Plan Review Details - Project Z17010009
Plan Review Stops For Project Z17010009
Review Stop B BUILDING (STRUCTURAL)
Rev No 1 Status P Date 02-07-2017 Cont ID  
Sent By rbrown Date 02-07-2017 Time 20:12 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rbrown Date 02-07-2017 Time 20:12 Sent To  
Notes
2017-02-07 20:15:12DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, BUILDING DIVISION,
 COMMENTS:
  
 1. 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. WHEN SUBMITTED FOR BUILDING PERMIT, THE PLANS SHALL
 SHOW THAT THE TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION FOR THE BUILDINGS
 WILL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE HEIGHT, AREA AND
 OCCUPANCY LIMITATIONS IN CHAPTER 5 OF THE FLORIDA
 BUILDING CODE
  
 3. WHEN SUBMITTED FOR BUILDING PERMIT, 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. THE
 EQUIVALENT REQUIREMENTS FOR ONE AND TWO FAMILY
 DWELLINGS, AND TOWNHOUSES ARE IN SECTION R302 OF
 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE (RESIDENTIAL).
  
 4. SEPARATE PERMITS REQUIRED. ALL APPLICABLE PERMITS
 AND SUB-PERMITS MUST BE OBTAINED BEFORE COMMENCING THE
 WORK. SEPARATE PERMITS, PLANS AND FEES, ARE REQUIRED
 FOR SIGNS, SWIMMING POOLS AND SPAS, GAS SYSTEMS,
 GENERATORS, FIRE ALARM SYSTEMS, FIRE SPRINKLER AND
 OTHER FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEMS, GREASE INTERCEPTORS,
 SITE LIGHTING, SITE LANDSCAPE, SITE IRRIGATION, ETC.
  
 5. EACH SEPARATE BUILDING SHALL HAVE A SEPARATE
 ADDRESS. FOR STREET ADDRESSING, CONTACT MICHAEL ORIO,
 GIS SUPPORT SPECIALIST, AT (561) 494 1080, OR BY EMAIL:
 [email protected]
  
 6. THIS PROJECT WILL BE SUBJECT TO ART IN PUBLIC PLACES
 (AIPP) ASSESSMENT. FOR ADVICE ON THE PROVISION OF
 PUBLIC ARTWORK IN LIEU OF THE AIPP ASSESSMENT, CONTACT
 SYBILLE WELTER, ART IN PUBLIC PLACES COORDINATOR, AT
 (561) 822-1521, OR BY EMAIL: [email protected]
  
 ROBERT BROWN
 BUILDING OFFICIAL
 TEL: 561 805 6652
 EMAIL: [email protected]
  
Review Stop ENG - PPRC ENGINEERING - PPRC
Rev No 2 Status P Date 04-19-2017 Cont ID  
Sent By mkhan Date 04-19-2017 Time 15:38 Rev Time 0.00
Received By mkhan Date 04-19-2017 Time 15:38 Sent To  
Notes
2017-04-19 15:39:59CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH
 ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
  
 DATE: 04/19/2017
  
 PROJECT NAME: 8230 OKEECHOBEE BLVD (BELLA VITA ESTATES)
 - Z17010009
  
 2ND/RE-SUBMITTAL REVIEW RESPONSE
  
 STATUS: PASSED WITH CONDITION (AT THE SITE PLAN
 APPROVAL LEVEL)
  
 AFTER REVIEWING THE REVISED PLANS AND RESPONSE (LETTER
 DATED MARCH 14, 2017) TO THE PPRC COMMENTS, WE HAVE THE
 FOLLOWING COMMENTS:
  
 1. SUBMITTED "SERVICE AVAILABILITY LETTER" FOR WATER
 AND SANITARY SEWER SERVICES FROM PALM BEACH COUNTY IS
 ACCEPTABLE AT SITE PLAN APPROVAL LEVEL;
  
 2. FINAL WATER AND SANITARY SEWER PLANS APPROVED BY
 PBCWUD NEED TO BE SUBMITTED DURING SUBMISSION OF
 ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL APPLICATION TO THE
 CITY'S ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT. PRIOR TO
 ISSUANCE OF CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION INCLUDING
 BUILDING PERMITS, ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL
 APPLICATION IS REQUIRED FOR STORM WATER REVIEW AND
 APPROVAL. THE APPLICATION CAN BE DOWNLOADED FROM THE
 FOLLOWING LINK:
  
 HTTP://WPB.ORG/DEPARTMENTS/ENGINEERING-PUBLIC-WORKS/FOR
 MS,-PERMITS-APPLICATIONS
  
 3. SANITATION/SOLID WASTE COLLECTION PLAN NEED TO BE
 COORDINATED WITH THE CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH PUBLIC
 WORKS DEPARTMENT. PLEASE SUBMIT A WRITTEN LETTER OF
 APPROVAL FROM THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, PETER BIENIEK;
  
 MOSTAQUE KHAN, P.E.
 LAND DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER
 [email protected]
 561-494-1124 (OFFICE)
  
Review Stop ENG - PPRC ENGINEERING - PPRC
Rev No 1 Status F Date 02-03-2017 Cont ID  
Sent By mkhan Date 02-03-2017 Time 10:17 Rev Time 0.00
Received By mkhan Date 02-03-2017 Time 10:17 Sent To  
Notes
2017-02-03 10:19:56CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH
 ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
  
 PROJECT NAME: 8230 OKEECHOBEE BLVD (BELLA VITA ESTATES)
 - Z17010009
  
 DATE: FEBRUARY 3, 2017
  
 THE FOLLOWING GENERAL COMMENTS MUST BE ADDRESSED PRIOR
 TO SITE PLAN APPROVAL:
  
 1. AS WATER AND SEWER SERVICES ARE PROVIDED BY THE
 COUNTY, OBTAIN A ?UTILITY SERVICE LETTER? PALM BEACH
 COUNTY WATER UTILITY DISTRICT (PBCWUD) PRIOR TO SITE
 PLAN APPROVAL;
  
 2. WATER AND SEWER PLANS SHOW SOME LOTS DO NOT HAVE
 SERVICES. CONSIDER ALIGNING SERVICE LATERALS WITH LOT
 LINES AND/OR USING UTILITY EASEMENTS ETC.
  
 3. SANITATION/SOLID WASTE PICKUP SERVICES WILL BE
 PROVIDED BY THE CITY. PROVIDE LANGUAGE IN THE CONDO
 ASSOCIATION DOCUMENTS ADDRESSING SANITATION PICK UP
 ROUTE PLAN AND SCHEDULE;
  
 MOSTAQUE KHAN, P.E.
 LAND DEVELOPMENT ENGINEER
 [email protected]
 561-494-1124 (OFFICE)
  
Review Stop FIRE FIRE DEPARTMENT
Rev No 2 Status P Date 04-12-2017 Cont ID  
Sent By pleduc Date 04-12-2017 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By pleduc Date 04-12-2017 Time 11:06 Sent To  
Notes
2017-04-12 11:09:332ND REVIEW RESPONSE
  
 AFTER A REVIEW OF THE PPRC RESPONSE LETTER DATED MARCH
 14, 2017, FROM DEC, TO ALEX HANSEN, AICP, CITY
 COMPREHENSIVE PLANNER, THE PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED FIRE
 PREVENTION BUREAU COMMENTS HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED.
  
 THE BUREAU'S APPROVAL OF THIS SUBMITTED PROJECT DOES
 NOT CONSTITUTE IT'S FINAL REVIEW OR APPROVAL.
  
 THE BUREAU SHALL REVIEW ALL SUBMITTED BUILDING PLANS AT
 THE APPROPRIATE TIME AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
 REQUIREMENTS OF ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND STANDARDS.
  
  
 PETER LEDUC
 FIRE MARSHAL
 WEST PALM BEACH FIRE RESCUE
 561-804-4709
 [email protected]
  
Review Stop FIRE FIRE DEPARTMENT
Rev No 1 Status F Date 02-06-2017 Cont ID  
Sent By pleduc Date 02-06-2017 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By pleduc Date 02-06-2017 Time 15:28 Sent To  
Notes
2017-02-06 17:35:28THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS WERE SUBMITTED BY PETER LEDUC,
 FIRE MARSHAL, BUREAU OF FIRE PREVENTION, WEST PALM
 BEACH FIRE RESCUE.
  
 THIS REVIEW CAN ONLY BE CONSIDERED PRELIMINARY AS THE
 DRAWINGS THAT WERE REVIEWED WERE NOT COMPLETE.
 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS CAN BE EXPECTED WHEN FULL DRAWINGS
 ARE SUBMITTED FOR PERMIT.
  
 THE FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU HAS NO OBJECTIONS TO THE
 PROPOSED PROJECT.
  
 1. CONSTRUCTION, DEMOLITION, AND RENOVATION TO COMPLY
 WITH NFPA 241. EXTRA ATTENTION SHALL BE GIVEN TO THE
 PERMITTING AND LOCATION OF CONSTRUCTION TRAILERS. A
 PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR ANY CONSTRUCTION TRAILER RELATED
 TO THIS PROJECT. SEPARATION DISTANCES FROM MAIN
 STRUCTURES AS WELL AS OTHER TRAILERS SHALL BE CLOSELY
 MONITORED FOR THE REQUIREMENTS OF FIRE SPRINKLER
 PROTECTION.
  
 2. SITE ACCESS AND EXIT POINTS ARE TO BE CLEARLY
 IDENTIFIED AND MAINTAINED FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES DURING
 ALL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES.
  
 3. THE BUILDING ADDRESSES SHALL BE CLEARLY VISIBLE FROM
 ALL ACCESS ROADWAYS, INCLUDING DURING CONSTRUCTION.
 ADDRESS NUMBERS SHALL CONTRAST WITH THEIR BACKGROUND
 AND SHALL NOT BE LESS THAN SIX (6) INCHES IN HEIGHT
 WITH A ONE (1) INCH STROKE FOR ALL BUILDINGS.
  
