CHILLERS, GENERATORS ETC.) SHALL
	BE EITHER FLOODPROOFED OR ELEVATED TO 6 INCHES
	(FREEBOARD) ABOVE THE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION.

	3. WHEN SUBMITTED FOR PERMIT, THE PLANS SHALL SHOW AT
	LEAST ONE ACCESSIBLE ROUTE, COMPLYING WITH SECTIONS
	206.2 AND 402.2 OF FLORIDA ACCESSIBILITY CODE, FROM THE
	PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY TO ALL ACCESSIBLE BUILDING OR
	FACILITY ENTRANCES.

	4. WHEN SUBMITTED FOR PERMIT, THE PLANS SHALL SHOW AT
	LEAST ONE ACCESSIBLE ROUTE, COMPLYING WITH SECTIONS
	206.2 AND 402.2 OF FLORIDA ACCESSIBILITY CODE,
	CONNECTING ACCESSIBLE BUILDING OR FACILITY ENTRANCES
	WITH ALL ACCESSIBLE SPACES AND ELEMENTS WITHIN THE
	BUILDING OR FACILITY

	5. ANY PART OF AN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE WITH A SLOPE GREATER
	THAN 1:20 SHALL BE CONSIDERED A RAMP AND SHALL COMPLY
	WITH SECTION 405 OF FLORIDA ACCESSIBILITY CODE.

	6. PER SECTION 208.3 OF FLORIDA ACCESSIBILITY CODE
	ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES ARE TO BE LOCATED ON THE
	SHORTEST POSSIBLE ROUTE OF TRAVEL FROM ADJACENT PARKING
	TO AN ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCE FOR EACH BUILDING. THE DESIGN
	OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES SHALL COMPLY WITH SECTION
	502 OF FLORIDA ACCESSIBILITY CODE

	7. PER SECTION 208.2.4 OF FLORIDA ACCESSIBILITY CODE,
	ONE IN EVERY SIX ACCESSIBLE SPACES (AT LEAST ONE) IN A
	PARKING STRUCTURE, SHALL BE ?VAN ACCESSIBLE? AND
	DESIGNED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION OF 502 OF FLORIDA
	ACCESSIBILITY CODE (VERTICAL CLEARANCE NOT LESS THAN 98
	INCHES AT SPACE AND VEHICLE ACCESS ROUTE)

	8. THE TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION FOR THE BUILDINGS SHALL BE
	IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE HEIGHT, AREA AND OCCUPANCY
	LIMITATIONS IN CHAPTER 5 OF THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE

	9. COMPLIANCE WITH ALL BUILDING SEPARATION, PERCENTAGE
	OF OPENINGS AND OPENING PROTECTIVE REQUIREMENTS OF
	CHAPTERS 6 AND 7 OF THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE SHALL BE
	VERIFIED.

	10. ENCLOSED PARKING GARAGES MUST HAVE EXHAUST SYSTEMS
	DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE NOISE LEVELS USING INLINE FAN
	SILENCERS OR OTHER APPROVED METHODS.

	11. ALL APPLICABLE PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED BEFORE
	COMMENCING THE WORK.

	12. FOR STREET ADDRESSING CONTACT JOSH MILLS, GIS
	SUPPORT SPECIALIST ON 561 494 1084

	ROBERT BROWN
	BUILDING OFFICIAL
	TEL: 561 805 6652
	EMAIL: [email protected]

Review Stop	ENG - PPRC			ENGINEERING - PPRC
Rev No	1	Status	F	Date	09-10-2013		Cont ID
Sent By	mgonzale			Date	09-10-2013	Time	Rev Time	8.00
Received By	mgonzale			Date	09-10-2013	Time	Sent To

Notes

2013-09-11 12:24:39	CASE 1445X (Z13080022), 1445Y (Z13080023) AND
	1445Z (Z13080024) RYBOVICH COMMERCIAL MARINE

	WATER
	EXISTING WATER UTILITIES ARE ALREADY LOCATED ADJACENT
	TO THE PROPERTY AND TWO (2) TAPS (16 X 12) AND (8 X 12)
	ARE INDICATED.

	THE PROPOSED 16 X 12 TAP IS SHOWN ON THE 16? DI
	SUBAQUEOUS LINE THAT CROSSES THE INTER COASTAL WATERWAY
	(ICW) AND SERVES THE NORTHERN PORTION OF THE TOWN OF
	PALM BEACH (TPB). A 12" TAP ON THIS LINE MAY CREATE
	PRESSURE ISSUES FOR THE TPB.

	ALSO, THE PROPOSED 8 X 12 TAP MAY NOT PROVIDE ENOUGH
	FLOW/PRESSURE THROUGH THE EXISTING 8" WATER MAIN TO
	PROVIDE SUFFICIENT DOMESTIC/FIRE LINE WATER FLOW TO
	SERVE THE FIVE (5) MULTI STORY CONDOS.

	ADDITIONAL FLOW WOULD BE AVAILABLE FROM THE EXISTING
	20" WATER MAIN THAT RUNS NORTH/SOUTH ON BROADWAY/US 1.
	THIS LINE MAY BE TAPPED VIA 38TH STREET WITH A SHORT
	DIRECTIONAL UNDER THE EXISTING PARKING LOT AT THE
	ELEMENTARY SCHOOL ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE EXISTING
	RYBOVICH MARINE LOCATION.



