City of West Palm Beach eGovPlus

Plan Review Details - Project Z19050019

Plan Review Stops For Project Z19050019

Review Stop	B			BUILDING (STRUCTURAL)
Rev No	4	Status	P	Date	10-09-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	rbrown			Date	10-09-2019	Time	12:39	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	rbrown			Date	10-09-2019	Time	12:39	Sent To

Notes

***NONE***

Review Stop	B			BUILDING (STRUCTURAL)
Rev No	3	Status	F	Date	09-19-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	rbrown			Date	09-19-2019	Time	19:36	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	rbrown			Date	09-19-2019	Time	19:36	Sent To

Notes

2019-09-19 20:28:04	DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, BUILDING DIVISION,
	COMMENTS:

	1. THIS IS THE THIRD REVIEW. THE SUBMITTED LETTER
	RESPONSES TO THE PREVIOUS COMMENTS ARE NOTED. ALL
	INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS PROVIDED IN THE FIRST REVIEW
	STILL APPLY.

	2. LOCATION OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES. A SCANNED
	MARK UP OF THE SUGGESTED SOLUTION DESCRIBED BELOW CAN
	BE MADE AVAILABLE. ACCORDING TO THE ACTIVE USE
	DIAGRAMS, SHEET A0.06, AND EXISTING PARKING GARAGE
	PARKING COUNT, SHEET A0.11, ACCESS TO THE RESIDENTIAL
	OCCUPANCY WILL BE VIA THE HIBISCUS ST DOORS TO THE 1ST
	FLOOR LOBBY, OR VIA THE LEVEL 2 (PARKING LEVEL 3)
	BRIDGE FROM THE PARKING GARAGE. GIVEN THE CONVENIENCE
	AND WEATHER PROTECTION OFFERED BY THE LEVEL 2 (PARKING
	LEVEL 3) BRIDGE, AND THE TRAVEL DISTANCE FROM CAR TO
	RESIDENTIAL UNIT BEING SHORTER, AT LEAST 50% OF THE
	RESIDENTIAL SPACE OCCUPANTS WOULD BE EXPECTED TO USE
	THE BRIDGE TO GO FROM THE PARKING GARAGE TO THE NEW
	BUILDING. YET ONLY 29% (2 OUT OF 7) OF THE ACCESSIBLE
	PARKING SPACES REQUIRED BY FAIR HOUSING ACT ARE THE
	CLOSEST PARKING SPACES TO THE BRIDGE. AS STATED IN THE
	PREVIOUS REVIEW, THAT MEANS THAT SOME PEOPLE NEEDING
	ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES WILL BE TRAVELING FURTHER TO
	ACCESS THE BUILDING THAN PEOPLE WHO DO NOT NEED
	ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES. THEY WILL ALSO BE MORE
	EXPOSED TO THE ELEMENTS AND VEHICULAR TRAFFIC IF THEY
	TAKE THE ELEVATOR TO GROUND AND THEN CROSS THE STREET.
	CONSIDERING THE PROBABILITY THAT THE OCCUPANTS OF AT
	LEAST 50% OF THE RESIDENTIAL SPACE OCCUPANTS WILL
	ACCESS THE NEW BUILDING VIA THE LEVEL 2 BRIDGE, AT
	LEAST 4 OF THE 7 ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES REQUIRED BY
	FAIR HOUSING ACT SHOULD BE LOCATED AS THE CLOSEST
	PARKING SPACES TO THE BRIDGE ENTRANCE, BUT ONLY 2 ARE
	CURRENTLY SHOWN AS ACCESSIBLE.
	SUGGESTION: IF THE EXISTING SOUTH-EAST PARKING "END
	CAP" THAT IS CLOSEST TO THE BRIDGE WERE TO BE USED TO
	MOVE THE DRIVE LANES CLOSER TO THE CENTER OF THE
	PARKING GARAGE BUILDING, THAT MAY PROVIDE ENOUGH SPACE
	TO ADD TWO MORE ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES ALONG THE
	SOUTH WALL NEXT TO THE ONE ALREADY PROVIDED. THE
	WHEELCHAIR ACCESS AISLE COULD THEN BE AGAINST THE
	EXTERIOR WALL AND PROTECTED BY BOLLARDS/WHEEL STOPS.
	THE SUBJECT EXISTING SOUTH-EAST PARKING "END CAP" THAT
	IS CLOSEST TO THE BRIDGE IS PROBABLY JUST A PAINTED OUT
	AREA OF SLAB THAT COULD BE USED TO REALIGN THE DRIVE
	LANES. ALSO, THE ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE THAT IS
	ALREADY SHOWN COULD HAVE ITS ACCESS AISLE MOVED TO THE
	WEST SIDE OF THE PARKING SPACE SO THAT THE PARKING
	SPACE CAN BE MOVED TO THE EAST AND THE ACCESS AISLE
	SHARED WITH THE NEXT ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE THAT THIS
	SUGGESTION WOULD ADD. A SCANNED MARK UP OF THIS
	SUGGESTION HAS BEEN SENT TO ERIC SCHNEIDER BY EMAIL SO
	THAT HE CAN MAKE IT AVAILABLE TO YOU.
	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. THE DESIGN OF ACCESSIBLE
	PARKING SPACES SHALL COMPLY WITH SECTION 502 OF FLORIDA
	ACCESSIBILITY CODE


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

Review Stop	B			BUILDING (STRUCTURAL)
Rev No	2	Status	F	Date	08-21-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	rbrown			Date	08-21-2019	Time	10:18	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	rbrown			Date	08-21-2019	Time	10:18	Sent To

Notes

2019-08-21 10:57:17	DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, BUILDING DIVISION,
	COMMENTS:

	1. THIS IS THE SECOND REVIEW. THE SUBMITTED LETTER
	RESPONSE TO THE PREVIOUS COMMENTS IS NOTED. ALL
	INFORMATIONAL COMMENTS PROVIDED IN THE FIRST REVIEW
	STILL APPLY.