 4. DURING CONSTRUCTION, TRASH AND DEBRIS IS TO BE
 REMOVED FROM THE SITE DAILY OR MORE OFTEN TO REDUCE THE
 ACCUMULATION OF POTENTIAL LIFE AND FIRE SAFETY HAZARDS.
  
 5. THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDINGS SHALL COMPLY WITH
 THE 5TH EDITION OF THE FLORIDA FIRE PREVENTION CODE,
 INCLUDING NFPA 1 & 101, AND ALL ASSOCIATED FIRE CODES.
  
 6. FOR PLAN REVIEW SUBMITTAL, PLEASE INCLUDE THE
 OCCUPANCY TYPE, PER THE FLORIDA FIRE PREVENTION CODE.
  
 ENSURE THE SEPARATION OF EACH TOWNHOME IS CLEARLY
 INDICATED AS IT AFFECTS IF IT IS A SEPARATED
 TOWNHOME(RESIDENTIAL UNIT) OR AN APARTMENT BUILDING.
  
 IF AN APARTMENT BUILDING:
  
 ATTACHED GARAGES ARE INDICATED. THOSE PROPOSED GARAGES
 ARE CONSIDERED ENCLOSED PARKING STRUCTURES AND NEED TO
 BE PROTECTED PER NFPA 88A, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED
 TO, MECHANICAL VENTILATION.
  
 DUE TO THE ATTACHED PARKING STRUCTURES, CARBON MONOXIDE
 DETECTORS ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL UNITS.
  
 7. FOR PLAN REVIEW SUBMITTAL, PLEASE ENSURE THAT A FIRE
 LOAD CALCULATION IS INCLUDED AND THAT ADEQUATE WATER
 SUPPLY IS EXISTING OR WILL BE PROVIDED.
  
 8. ALL EXISTING AND NEW FIRE HYDRANTS PLANNED FOR THIS
 DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE CLEARLY INDICATED AND IDENTIFIED
 ON THE PLAN AND CLOSELY COORDINATED WITH THE BUREAU OF
 FIRE PREVENTION.
 ALL NEW FIRE HYDRANTS AND FDC?S PLANNED FOR THIS
 DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE CLOSELY COORDINATED WITH THE
 BUREAU OF FIRE PREVENTION. PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANTS AND
 FDC?S SHOULD BE LOCATED ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE STREET
 OR ACCESS ROADWAY TO ALLOW FREE ACCESS FOR OTHER
 ARRIVING EMERGENCY VEHICLES.
  
 THERE DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE A FIRE HYDRANT LOCATED ON
 THE SOUTH SIDE ROAD, PLEASE REVIEW.
  
 ANY EXISTING HYDRANT LINES AND HYDRANT FLOWS WILL NEED
 TO BE CONFIRMED/VERIFIED FOR WATER SUPPLY
 REQUIREMENTS.(SEE # 7)
  
 9. PROVIDE FOR A FIRE SPRINKLER AND/OR FIRE ALARM PER
 THE APPLICABLE OCCUPANCY CODE. FOR ANY LIFE SAFETY
 ENGINEERED SYSTEM, I.E FIRE SPRINKLER AND FIRE ALARM,
 ENSURE THEY COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FS 61G AND
 SUBMITTED WITH THE MASTER PLAN.
  
 10. IT IS HIGHLY RECOMMENDED FOR ANY ACCESS GATES, IF
 APPLICABLE, THAT THEY BE PROVIDED WITH KNOX KEY
 SWITCHES FOR 24 HOUR EMERGENCY ACCESS.
  
 11. THE BUREAU'S APPROVAL OF THIS SUBMITTED PROJECT
 DOES NOT CONSTITUTE IT'S FINAL REVIEW OR APPROVAL.
  
 12. THE BUREAU SHALL REVIEW ALL SUBMITTED BUILDING
 PLANS AT THE APPROPRIATE TIME AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH
 THE REQUIREMENTS OF ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND STANDARDS.
  
  
 PETER LEDUC
 FIRE MARSHAL
 561-804-4709
 [email protected]
  
Review Stop L LANDSCAPING
Rev No 2 Status F Date 04-21-2017 Cont ID  
Sent By rcaranci Date 04-21-2017 Time 17:17 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rcaranci Date 04-21-2017 Time 17:17 Sent To  
Notes
2017-04-21 17:17:59FROM: RAY CARANCI, LANDSCAPE PLANNER 561-822-1462
 PROJECT: 8230 OKEECHOBEE BELLA VITA Z17010009
 APRIL 21, 2017
 1. NOT SATISFIED. PLEASE PROVIDE A TREE SURVEY FROM
 PRIOR TO INITIAL CLEARING OF THE PROPERTY OR TREE
 ALTERATION PERMIT ISSUED SHOWING THE TOTAL CANOPY
 MITIGATION REQUIRED FOR THE PROPERTY, AND SHOW QUANTITY
 OF MITIGATION PROVIDED WITH THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPE
 PLAN.
 ? PLEASE REVISE THE MITIGATION CHART IDENTIFYING THE
 TREES TO BE REMOVED BY SPECIES AND CATEGORY.
 ? PLEASE REMOVE THE NOTE REFERENCING MISSING TREES ON
 SHEET LP-3, AND INCLUDE ALL TREES FROM THE CHART IN
 MITIGATION REQUIREMENTS.
  
 2. SATISFIED. PLEASE PROVIDE CALCULATIONS FOR THE AREAS
 COUNTED TOWARD THE BUILDING PERIMETER LANDSCAPING
 REQUIREMENT OF 40% FOR THE 4 AND 6 UNIT BUILDINGS PER
 SECTION 443(D)(2).
  
 3. SATISFIED. PLEASE REVISE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN TO
 INDICATE A 10 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG OKEECHOBEE
 PER SECTION 94-443(D), AND INDICATE THE 5 FOOT WIDE
 LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG ALL OTHER PROPERTY LINES.
  
 4. SATISFIED. PLEASE PROVIDE A COLUMN ON THE PLANT LIST
 SHOWING DROUGHT TOLERANCE LEVELS INDICATED IN
 WATERWISE, THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT
 PLANT AND LANDSCAPE PRACTICES GUIDE AS SPECIFIED IN
 SECTION 94-446(G). PLEASE REVISE AND RECALCULATE TO
 CONFIRM PERCENTAGES FOR POINTS CLAIMED.
  
 5. SATISFIED. PLEASE PROVIDE A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF
 TREES SHOWING THE QUANTITIES TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS
 OF THE SITE AND ADDITIONAL TREES REQUIRED FOR
 MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS PER SECTION 94-443(D)(2)A.
  
 6. SATISFIED. PLEASE PROVIDE IN THE LANDSCAPE CODE
 REQUIREMENT CHART THE LENGTH OF EACH BUFFER AND
 CALCULATE THE NUMBER OF BUFFER TREES REQUIRED FOR EACH
 BUFFER SECTION, AND PROVIDE THE PLACEMENT OF THE BUFFER
 TREES EVERY 30 FEET OR LESS ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.
 THERE ARE GAPS IN EXCESS OF 30 FEET IN SEVERAL PLACES.
  
 7. SATISFIED. REMOVE THE ENCROACHMENT FROM THE
 SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PLAN AND PROVIDE THE REQUIRED
 LANDSCAPE BUFFER.
  
 8. SATISFIED. SENNA SURATTENSIS IS NOT A SUSTAINABLE
 FLOWERING TREE SPECIES. PLEASE CONSIDER OTHER
 ALTERNATIVE SPECIES.
  
 9. SATISFIED. PLEASE CONSIDER AN ALTERNATE SPECIES TO
 THE LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM IN AREAS WITH LIMITED SPACE AND
 WIDTH AS IN REAR PATIO AREAS. IT IS ALSO PREFERABLE TO
 HAVE A SPECIES THAT PROVIDES A SHADE CANOPY.
  
 10. SATISFIED. PLEASE REMOVE NOTES ON SHEET LP.4
 REFERRING TO MOVING TREES FOR LIGHTING CONFLICTS.
 LIGHTS SHALL BE SHOWN ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN AND
 ADJUSTMENTS MADE TO MEET LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS.
  
 11. SATISFIED. PLEASE PROVIDE CURBS FOR ALL PARKING
 AREAS ADJACENT TO LANDSCAPE AREAS.
  
 12. NOT SATISFIED. PLEASE CLARIFY THE PROPERTY LINE FOR
 BUILDINGS 11 AND 12.
 LANDSCAPE PLAN NEEDS TO BE REVISED TO MATCH THE SITE
 PLAN.
  
 13. NOT SATISFIED. PLEASE EXPLAIN THE REASON FOR
 COMBINING SIDEWALKS FOR ADJACENT INTERNAL END UNITS.
 PRIVATE WALKS SEPARATED BY LANDSCAPING WOULD BE BETTER.
 PLEASE PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION.
  
 14. SATISFIED. PLEASE SHOW THE LOCATION OF ALL WATER,
 SEWER, DRAINAGE, LIGHTING AND FPL TRANSFORMERS ON THE
 LANDSCAPE PLAN TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH LANDSCAPING.
  
 15. SATISFIED. PLEASE INCLUDE A ROOT BARRIER DETAIL AND
 SHOW LOCATIONS OF ROOT BARRIERS TO PROTECT
 INFRASTRUCTURE AND TREES FROM CONFLICTS. THIS INCLUDES
 WATER, SEWER, DRAINAGE, SIDEWALKS AND CURBS, AND ANY
 FIELD STRUCTURES THAT COULD BE IMPACTED BY TREE ROOTS.
  
 16. NOT SATISFIED. PLEASE PROVIDE SCREENING FOR ALL
 GROUND MOUNTED EQUIPMENT AND UTILITIES.
  
 PLEASE PROVIDE LOCATIONS OF A/C COMPRESSORS IN REAR
 YARDS THAT WILL AFFECT SHRUB PLACEMENT.
 Z17
 ADDITIONAL COMMENT 4/21/17:
 17. PLEASE REVISE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN TO LOCATE TREES
 AND SHRUBS CLEARLY WITHIN ONE LOT OR THE OTHER, NOT
 PLACED DIRECTLY ON LOT LINES.
  