	SANITARY SEWER
	THE PROPOSED TIE-INS TO THE CITY'S SANITARY COLLECTION
	SYSTEM APPEAR UNDERSIZED BOTH FOR THE PROPOSED AND
	EXISTING FLOW DYNAMICS.

	THE EXISTING SANITARY SEWER LINE COLLECTS GRAVITY AND
	CASCADING FORCE MAIN (FM) FLOWS FROM THE ENTIRE NORTH
	END OF THE CITY EAST OF FLORIDA GULF COAST RAILROAD
	(FGC) AND ALSO ST. MARY?S HOSPITAL. THIS 24" LINE
	EXPANDS TO 36" (AND TO 42") BEFORE A 36" LINE ENTERS
	LIFT STATION 23 (LS 23) AT CURRY PARK WHICH PUMPS TO
	THE CITY'S 14" FORCE MAIN THAT IS DIRECTLY CONNECTED TO
	THE REGIONAL WASTE WATER PLANT (ECR).

	THE PROPOSED TOWERS 3 AND 4 SHOW DOGHOUSE MANHOLE
	CONNECTIONS TO THE 24" GRAVITY MAIN AND THIS WOULD NOT
	BE PREFERRED. THESE FLOWS SHOULD BE COLLECTED BY THE
	EXISTING PRIVATE MASTER LIFT STATION CURRENTLY ON THE
	RYBOVICH SITE.

	THE PROPOSED 4" FM TIE-IN TO THE EXISTING 12" FM IS NOT
	PREFERRED BECAUSE THIS LINE IS A CASCADING FLOW TO THE
	DOWNSTREAM MANHOLE. ADDITIONAL FLOW IN THIS LINE MAY
	CAUSE ADDITIONAL HEAD PRESSURE TO THE DISCHARGE OF THE
	UPSTREAM LIFT STATION 26 (LS26).

	THE NEED FOR SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS FOR
	THIS SITE MAY BE A SUBSTANTIAL CHALLENGE FOR THE CITY
	AND THE DEVELOPER.



	STORM WATER
	THE PROPOSED DESIGN ROUTES ALL COLLECTED STORM FLOWS TO
	THE ICW WITH NO DIRECT IMPACT THE CITY?S STORM WATER
	SYSTEM.

Review Stop	FIRE			FIRE DEPARTMENT
Rev No	1	Status	F	Date	09-06-2013			Cont ID
Sent By				Date	09-06-2013	Time		Rev Time	0.00
Received By	pleduc			Date	09-06-2013	Time	14:49	Sent To

Notes

2013-09-06 15:16:56	ALL ACCESS ROADS APPEAR TO BE DEAD ENDS WITH NO
	EMERGENCY VEHICLE ACCESS TURN AROUND POINTS. ACCESS TO
	THE DOCKS AND INTERIOR PROPERTY POINTS IS CRITICAL FOR
	FIRE AND RESCUE OPERATIONAL TACTICS AND STRATEGIES.

	BUILDINGS AND DOCKAGE FIRE HYDRANT AND FDC LOCATION AND
	IDENTIFICATION WILL BE NECESSARY.

	WATER SUPPLY CAPABILITIES MUST BE EVALUATED IN SUPPORT
	OF FIRE GROUND OPERATIONS AND THAT MEET MINIMUM
	REQUIREMENTS.

	ALL PROPOSED PROJECT EXITING CAPABILITES, CAPACITIES,
	PROTECTED EXIT WAYS, PROTECTED CORRIDORS, SAFE PUBLIC
	WAYS, ETC, REQUIRE CLEAR DISTINCTION AND EVALUATION.



	ALL CONSTRUCTION SHALL MEET THE LIFE AND FIRE SAFETY
	REQUIREMENTS OF THE CURRENT EDITION OF FLORIDA FIRE
	PREVENTION CODE.

Review Stop	L		LANDSCAPING
Rev No	1	Status	Date		Cont ID
Sent By			Date	Time	Rev Time
Received By			Date	Time	Sent To

Notes

***NONE***

Review Stop	PARK		PARKING
Rev No	1	Status	Date		Cont ID
Sent By			Date	Time	Rev Time
Received By			Date	Time	Sent To

Notes

***NONE***

Review Stop	POLICE			POLICE
Rev No	1	Status	F	Date	09-10-2013			Cont ID
Sent By				Date	09-10-2013	Time		Rev Time	0.00
Received By	ktucker			Date	09-10-2013	Time	13:17	Sent To

Notes

2013-09-10 13:21:37	NOT ENOUGH INFORMATION AT THIS TIME FOR A CRIME
	PREVENTION REVIEW: WILL COMMENT WHEN THE APPLICANT
	SUBMITS THE FORMAIL SITE PLAN APPLICATION



	CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL
	PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST BUILDING PERMIT, THE
	APPLICANT SHALL PREPARE A CONSTRUCTION SITE SECURITY
	AND MANAGEMENT PLAN FOR APPROVAL BY THE CITY OF WEST
	PALM BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT CPTED OFFICIAL.
	A. AFTER SITE CLEARING AND PLACEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION
	TRAILERS, THE DEVELOPER/PROJECT MANAGER SHALL INSTITUTE
	SECURITY MEASURES TO REDUCE OR ELIMINATE OPPORTUNITIES
	FOR THEFT. THE MANAGEMENT PLAN SHALL INCLUDE, BUT NOT
	BE LIMITED TO, TEMPORARY LIGHTING, SECURITY PERSONNEL,
	VEHICLE BARRIERS, CONSTRUCTION/VISITOR PASS,
	REDUCE/MINIMIZE ENTRY/EXIT POINTS, ENCOURAGE
	SUBCONTRACTORS TO SECURE MACHINERY, TOOLS AT END OF
	WORK DAY, FENCING WITH SCREENING AND OR ANY OTHER
	MEASURE DEEMED APPROPRIATE TO PROVIDE A SAFE AND SECURE
	WORKING ENVIRONMENT.
	B. THE SECURITY MANAGEMENT PLAN SHALL BE MAINTAINED
	THROUGHOUT THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF THE PROJECT.
	NON-COMPLIANCE WITH THE APPROVED PLAN SHALL RESULT IN A
	STOP-WORK ORDER FOR THE ENTIRE PLANNED UNIT
	DEVELOPMENT.
	C. PROPERTY SHALL BE POST ?NO TRESPASSING? SIGNS EVERY
	500 FEET AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE SITE.

Review Stop	PW		PUBLIC WORKS
Rev No	1	Status	Date		Cont ID
Sent By			Date	Time	Rev Time
Received By			Date	Time	Sent To

Notes

***NONE***

Review Stop	STORM			STORMWATER
Rev No	2	Status	P	Date	10-01-2013			Cont ID
Sent By	tward			Date	10-01-2013	Time	01:20	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	tward			Date		Time		Sent To

Notes

2013-10-01 01:34:04	1. STORM DRAINAGE CONNECTIONS NEED TO BE CLARIFIED FOR
	THE FIRST PROPOSED ONSITE MANHOLE FOR THE CITY'S
	DRAINAGE SYSTEM THROUGH THE SITE (THE MANHOLE EAST OF
	THE DRIVEWAY LANDSCAPE ISLAND. IT APPEARS THERE IS A
	PIPE COMING DUE SOUTH OUT OF THE MANHOLE AND CONNECTING
	TO AN INLET ALONG THE WEST PROPERTY LINE. FROM THIS
	INLET, THERE IS A PIPE TO THE SOUTHEAST THAT CONNECTS
	TO A PROPOSED STORM MANHOLE. THE STORM MANHOLE HAS
	PROPOSED EXFILTRATION TRENCH SOUTH OF THE MANHOLE. THE
	DRAINAGE SYSTEM THEN TURNS TO THE EAST AND CONNECTS TO
	AN EXISTING OUTFALL JUST TO THE EAST-SOUTHEAST OF TOWER
	3. THUS IT APPEARS FROM THE INITIAL MANHOLE IN THE
	DRIVEWAY, WATER CAN FLOW SOUTH THEN EAST TO THE OUTFALL
	SOUTH OF TOWER 3 OR CONTINUE EAST OUT OF THE MANHOLE TO
	THE EXISTING 66" OUTFALL NORTHEAST OF THE EXISTING
	RESTAURANT. THE SOUTH CONVEYANCE WILL BYPASS THE
	PROPOSED POLLUTANT RETARDANT BASIN ON THE 66" OUTFALL
	PIPE.
	2. PERMITS FROM SFWMD AND/OR FDEP WILL BE NEEDED FOR
	THE SITE DRAINAGE SYSTEM AND THE CHANGES TO THE OUTFALL
	PIPE SIZES.
	3. PREVIOUS COMMENTS TO BE ADDRESSED IN LATER
	DEVELOPMENT PROCESS SUBMITTALS TO THE CITY.

	TRACY L. WARD, P.E.
	SENIOR STORMWATER ENGINEER
	ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
	561-494-1120

Review Stop	STORM			STORMWATER
Rev No	1	Status	F	Date	09-11-2013			Cont ID
Sent By	tward			Date	09-11-2013	Time	06:37	Rev Time
Received By	tward			Date	09-11-2013	Time		Sent To

Notes

2013-09-11 06:48:10	1. INDICATE IF PROPOSED PROJECT COMPLIES WITH
	SUPPLEMENTAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS 94-307:
	"ALL DEVELOPMENT SHALL PROVIDE FOR ADEQUATE DRAINAGE
	AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT. COMPLIANCE WITH THE
	STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REQUIREMENTS OF SOUTH FLORIDA
	WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT F.A.C. 40E-4, SHALL
	CONSTITUTE COMPLIANCE WITH THIS PROVISION AND WITH THE
	PROVISIONS OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH
	RELATE TO THE AQUIFER RECHARGE AREAS. PROVIDED,
	HOWEVER, THAT THERE SHALL BE NO NEW DRAINAGE OUTFALLS
	INTO LAKE WORTH."
	2. IT APPEARS ONSITE DRAINAGE SYSTEM SOUTH OF 40TH
	STREET IS CONNECTED TO BOTH THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM FROM
	FLAGLER DRIVE AND TO ANOTHER OUTFALL INTO LAKE WORTH.
	THIS WILL ALLOW BYPASS OF THE STORM CEPTOR STRUCTURE.
	3. DRAINAGE EASEMENT FOR THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM FROM
	FLAGLER DRIVE TO THE OUTFALL WILL BE NEEDED. EASEMENT
	WIDTH AND RELATIVE LOCATION TO STORM PIPES TO BE
	DETERMINED.
	4. PLUG EXISTING 66" OUTFALL AT THE SEAWALL AFTER THE
	FLAGLER DRIVE DRAINAGE SYSTEM IS DIVERTED.
	5. ORIENT PLAN SHEETS TO HAVE NORTH ARROW POINTING IN
	SAME DIRECTION ON THE SHEETS.
	6. SFWMD ERP OR ERP MODIFICATION WILL NEED TO BE
	SUBMITTED TO CWPB ENGINEERING SERVICES BEFORE START OF
	CONSTRUCTION.
	7. SWPPP WILL NEED TO BE SUBMITTED WITH THE ENGINEERING
	PERMIT APPLICATION.
	8. FDEP NPDES CONSTRUCTION PERMIT WILL NEED TO BE
	SUBMITTED TO ENGINEERING SERVICES BEFORE START OF
	CONSTRUCTION.