	2. LOCATION OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES. SITE AND
	PROJECT DATA SHEET A0.01 STATES THAT EXISTING SHARED
	PARKING WILL BE USED, AND A TOTAL OF 379 PARKING SPACES
	WILL BE PROVIDED, INCLUDING 9 ACCESSIBLE PARKING
	SPACES. BASED ON THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES FOR
	RESIDENTIAL USE, PER FAIR HOUSING ACT, 7 ACCESSIBLE
	PARKING SPACES MUST BE AVAILABLE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL
	OCCUPANCY. ACCORDING TO THE ACTIVE USE DIAGRAMS, SHEET
	A0.06, ACCESS TO THE RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCY WILL BE VIA
	THE HIBISCUS ST DOORS TO THE 1ST FLOOR LOBBY, OR VIA
	THE LEVEL 2 BRIDGE FROM THE PARKING GARAGE. THEREFORE,
	THE 7 ACCESSIBLE SPACES REQUIRED BY THE FAIR HOUSING
	ACT SHOULD BE THE 7 CLOSEST PARKING SPACES TO THE
	HIBISCUS ST DOORS TO THE 1ST FLOOR LOBBY, AND THE LEVEL
	2 BRIDGE. GROUND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN, SHEET A1.01, AND 2ND
	LEVEL FLOOR PLAN, SHEET A1.02, SHOW 5 ACCESSIBLE
	PARKING SPACES AS THE CLOSEST TO THOSE ENTRANCES. THE
	REMAININING ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES SHOWN ON 3RD
	LEVEL THROUGH PENTHOUSE LEVEL FLOOR PLAN, SHEETS A1.03
	THROUGH A1.06, ARE FURTHER FROM THOSE TWO ENTRANCES
	THAN MANY OF THE REGULAR (NON-ACCESSIBLE) PARKING
	SPACES SHOWN ON GROUND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN, SHEET A1.01,
	AND 2ND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN, SHEET A1.02. THAT MEANS THAT
	SOME PEOPLE NEEDING ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES WILL BE
	TRAVELING FURTHER TO ACCESS THE BUILDING THAN SOME
	PEOPLE WHO DO NOT NEED ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES.
	CONSIDERING THE PROBABILITY THAT THE OCCUPANTS OF MORE
	THAN 100 OF THE CARS PARKED IN THE GARAGE FOR THE
	RESIDENTIAL OCCUPANCY WILL ACCESS THE BUILDING VIA THE
	LEVEL 2 BRIDGE, MORE THAN 2 ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES
	SHOULD BE LOCATED CLOSEST TO THE BRIDGE ENTRANCE, BUT
	ONLY 2 ARE CURRENTLY SHOWN. ALSO, GROUND LEVEL THROUGH
	PENTHOUSE LEVEL FLOOR PLAN, SHEETS A1.01 THROUGH A1.06,
	CURRENTLY SHOW A TOTAL OF 7 ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES,
	WHICH IS LESS THAN THE 9 REQUIRED ACCESSIBLE PARKING
	SPACES STATED ON SITE AND PROJECT DATA SHEET A0.01.
	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. THE DESIGN OF ACCESSIBLE
	PARKING SPACES SHALL COMPLY WITH SECTION 502 OF FLORIDA
	ACCESSIBILITY CODE


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

Review Stop	B			BUILDING (STRUCTURAL)
Rev No	1	Status	F	Date	06-11-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	rbrown			Date	06-11-2019	Time	19:31	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	rbrown			Date	06-11-2019	Time	19:31	Sent To

Notes

2019-06-11 19:42:15	DEVELOPMENT 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 THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION.

	2. DEMOLITION OF THE EXISTING BUILDING. AN ASBESTOS
	SURVEY SHALL BE PERFORMED AND AN ASBESTOS ABATEMENT
	REPORT SUBMITTED TO THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT PALM BEACH
	COUNTY OFFICE. CONTACT ALEX ORTEGA AT (561) 837-5963,
	OR BY EMAIL: [email protected]

	3. LOCATION OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES. SITE AND
	PROJECT DATA SHEET A0.01 STATES THAT EXISTING SHARED
	PARKING WILL BE USED, BUT THE PLANS DO NOT SHOW THE
	EXISTING ACCESIBLE PARKING TO BE LOCATED CLOSEST TO THE
	ENTRANCES OF THE NEW BUILDING. 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.
	THE DESIGN OF ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES SHALL COMPLY
	WITH SECTION 502 OF FLORIDA ACCESSIBILITY CODE

	4. BUILDING SIZE. 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.

	5. BUILDING LOCATION RELATIVE TO THE PROPERTY LINE AND
	OTHER STRUCTURES. 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.

	6. EGRESS FROM LOBBY. GROUND LEVEL FLOOR PLAN SHEET
	A1.01 HAS A NOTE STATING THAT ONE EXIT IS REQUIRED FROM
	THE LOBBY. THE NOTE DOES NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT THE
	NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT WILL BE DISCHARGED INTO THE LOBBY
	FROM STAIR 1. THE NOTE SHOULD BE CORRECTED.

	7. GREASE INTERCEPTOR. A GREASE INTERCEPTOR WILL BE
	REQUIRED. PLEASE CONTACT JEFFREY ODOMS, UTILITIES O&M
	SUPERINTENDENT, PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENT, FATS OILS
	AND GREASE DIVISION, AT (561) 822-2172, OR BY EMAIL:
	[email protected]

	8. 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.

	9. CONTRACTOR VEHICLE PARKING. PROPERTY OWNER AND
	CONTRACTOR SHALL MAKE ARRANGEMENTS FOR PARKING OF
	CONTRACTOR VEHICLES TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT ON ALL
	NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.

	10. PROTECTION OF NEIGHBORING PROPERTY. PROPERTY OWNER
	AND CONTRACTOR SHALL PROTECT ALL NEIGHBORING PROPERTY,
	INCLUDING VEHICLES, FROM DAMAGE OR DIRT CAUSED BY THE
	CONSTRUCTION, AND SHALL NOTIFY THE OCCUPANTS OF
	NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES ABOUT ALL STAGES OF CONSTRUCTION
	THAT MAY AFFECT THE USE OF THEIR PROPERTY.

	11. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES. 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	08-01-2019		Cont ID
Sent By	rrossano			Date	08-01-2019	Time	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	rrossano			Date	08-01-2019	Time	Sent To

Notes

2019-08-01 10:03:22	A MEETING WAS HELD AT CITY OF WPB ENGINEERING
	DISCUSSING UTILITY DESIGN WITH MR. FITZGERALD OF KIMLEY
	HORN AND CITY ENGINEERING AND O&M PERSONNEL. THE PPRC
	SUBMITTAL Z19050019 IS PASSED WITH THE FOLLOWING
	PROVISOS AS CONDITIONS FOR THE FORMAL ENGINEERING
	SUBMITTAL:

	PROVIDE CCTV VIDEO OF EXISTING SANITARY SEWER ALONG
	ENTIRE PROJECT FRONTAGE.

	PROVIDE UTILITY EASEMENTS TO ALLOW ACCESS FOR CITY
	PERSONNEL TO PROPOSED UTILITIES INCLUDING WATER METERS.

	PER MARK HURLEY, CITY OF WPB PUBLIC UTILITIES FIELD
	CUSTOMER SERVICE SUPERVISOR:

	THE BACKFLOW PREVENTERS ARE NOT SHOWING ON SHEET C6.00;
	NOT SURE IF THEY ARE LABELED ON ANOTHER SHEET. ALL OF
	THE DOMESTIC/GENERAL CONTAINMENT BACKFLOW PREVENTERS
	NEED TO BE OUTSIDE, CANNOT BE LOCATED INSIDE BUILDING.
	TO FACILITATE THAT, THE METER VAULT/SERVICE MAY NEED TO
	MOVE A NUMBER OF FEET NORTH FROM CURRENT POSITION.THE 3
	INCH BACKFLOW PREVENTERS FOR THE 2 INCH METERS MAY ALSO
	BE A TIGHT FIT. EOR SHOULD VERIFY HOW HE WILL MAKE IT
	WORK.