  
  
 PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE
 REQUESTED, AND STAFF MAY HAVE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AS
 THE REVIEW PROCESS CONTINUES.
  
 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
 1. PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL OR RELOCATION OF ANY TREES ON
 THE PROPERTY, A TREE ALTERATION PERMIT SHALL BE
 SUBMITTED, REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE DEVELOPMENT
 SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING DIVISION.
  
Review Stop L LANDSCAPING
Rev No 1 Status F Date 02-07-2017 Cont ID  
Sent By rcaranci Date 02-07-2017 Time 08:11 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rcaranci Date 02-07-2017 Time 08:10 Sent To  
Notes
2017-02-07 08:11:23FROM: RAY CARANCI, LANDSCAPE PLANNER 561-822-1462
 PROJECT: 8230 OKEECHOBEE BELLA VITA Z17010009
 FEBRUARY 6, 2017
 1. PLEASE PROVIDE A TREE SURVEY FROM PRIOR TO INITIAL
 CLEARING OF THE PROPERTY OR TREE ALTERATION PERMIT
 ISSUED SHOWING THE TOTAL CANOPY MITIGATION REQUIRED FOR
 THE PROPERTY, AND SHOW QUANTITY OF MITIGATION PROVIDED
 WITH THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLAN.
  
 2. PLEASE PROVIDE CALCULATIONS FOR THE AREAS COUNTED
 TOWARD THE BUILDING PERIMETER LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENT
 OF 40% FOR THE 4 AND 6 UNIT BUILDINGS PER SECTION
 443(D)(2).
  
 3. PLEASE REVISE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN TO INDICATE A 10
 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG OKEECHOBEE PER SECTION
 94-443(D), AND INDICATE THE 5 FOOT WIDE LANDSCAPE
 BUFFER ALONG ALL OTHER PROPERTY LINES.
  
 4. PLEASE PROVIDE A COLUMN ON THE PLANT LIST SHOWING
 DROUGHT TOLERANCE LEVELS INDICATED IN WATERWISE, THE
 SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT PLANT AND
 LANDSCAPE PRACTICES GUIDE AS SPECIFIED IN SECTION
 94-446(G). PLEASE REVISE AND RECALCULATE TO CONFIRM
 PERCENTAGES FOR POINTS CLAIMED.
  
 5. PLEASE PROVIDE A COMPREHENSIVE LIST OF TREES SHOWING
 THE QUANTITIES TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE SITE AND
 ADDITIONAL TREES REQUIRED FOR MULTIFAMILY BUILDINGS PER
 SECTION 94-443(D)(2)A.
  
 6. PLEASE PROVIDE IN THE LANDSCAPE CODE REQUIREMENT
 CHART THE LENGTH OF EACH BUFFER AND CALCULATE THE
 NUMBER OF BUFFER TREES REQUIRED FOR EACH BUFFER
 SECTION, AND PROVIDE THE PLACEMENT OF THE BUFFER TREES
 EVERY 30 FEET OR LESS ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. THERE ARE
 GAPS IN EXCESS OF 30 FEET IN SEVERAL PLACES.
  
 7. REMOVE THE ENCROACHMENT FROM THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
 THE PLAN AND PROVIDE THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE BUFFER.
  
 8. SENNA SURATTENSIS IS NOT A SUSTAINABLE FLOWERING
 TREE SPECIES. PLEASE CONSIDER OTHER ALTERNATIVE
 SPECIES.
  
 9. PLEASE CONSIDER AN ALTERNATE SPECIES TO THE
 LIGUSTRUM JAPONICUM IN AREAS WITH LIMITED SPACE AND
 WIDTH AS IN REAR PATIO AREAS. IT IS ALSO PREFERABLE TO
 HAVE A SPECIES THAT PROVIDES A SHADE CANOPY.
 10. PLEASE REMOVE NOTES ON SHEET LP.4 REFERRING TO
 MOVING TREES FOR LIGHTING CONFLICTS. LIGHTS SHALL BE
 SHOWN ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN AND ADJUSTMENTS MADE TO
 MEET LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS.
  
 11. PLEASE PROVIDE CURBS FOR ALL PARKING AREAS ADJACENT
 TO LANDSCAPE AREAS.
  
 12. PLEASE CLARIFY THE PROPERTY LINE FOR BUILDINGS 11
 AND 12.
  
 13. PLEASE EXPLAIN THE REASON FOR COMBINING SIDEWALKS
 FOR ADJACENT INTERNAL END UNITS. PRIVATE WALKS
 SEPARATED BY LANDSCAPING WOULD BE BETTER.
  
 14. PLEASE SHOW THE LOCATION OF ALL WATER, SEWER,
 DRAINAGE, LIGHTING AND FPL TRANSFORMERS ON THE
 LANDSCAPE PLAN TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH LANDSCAPING.
  
 15. PLEASE INCLUDE A ROOT BARRIER DETAIL AND SHOW
 LOCATIONS OF ROOT BARRIERS TO PROTECT INFRASTRUCTURE
 AND TREES FROM CONFLICTS. THIS INCLUDES WATER, SEWER,
 DRAINAGE, SIDEWALKS AND CURBS, AND ANY FIELD STRUCTURES
 THAT COULD BE IMPACTED BY TREE ROOTS.
  
 16. PLEASE PROVIDE SCREENING FOR ALL GROUND MOUNTED
 EQUIPMENT AND UTILITIES.
  
 PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION MAY BE
 REQUESTED, AND STAFF MAY HAVE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS AS
 THE REVIEW PROCESS CONTINUES.
  
 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
 1. PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL OR RELOCATION OF ANY TREES ON
 THE PROPERTY, A TREE ALTERATION PERMIT SHALL BE
 SUBMITTED, REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE DEVELOPMENT
 SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING DIVISION.
  
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   Date   Cont ID  
Sent By   Date   Time   Rev Time  
Received By   Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
***NONE***
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 05-09-2017 Cont ID  
Sent By tward Date 05-09-2017 Time 09:46 Rev Time 0.00
Received By tward Date 05-09-2017 Time 09:57 Sent To  
Notes
2017-05-09 09:56:49ALL COMMENTS FROM THE FIRST STORM REVIEW WERE
 ADDRESSED.
  
 THE FOLLOWING COMMENT IS BASED ON MARCH 14, 2017
 SUBMITTAL PACKAGE:
  
 1. THE CITY COMMISSION IS CONSIDERING RAISING THE
 FREEBOARD TO TWO FEET ABOVE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION FOR
 STRUCTURES WITHIN A SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA. THE
 RESPONSE TO COMMENT 1 FROM THE INITIAL STORM REVIEW
 COMMENTS INDICATED THAT PORTIONS OF THE DEVELOPMENT
 WILL BE WITHIN AN AE ZONE WITH BASE FLOOD ELEVATION OF
 15.0' NAVD (=16.5 FT NGVD) ON THE NEW FEMA MAPS AND THE
 PROPOSED FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT
 IS 18.0' NGVD, OR 1.5 FEET ABOVE THE BASE FLOOD
 ELEVATION. THIS WILL MEET THE CURRENT FREE BOARD
 CRITERIA BUT NOT THE PROPOSED FREEBOARD CRITERIA.
  
 TRACY L. WARD, P.E.
 SENIOR STORMWATER ENGINEER
 ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
 [email protected]
 561-494-1120
  
Review Stop STORM STORMWATER
Rev No 1 Status F Date 02-08-2017 Cont ID  
Sent By tward Date 02-08-2017 Time 10:01 Rev Time  
Received By tward Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
2017-02-08 10:03:06THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL LEVEL REVIEW. CONSTRUCTION LEVEL
 DETAILS, DESIGN CALCULATIONS AND THE POLLUTION
 PREVENTION PLAN WILL BE REVIEWED AS PART OF THE
 ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL AND BUILDING PERMIT
 APPLICATION PROCESSES. THE ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT
 APPROVAL APPLICATION FORMS CAN BE DOWNLOADED AT HTTP://
 WPB.ORG/DEPARTMENTS/ENGINEERING-PUBLIC-WORKS/FORMS,-PER
 MITS-APPLICATIONS
  
 THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS MUST BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO SITE
 PLAN APPROVAL:
  
 1. PRELIMINARY, UPDATED FEMA FLOOD INSURANCE MAPS ARE
 AVAILABLE AT
 HTTP://MAPS.CO.PALM-BEACH.FL.US/GIS/FLOODZONES.ASPX?.
 PLEASE REVIEW THE MAPS AND VERIFY THAT THE NEW MAPS
 WILL NOT IMPACT THE PROPOSED PROJECT.
  
 2. THE FREEBOARD REQUIREMENT FOR STRUCTURES IN A
 SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA IS ONE FOOT ABOVE BASE FLOOD
 ELEVATION.
  
 3. OKEECHOBEE BLVD. IS MAINTAINED BY PALM BEACH COUNTY.
 COUNTY APPROVAL WILL BE REQUIRED FOR WORK WITHIN THE
 RIGHT-OF-WAY OF OKEECHOBEE BLVD.
  
 4. WATER METERS AND SEWER LATERALS DO NOT ALIGN WITH
 THE LOTS. SERVICES MISSING FROM SOME LOTS.
  
 THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS MUST BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO
 ISSUANCE OF CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION INCLUDING
 BUILDING PERMITS AND ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL.
  
 1. AN ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL APPLICATION WILL
 BE REQUIRED FROM THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
 THE ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL APPLICATION FORMS
 CAN BE DOWNLOADED AT: HTTP://WPB.ORG/DEPARTMENTS/ENGINE
 ERING-PUBLIC-WORKS/FORMS,-PERMITS-APPLICATIONS
  
 2. PROVIDE ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS SIGNED AND SEALED
 BY A FLORIDA REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER FOR THE
 MINIMUM REQUIRED STORM RUNOFF WATER QUALITY TREATMENT
 AND PEAK FLOOD STAGES FOR 5-YEAR 1-DAY, 25-YEAR 3-DAY
 AND 100-YEAR 3-DAY DESIGN STORMS PER SFWMD CRITERIA.
  