	TRACY L. WARD, P.E.
	SENIOR STORMWATER ENGINEER
	ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
	561-494-1120

Review Stop	SURVEY			SURVEYING
Rev No	2	Status	P	Date	09-26-2013			Cont ID
Sent By	vnoel			Date	09-26-2013	Time	08:46	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	vnoel			Date		Time		Sent To

Notes

2013-09-26 08:46:14	PASSED BUT CONDITIONAL UPON REPLAT AND SITE/CIVIL
	SUBMITTAL TO ENGINEERING SERVICES.

Review Stop	SURVEY			SURVEYING
Rev No	1	Status	F	Date	09-09-2013			Cont ID
Sent By	vnoel			Date	09-09-2013	Time	08:04	Rev Time
Received By	vnoel			Date	09-09-2013	Time		Sent To

Notes

2013-09-09 08:04:29	1. BOTH PROPERTIES WILL NEED TO BE REPLATTED.
	2. SEPARATE APPLICATION WILL BE NEEDED FOR SITE/CIVIL
	REVIEW AND FOR PLATS.
	3. EXISTING DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT WITH RYBOVICH
	CONCERNING FLAGLER DRIVE WILL NEED REVIEW.
	4. THE INTERIM MARINA PLAN AND EXISTING CONDITIONS PLAN
	APPEAR TO BE THE SAME.
	5. THE SMALL FDOT TRIANGULAR PARCEL ALONG FLAGLER MAY
	NEED TO BE ACQUIRED.

Review Stop	TRAFFIC			TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
Rev No	2	Status	P	Date	11-22-2013			Cont ID
Sent By	jroach			Date	11-22-2013	Time	15:08	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	jroach			Date	11-22-2013	Time	15:08	Sent To

Notes

2013-11-22 15:09:28	PURSUANT TO EMAIL FROM BRIAN COLLINS, CITY TRAFFIC
	ENGINEER, DATED 11/22/2013 (SEE ATTACHED)...

	I HAVE REVIEWED THE LATEST TRAFFIC STUDY, DATED
	NOVEMBER 2013, FOR THE PROPOSED TRG NORTH FLAGLER
	DEVELOPMENT. THIS STUDY ADDRESSES THE COMMENTS AND
	ISSUES PREVIOUSLY RAISED. IF APPROVED, I RECOMMEND THE
	FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:

	CHANGE TRAFFIC FLOW ON 40TH STREET BETWEEN FLAGLER
	DRIVE TO SPRUCE AVENUE FROM ONE-WAY TO TWO WAY.
	APPLICANT TO IMPLEMENT SIGNAL MODIFICATIONS AND CHANGES
	TO SIGNAGE AND STRIPING. PLANS WILL BE SUBMITTED TO,
	AND APPROVED BY, THE CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH
	ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SIGNAL
	MODIFICATIONS TO BE COORDINATED WITH, AND APPROVED BY
	PALM BEACH COUNTY TRAFFIC DIVISION.
	APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT NORTHBOUND LEFT TURN LANE ON
	FLAGLER DRIVE AT 45TH STREET. DESIGN TO BE APPROVED BY
	THE CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC
	WORKS DEPARTMENT.
	APPLICANT WILL WORK WITH STAFF TO DETERMINE SCHEDULING
	OF THE ABOVE IMPROVEMENTS.
	APPLICANT TO BOND AND CONSTRUCT, WHEN WARRANTED, A
	TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT THE INTERSECTION OF FLAGLER DRIVE AND
	45TH STREET. APPLICANT WILL PREPARE TRAFFIC SIGNAL
	WARRANT STUDIES ANNUALLY STARTING AFTER THE FIRST
	OCCUPANCY PERMIT IS ISSUED.

	WITH THESE CHANGES, FLAGLER DRIVE AND ALL STUDY AREA
	INTERSECTIONS ARE PROJECTED TO OPERATE AT AN ACCEPTABLE
	LEVEL OF SERVICE AT FULL PROJECT BUILD-OUT.


	BRIAN A. COLLINS, P.E.
	CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER
	TRANSPORTATION DIVISION
	ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
	CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH

	TEL:(561) 494 - 1040
	FAX:(561) 494 - 1069

Review Stop	TRAFFIC			TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
Rev No	1	Status	F	Date	09-10-2013			Cont ID
Sent By				Date	09-10-2013	Time		Rev Time	0.00
Received By	bcollins			Date	09-10-2013	Time	09:31	Sent To

Notes

2013-09-10 09:37:23	APPLICANT IS PREPARING A TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY. WILL
	MAKE COMMENTS BASED ON REVIEW OF THAT STUDY AND THE
	TRAFFIC IMPACTS IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROJECT, THE
	ORIGINAL CONDITIONS ON THE RYBOVICH APPROVAL RELATING
	TO OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS, AND THE MULTIPLE ACCESS
	POINTS ALONG FLAGLER DRIVE.