	ADJUST NOTE FOR 6 INCH METER TO INCLUDE CITY OF WPB
	STANDARD DETAIL WS-6.1.

	ADJUST NOTE FOR 2 INCH METER TO REMOVE REFERENCE TO "3
	INCH WATER SERVICE", AND TO ADD STANDARD DETAIL NOTES
	WS-1 AND WS-7.

	IF FIRE MARSHAL REQUIRING DCDA IN BUILDING THEN
	BACKFLOW COVENANT SUBMISSION WOULD BE REQUIRED BY
	PROPERTY OWNERS BEFORE IT CAN PASS INSPECTION AS
	DISCUSSED IN MEETING.

	PLEASE NOTE THAT THE ADJACENT DROP-OFF ON HIBISCUS ST.
	WILL REQUIRE A FORMAL TRAFFIC ENGINEERING SUBMITTAL TO
	ADDRESS PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AND ADA CONCERNS.

	FEEL FREE TO CONTACT US IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS,
	THANKS.

	RICK ROSSANO
	PROJECT COORDINATOR
	ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
	401 CLEMATIS STREET, 4TH FLOOR
	WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401
	(MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 3366, ZIP 33402)
	MAIN PHONE: (561) 822-1200
	DIRECT: (561) 494-1098
	FAX: (561) 494-1116
	MOBILE: (561) 246-9525
	EMAIL: [email protected]
	WWW.WPB.ORG/ENGINEERING

	MANNY GONZALEZ
	SENIOR ENGINEERING PROJECT COORDINATOR
	ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
	401 CLEMATIS STREET, 4TH FLOOR
	WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401
	(MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 3366, ZIP 33402)
	MAIN PHONE: (561) 822-1200
	DIRECT: (561) 494-1085
	FAX: (561) 494-1116
	MOBILE: (561) 644-7301
	EMAIL: [email protected]
	WWW.WPB.ORG/ENGINEERING

	CENTRAL OPERATIONS CENTER (DISPATCH):
	24-HOUR EMERGENCY RESPONSE SERVICES TO PUBLIC
	UTILITIES, PUBLIC WORKS, PARKS, ETC. 561-822-2210

Review Stop	ENG - PPRC			ENGINEERING - PPRC
Rev No	1	Status	F	Date	06-07-2019		Cont ID
Sent By	rrossano			Date	06-07-2019	Time	Rev Time	2.00
Received By	rrossano			Date	06-07-2019	Time	Sent To

Notes

2019-06-07 07:20:10	PROVIDE CCTV VIDEO OF EXISTING SANITARY SEWER ALONG
	ENTIRE PROJECT FRONTAGE.

	PLEASE SUBMIT A FORMAL AS-BUILT REQUEST FOR ALL CITY OF
	WEST PALM BEACH-OWNED UTILITIES WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT
	OF WAY FOR THE ENTIRE EXTENT OF THE LIMITS OF YOUR
	PROJECT. IDENTIFY TYPE OF UTILITY, LOCATION, PIPE
	MATERIAL, AGE AND SIZE. PLEASE CONTACT JANICE TARBILL
	IN THE WPB ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AT
	[email protected] OR 561-494-1079 FOR FURTHER
	ASSISTANCE. NOTE THAT FIELD RECORDS ARE FOR INFORMATION
	ONLY. FIELD VERIFY UTILITY LOCATIONS USING FIELD
	SURVEY, POT-HOLING, SOFT DIGS ETC.

	AS OF DECEMBER 20, 2015, THE CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH
	CROSS-CONNECTION CONTROL MANUAL HAS BEEN REVISED,
	STATING "ALL BACKFLOW DEVICES MUST BE LEAD-FREE". FOR
	MORE INFORMATION, REFER TO THE LINK BELOW:
	HTTP://WPB.ORG/DEPARTMENTS/PUBLIC-UTILITIES/FORMS-PUBLI
	CATIONS/BACKFLOW-CROSS-CONNECTION-CONTROL-MANUAL

	PLANS SHALL SHOW PROPOSED LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS OF
	ALL WATER, STORMWATER, AND SANITARY AND SEWER LINES,
	INCLUDING STUBS TO EACH PROPERTY LINE FOR WATER AND
	SANITARY SEWERS, THE MAKE AND MODEL OF ALL VALVES,
	METERS, AND OTHERS DEVICES TO BE INSTALLED ON THE
	SYSTEM, CATCH BASINS, CULVERTS, DITCHES INCLUDING
	GRADES, PIPES SIZES, MATERIALS, ELEVATIONS,
	ASSUMPTIONS, CALCULATIONS, INVERT ELEVATIONS FOR ALL
	INLETS AND MANHOLES AND PROFILES OF SANITARY SEWER
	LINES. ALL AVAILABLE ELEVATION SHALL BE SHOWN ON THE
	PROFILE VIEW. DIRECTION OF FLOW SHALL BE SHOWN ON PLAN
	VIEW ON PLAN VIEW FOR ALL SANITARY AND STORM SEWERS.
	ADDITIONALLY, PLAN VIEW SHALL SHOW ALL EXISTING AND
	PROPOSED UNDERGROUND UTILITY LAYOUT, INCLUDING FIBER
	OPTIC, ELECTRIC, GAS, AND CABLEVISION &
	TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES LOCATED ON THE
	RIGHT-OF-WAY. PROVIDE PROFILE AND CLEARANCES AT ALL
	UTILITY CROSSINGS.

	CUT AND CAP UTILITIES NOT IN USE, AND REMOVE ANY
	ABANDONED UTILITY LINES LARGER THAN 2 INCHES FROM CITY
	RIGHT OF WAY.

	PLEASE SUBMIT COMPLETED LOS ANALYSIS SUMMARY TABLE
	DIRECTLY TO ENGINEERING (SHEET 33 OF CITY OF WPB
	DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION).

	PLEASE PROVIDE CALCULATIONS OF REVISED PERVIOUS AND
	IMPERVIOUS CALCULATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED IMPACTED
	AREAS.

	PROVIDE ONSITE CLEANOUTS AT PROPERTY LINE FOR PROPOSED
	SANITARY LATERALS.

	PROVIDE UTILITY EASEMENTS TO ALLOW ACCESS FOR CITY
	PERSONNEL TO PROPOSED UTILITIES INCLUDING WATER METERS.

	DELINEATE CITY OF WPB UTILITY EASEMENTS AND/OR RIGHTS
	OF WAY. PLEASE BOLD THE 25' ACCESS & UTILITY EASEMENT
	ON SHEET C6.

	PROVIDE ENLARGED DETAIL ON PLANS OF PROPOSED LOCATION
	OF WATER METER AND BACKFLOW PREVENTION.


	THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS ARE FROM MARK HURLEY, FIELD
	CUSTOMER SERVICE SUPERVISOR, PUBLIC UTILITIES, CITY OF
	WEST PALM BEACH, 561-822-2262

	SHEET P1.01:

	-BACKFLOW PREVENTERS ARE LABELED AS INDOORS. SHOULD NOT
	BE INDOORS, SHOULD BE OUTSIDE CLOSE TO WATER SERVICE AS
	POSSIBLE ON PRIVATE PROPERTY OUTSIDE OF ROW/UE.