 3. PROVIDE A COPY OF THE SFWMD ERP MODIFICATION FOR THE
 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
  
 4. PROVIDE A COPY OF THE LWDD PERMIT FOR THE PROPOSED
 DEVELOPMENT.
  
 TRACY WARD, PE
 SENIOR STORMWATER ENGINEER
 ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
 561-494-1120
 [email protected]
  
Review Stop SURVEY SURVEYING
Rev No 2 Status F Date 02-08-2017 Cont ID  
Sent By vnoel Date 02-08-2017 Time 10:46 Rev Time 0.00
Received By vnoel Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
2017-02-08 10:49:23UPDATE TO PREVIOUS COMMENTS:
  
 1. AS LOTS ARE TO BE FEE SIMPLE, A MAJOR SUBDIVISION
 AND REPLAT WILL BE REQUIRED.
 2. A SEPARATE APPLICATION FOR PLAT REVIEW WILL BE
 REQUIRED THROUGH ENGINEERING SERVICES AFTER SITE PLAN
 APPROVAL.
Review Stop SURVEY SURVEYING
Rev No 1 Status P Date 02-03-2017 Cont ID  
Sent By vnoel Date 02-03-2017 Time 08:03 Rev Time  
Received By vnoel Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
2017-02-03 08:03:531. PROPERTY HAS BEEN PLATTED.
 2. NO REPLAT REQUIRED AS UNITS ARE TO BE RENTALS.
 3. GARBAGE COLLECTION IS REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED BY THE
 CITY, NOT COUNTY. PLEASE CONTACT PETER BIENIEK, PUBLIC
 WORKS DIRECTOR.
Review Stop TRAFFIC TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
Rev No 1 Status   Date   Cont ID  
Sent By   Date   Time   Rev Time  
Received By   Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
***NONE***
Review Stop Z ZONING
Rev No 2 Status F Date 04-21-2017 Cont ID  
Sent By ahansen Date 04-21-2017 Time 17:22 Rev Time 0.00
Received By ahansen Date 04-21-2017 Time 17:22 Sent To  
Notes
2017-04-21 17:23:54CASE NO. 1633E
 NAME OF CASE BELLA VITA ESTATES MAJOR PD AMENDMENT
 ADDRESS 8230 OKEECHOBEE BOULEVARD
 - CONTACT ALEX HANSEN @ (561) 822-1463
  
 - PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN
 WRITTEN FORMAT.
  
 - WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF FIVE
 (5) PAPER COPIES AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY IN .PNG/.PDF
 FORMAT OF ALL PLANS. PLEASE NOTE THAT CHANGES ON THE
 RESUBMITTED PLANS OR THE SUBMITTAL OF INFORMATION/PLANS
 TO ADDRESS THE COMMENTS MAY RESULT IN ADDITIONAL
 COMMENTS.
  
 - THE COMMENTS SHALL BE SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED AND
 SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5 PM ON MAY 12,
 2017, TO BE SCHEDULED FOR THE JUNE 20, 2017 PLANNING
 BOARD MEETING.
  
 -PLEASE NOTE THAT DUE TO THE REPEAT COMMENTS BELOW, THE
 NEXT RESUBMITTAL SHALL BE ASSESSED A RESUBMITTAL FEE OF
 $600 (20% OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FEE).
  
 - PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION SIGNAGE SHALL BE POSTED
 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION
 94-39(I)(5) OF THE ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT
 REGULATIONS.
  
 1. APPLICANT NEEDS TO PROVIDE AN ALTA SURVEY WITH THE
 APPLICATION. THE ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY SHALL BE
 PREPARED AND SIGNED/SEALED BY A FLORIDA REGISTERED
 SURVEYOR. THE ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY MUST MEET THE
 ?MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTA/ACSM
 LAND TITLE SURVEYS? AS ADOPTED BY THE AMERICAN LAND
 TITLE ASSOCIATION, AMERICAN CONGRESS ON SURVEYING AND
 MAPPING, AND THE NATIONAL SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL
 SURVEYORS.
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: PLEASE FIND ATTACHED A BOUNDARY
 SURVEY WITH EXISTING IMPROVEMENTS PRESENTED THEREON.
 THIS SURVEY IS PROVIDED IN LIEU OF AN ALTA SURVEY
 PURSUANT TO OUR DISCUSSION WITH VINCE NOEL. AN
 ALTA/NSPS-LEVEL SURVEY IS MORE THAN WHAT IS NECESSARY
 TO CONVEY INFORMATION ABOUT EXISTING CONDITIONS. THE
 PROVIDED DOCUMENT SHOULD SATISFACTORILY MEET THE CITY?S
 NEEDS.
  
 CITY COMMENT: THE BOUNDARY SURVEY WITH EXISTING
 IMPROVEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE RESUBMITTAL DOES NOT SHOW
 THE 6.5? BARN ENCROACHMENT LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST
 CORNER OF THE SITE IDENTIFIED IN COMMENT 11. IT IS
 STAFF?S UNDERSTANDING THAT THE BARN IS STILL LOCATED
 WITHIN THE SITE. AS SUCH, THIS BARN SHOULD HAVE BEEN
 IDENTIFIED IN THIS SURVEY. PLEASE ADDRESS ACCORDINGLY
  
 2. UNDER JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT ? WAIVER REQUESTS -
 THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING ONE WAIVER:
 THE REQUESTED WAIVER IS FOR SECTION 94-207.C.4
 RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS WHICH
 REQUIRES THAT RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS BE LOCATED AT LEAST
 20 FEET FROM ANY OUTERMOST PERIMETER PROPERTY LINE OR
 ANY PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A
 13? MINIMUM PERIMETER PROPERTY LINE SETBACK, ONLY FOR
 TOWNHOME UNITS ALONG THE WEST AND SOUTH PERIMETER OF
 THE PROPERTY.
  
 EARLIER IN THE APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT CORRECTLY
 IDENTIFIES THAT THE INTERNAL TOWNHOMES HAVE TO COMPLY
 WITH THE STANDARDS OF CITY CODE SECTION 94-309.G.,
 WHICH UNDER 94-309.G(6)D.3 INCLUDES REAR SETBACK
 REQUIREMENTS OF 15 FEET OR TEN PERCENT OF LOTH DEPTH,
 WHICHEVER IS LESS. THE APPLICATION INDICATES THAT THE
 PROPOSED TOWNHOME LOTS AREA IS APPROXIMATELY 84 FEET
 DEEP, WHICH PROVIDES FOR THE 8.4 FEET MINIMUM REAR
 SETBACK. THE APPLICATION ALSO INDICATES THAT ?ALL OF
 THE INTERNAL TOWNHOMES HAVE A REAR SETBACK OF 10 FEET
 MINIMUM AND THEREFORE EXCEED THE CALCULATED REAR
 SETBACK.? STAFF IS UNABLE TO VERIFY IN THE SITE PLAN
 WHETHER THE PROPOSED TOWNHOMES LOCATED AT THE NORTH END
 OF THE PROJECT, IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF THE EXISTING LAKE
 (IDENTIFIED IN THE SITE PLAN AS BUILDING GROUPS 11 AND
 12) MEET THE REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT AS THE SITE PLAN
 DOES NOT SHOW THEIR PROPERTY LINE OR THE DISTANCE FROM
 THE STRUCTURES TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE(S). IN
 ADDITION, STAFF IS ALSO UNABLE TO DETERMINE THE REAR
 SETBACKS FOR THE TOWNHOMES LOCATED ACROSS THE STREET
 (IDENTIFIED IN THE SITE PLAN AS BUILDING GROUP 10) AS
 THE SITE PLAN DOES NO SHOW THE DISTANCE FROM THE
 STRUCTURES TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE(S). IT IS POSSIBLE
 THAT SOME OF THESE UNITS MAY ALSO REQUIRE A REAR
 SETBACK WAIVER, ALTHOUGH A DIFFERENT ONE FROM THE ONE
 REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT FOR THE EXTERNAL TOWNHOMES.
 THE SITE PLAN NEEDS TO BE REVISED TO SHOW ALL PROPERTY
 LINES FOR ALL PROPOSED TOWNHOMES AND IT SHOULD INCLUDE
 ALL SETBACKS.
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: THE SITE PLAN HAS BEEN REVISED TO
 INDICATE ADDITIONAL DIMENSIONS FOR BUILDING NUMBER 10.
 THE DIMENSIONS ARE FROM THE REAR OF THE BUILDING TO THE
 PLATTED TRACT LINE AND THE DIMENSIONS EXCEED THE 8.4?
 MINIMUM. BUILDINGS #10 AND 11 HAVE BEEN REVISED TO
 INDICATE AN 8.5? REAR LOT WHICH EXCEEDS THE 8.4?
 MINIMUM REAR LOT DIMENSION. FINALLY A WAIVER REQUEST IS
 BEING INCLUDED IN ORDER TO REDUCE THE MINIMUM TOWNHOME
 SEPARATION FROM 20? TO 15? ONLY FOR BUILDINGS # 11 AND
 12. PLEASE SEE ATTACHED REVISED JUSTIFICATION
 STATEMENT.
  
 CITY COMMENT: COMMENT NOTED
  
 3. THE CITY ALLOWS FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS IN ORDER TO
 ENCOURAGE INNOVATIVE DESIGN. IT IS STAFF?S OPINION THAT
 THE CURRENT SITE PLAN PROPOSAL DOES NOT INCORPORATE ANY
 INNOVATIVE DESIGN COMPONENTS. IN ORDER FOR STAFF TO
 SUPPORT THE WAIVER(S) REQUEST(S), THE PROPOSAL WOULD
 NEED TO PROVIDE CERTAIN DESIGN COMPONENTS THAT COULD BE
 CONSIDERED INNOVATIVE, SUCH AS THE FOLLOWING: A) ALL
 THE INTERNAL ACCESS SIDEWALKS SHOULD HAVE A MINIMUM
 WIDTH OF 5 FEET (CURRENTLY THEY ARE ONLY 4 FEET WIDE);
 B) ADD SIDEWALKS IN FRONT OF ALL THE UNITS (CURRENTLY
 ONLY 46 OF THE PROPOSED 98 UNITS HAVE SIDEWALKS IN
 FRONT ON THEM). WHILE THE APPLICATION STATES THAT THERE
 ARE PROPOSED WALKWAYS ON ONE SIDE OF THE ROAD ?DUE TO
 THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY AS WELL AS THE RESTRICTIONS
 BASED UPON EXISTING ROADWAYS?, STAFF BELIEVES THAT
 ADDITIONAL SPACE FOR SIDEWALKS COULD BE PROVIDED IF THE
 GARAGES WERE TO BE RECESSED A FEW FEET OR IF TOWNHOMES
 WERE TO BE BUILT AS 3-STORY UNITS.
  