Review Stop	Z			ZONING
Rev No	2	Status	F	Date	09-18-2013			Cont ID
Sent By	jroach			Date	09-18-2013	Time	15:04	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	jroach			Date	09-18-2013	Time	15:04	Sent To

Notes

2013-09-18 15:04:55	THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS WERE PROVIDED BY ALEX HANSEN,
	SENIOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNER, REGARDING THE FUTURE
	LAND USE AMENDMENT TRAFFIC ANALYSIS...

	I HAVE THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
	AMENDMENT TRAFFIC ANALYSIS FOR TRG NORTH FLAGLER
	PREPARED BY KIMLEY-HORN AND DATED AUGUST 2013:

	- WHILE FOR THE MOST PART THE ANALYSIS FOLLOWS THE
	GUIDELINES OF PALM BEACH COUNTY FLU ELEMENT POLICY
	3.5-D, WHICH IS WHAT WE ADVISE APPLICANTS TO FOLLOW,
	THERE ARE TWO COMPONENTS WHERE THE STUDY DOES NOT MEET
	THE GUIDELINES OF 3.5-D:

	1) THE YEAR 2035 MODEL VOLUMES INCLUDED IN THE STUDY
	WERE OBTAINED FROM THE 2035 GREATER TREASURE COAST
	REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL. POLICY 3.5-D CALLS FOR THE
	USE OF THE MPO'S LATEST ADOPTED LONG RANGE
	TRANSPORTATION PLAN (LRTP) AS AMENDED. AS A RESULT, THE
	STUDY SHOULD BE REVISED TO USE THE PROJECTED MPO LRTP
	VOLUMES.

	2) POLICY 3.5-D ALSO REQUIRES THE TRAFFIC STUDY TO
	REFLECT THE TRIPS FROM THE LATEST AVAILABLE FUTURE LAND
	USE AMENDMENTS THAT BECAME EFFECTIVE SUBSEQUENT TO THE
	ADOPTION OF THE LRTP, WHICH I BELIEVE HAPPENED AROUND
	2010.

Review Stop	Z			ZONING
Rev No	1	Status	F	Date	09-11-2013			Cont ID
Sent By	jroach			Date	09-11-2013	Time	09:59	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	jroach			Date	09-11-2013	Time	09:59	Sent To

Notes

2013-09-11 10:00:16	ZONING PLANS AND PLATS REVIEW COMMITTEE (PPRC) REVIEW
	___________________________________________

	DATE OF REVIEW: 09.11.2013
	PROJECT NO.: Z13080022, Z13080023 AND Z13080024
	CASE NO.: PB 1445X, Y AND Z
	ADDRESS: 4200 NORTH FLAGLER DRIVE
	APPLICANT/CONTACT: LYNDA HARRIS AND JOSEPH VERDONE
	TELEPHONE NO.: 561.659.7070
	___________________________________________

	PLEASE PROVIDE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING
	REVIEW COMMENTS:

	1. THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT CONCERNS WITH THE PROPOSED
	UTILIZATION OF THE PERMISSIBLE BUILDING AREAS (PBAS)
	AND DESIGN GUIDELINES GIVEN THE AMOUNT OF INFORMATION
	THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED. THE REQUIREMENTS SPELLED OUT ON
	THE MASTER PLAN AND THE DESIGN GUIDELINES LEAVE A LOT
	OF UNKNOWN ABOUT WHAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE BUILT WITHIN
	SUCH PARAMETERS. IN ORDER TO HAVE A COMFORT LEVEL WITH
	PBAS, THERE NEEDS TO BE SIGNIFICANT DETAIL IN THE
	DESIGN GUIDELINES SO THAT EVERYONE KNOWS ULTIMATELY
	WHAT THE DEVELOPMENT COULD AND WILL LOOK LIKE. SOME
	EXAMPLES INCLUDE, BUT ARE NOT LIMITED TO:

	A. NO MAXIMUM HEIGHT IS SPECIFIED, WITH THE EXCEPTION
	OF THE NUMBER OF STORIES. THEREFORE, A BUILDING COULD
	VARY IN HEIGHT SIGNIFICANTLY AND THE ONLY REQUIREMENT
	IS THAT IT BE 50-55 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.

	B. IF THE PRESCRIBED SIZE OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT IS
	UTILIZED, WHAT DOES THIS TRANSLATE TO IN THE FINAL
	PRODUCT? HAVE 3-D MODELS BEEN PREPARED TO SHOW WHAT THE
	MAXIMUM BUILD-OUT COULD BE UNDER THE GUIDELINES
	PROPOSED?

	C. HOW ARE THE FACADES OF THE GARAGES ADDRESSED? THERE
	IS SIGNIFICANT CONCERN THAT NEARLY ALL OF THE BUILDINGS
	ARE SHOWN AS UN-LINED GARAGES OPEN TO NORTH FLAGLER
	DRIVE, AS WELL AS TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH. IN
	COMBINATION WITH COMMENT D. BELOW, THIS DOES NOT
	POSITIVELY ADDRESS THE STREET AND ALLOW THE PROJECT TO
	INTERACT WITH THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY.