	-ALL OF THE BACKFLOW PREVENTERS ARE MARKED AS DOUBLE
	CHECK. THEY SHOULD BE RPZ.

	-VERTICAL INSTALLATION MAY NOT BE USC APPROVED OR
	MANUFACTURER APPROVED FOR THE ASSEMBLY THEY ARE
	INSTALLING. WOULD EITHER NEED FIND APPROVED-ASSEMBLY OR
	CHANGE INSTALLATION TO HORIZONTAL.

	-DID NOT SEE FIRELINE DCDAS ON PLAN? NOT SURE IF THEY
	ARE SHOWN ON THEIR UTILITY PLAN INSTEAD? I THINK THERE
	ARE SOME EXISTING ONES ON SITE.. THEY SHOULD PUT ON
	PLANS WITH THE EXISTING WATER SERVICES AND SHOW
	CONNECTION/DESIGN/ETC. IF THEY FORGOT TO DRAW THE DCDA,
	THEN THEY SHOULD RE-DRAW & LABEL. THEY CANNOT USE THE
	DOMESTIC WATER SERVICES FOR FIRE WATER USES SUCH AS
	FIRE SPRINKLERS.

	-FIELD CUSTOMER SERVICE RECOMMENDS CUSTOMERS INSTALL
	PARALLEL BACKFLOW PREVENTERS SO CUSTOMERS STILL HAVE
	WATER DURING BACKFLOW MAINTENANCE OR PROBLEMS.PLEASE
	SEE SINGLE INSTALLATION HERE, DON'T KNOW IF THEY
	CONSIDERED DOING THAT.

	-CAN'T TELL IF METER BOXES/VAULTS ARE IN GRASS AND
	WHERE PROPERTY LINE AND UES ARE FROM DRAWING. PREFER
	BOXES IN GRASS AND OUT OF SIDEWALKS.SHOULD BE IN
	UE/ROW/PARKWAY.

	SHEET C6.00:

	-METER BOXES AND VAULTS APPEAR TO BE IN SIDEWALK.
	THAT'S A SAFETY HAZARD AND ALSO HAVE TO CLOSE SIDEWALK
	DURING METER MAINTENANCE. BOXES AND LIDS SHOULD BE
	LOCATED OUT OF SIDEWALKS. CUSTOMER NEEDS TO DEVELOP
	AREA PREFERABLY WITH GRASS BETWEEN SIDEWALKS AND
	BUILDING WHERE VAULTS AND METER BOXES CAN LIE AND WON'T
	BE WALKED ON IN REGULAR TRAFFIC PATHS. THEY CAN
	SET-BACK OR REDESIGN BUILDING FOOTPRINT IF NEEDED AND
	CREATE UTILITY EASEMENT.

	-ALL OF EXISTING UTILITIES NOT SHOWN. IN OUR BILLING
	SYSTEM I SEE EXISTING 3 IN. METER AND 8 IN. FIRELINE
	WITH DETECTOR METER.

	-8 IN. FIRELINE DCDA ARE PRETTY BIG. ON THE UTILITY
	DRAWING IT DOES NOT SHOW THE FOOTPRINT AND EXACT
	LOCATION OF PROP 8 IN. DCDA. CUSTOMER MAY HAVE
	DIFFICULTY FITTING THERE. THIS MAY REQUIRE SPECIAL
	PROTECTION IF LOCATED ADJACENT OUTSIDE WALL BY FIRE
	DEPARTMENT.

	-CUSTOMER PROPERTY LINE NOT SHOWING IN ALLEY -> NOT
	SURE IF PRIVATELY OWNED ROAD? -> UTILITY EASEMENT MAY
	NEED BE ASSIGNED TO ALL THE WATER UTILITY MAIN,
	SERVICE, AND METERS BOXES.

	-STANDARD DETAILS REFERENCES NOT SHOWN AND LABELED BY
	CITY WPB WSD#

	-VAULT IS FAR FROM EXISTING CONNECTION -> ADDITIONAL
	WATER SERVICE PIPING BEFORE VAULT SHOULD BE MINIMIZED.


	FEEL FREE TO CONTACT US IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR
	CONCERNS, THANKS.

	RICK ROSSANO
	PROJECT COORDINATOR
	ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
	401 CLEMATIS STREET, 4TH FLOOR
	WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401
	(MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 3366, ZIP 33402)
	MAIN PHONE: (561) 822-1200
	DIRECT: (561) 494-1098
	FAX: (561) 494-1116
	MOBILE: (561) 246-9525
	EMAIL: [email protected]
	WWW.WPB.ORG/ENGINEERING

	MANNY GONZALEZ
	SENIOR ENGINEERING PROJECT COORDINATOR
	ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
	401 CLEMATIS STREET, 4TH FLOOR
	WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401
	(MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 3366, ZIP 33402)
	MAIN PHONE: (561) 822-1200
	DIRECT: (561) 494-1085
	FAX: (561) 494-1116
	MOBILE: (561) 644-7301
	EMAIL: [email protected]
	WWW.WPB.ORG/ENGINEERING

	CENTRAL OPERATIONS CENTER (DISPATCH):
	24-HOUR EMERGENCY RESPONSE SERVICES TO PUBLIC
	UTILITIES, PUBLIC WORKS, PARKS, ETC. 561-822-2210

Review Stop	FIRE			FIRE DEPARTMENT
Rev No	1	Status	P	Date	05-31-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	pleduc			Date	05-31-2019	Time		Rev Time	0.00
Received By	pleduc			Date	05-31-2019	Time	12:33	Sent To

Notes

2019-05-31 12:35:11	THE 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 ADDRESS 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 BUILDING SHALL COMPLY WITH
	THE 6TH EDITION OF THE FLORIDA FIRE PREVENTION CODE,
	INCLUDING NFPA 1 & 101, AND ALL ASSOCIATED FIRE CODES.

	6. ALL PARKING STRUCTURES SHALL COMPLY WITH NFPA 88A,
	PARKING STRUCTURES AND NFPA 101, THE LIFE SAFETY CODE,
	INCLUDING MORE SPECIFICALLY, CHAPTER 42 STORAGE
	OCCUPANCIES (PARKING STRUCTURES)

	7. A NFPA 13 COMPLAINT FIRE SPRINKLER SYSTEM AND NFPA
	14 COMPLIANT WET STANDPIPE SYSTEM ARE REQUIRED FOR THIS
	STRUCTURE. TEMPORARY STANDPIPES ARE REQUIRED WHEN THE
	BUILDING REACHES THREE LEVELS OR THIRTY FEET WHILE
	BEING CONSTRUCTED.

	SEPARATE SHOP DRAWINGS, ARE REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED,
	REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU
	PRIOR TO ANY INSTALLATION.