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: THE RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOME PRODUCT
 HAS ALREADY BEEN DESIGNED BY THE HOME BUILDER?S
 ARCHITECT. THEREFORE, REDESIGN TO 3 ?STORY OR RECESSED
 GARAGES IS NOT FEASIBLE. THE SITE PLAN HAS BEEN REVISED
 IN ORDER TO INCORPORATE THE SIDEWALK, AS REQUESTED BY
 CITY STAFF. HOWEVER, DUE TO SITE CONSTRAINTS THE DESIGN
 CAN ONLY PERMIT 4? SIDEWALKS IN CERTAIN LOCATIONS. A
 WALK HAS BEEN ADDED IN FRONT OF BUILDING #11 AND #12,
 AS WELL AS ALONG THE EAST PROPERTY LINE TO PROVIDE
 ACCESS TO THE GUEST SPACES. FINALLY THE WALK WAS
 EXTENDED ADJACENT TO BUILDING #1.
  
 CITY COMMENT: STAFF STILL HAS CONCERNS ABOUT THE LACK
 OF SIDEWALKS IN FRONT OF A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF THE
 PROPOSED UNITS.
  
 4. THE PLANS IDENTIFY A PROPOSED 5-FOOT TRAIL AROUND
 THE LAKE; HOWEVER THE PLANS PROVIDE NO ADDITIONAL
 DETAIL ON THIS TRAIL, INCLUDING MATERIAL TO BE USED.
 PLEASE NOTE THAT THE TRAIL SHOULD BE PAVED, PREFERABLY
 WITH EITHER ASPHALT OR CONCRETE. PLEASE REVISE THE
 PLANS BY IDENTIFYING PAVING SURFACE AND DETAILS FOR THE
 TRAIL.
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: A NOTE HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE
 PLAN, WHICH INDICATES ASPHALT MATERIAL FOR FITNESS
 TRAIL.
  
 CITY COMMENT: COMMENT ADDRESSED
  
  
  
 5. THE CURRENTLY APPROVED SITE PLAN FOR THIS SITE
 INCLUDES A 35-FOOT X 30-FOOT FUTURE PALM TRAN BOARDING
 AND ALIGHTING EASEMENT ON THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY
 RIGHT NEXT TO THE OKEECHOBEE BOULEVARD RIGHT OF WAY.
 THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION DOES
 NOT INCLUDE THIS EASEMENT. IN ORDER TO REMOVE THE
 EASEMENT FROM THE PLAN, PLEASE PROVIDE WRITTEN
 CONFIRMATION FROM PALM TRAN THAT THEY AGREE WITH THE
 EASEMENT REMOVAL.
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: THE 25?X30? PALM TRAN EASEMENT
 HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE SITE PLAN. A COPY OF AN EMAIL
 FROM STEVEN ANDERSON, WITH PBC PALM TRAN, IS ALSO
 ATTACHED TO THIS RESPONSE LETTER, WHICH INDICATES THAT
 THE EASEMENT IS REQUIRED.
  
 CITY COMMENT: COMMENT ADDRESSED
  
 6. THE PARKING DETAIL INCLUDED IN DET.1/SP.2 IS NOT
 CONSISTENT WITH THE PARKING STALL PAINTING REQUIREMENTS
 OF SECTION 94-485. ALSO, PROVIDE DIMENSIONS ON SP.1 AND
 ON THE DETAIL PAGE FOR THE PARKING AREA LOCATED
 ADJACENT TO THE MAIL BOXES AS THE DIMENSIONS FOR THE
 SPACES IN THIS AREA APPEAR TO FLUCTUATE IN THE SITE
 PLAN.
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: THE PARKING DETAIL ON DETAIL
 SHEET SHEET #1/SITE PLAN SHEET #2 HAS BEEN REVISED IN
 ORDER TO ADD THE DOUBLE PARKING STRIPE LINES THAT ARE
 CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY STANDARD DETAIL. IN ADDITION,
 ADDITIONAL DIMENSIONS WERE ADDED TO THE SITE PLAN TO
 DIMENSION THE PARKING SPACES ADJACENT TO THE MAIL BOX
 KIOSK. PARKING SPACES ON RADII ARE DESIGNED TO HAVE THE
 MINIMUM WIDTH AT THE TOP OF THE PARKING STALL, SO THAT
 VEHICLES FIT WITHIN THE SPACES. THE MINIMUM WIDTH IS
 8.5? AS INDICATED.
  
 CITY COMMENT: COMMENT ADDRESSED
  
 7. PER SECTION 94-485, THE MINIMUM LENGTH FOR STANDARD
 0 DEGREE (PARALLEL) PARKING STALLS IS 22 FEET. THE
 LENGTH OF THE PARALLEL GUEST PARKING SPACES SHOWN IN
 THE PLAN IS 20 FEET. WHILE THE CODE DOES ALLOW FOR
 SMALL CAR SPACES WITH A LENGTH OF 20 FEET FOR PARALLEL
 PARKING, IT APPEARS THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD NOT
 BE ABLE TO USE THE SMALL CAR PARKING REQUIREMENTS BASED
 ON THE LIMITATIONS OUTLINED IN SECTION 94-485(N)(1).
 ALSO NOTE THAT THE CURB LINE FOR THE END SPACES OF
 PARALLEL PARKING ROWS SHALL HAVE A 45 DEGREE ANGLE
 BEYOND THE REQUIRED MINIMUM LENGTH OF THE SPACES.
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: ALL PARALLEL PARKING SPACES ON
 THE SITE PLAN HAVE BEEN REVISED TO BE 8.5? X 22? DEEP,
 WITH THE END SPACES INCLUDING THE 45 DEGREE PAVEMENT
 RETURN.
  
 CITY COMMENT: COMMENT ADDRESSED
  
 8. THE PARKING SITE DATA ON SP.1 INDICATES THAT THE
 GUEST SPACES REQUIRED ARE 10 SPACES (1 SPACES/PER 10
 REQUIRED SPACES). SINCE 196 SPACES ARE REQUIRED FOR THE
 RESIDENTIAL PARKING, THEN THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED GUEST
 SPACES SHOULD BE 20 (19.6) INSTEAD OF THE 10 INDICATED
 IN THE TABLE. AS A RESULT, THE TOTAL REQUIRED PARKING
 SHOULD BE 216 SPACES INSTEAD OF THE 206 SHOWN IN THE
 TABLE. ALSO, THE SITE PLAN SHOWS THAT ONLY 18 GUEST
 PARKING SPACES ARE BEING PROVIDED, WHICH IS SHORT OF
 THE 20 SPACES REQUIRED PER CODE. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE
 CODE DOES NOT ALLOW FOR PARKING WAIVERS FOR PROPERTIES
 WEST OF I-95.
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: THE PARKING CALCULATION HAS BEEN
 CORRECTED IN THE SITE DATA TO INDICATE THE CORRECT
 CALCULATION BASED UPON THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PARKING
 SPACES (NOT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS). TWENTY (20)
 GUEST SPACES HAVE BEEN PROVIDED, WHICH YIELDS A TOTAL
 OF 292 PARKING SPACES FOR THE PROPERTY.
  
 CITY COMMENT: THE SITE PLAN APPEARS TO HAVE BEEN
 REVISED TO ADDRESS THIS COMMENT; HOWEVER, THE REVISED
 JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT/PROJECT NARRATIVE STILL
 INCLUDES INACCURATE REFERENCES REGARDING THE NUMBER OF
 GUEST SPACES THAT ARE BOTH REQUIRED AND PROPOSED FOR
 THIS PROJECT. PLEASE REVISE ACCORDINGLY.
  
  
 9. PLEASE PROVIDE WRITTEN VERIFICATION FROM THE CITY?S
 BUILDING DIVISION THAT THE PARALLEL ADA PARKING SPACE
 SHOWN NEAR THE PASSIVE RECREATION/TOT LOT AREA MEETS
 ADA REQUIREMENTS.
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: AN EMAIL DRAFTED FROM CITY OF
 WEST PALM BEACH BUILDING OFFICIAL ROBERT BROWN IS
 ATTACHED TO THIS RESPONSE LETTER, WHICH INDICATES THAT
 THE ADA PARALLEL HANDICAP SPACE DESIGN IS ACCEPTABLE
 AND MEETS ALL REQUIREMENTS.
  
 CITY COMMENT: COMMENT ADDRESSED
  
 10. PLEASE EXPLAIN THE GARBAGE COLLECTION SYSTEM OR
 PLAN THAT WILL BE USED FOR THIS PROJECT. BE AWARE THAT
 THE CITY?S SANITATION DIVISION WOULD NEED TO APPROVE IN
 WRITING ANY GARBAGE COLLECTION PLAN.
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: GARBAGE COLLECTION SYSTEM WILL BE
 CURBSIDE PICKUP. HOA DOCUMENTS WILL REQUIRE THAT THE
 GARBAGE BINS AND RECYCLE BINS BE STORED OUT OF SIGHT.
 THE SITE PLAN INDICATES BOTH OF THESE REQUIREMENTS
 WITHIN THE NOTES SECTION. AN EMAIL IS ATTACHED FROM MR.
 FERDINAND RIVERA-NEGRON, WITH THE SANITATION
 DEPARTMENT, WHICH APPROVES THIS TYPE OF COLLECTION
 SYSTEM.
  