	D. CROSS SECTIONS HAVE ONLY BEEN PROVIDED FOR A PORTION
	OF THE NORTH FLAGLER DRIVE BUFFER. WHAT DOES THE
	REMAINDER LOOK LIKE? ADDITIONALLY, ELEVATING THE
	SIDEWALK, BUILDING A BERM, ETC. ?WALLS-OFF? THE PROJECT
	FROM THE RIGHT-OF-WAY; AND IN CONNECTION WITH EXPOSED
	PARKING GARAGES, DOES NOT POSITIVELY ADDRESS THE STREET
	AND SURROUNDING AREA.

	E. THE DESIGN GUIDELINES INDICATE THAT 30% OF THE
	DENSITY/INTENSITY CAN BE TRANSFERRED BETWEEN PBAS; DOES
	THIS MEAN THAT MASSING, ETC. CAN BE TRANSFERRED AS WELL
	(I.E. SIZE OF BUILDING FOOTPRINT)? THIS LEAVE A
	SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF FLEXIBILITY THAT MAKES IT HARD TO
	DETERMINE THE MAXIMUM BUILD-OUT POTENTIAL.

	F. BUILDINGS CAN BE PLACED ANYWHERE WITHIN THE PBA.

	STAFF WOULD REQUEST THAT A FOLLOW-UP MEETING BE HELD TO
	DISCUSS THESE ISSUES IN FURTHER DETAIL AND DETERMINE
	THE BEST SOLUTION. AS PROPOSED, THE REQUIREMENTS ARE
	TOO VAGUE AND THE IMPACT OF THE POTENTIAL BUILD-OUT
	CANNOT BE DETERMINED. AT THIS MEETING, MORE SPECIFIC
	COMMENTS CAN BE PROVIDED REGARDING THE CONTENTS OF THE
	DESIGN GUIDELINES.

	2. A NEW TRAFFIC CONCURRENCY APPROVAL SHALL BE PROVIDED
	FROM PALM BEACH COUNTY.

	3. PROJECT FACT SHEET SHALL BE COMPLETED AND PROVIDED.

	4. JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT

	A. ON PAGE 2 IT INDICATES THAT RYBOVICH HAD PREVIOUSLY
	PROPOSED 488 UNITS?ONLY 448 UNITS WERE APPROVED.

	B. ON PAGE 4, UNDER THE ?FLU AMENDMENT? SECTION, IT
	INDICATES THAT THE TRG PROPERTY IS BEING CHANGED FROM
	MULTIFAMILY TO COMMERCIAL. OTHER DOCUMENTATION
	INDICATES THAT IT IS BEING CHANGED TO COMMERCIAL EAST
	(CE). PLEASE CLARIFY AND ENSURE ALL DOCUMENTATION,
	STUDIES, PLANS, ETC. ARE CONSISTENT.

	C. ON PAGE 4, IT INDICATES THAT NO OTHER COMMERCIAL
	USES ARE PROPOSED ON THE TRG PROPERTY. THE PROPOSED
	MASTER PLAN INDICATES THE BEACH CLUB IS PROPOSED.
	PLEASE CLARIFY AND ENSURE THAT ALL DOCUMENTATION AND
	PLANS ARE CONSISTENT. PLEASE PROVIDED ADDITIONAL DETAIL
	REGARDING THE BEACH CLUB?IS THIS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC? IS
	IT RESTRICTED TO JUST RESIDENTS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT?
	WHAT DOES THE BEACH CLUB CONSIST OF?SPA?

	D. ON PAGE 8, NO RESPONSE WAS PROVIDED TO STANDARD #8
	OF THE REZONING REQUEST.

	E. ON PAGE 9, IT INDICATES THAT THE EXISTING LAND USE
	IS MULTIFAMILY 32?IT SHOULD ONLY READ MULTIFAMILY (MF).

	F. ON PAGE 9, IT INDICATES THAT THE PROPOSED LAND USE
	AS COMMERCIAL. OTHER DOCUMENTATION INDICATES THAT
	COMMERCIAL EAST IS PROPOSED. PLEASE CLARIFY AND ENSURE
	ALL DOCUMENTATION, STUDIES, AND PLANS ARE CONSISTENT.

	G. ON PAGE 9, IT INDICATES THAT A MAXIMUM BUILDING
	HEIGHT OF 405 FEET IS PROPOSED. THIS IS NOT OUTLINED
	ANYWHERE ON THE MASTER PLAN OR WITHIN THE DESIGN
	GUIDELINES.

	H. ON PAGE 12, IT INDICATES THAT THE MINIMUM REQUIRED
	LANDSCAPE BUFFER IS PROPOSED TO BE 21 FEET; HOWEVER,
	THE DESIGN GUIDELINES ONLY INDICATE 15 FEET ALONG THE
	NORTH AND SOUTH PROPERTY LINES. ADDITIONALLY, THE
	JUSTIFICATION STATES THAT A 25 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER
	WILL BE PROVIDED ALONG NORTH FLAGLER; THE DESIGN
	GUIDELINES INDICATES ONLY 15 FEET IS REQUIRED. PLEASE
	ENSURE THAT ALL PLANS AND DOCUMENTATION IS CONSISTENT.