	6.4.5.4* FIRE DEPARTMENT CONNECTIONS SHALL BE LOCATED
	NOT MORE THAN 100 FT (30.5 M) FROM THE NEAREST FIRE
	HYDRANT CONNECTED TO AN APPROVED WATER SUPPLY.

	18.3 WATER SUPPLIES.
	18.3.1* AN APPROVED WATER SUPPLY CAPABLE OF SUPPLYING
	THE REQUIRED FIRE FLOW FOR FIRE PROTECTION SHALL BE
	PROVIDED TO ALL PREMISES UPON WHICH FACILITIES,
	BUILDINGS, OR PORTIONS OF BUILDINGS ARE HEREAFTER
	CONSTRUCTED OR MOVED INTO THE JURISDICTION. THE
	APPROVED WATER SUPPLY SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH
	SECTION 18.4.

	THE LOCATION OF THE DDCV COULD NOT BE IDENTIFIED OF
	SHEET F 1.01. THE LOCATION OF THE DDCV SHALL BE CLOSELY
	COORDINATED WITH THE OFFICE OF THE FIRE MARSHAL,
	ENGINEERING, ZONING AND THE LANDSCAPE PLANNER.

	PER NFPA 14 SECTION 7.12.2, HIGH-RISE BUILDINGS SHALL
	HAVE AT LEAST TWO REMOTELY LOCATED FIRE DEPARTMENT
	CONNECTIONS FOR EACH ZONE.

	PER FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE SECTION 61G15-32.004,
	FIRE PROTECTION ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS SHALL INCLUDE THE
	POINT OF SERVICE FOR THE WATER SUPPLY, A LIST OF
	APPLICABLE NFPA STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO THE PROJECT,
	CLASSIFICATION OF HAZARD OCCUPANCY FOR EACH ROOM OR
	AREA, SUPPRESSION SYSTEM TYPE, DESIGN DENSITIES, WATER
	SUPPLY DATA (FIRE PUMP DATA, HYDRANT FLOW TEST DATA)
	AND ANY PERFORMANCE BASED INFORMATION SUCH AS
	PRE-ENGINEERED SYSTEMS.
	FOR THE PROPOSED FIRE PUMP(S) , WHAT IS(ARE) THE
	PRIMARY AND SECONDARY POWER SOURCES?

	8. A CLASS A NFPA 72 COMPLIANT MONITORED FIRE ALARM
	SYSTEM IS REQUIRED FOR THIS STRUCTURE. SEPARATE SHOP
	DRAWINGS, ARE REQUIRED TO BE SUBMITTED, REVIEWED AND
	APPROVED BY THE FIRE PREVENTION BUREAU PRIOR TO ANY
	INSTALLATION.

	9. ALL ELEVATORS SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH A REGION 7
	KEYWAY SYSTEM.

	ALL NEW ELEVATORS SHALL CONFORM TO THE FIRE FIGHTERS
	EMERGENCY OPERATIONS REQUIREMENTS OF ASME A17.1/CSA
	B44, SAFETY CODE FOR ELEVATORS.
	ANY BUILDING THAT IS MORE THAN THREE STORIES HIGH OR IN
	WHICH THE VERTICAL DISTANCE BETWEEN THE BOTTOM TERMINAL
	LANDING AND THE TOP TERMINAL LANDING EXCEEDS 25 FEET
	MUST BE CONSTRUCTED TO CONTAIN AT LEAST ONE PASSENGER
	ELEVATOR THAT IS OPERATIONAL AND WILL ACCOMMODATE AN
	AMBULANCE STRETCHER 76 INCHES LONG AND 24 INCHES WIDE
	IN THE HORIZONTAL POSITION.

	10. COMPLETE LIFE SAFETY PLANS FOR EACH OCCUPANCY SHALL
	BE PROVIDED THAT ILLUSTRATE OCCUPANT LOADS, TRAVEL
	DISTANCES, COMMON PATHS OF TRAVEL, DEAD-END CORRIDORS,
	EXIT SIGNS, EMERGENCY LIGHTING, EXITS LEADING TO A
	PUBLIC WAY, FIRE EXTINGUISHER LOCATIONS, AND ALL FIRE
	SAFETY FEATURES AND EQUIPMENT.

	11. 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 FDCS PLANNED FOR THIS
	DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE CLOSELY COORDINATED WITH THE
	BUREAU OF FIRE PREVENTION. PROPOSED FIRE HYDRANTS AND
	FDCS SHOULD BE LOCATED ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE STREET
	OR ACCESS ROADWAY TO ALLOW FREE ACCESS FOR OTHER
	ARRIVING EMERGENCY VEHICLES.

	TWO (2) SEPARATE FDCS ARE REQUESTED FOR THIS HIGH RISE,
	SEPARATE FROM EACH OTHER, FOR EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT
	FIREGROUND OPERATIONS. THE LOCATION SHOULD BE
	COORDINATED THROUGH THE OFFICE OF THE FIRE MARSHAL.

	12. COMMAND ROOM

	THE FIRE COMMAND CENTER SHALL COMPLY WITH NFPA 1,
	CHAPTER 11, BUILDING SERVICES; 11.9 AND SHALL CONTAIN
	THE FOLLOWING FEATURES:

	A. SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 200 FT SQUARED WITH A MINIMUM
	DIMENSION OF 10 FT.
	B. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEM.
	C. A TELEPHONE FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT USE WITH CONTROLLED
	ACCESS TO THE PUBLIC TELEPHONE SYSTEM
	D. SCHEMATIC BUILDING PLANS INDICATING THE TYPICAL
	FLOOR PLAN AND DETAILING THE BUILDING CORE, MEANS OF
	EGRESS, FIRE PROTECTION SYSTEMS, FIRE-FIGHTING
	EQUIPMENT AND FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS AND THE LOCATION
	OF FIRE WALLS, FIRE BARRIERS, FIRE PARTITIONS, SMOKE
	BARRIERS AND SMOKE PARTITIONS
	E. A WORK TABLE.
	F. IF APPLICABLE, A HAZARDOUS MATERIAL MANAGEMENT PLAN
	FOR THE BUILDING.
	G. THE EMERGENCY VOICE/ALARM COMMUNICATION SYSTEM
	CONTROL UNIT.
	H. ANNUNCIATOR UNIT VISUALLY INDICATING THE LOCATION OF
	THE ELEVATORS AND WHETHER THEY ARE OPERATIONAL
	I. STATUS INDICATORS AND CONTROLS FOR AIR DISTRIBUTION
	SYSTEMS.
	J. CONTROLS FOR UNLOCKING STAIRWAY DOORS SIMULTANEOUSLY
	K. SPRINKLER VALVE AND WATER FLOW DETECTOR DISPLAY
	PANELS
	L. EMERGENCY AND STANDBY POWER STATUS INDICATORS
	M. FIRE PUMP STATUS INDICATORS
	N. GENERATOR SUPERVISION DEVICES AND MANUAL START AND
	TRANSFER FEATURES.
	O. PUBLIC ADDRESS SYSTEM, WHERE SPECIFICALLY REQUIRED
	BY OTHER SECTIONS OF THIS CODE
	P. CONTROLS REQUIRED FOR SMOKE CONTROL
	Q. ELEVATOR FIRE RECALL SWITCH IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASME
	A17.1.
	R. ELEVATOR EMERGENCY OR STANDBY POWER SELECTOR
	SWITCH(ES), WHERE EMERGENCY OR STANDBY POWER IS
	PROVIDED