 CITY COMMENT: COMMENT ADDRESSED
  
 11. THE SITE PLAN IDENTIFIES NEAR THE SOUTHWEST CORNER
 OF THE SITE THE PRESENCE OF A WOOD BARN WHICH
 ENCROACHES 6.5 FEET INTO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THIS
 ENCROACHMENT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED AND THE DIFFERENT
 PLANS NEED TO BE MODIFIED ACCORDINGLY.
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: A NOTE HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE SITE
 PLAN TO REMOVE THIS BARN ENCROACHMENT.
 CITY COMMENT: COMMENT ADDRESSED WITH REGARDS TO THE
 SITE. PLEASE SEE CITY COMMENT FOR COMMENT #1 WITH
 REGARDS TO SURVEY?S DEPICTION OF THIS BARN.
  
  
 12. THIS PROPOSED MAJOR PD AMENDMENT TO A FEE SIMPLE
 RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOME COMMUNITY WILL REQUIRE AN
 APPLICATION FOR REPLAT TO CREATE THE FEE SIMPLE LOTS.
 THE APPLICATION FOR THE PD AMENDMENT WILL NOT BE TAKEN
 TO CITY COMMISSION UNTIL THE REPLAT APPLICATION HAS
 BEEN SUBMITTED AND STAFF HAS DETERMINED THAT IT MEETS
 ALL CITY REQUIREMENTS AND IS READY FOR CITY COMMISSION
 ACTION.
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: THE REPLAT APPLICATION WILL BE
 SUBMITTED UNDER A SEPARATE COVER, SO THAT ALL
 APPLICATIONS WILL BE HEARD CONCURRENTLY.
  
 CITY COMMENT: COMMENT ADDRESSED
  
  
 13. PLEASE EXPLAIN WHETHER ANY SCREEN ENCLOSURES OR
 FENCES WILL BE EITHER CONSTRUCTED BY THE DEVELOPER IN
 THE REAR OF THE UNITS OR WHETHER THE FUTURE OWNERS OF
 THE UNITS WILL BE PERMITTED TO BUILD SUCH ENCLOSURES OR
 FENCES. IF SO, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE REQUIRED AS
 PART OF THIS AMENDMENT AND ADDITIONAL WAIVERS MAY BE
 REQUIRED.
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: A NOTE HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE SITE
 PLAN, WHICH INDICATES THAT PRIVACY FENCES ARE ALLOWED
 ON THE PROPERTY LINE. PRIVACY FENCES CAN EXTEND TO THE
 REAR LOT LINE. IN ADDITION, A NOTE HAS BEEN ADDED TO
 THE TYPICAL PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT REGULATION DETAIL THAT
 THIS FENCE TO COMPLY WITH SECTION 94-302 OF THE CITY
 CODE. FINALLY, THE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT REGULATION
 DETAIL HAS BEEN UPDATED TO INDICATE LOCATION OF PAVER
 PATIO OPTION AND TO CLARIFY THE 3?X3? LANDING FROM THE
 EXTERIOR DOOR. PLEASE REFERENCE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS.
  
 CITY COMMENT: BOTH, THE LANDSCAPE PLANS AND THE
 PHOTOMETRIC PLANS SHOW FOR BUILDING #11 DIFFERENT
 DIMENSIONS FOR THE PAVER PATIOS AND THE EXTERIOR DOOR
 LANDINGS THAN THOSE SHOWN IN THE SITE PLAN. PLEASE
 ADDRESS.
  
 SHEET LP.6 OF THE LANDSCAPE PLANS SHOWS LANDSCAPE
 HEDGES LOCATED OVER THE PROPERTY LINES IN THE REAR OF
 THE UNITS. PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW THE POTENTIAL PRIVACY
 FENCES REFERENCED IN THE RESPONSE ABOVE WOULD BE
 INSTALLED GIVEN THE PRESENCE OF THESE HEDGES.
  
 PLEASE EXPLAIN WHETHER THERE ARE ANY PROPOSED
 DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE PRIVACY FENCES THAT WOULD BE
 ALLOWED FOR LOTS LOCATED WITHIN THE INTERIOR AREAS OF
 THE DEVELOPMENT VERSUS PRIVACY FENCES POTENTIALLY
 ALLOWED FOR LOTS LOCATED IN THE PERIMETER OF THE
 DEVELOPMENT AS IT APPEARS THAT BOTH TYPES OF LOCATIONS
 PRESENT DIFFERENT LIMITATIONS.
  
  
 14. THE SITE PLAN (SP.1) IDENTIFIES A PASSIVE
 RECREATION/TOT LOT AND AN ADJACENT BENCH. HOWEVER, THE
 SITE PLAN DOES NOT INCLUDE A DETAIL, INCLUDING
 ELEVATIONS OF EITHER THE TOT LOT OR OF THE BENCH.
 PLEASE MODIFY THE SITE PLAN BY ADDING THESE DETAILS,
 INCLUDING INFORMATION ON THE MATERIALS OF THE TOT LOT
 HARDSCAPE SURFACE(S).
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: A DETAIL HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE
 DETAIL SHEET WHICH INDICATES THE ELEVATION OF THE BENCH
 AND TOT LOT. A NOTE HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE SITE PLAN
 WHICH INDICATES THAT THE SURFACE OF THE TOT LOT PLAY
 AREA WILL BE MULCH.
  
 CITY COMMENT: COMMENT ADDRESSED
  
  
 15. THE SITE PLAN (SP.1) IDENTIFIES A BIKE RACK NEXT TO
 THE PROPOSED PASSIVE RECREATION/TOT LOT. HOWEVER, THE
 SITE PLAN DOES NOT INCLUDE A BICYCLE RACK DETAIL, WITH
 AN ELEVATION OF THE BIKE RACK AND WITH THE DIMENSIONS
 FOR THE BIKE PARKING PAD AND THE BIKE RACK. PLEASE
 MODIFY THE SITE PLAN BY ADDING THESE DETAILS.
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: A DETAIL HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE
 DETAIL SHEET WHICH INDICATES THE BIKE RACKS. THREE
 PROVIDED FOR A TOTAL OF SIX (6) BIKE PARKING SPACES.
 THE SPECIFICATION INDICATED COINCIDES WITH THE CITY
 RECOMMENDED DETAIL, PER THE BICYCLE PARKING GUIDELINES
 PROVIDED BY THE CITY. IN ADDITION, THE DETAIL SHEET HAS
 BEEN UPDATED TO INDICATE THE DIMENSIONS FOR THE
 CONCRETE PAD BELOW THE BIKE RACK.
  
 CITY COMMENT: COMMENT ADDRESSED
  
 16. THE SITE PLAN DETAIL NEEDS TO INCLUDE INFORMATION
 REGARDING THE TYPE OF MATERIAL BEING PROPOSED FOR THE
 CROSSWALKS DEPICTED IN THE SITE PLAN.
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: A NOTE HAS BEEN ADDED TO ALL
 LOCATIONS WHERE THE CROSSWALKS EXIST IN ORDER TO SPEC
 PAVER CROSSWALK MATERIAL.
  
 CITY COMMENT: COMMENT ADDRESSED
  
  
 17. SHEET DETAIL 1/SITE PLAN PAGE 2 IDENTIFIES THE
 ?INTERNAL VEHICULAR ACCESSWAY STREET LIGHT DETAIL?
 FIXTURE PROPOSED FOR THIS PROJECT. IN ADDITION, PAGE 8
 OF THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT/PROJECT NARRATIVE UNDER
 (13) EXTERIOR LIGHTING STATES THAT ?ALL PROPOSED
 LIGHTING WILL BE INTERNAL TO THE COMMUNITY ALONG THE
 INTERNAL VEHICULAR ACCESS TRACT?. NEITHER ONE OF THE
 PLANS INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION APPEARS TO SHOW ANY
 LIGHT POLES WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE PROJECT. ALL OF
 THE PLANS NEED TO BE REVISED TO IDENTIFY THE PROPOSED
 LOCATION OF THE LIGHT POLES. PLEASE NOTE THAT LIGHT
 POLES ARE CONSIDERED STRUCTURES BY THE CODE AND NO
 STRUCTURES ARE ALLOWED WITHIN THE SETBACK. AS A RESULT,
 ALL PROPOSED LIGHT POLES WOULD NEED TO BE LOCATED
 OUTSIDE OF THE SETBACKS OR THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO
 APPLY FOR A WAIVER TO ALLOW THEM WITHIN THE SETBACK.
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: A PHOTOMETRIC PLAN IS INCLUDED
 WITHIN THIS RESUBMITTAL PACKAGE. LIGHT POLES HAVE
 LOCATED WITHIN ALL ROADWAY AREAS. LIGHT POLES HAVE ALSO
 BEEN LOCATED AT THE ENTRANCE ALONG EAST SIDE SO THAT
 ALL POLES MEET THE 25? PERIMETER SETBACK.
  
 CITY COMMENT: THE POLE DETAIL SHOWN IN PH-4 OF THE
 PHOTOMETRIC PLANS APPEARS TO SHOW A DIFFERENT POLE FROM
 THE ONE SHOWN DET.1/SP.2 OF THE SITE PLAN. THE POLE
 SHOWN IN THE PHOTOMETRIC PLANS HAS A LAMP CENTER
 ELEVATION OF 16?6? WHILE THE POLE IN THE SITE PLAN HAS
 LAMP CENTER ELEVATION OF 18?. PLEASE CORRECT THIS
 DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE PLANS AND CONFIRM THE LAMP
 CENTER ELEVATION ASSUMED FOR THE ILLUMINATION LEVELS
 FOR THE SUBJECT SITE SHOWN IN THE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN.
  