	I. PLEASE EXPLAIN THE PARKING WAIVER THAT IS DISCUSSED
	ON PAGES 13-14. WHAT WAIVER IS BEING REQUESTED?

	J. THE SECTION PERTAINING TO DOCKS ON PAGE 14 IS
	MISLEADING. THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT SHOULD DESCRIBE
	(IN ALL PART OF THE STATEMENT), WHAT IS ULTIMATELY
	PROPOSED TO BE BUILT ON THE SITE. EXPLAINING WHAT
	EXISTS AND WHAT WILL BE ADDED CAN BE ADDITIONAL
	INFORMATION.
	K. ON PAGE 14 IT INDICATES THAT THE TRAFFIC IMPACT
	STUDY INDICATES THAT THE PROJECT MEETS OR EXCEEDS THE
	CITY?S STANDARDS?THIS STUDY HAS NOT BEEN PROVIDED.

	L. NO DESCRIPTION REGARDING THE NEED FOR A DENSITY
	WAIVER? PLEASE ENSURE THAT ALL WAIVERS ARE DESCRIBED
	AND JUSTIFIED. I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT A TABLE BE
	GENERATED INDICATING ALL REQUESTED WAIVERS.

	M. ON PAGE 17, IT INDICATES THAT ALL RESIDENTIAL
	BUILDINGS WILL BE SET BACK 90 FEET FROM NORTH FLAGLER
	DRIVE (WITH THE EXCEPTION OF PBA #3). THIS IS NOT
	OUTLINED ANYWHERE IN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES.

	5. AFFIDAVIT FROM PAGE 19 OF THE DEVELOPMENT
	APPLICATION SHALL BE PROVIDED.

	6. UTILITY LETTER SHALL BE PROVIDED FROM THE CITY?S
	ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT.

	7. APPROVED SCHOOL CONCURRENCY APPLICATION SHALL BE
	PROVIDED.

	8. FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT, A LEVEL OF
	SERVICE ANALYSIS SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL SERVICES,
	NOT JUST TRAFFIC. THE LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS SHALL
	COMPARE THE ?WORST-CASE? SCENARIO UNDER THE EXISTING
	FLU AND COMPARE IT TO THE ?WORST-CASE? SCENARIO UNDER
	THE PROPOSED FLU. THE ANALYSIS SHALL LOOK AT THE
	FOLLOWING:

	A. DRAINAGE
	B. POTABLE WATER
	C. WASTE WATER (SEWER)
	D. SOLID WASTE
	E. SCHOOLS
	F. PARKS
	G. TRAFFIC

	9. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT UTILIZED FOR THE TRAFFIC
	EQUIVALENCY STATEMENT PREPARED BY KIMBLEY-HORN (DATED
	AUGUST 21, 2013) IS INCORRECT. THE LETTER INDICATES
	THAT ONLY 660 RESIDENTIAL UNITS ARE PROPOSED. FOR THE
	PURPOSES OF TRAFFIC EQUIVALENCY, I BELIEVE YOU NEED TO
	COMPARE THE APPROVALS OF TRG AND RYBOVICH
	(COLLECTIVELY) VS. THE PROPOSED OVERALL DEVELOPMENT
	(I.E. 1059 DWELLING UNITS, ETC.)

	10. PLEASE CLARIFY THE PROPOSED 40 FOOT MINIMUM SETBACK
	FROM FLAGLER DRIVE. IS THIS THE SETBACK REQUIRED PER
	SECTION 94-305(D), AS MEASURED FROM THE CENTERLINE OF
	THE ROAD?

	11. MORE DETAIL NEEDS TO BE ADDED INTO THE MASTER PLAN:

	A. MAXIMUM # OF SLIPS THAT WILL BE PERMITTED INTO THE
	CMPD.

	B. MASTER PLAN SHOULD SHOW THE ENTIRE IN-WATER MARINA
	LAYOUT, SHOWING LOCATIONS OF DOCK, NUMBER OF SLIPS,
	ETC., AS DONE IN THE RYBOVICH MASTER PLAN, OR AT LEAST
	SHOW THE ENTIRE EXTENT OF THE MARINA BOUNDARIES.

	C. WHAT IS THE YELLOW LINE ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY
	LINE?

	D. PLEASE TRY TO SIMPLIFY THE MASTER PLAN BY MAKING IT
	JUST A LINE DRAWING?REMOVING THE LANDSCAPING, ETC.
	ALSO, IT IS UNCLEAR AS TO WHERE THE FRONTAGE ROAD IS
	PROPOSED. IT LOOKS LIKE WHAT IS SHOWN ON THE MASTER
	PLAN DOES NOT MATCH WHAT HAS BEEN CONCEPTUALLY SHOWN ON
	THE PAVING, GRADING, AND DRAINAGE PLAN.

	E. DOES THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT SIZE INCLUDE THE PARKING
	GARAGES?

	12. CROSS SECTIONS SHOW THAT 20 FEET WORTH OF
	IMPROVEMENTS ARE SHOWN OUTSIDE OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY?AND
	THEN A 50 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. IS THERE
	SPACE FOR ALL OF THIS? HOW TO ALL OF THE CROSS SECTIONS
	RELATE TO THE MASTER PLAN? CROSS SECTIONS ARE NOT
	PROVIDED FOR ALL AREAS OF THE DEVELOPMENT. ARE THE
	CROSS SECTIONS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE REGULATIONS?

	13. CORRECTIONS NEED TO BE MADE TO THE MASTER PLAN

	A. EXISTING ZONING SHOULD BE LABELED AS RPD AND CMPD.

	B. PROPOSED ZONING SHOULD ONLY BE CMPD?NO MF32 WILL
	EXIST.

	C. EXISTING LAND USE (FUTURE LAND USE) SHOULD BE MF AND
	C.

	D. PROPOSED LAND USE (FUTURE LAND USE) SHOULD BE C AND
	CE.

	E. IN THE LOWER LEFT-HAND TABLE, IT INDICATES THAT OPEN
	SPACE IS A (BUILDING FOOTPRINT) +B (ON-GRADE PERVIOUS);
	OPEN SPACE SHOULD BE ANYTHING THAT IS NOT BUILDING.