	11.8.6* EMERGENCY COMMAND CENTER.
	11.8.6.1 AN EMERGENCY COMMAND CENTER SHALL BE PROVIDED
	IN A
	LOCATION APPROVED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT.
	11.8.6.2 THE EMERGENCY COMMAND CENTER SHALL CONTAIN THE
	FOLLOWING:
	(1) VOICE FIRE ALARM SYSTEM PANELS AND CONTROLS
	(2) FIRE DEPARTMENT TWO-WAY TELEPHONE COMMUNICATION
	SERVICE
	PANELS AND CONTROLS WHERE REQUIRED BY ANOTHER SECTION
	OF THIS
	CODE
	(3) FIRE DETECTION AND FIRE ALARM SYSTEM ANNUNCIATION
	PANELS
	(4) ELEVATOR FLOOR LOCATION AND OPERATION ANNUNCIATORS
	(5) ELEVATOR FIRE RECALL SWITCH IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASME
	A17.1/CSA B44, SAFETY CODE FOR ELEVATORS AND ESCALATORS
	(6) ELEVATOR EMERGENCY POWER SELECTOR SWITCH(ES) WHERE
	PROVIDED
	IN ACCORDANCE WITH ASME A17.1/CSA B44
	(7) SPRINKLER VALVE AND WATERFLOW ANNUNCIATORS
	(8) EMERGENCY GENERATOR STATUS INDICATORS
	(9) CONTROLS FOR ANY AUTOMATIC STAIRWAY DOOR UNLOCKING
	SYSTEM
	(10) FIRE PUMP STATUS INDICATORS
	(11) TELEPHONE FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT USE WITH CONTROLLED
	ACCESS TO THE
	PUBLIC TELEPHONE SYSTEM
	(12) STAIRWAY VIDEO MONITORING EQUIPMENT AS REQUIRED BY
	11.8.8

	13. RADIO

	NFPA 1, CHAPTER 11, BUILDING SERVICES; 11.10 TWO-WAY
	RADIO ENHANCEMENT SERVICES.

	11.10.1 IN ALL NEW AND EXISTING BUILDINGS, MINIMUM
	RADIO SIGNAL STRENGTH FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT
	COMMUNICATIONS SHALL BE MAINTAINED AT A LEVEL
	DETERMINED BY THE AHJ.

	NFPA 72, 24.5.2* TWO-WAY RADIO COMMUNICATIONS
	ENHANCEMENT SYSTEMS.
	24.5.2.2 RADIO COVERAGE. RADIO COVERAGE SHALL BE
	PROVIDED THROUGHOUT THE BUILDING AS A PERCENTAGE OF
	FLOOR AREA AS SPECIFIED IN 24.5.2.2.1 THROUGH
	24.5.2.2.3.
	24.5.2.2.1 CRITICAL AREAS. CRITICAL AREAS, SUCH AS THE
	EMERGENCY COMMAND CENTER(S), THE FIRE PUMP ROOM(S),
	EXIT STAIRS, EXIT PASSAGEWAYS, ELEVATOR LOBBIES,
	STANDPIPE CABINETS, SPRINKLER SECTIONAL VALVE
	LOCATIONS, AND OTHER AREAS DEEMED CRITICAL BY THE
	AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION, SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH
	99 PERCENT FLOOR AREA RADIO COVERAGE.
	24.5.2.2.2 GENERAL BUILDING AREAS. GENERAL BUILDING
	AREAS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH 90 PERCENT FLOOR AREA
	RADIO COVERAGE.
	24.5.2.3 SIGNAL STRENGTH.
	24.5.2.3.1 INBOUND. A MINIMUM INBOUND SIGNAL STRENGTH
	OF -95 DBM, OR OTHER SIGNAL STRENGTH AS REQUIRED BY THE
	AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION, SHALL BE PROVIDED
	THROUGHOUT THE COVERAGE AREA.
	24.5.2.3.2 OUTBOUND. A MINIMUM OUTBOUND SIGNAL STRENGTH
	OF -95 DBM AT THE DONOR SITE, OR OTHER SIGNAL STRENGTH
	AS REQUIRED BY THE AUTHORITY HAVING JURISDICTION, SHALL
	BE PROVIDED FROM THE COVERAGE AREA.

	THE SYSTEM SHALL MAINTAIN A MINIMUM RADIO SIGNAL
	STRENGTH OF -95 DBM FOR THE RADIO SYSTEM USED BY WEST
	PALM BEACH FIRE RESCUE. TESTING SHALL BE BY AN
	ACCEPTABLE NATIONAL STANDARD DOCUMENTING PERCENTAGES
	NOTED ABOVE AND BY ACTUAL RADIO TESTING BY FIRE
	PERSONNEL. IF THE MINIMUM CANNOT BE MAINTAINED, A
	BI-DIRECTIONAL AMPLIFIED SYSTEM SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH
	A MINIMUM 2-HOUR RUN TIME BATTERY BACK-UP.

	14. KNOX-BOX KEY SYSTEM SHALL BE REQUIRED FOR THIS
	BUILDING.
	ANY GATES SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH KNOX KEY ACCESS LOCKS,
	PADLOCKS AND/OR SWITCHES FOR 24 HOUR EMERGENCY ACCESS.

	15. THE SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEM SHALL COMPLY WITH NFPA
	101, CHAPTER 9, BUILDING SERVICE AND FIRE PROTECTION
	EQUIPMENT, INCLUDING:

	THE SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEMS SHALL BE INSTALLED,
	INSPECTED, TESTED, AND MAINTAINED IN ACCORDANCE WITH
	NFPA 92, STANDARD FOR SMOKE CONTROL SYSTEMS; NFPA 204,
	STANDARD FOR SMOKE AND HEAT VENTING; OR NATIONALLY
	RECOGNIZED STANDARDS, ENGINEERING GUIDES, OR
	RECOMMENDED PRACTICES, AS APPROVED BY THE AUTHORITY
	HAVING JURISDICTION.

	THE ENGINEER OF RECORD SHALL CLEARLY IDENTIFY THE
	INTENT OF THE SYSTEM, THE DESIGN METHOD USED, THE
	APPROPRIATENESS OF THE METHOD USED, AND THE REQUIRED
	MEANS OF INSPECTING, TESTING, AND MAINTAINING THE
	SYSTEM.

	ACCEPTANCE TESTING SHALL BE PERFORMED BY A SPECIAL
	INSPECTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 9.9.


	16. FOR BUILDING PLAN REVIEWDICUSSION PURPOSES THE
	STAIRWAY EXIT DISCHARGE LOCATED AT THE CENTER OF THE
	BUILDING THROUGH THE ASSEMBLY SEATING AREA REMAINS A
	CONCERN. THE CODE WILL ALLOW THE EXIT THROUGH CERTAIN
	AREAS; HOWEVER, THE ASSEMBLY SEATING AREA DOES NOT
	APPEAR TO BE ONE OF THOSE AREAS.