 18. PER SECTION 94-130(D) ?ANY OPERATION OR ACTIVITY
 PRODUCING GLARE SHALL BE CONDUCTED SO THAT DIRECT OR
 INDIRECT LIGHT FROM THE SOURCE SHALL NOT CAUSE
 ILLUMINATION IN EXCESS OF 0.5 FOOT CANDLES WHEN
 MEASURED IN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT?. IN ORDER TO
 CONFIRM COMPLIANCE WITH THIS REQUIREMENT, ONCE THE
 PROPOSED LIGHT POLES ARE INCLUDED IN THE PLANS, THE
 APPLICANT WILL NEED TO SUBMIT PHOTOMETRIC PLANS WHICH
 IDENTIFY ILLUMINATION LEVELS FOR THE ADJACENT
 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS TO THE WEST, SOUTH AND EAST
 RESULTING FROM THE PROPOSED PHOTOMETRIC PLAN FOR BELLA
 VITA. THE PHOTOMETRIC PLANS WOULD NEED TO DEMONSTRATE
 THAT THE PROPOSED LIGHTING PLAN WILL COMPLY WITH THIS
 REQUIREMENT IN RELATION TO THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL
 DISTRICTS.
 APPLICANT?S RESPONSE: A PHOTOMETRIC PLAN IS INCLUDED
 WITHIN THIS RESUBMITTAL PACKAGE. LIGHT LEVELS ARE
 INDICATED WITHIN THE PLAN TO INDICATE COMPLIANCE WITH
 THE .5 FOOT-CANDLE MAXIMUM AT THE PROPERTY LINES.
  
 CITY COMMENT: SEE CITY COMMENT TO COMMENT RESPONSE #17.
  
 NEW COMMENT 19. PLEASE INCLUDE IN THE PLANS THE AIR
 CONDITIONING (AC) COMPRESSORS FOR EACH UNIT IN ORDER TO
 DETERMINE WHETHER THERE ARE ANY POTENTIAL LOCATIONAL
 CONFLICTS BETWEEN THE AC UNITS AND OTHER ELEMENTS OF
 THE PLAN.
  
  
 NEW COMMENT 20. THE LANDSCAPE PLANS SHOW MULTIPLE
 LOCATIONS WERE TREES ARE LOCATED IN THE PROPERTY LINE.
 THIS IS PROBLEMATIC FOR MULTIPLE REASONS AND SUCH TREES
 SHOULD BE MOVED.
  
 NEW COMMENT 21. ORIGINAL COMMENT #13 BY RAY CARANCI,
 CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH LANDSCAPE PLANNER, QUESTIONED
 THE PROPOSED ?COMBINED? SIDEWALKS FOR ADJACENT INTERNAL
 END UNITS. THESE SIDEWALKS ARE ONLY 4 FEET IN WIDTH AND
 ARE LOCATED ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE. THIS PROPOSED
 CONFIGURATION WOULD RESULT IN THE OWNERS OF THESE UNITS
 CONSTANTLY HAVING TO ENTER INTO THE LIMITS OF THE
 ADJACENT PROPERTY IN ORDER TO WALK FROM THEIR OWN
 DRIVEWAY TO THEIR OWN ENTRY DOOR. THE APPLICANT WILL BE
 REQUIRED TO PROVIDE HOA DOCUMENTS INDICATING HOW THIS
 SITUATION WILL BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO THIS APPLICATION
 BEING SCHEDULED FOR CITY COMMISSION.
  
Review Stop Z ZONING
Rev No 1 Status F Date   Cont ID  
Sent By   Date   Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By ahansen Date 02-07-2017 Time 10:29 Sent To  
Notes
2017-02-07 10:33:34CASE NO. 1633E
 NAME OF CASE BELLA VITA ESTATES MAJOR PD AMENDMENT
 ADDRESS 8230 OKEECHOBEE BOULEVARD
  
 - CONTACT ALEX HANSEN @ (561) 822-1463
  
 - PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN
 WRITTEN FORMAT.
  
 - WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF ELEVEN
 (11)/FIVE (5) PAPER COPIES AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY IN
 .PNG/.PDF FORMAT OF ALL PLANS. PLEASE NOTE THAT CHANGES
 ON THE RESUBMITTED PLANS OR THE SUBMITTAL OF
 INFORMATION/PLANS TO ADDRESS THE COMMENTS MAY RESULT IN
 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
  
 - THE PPRC COMMENTS SHALL BE SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED AND
 SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5 PM ON FEBRUARY
 24, 2017, TO BE SCHEDULED FOR THE APRIL 2017 PLANNING
 BOARD MEETING.
  
 - PLEASE NOTE THAT IF THE PLANNING DIVISION HAS NOT
 RECEIVED A RESPONSE TO THE PPRC COMMENTS WITHIN 60 DAYS
 FROM THE DATE OF THE PPRC MEETING (APRIL 10, 2017), THE
 CASE SHALL BE CONSIDERED WITHDRAWN. ANY FURTHER ACTION
 SHALL REQUIRE A NEW DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION.
  
 - 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.
  
 - PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION SIGNAGE SHALL BE POSTED
 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION
 94-39(I)(5) OF THE ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT
 REGULATIONS.
  
  
 1. APPLICANT NEEDS TO PROVIDE AN ALTA SURVEY WITH THE
 APPLICATION. THE ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY SHALL BE
 PREPARED AND SIGNED/SEALED BY A FLORIDA REGISTERED
 SURVEYOR. THE ALTA/ACSM LAND TITLE SURVEY MUST MEET THE
 ?MINIMUM STANDARD DETAIL REQUIREMENTS FOR ALTA/ACSM
 LAND TITLE SURVEYS? AS ADOPTED BY THE AMERICAN LAND
 TITLE ASSOCIATION, AMERICAN CONGRESS ON SURVEYING AND
 MAPPING, AND THE NATIONAL SOCIETY OF PROFESSIONAL
 SURVEYORS.
  
 2. UNDER JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT - WAIVER REQUESTS -
 THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING ONE WAIVER:
 THE REQUESTED WAIVER IS FOR SECTION 94-207.C.4
 RESIDENTIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS WHICH
 REQUIRES THAT RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS BE LOCATED AT LEAST
 20 FEET FROM ANY OUTERMOST PERIMETER PROPERTY LINE OR
 ANY PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING A
 13-FOOT MINIMUM PERIMETER PROPERTY LINE SETBACK, ONLY
 FOR TOWNHOME UNITS ALONG THE WEST AND SOUTH PERIMETER
 OF THE PROPERTY.
  
 EARLIER IN THE APPLICATION, THE APPLICANT CORRECTLY
 IDENTIFIES THAT THE INTERNAL TOWNHOMES HAVE TO COMPLY
 WITH THE STANDARDS OF CITY CODE SECTION 94-309.G.,
 WHICH UNDER 94-309.G(6)D.3 INCLUDES REAR SETBACK
 REQUIREMENTS OF 15 FEET OR TEN PERCENT OF LOTH DEPTH,
 WHICHEVER IS LESS. THE APPLICATION INDICATES THAT THE
 PROPOSED TOWNHOME LOTS AREA IS APPROXIMATELY 84 FEET
 DEEP, WHICH PROVIDES FOR THE 8.4 FEET MINIMUM REAR
 SETBACK. THE APPLICATION ALSO INDICATES THAT "ALL OF
 THE INTERNAL TOWNHOMES HAVE A REAR SETBACK OF 10 FEET
 MINIMUM AND THEREFORE EXCEED THE CALCULATED REAR
 SETBACK." STAFF IS UNABLE TO VERIFY IN THE SITE PLAN
 WHETHER THE PROPOSED TOWNHOMES LOCATED AT THE NORTH END
 OF THE PROJECT, IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF THE EXISTING LAKE
 (IDENTIFIED IN THE SITE PLAN AS BUILDING GROUPS 11 AND
 12) MEET THE REAR SETBACK REQUIREMENT AS THE SITE PLAN
 DOES NOT SHOW THEIR PROPERTY LINE OR THE DISTANCE FROM
 THE STRUCTURES TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE(S). IN
 ADDITION, STAFF IS ALSO UNABLE TO DETERMINE THE REAR
 SETBACKS FOR THE TOWNHOMES LOCATED ACROSS THE STREET
 (IDENTIFIED IN THE SITE PLAN AS BUILDING GROUP 10) AS
 THE SITE PLAN DOES NO SHOW THE DISTANCE FROM THE
 STRUCTURES TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE(S). IT IS POSSIBLE
 THAT SOME OF THESE UNITS MAY ALSO REQUIRE A REAR
 SETBACK WAIVER, ALTHOUGH A DIFFERENT ONE FROM THE ONE
 REQUESTED BY THE APPLICANT FOR THE EXTERNAL TOWNHOMES.
 THE SITE PLAN NEEDS TO BE REVISED TO SHOW ALL PROPERTY
 LINES FOR ALL PROPOSED TOWNHOMES AND IT SHOULD INCLUDE
 ALL SETBACKS.
  
 3. THE CITY ALLOWS FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS IN ORDER TO
 ENCOURAGE INNOVATIVE DESIGN. IT IS STAFF'S OPINION THAT
 THE CURRENT SITE PLAN PROPOSAL DOES NOT INCORPORATE ANY
 INNOVATIVE DESIGN COMPONENTS. IN ORDER FOR STAFF TO
 SUPPORT THE WAIVER(S) REQUEST(S), THE PROPOSAL WOULD
 NEED TO PROVIDE CERTAIN DESIGN COMPONENTS THAT COULD BE
 CONSIDERED INNOVATIVE, SUCH AS THE FOLLOWING: A) ALL
 THE INTERNAL ACCESS SIDEWALKS SHOULD HAVE A MINIMUM
 WIDTH OF 5 FEET (CURRENTLY THEY ARE ONLY 4 FEET WIDE);
 B) ADD SIDEWALKS IN FRONT OF ALL THE UNITS (CURRENTLY
 ONLY 46 OF THE PROPOSED 98 UNITS HAVE SIDEWALKS IN
 FRONT ON THEM). WHILE THE APPLICATION STATES THAT THERE
 ARE PROPOSED WALKWAYS ON ONE SIDE OF THE ROAD "DUE TO
 THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY AS WELL AS THE RESTRICTIONS
 BASED UPON EXISTING ROADWAYS", STAFF BELIEVES THAT
 ADDITIONAL SPACE FOR SIDEWALKS COULD BE PROVIDED IF THE
 GARAGES WERE TO BE RECESSED A FEW FEET OR IF TOWNHOMES
 WERE TO BE BUILT AS 3-STORY UNITS.
  