	14. PBA #4 IS SHOWN ON LAND THAT IS CURRENTLY
	SUBMERGED?IS THIS PROPOSED TO BE FILLED IN? IS LAND ON
	WHAT IS NOW TRG PROPOSED TO BE FILLED?

	15. TRAFFIC STUDY SHALL BE PROVIDED SHOWING THE IMPACT
	OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT (AT FULL BUILD-OUT) ON THE
	SURROUNDING ROAD NETWORK. STUDY SHALL INCLUDE EXISTING
	TRAFFIC CONDITIONS, APPROVED AND UN-BUILT FUTURE
	DEVELOPMENTS, AS WELL AS BUILD-OUT OF OTHER PROPERTIES
	IN THE CORRIDOR.

	16. ALEX HANSEN, SENIOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNER, IS
	FURTHER REVIEWING THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS FOR THE
	FLU AMENDMENT. SOME INITIAL CONCERNS WERE:

	A. USE OF THE GREATER TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING
	MODEL. THE PALM BEACH COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
	CURRENTLY SPECIFIES USE OF THE METROPOLITAN PLANNING
	ORGANIZATION (MPO) MODEL. MR. HANSEN IS AWAITING
	RESPONSES FROM PALM BEACH COUNTY TO FURTHER ADDRESS
	THIS COMMENT.

	B. THE LONG RANGE CUMULATIVE IMPACT DID NOT APPEAR TO
	ACCOUNT FOR ADOPTED FLU AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN
	APPROVED SINCE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PLANNING MODEL.
	PER PALM BEACH COUNTY?S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE
	CUMULATIVE IMPACT SHOULD ACCOUNT FOR AMENDMENTS THAT
	HAVE OCCURRED SINCE THE MODEL WAS ESTABLISHED. AGAIN,
	MR. HANSEN IS AWAITING INFORMATION FROM PALM BEACH
	COUNTY TO FURTHER ADDRESS THIS COMMENT.

	17. THE FLU TRAFFIC ANALYSIS INDICATES THAT THE TRG
	PROPERTY IS 5.11 ACRES, WHILE THE MASTER PLAN INDICATES
	THAT IT IS 5.09 ACRES. ALL DOCUMENTATION, ETC. NEEDS TO
	BE ACCURATE AND CONSISTENT.

	18. ELECTRONIC COPIES OF ALL PLANS, DESIGN GUIDELINES,
	ETC. SHALL BE PROVIDED.
	___________________________________________

	PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING WHEN RESUBMITTING:

	A) WRITTEN RESPONSES TO COMMENTS MADE BY ALL
	DEPARTMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED UPON RESUBMISSION.

	B) 15 SETS OF REVISED PLANS AND/OR DOCUMENTS SHALL BE
	PROVIDED, ALONG WITH ONE (1) REDUCED COPY (11IN X
	17IN), AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY OF ALL PLANS.

	C) PLEASE NOTE THAT RE-SUBMITTALS MAY BE SUBJECT TO
	ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.

	D) IF NO RESPONSE IS RECEIVED WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THE
	ISSUANCE OF THESE COMMENTS, THE APPLICATION WILL BE
	CONSIDERED WITHDRAWN AND ANY FURTHER ACTION WILL
	REQUIRE SUBMISSION OF A NEW DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION.

	E) PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU WILL BE PERMITTED ONE (1)
	RESUBMITTAL AT NO ADDITIONAL COST. IF PREVIOUSLY-ISSUED
	COMMENTS CONTINUE TO NOT BE SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED, THE
	APPLICANT WILL BE ACCESSED A RESUBMITTAL FEE. SUCH FEE
	WILL BE 20% OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FEE.

	F) IN ORDER TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE NEXT PLANNING
	BOARD AGENDA, ALL COMMENTS AND CONCERNS SHALL BE
	SATISFACTORILY ADDRESSED. PLEASE SUBMIT ALL REVISED
	DOCUMENTS/PLANS NO LATER THAN FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 20,
	2013, TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE OCTOBER 16, 2013,
	PLANNING BOARD HEARING.

	G) TO BE PLACED ON THE OCTOBER 16, 2013, PLANNING BOARD
	AGENDA, SIGNS SHALL BE POSTED ON THE PROPERTY NO LATER
	THAN OCTOBER 1, 2013. SIGNAGE SHALL CONFORM AND BE
	INSTALLED WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY?S ZONING
	AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, AS ALSO PROVIDED IN
	THE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION. A SIGNED AND NOTARIZED
	AFFIDAVIT SHALL BE PROVIDED BY THE DEADLINE REFERENCED
	ABOVE.
	___________________________________________

	QUESTIONS/COMMENTS, PLEASE CONTACT THE FOLLOWING:

	JOHN ROACH, PRINCIPAL PLANNER
	CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH
	DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT ? PLANNING DIVISION
	401 CLEMATIS STREET - P.O. BOX 3147
	WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33402

	PHONE: 561.822.1448
	FAX: 561.822.1460

	EMAIL: [email protected]

	WWW.WPB.ORG