 4. THE PLANS IDENTIFY A PROPOSED 5-FOOT TRAIL AROUND
 THE LAKE; HOWEVER THE PLANS PROVIDE NO ADDITIONAL
 DETAIL ON THIS TRAIL, INCLUDING MATERIAL TO BE USED.
 PLEASE NOTE THAT THE TRAIL SHOULD BE PAVED, PREFERABLY
 WITH EITHER ASPHALT OR CONCRETE. PLEASE REVISE THE
 PLANS BY IDENTIFYING PAVING SURFACE AND DETAILS FOR THE
 TRAIL.
  
 5. THE CURRENTLY APPROVED SITE PLAN FOR THIS SITE
 INCLUDES A 35-FOOT X 30-FOOT FUTURE PALM TRAN BOARDING
 AND ALIGHTING EASEMENT ON THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY
 RIGHT NEXT TO THE OKEECHOBEE BOULEVARD RIGHT OF WAY.
 THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION DOES
 NOT INCLUDE THIS EASEMENT. IN ORDER TO REMOVE THE
 EASEMENT FROM THE PLAN, PLEASE PROVIDE WRITTEN
 CONFIRMATION FROM PALM TRAN THAT THEY AGREE WITH THE
 EASEMENT REMOVAL.
  
 6. THE PARKING DETAIL INCLUDED IN DET.1/SP.2 IS NOT
 CONSISTENT WITH THE PARKING STALL PAINTING REQUIREMENTS
 OF SECTION 94-485. ALSO, PROVIDE DIMENSIONS ON SP.1 AND
 ON THE DETAIL PAGE FOR THE PARKING AREA LOCATED
 ADJACENT TO THE MAIL BOXES AS THE DIMENSIONS FOR THE
 SPACES IN THIS AREA APPEAR TO FLUCTUATE IN THE SITE
 PLAN.
  
 7. PER SECTION 94-485, THE MINIMUM LENGTH FOR STANDARD
 0 DEGREE (PARALLEL) PARKING STALLS IS 22 FEET. THE
 LENGTH OF THE PARALLEL GUEST PARKING SPACES SHOWN IN
 THE PLAN IS 20 FEET. WHILE THE CODE DOES ALLOW FOR
 SMALL CAR SPACES WITH A LENGTH OF 20 FEET FOR PARALLEL
 PARKING, IT APPEARS THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD NOT
 BE ABLE TO USE THE SMALL CAR PARKING REQUIREMENTS BASED
 ON THE LIMITATIONS OUTLINED IN SECTION 94-485(N)(1).
 ALSO NOTE THAT THE CURB LINE FOR THE END SPACES OF
 PARALLEL PARKING ROWS SHALL HAVE A 45 DEGREE ANGLE
 BEYOND THE REQUIRED MINIMUM LENGTH OF THE SPACES.
  
 8. THE PARKING SITE DATA ON SP.1 INDICATES THAT THE
 GUEST SPACES REQUIRED ARE 10 SPACES (1 SPACES/PER 10
 REQUIRED SPACES). SINCE 196 SPACES ARE REQUIRED FOR THE
 RESIDENTIAL PARKING, THEN THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED GUEST
 SPACES SHOULD BE 20 (19.6) INSTEAD OF THE 10 INDICATED
 IN THE TABLE. AS A RESULT, THE TOTAL REQUIRED PARKING
 SHOULD BE 216 SPACES INSTEAD OF THE 206 SHOWN IN THE
 TABLE. ALSO, THE SITE PLAN SHOWS THAT ONLY 18 GUEST
 PARKING SPACES ARE BEING PROVIDED, WHICH IS SHORT OF
 THE 20 SPACES REQUIRED PER CODE. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE
 CODE DOES NOT ALLOW FOR PARKING WAIVERS FOR PROPERTIES
 WEST OF I-95.
  
 9. PLEASE PROVIDE WRITTEN VERIFICATION FROM THE CITY?S
 BUILDING DIVISION THAT THE PARALLEL ADA PARKING SPACE
 SHOWN NEAR THE PASSIVE RECREATION/TOT LOT AREA MEETS
 ADA REQUIREMENTS.
  
 10. PLEASE EXPLAIN THE GARBAGE COLLECTION SYSTEM OR
 PLAN THAT WILL BE USED FOR THIS PROJECT. BE AWARE THAT
 THE CITY'S SANITATION DIVISION WOULD NEED TO APPROVE IN
 WRITING ANY GARBAGE COLLECTION PLAN.
  
 11. THE SITE PLAN IDENTIFIES NEAR THE SOUTHWEST CORNER
 OF THE SITE THE PRESENCE OF A WOOD BARN WHICH
 ENCROACHES 6.5 FEET INTO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THIS
 ENCROACHMENT NEEDS TO BE REMOVED AND THE DIFFERENT
 PLANS NEED TO BE MODIFIED ACCORDINGLY.
  
 12. THIS PROPOSED MAJOR PD AMENDMENT TO A FEE SIMPLE
 RESIDENTIAL TOWNHOME COMMUNITY WILL REQUIRE AN
 APPLICATION FOR REPLAT TO CREATE THE FEE SIMPLE LOTS.
 THE APPLICATION FOR THE PD AMENDMENT WILL NOT BE TAKEN
 TO CITY COMMISSION UNTIL THE REPLAT APPLICATION HAS
 BEEN SUBMITTED AND STAFF HAS DETERMINED THAT IT MEETS
 ALL CITY REQUIREMENTS AND IS READY FOR CITY COMMISSION
 ACTION.
  
 13. PLEASE EXPLAIN WHETHER ANY SCREEN ENCLOSURES OR
 FENCES WILL BE EITHER CONSTRUCTED BY THE DEVELOPER IN
 THE REAR OF THE UNITS OR WHETHER THE FUTURE OWNERS OF
 THE UNITS WILL BE PERMITTED TO BUILD SUCH ENCLOSURES OR
 FENCES. IF SO, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE REQUIRED AS
 PART OF THIS AMENDMENT AND ADDITIONAL WAIVERS MAY BE
 REQUIRED.
  
 14. THE SITE PLAN (SP.1) IDENTIFIES A PASSIVE
 RECREATION/TOT LOT AND AN ADJACENT BENCH. HOWEVER, THE
 SITE PLAN DOES NOT INCLUDE A DETAIL, INCLUDING
 ELEVATIONS OF EITHER THE TOT LOT OR OF THE BENCH.
 PLEASE MODIFY THE SITE PLAN BY ADDING THESE DETAILS,
 INCLUDING INFORMATION ON THE MATERIALS OF THE TOT LOT
 HARDSCAPE SURFACE(S).
  
 15. THE SITE PLAN (SP.1) IDENTIFIES A BIKE RACK NEXT TO
 THE PROPOSED PASSIVE RECREATION/TOT LOT. HOWEVER, THE
 SITE PLAN DOES NOT INCLUDE A BICYCLE RACK DETAIL, WITH
 AN ELEVATION OF THE BIKE RACK AND WITH THE DIMENSIONS
 FOR THE BIKE PARKING PAD AND THE BIKE RACK. PLEASE
 MODIFY THE SITE PLAN BY ADDING THESE DETAILS.
  
 16. THE SITE PLAN DETAIL NEEDS TO INCLUDE INFORMATION
 REGARDING THE TYPE OF MATERIAL BEING PROPOSED FOR THE
 CROSSWALKS DEPICTED IN THE SITE PLAN.
  
 17. SHEET DETAIL 1/SITE PLAN PAGE 2 IDENTIFIES THE
 "INTERNAL VEHICULAR ACCESSWAY STREET LIGHT DETAIL"
 FIXTURE PROPOSED FOR THIS PROJECT. IN ADDITION, PAGE 8
 OF THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT/PROJECT NARRATIVE UNDER
 (13) EXTERIOR LIGHTING STATES THAT "ALL PROPOSED
 LIGHTING WILL BE INTERNAL TO THE COMMUNITY ALONG THE
 INTERNAL VEHICULAR ACCESS TRACT". NEITHER ONE OF THE
 PLANS INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION APPEARS TO SHOW ANY
 LIGHT POLES WITHIN THE LIMITS OF THE PROJECT. ALL OF
 THE PLANS NEED TO BE REVISED TO IDENTIFY THE PROPOSED
 LOCATION OF THE LIGHT POLES. PLEASE NOTE THAT LIGHT
 POLES ARE CONSIDERED STRUCTURES BY THE CODE AND NO
 STRUCTURES ARE ALLOWED WITHIN THE SETBACK. AS A RESULT,
 ALL PROPOSED LIGHT POLES WOULD NEED TO BE LOCATED
 OUTSIDE OF THE SETBACKS OR THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO
 APPLY FOR A WAIVER TO ALLOW THEM WITHIN THE SETBACK.
  
 18. PER SECTION 94-130(D) "ANY OPERATION OR ACTIVITY
 PRODUCING GLARE SHALL BE CONDUCTED SO THAT DIRECT OR
 INDIRECT LIGHT FROM THE SOURCE SHALL NOT CAUSE
 ILLUMINATION IN EXCESS OF 0.5 FOOT CANDLES WHEN
 MEASURED IN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT". IN ORDER TO
 CONFIRM COMPLIANCE WITH THIS REQUIREMENT, ONCE THE
 PROPOSED LIGHT POLES ARE INCLUDED IN THE PLANS, THE
 APPLICANT WILL NEED TO SUBMIT PHOTOMETRIC PLANS WHICH
 IDENTIFY ILLUMINATION LEVELS FOR THE ADJACENT
 RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS TO THE WEST, SOUTH AND EAST
 RESULTING FROM THE PROPOSED PHOTOMETRIC PLAN FOR BELLA
 VITA. THE PHOTOMETRIC PLANS WOULD NEED TO DEMONSTRATE
 THAT THE PROPOSED LIGHTING PLAN WILL COMPLY WITH THIS
 REQUIREMENT IN RELATION TO THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL
 DISTRICTS.
  
  
  Print


Account Summary | Usage Policy | Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2005 – 2014, SunGard Pentamation, Inc & City of West Palm Beach, FL – All Rights Reserved