	7.1.3.2.2 AN EXIT ENCLOSURE SHALL PROVIDE A CONTINUOUS
	PROTECTED
	PATH OF TRAVEL TO AN EXIT DISCHARGE.

	3.3.85 EXIT DISCHARGE. THAT PORTION OF A MEANS OF
	EGRESS BETWEEN
	THE TERMINATION OF AN EXIT AND A PUBLIC WAY.

	7.7 DISCHARGE FROM EXITS.

	7.7.1.1 YARDS, COURTS, OPEN SPACES, OR OTHER PORTIONS
	OF THE EXIT
	DISCHARGE SHALL BE OF THE REQUIRED WIDTH AND SIZE TO
	PROVIDE ALL
	OCCUPANTS WITH A SAFE ACCESS TO A PUBLIC WAY.

	A 5' AREA IS INDICATED ALONG THE WALL; HOWEVER, HOW
	WILL THIS AREA BE MAINTAINED/SEPARATED FOR THE SEATING.
	WHAT IS TO STOP ANYONE FROM MOVING TABLE AND CHAIRS
	INTO THIS EXT TRAVEL PATH?

	THE PPRC PLAN WILL BE APPROVED AND THIS AREA CAN BE
	ADDRESSED WITH BUILDING PLAN SUBMITTALS.

	17) THE BUREAU'S APPROVAL OF THIS SUBMITTED PROJECT
	DOES NOT CONSTITUTE IT'S FINAL REVIEW OR APPROVAL.


	18). 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	4	Status	P	Date	10-22-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	rcaranci			Date	10-22-2019	Time	09:31	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	rcaranci			Date	10-22-2019	Time	09:31	Sent To

Notes

2019-10-22 09:31:54	FROM: RAY CARANCI, LANDSCAPE PLANNER 561-822-1462
	PROJECT: 575 ROSEMARY (MACY?S) Z19050019
	OCTOBER 15, 2019
	I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PETITION, AND
	PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:

	1. MAKE THE FOLLOWING CORRECTIONS TO THE TREE
	DISPOSITION PLAN:
	? SATISFIED. THE WASHINGTONIA PALMS ARE CATEGORY 4,
	CANOPY VALUE IS 50 SQ FT.
	? SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF
	MITIGATION FOR ALL TREES AND PALMS PROPOSED TO BE
	REMOVED.
	? SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE MITIGATION VALUES BY CATEGORY
	FOR THE PROPOSED STREETSCAPE TREES AND PALMS. SEE
	BELOW.

	2. SATISFIED. THE STREETSCAPE CAN BE IMPROVED TO
	ACCOMPLISH THE INTENT OF THE CODE SECTION 94-113. THE
	COCONUT PALMS AND DATE PALMS MAY BE USED, BUT NOT AS
	COUNTING TOWARD THE TREE REQUIREMENT AT THE MAXIMUM 30
	FOOT SPACING. THERE ARE ALSO CONFLICTS WITH PROPOSED
	AWNING AND STREET TREES.
	PLANNING STAFF HAS NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED THE
	STREETSCAPE PLANS FOR THE AREAS ADJACENT TO THIS
	PROJECT. PROVIDE THE 100% PLANS FOR REVIEW.
	3. SATISFIED. REQUIRED STREET TREES MUST MEET THE 20
	FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT AT INSTALLATION. LIST OVERALL
	HEIGHT ON PLANT LIST.
	PLANNING STAFF HAS NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED THE
	STREETSCAPE PLANS FOR THE AREAS ADJACENT TO THIS
	PROJECT. PROVIDE THE 100% PLANS FOR REVIEW.

	4. SATISFIED. SECTION 94-448 (D)(3) REQUIRES NATIVE
	TREES IN GOOD CONDITION TO BE PRESERVED ON SITE OR
	RELOCATED. SUBMIT THE REASON THE TWO EXISTING LIVE OAK
	TREES CANNOT BE RELOCATED OR USED IN THE PROPOSED
	STREETSCAPE.
	PLANNING STAFF HAS NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED THE
	STREETSCAPE PLANS FOR THE AREAS ADJACENT TO THIS
	PROJECT. PROVIDE THE 100% PLANS FOR REVIEW.


	5. SATISFIED. PUBLIC AND PRIVATE OPEN SPACE AREAS SHOWN
	ON SHEET A0.05 MUST BE BROKEN DOWN TO SHOW THE REQUIRED
	VEGETATED AREA AND ANY TREE CANOPY REQUIREMENT FOR EACH
	AREA. PASSAGEWAY LESS THAN 7500 SQ FT REQUIRE ZERO ANY
	OF EITHER. TERRACE REQUIRES 20% MINIMUM VEGETATED AREA.
	ROOFTOP GARDEN REQUIRES 30% VEGETATED AREA AND 20% TREE
	CANOPY. TREE CANOPY VALUES CAN BE FOUND IN SECTION
	94-109 TABLE IV-8.

	6. SATISFIED. AREA LISTED AS POOL DECK ON LEVEL 3 IS
	NOT AN OPEN SPACE TYPE. CLASSIFY AS A PERMITTED PRIVATE
	OPEN SPACE TYPE (ROOFTOP GARDEN?) AND SHOW
	REQUIREMENTS.

	7. SATISFIED. ADD COLUMNS FOR NATIVE PLANTS AND DROUGHT
	TOLERANCE/ WATER USAGE TO THE PLANT LIST SO THAT
	FLORIDA FRIENDLY POINTS CAN BE SUBSTANTIATED.

	8. SATISFIED. TRA IS MISSING FROM THE PLANT LIST.

	9. SATISFIED. SHOW LOCATIONS OF ANY ROOT BARRIERS
	REQUIRED TO PROTECT UTILITY LINES.
	BIOBARRIER IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AS ROOT BARRIER, MUST BE
	HARD PLASTIC ROOT BARRIER DEEP ROOT OR SIMILAR.
	SOME ROOT BARRIER LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE NOT APPROPRIATE,
	AS THEY SEPARATE THE ROOTS FROM REQUIRED SOIL AREAS.
	PROVIDE A ROOT BARRIER DETAIL.

	10. SATISFIED. SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 94-445 L.
	PLANT SPECIES. A MINIMUM OF 60 PERCENT OF PLANT
	MATERIAL ADDED SHALL BE FLORIDA NATIVE OR DROUGHT
	TOLERANT SPECIES SELECTED FROM THE CITY LIST OR THE
	LIST OF SPECIES IN THE MOST RECENT EDITION OF SOUTH
	FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT WATERWISE SOUTH
	FLORIDA LANDSCAPES.
	PROVIDE THE ACTUAL PERCENTAGE OF DROUGHT TOLERANT AND
	NATIVE SPECIES ADDED BASED ON THE PROPOSED PLANT LIST.

	ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 8/16/19:

	11. SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE 50 POINTS REQUIRED FROM THE
	FLORIDA FRIENDLY DESIGN OPTIONS FOUND IN SECTION
	94-443(G).

	12. SATISFIED. PER RESOLUTION NO. 304-18 UNDER 2.
	CITYPLACE CENTER B., FOUR FICUS TREES WITHIN THE PAVED
	AREAS NEED TO BE SHOWN WITH SUSPENDED PAVEMENT SYSTEM
	FOR THE ROOT ZONES OF THE TREES. PROVIDE THE LOCATIONS
	AND DETAIL FOR THE SYSTEM.

	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	3	Status	F	Date	09-18-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	rcaranci			Date	09-18-2019	Time	17:21	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	rcaranci			Date	09-18-2019	Time	17:21	Sent To

Notes

2019-09-18 17:22:08	FROM: RAY CARANCI, LANDSCAPE PLANNER 561-822-1462
	PROJECT: 575 ROSEMARY (MACY?S) Z19050019
	SEPTEMBER 18, 2019
	I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PETITION, AND
	PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:

	1. MAKE THE FOLLOWING CORRECTIONS TO THE TREE
	DISPOSITION PLAN:
	? SATISFIED. THE WASHINGTONIA PALMS ARE CATEGORY 4,
	CANOPY VALUE IS 50 SQ FT.
	? PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE
	OF MITIGATION FOR ALL TREES AND PALMS PROPOSED TO BE
	REMOVED.
	OAKS ON GARDENIA NEED TO BE INCLUDED, AS THEY ARE IN
	THE AREA OF STREETSCAPE REQUIRED TO BE INCLUDED WITH
	THIS SITE.
	? SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE MITIGATION VALUES BY CATEGORY
	FOR THE PROPOSED STREETSCAPE TREES AND PALMS.

	2. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. THE STREETSCAPE CAN BE IMPROVED
	TO ACCOMPLISH THE INTENT OF THE CODE SECTION 94-113.
	THE COCONUT PALMS AND DATE PALMS MAY BE USED, BUT NOT
	AS COUNTING TOWARD THE TREE REQUIREMENT AT THE MAXIMUM
	30 FOOT SPACING. THERE ARE ALSO CONFLICTS WITH PROPOSED
	AWNING AND STREET TREES.
	PLANNING STAFF HAS NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED THE
	STREETSCAPE PLANS FOR THE AREAS ADJACENT TO THIS
	PROJECT. PROVIDE THE 100% PLANS FOR REVIEW.
	A COURTESY REVIEW WAS CONDUCTED ON THE PLAN COPY
	DELIVERED BY THE APPLICANT. A FORMAL SUBMITTAL WITH THE
	PLANS INCORPORATED INTO THE LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR THIS
	SITE IS REQUIRED FOR APPROVAL. AREAS OF STRUCTURAL SOIL
	MUST BE SHOWN ON ROSEMARY SECTION.

	3. SATISFIED. REQUIRED STREET TREES MUST MEET THE 20
	FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT AT INSTALLATION. LIST OVERALL
	HEIGHT ON PLANT LIST.
	PLANNING STAFF HAS NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED THE
	STREETSCAPE PLANS FOR THE AREAS ADJACENT TO THIS
	PROJECT. PROVIDE THE 100% PLANS FOR REVIEW.

	4. SATISFIED. SECTION 94-448 (D)(3) REQUIRES NATIVE
	TREES IN GOOD CONDITION TO BE PRESERVED ON SITE OR
	RELOCATED. SUBMIT THE REASON THE TWO EXISTING LIVE OAK
	TREES CANNOT BE RELOCATED OR USED IN THE PROPOSED
	STREETSCAPE.
	PLANNING STAFF HAS NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED THE
	STREETSCAPE PLANS FOR THE AREAS ADJACENT TO THIS
	PROJECT. PROVIDE THE 100% PLANS FOR REVIEW.


	5. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PUBLIC AND PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
	AREAS SHOWN ON SHEET A0.05 MUST BE BROKEN DOWN TO SHOW
	THE REQUIRED VEGETATED AREA AND ANY TREE CANOPY
	REQUIREMENT FOR EACH AREA. PASSAGEWAY LESS THAN 7500 SQ
	FT REQUIRE ZERO ANY OF EITHER. TERRACE REQUIRES 20%
	MINIMUM VEGETATED AREA. ROOFTOP GARDEN REQUIRES 30%
	VEGETATED AREA AND 20% TREE CANOPY. TREE CANOPY VALUES
	CAN BE FOUND IN SECTION 94-109 TABLE IV-8.
	AREAS SHOWN MUST MEET THE DEFINITION FOR THE OPEN SPACE
	TYPE IF THEY ARE TO BE COUNTED TOWARD REQUIRED OPEN
	SPACE. ZONING COMMENTS WILL INCLUDE DETAILS.

	6. SATISFIED. AREA LISTED AS POOL DECK ON LEVEL 3 IS
	NOT AN OPEN SPACE TYPE. CLASSIFY AS A PERMITTED PRIVATE
	OPEN SPACE TYPE (ROOFTOP GARDEN?) AND SHOW
	REQUIREMENTS.

	7. SATISFIED. ADD COLUMNS FOR NATIVE PLANTS AND DROUGHT
	TOLERANCE/ WATER USAGE TO THE PLANT LIST SO THAT
	FLORIDA FRIENDLY POINTS CAN BE SUBSTANTIATED.

	8. SATISFIED. TRA IS MISSING FROM THE PLANT LIST.

	9. SATISFIED. SHOW LOCATIONS OF ANY ROOT BARRIERS
	REQUIRED TO PROTECT UTILITY LINES.
	BIOBARRIER IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AS ROOT BARRIER, MUST BE
	HARD PLASTIC ROOT BARRIER DEEP ROOT OR SIMILAR.
	SOME ROOT BARRIER LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE NOT APPROPRIATE,
	AS THEY SEPARATE THE ROOTS FROM REQUIRED SOIL AREAS.
	PROVIDE A ROOT BARRIER DETAIL.

	10. SATISFIED. SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 94-445 L.
	PLANT SPECIES. A MINIMUM OF 60 PERCENT OF PLANT
	MATERIAL ADDED SHALL BE FLORIDA NATIVE OR DROUGHT
	TOLERANT SPECIES SELECTED FROM THE CITY LIST OR THE
	LIST OF SPECIES IN THE MOST RECENT EDITION OF SOUTH
	FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT WATERWISE SOUTH
	FLORIDA LANDSCAPES.
	PROVIDE THE ACTUAL PERCENTAGE OF DROUGHT TOLERANT AND
	NATIVE SPECIES ADDED BASED ON THE PROPOSED PLANT LIST.

	ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 8/16/19:

	11. SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE 50 POINTS REQUIRED FROM THE
	FLORIDA FRIENDLY DESIGN OPTIONS FOUND IN SECTION
	94-443(G).

	12. SATISFIED. PER RESOLUTION NO. 304-18 UNDER 2.
	CITYPLACE CENTER B., FOUR FICUS TREES WITHIN THE PAVED
	AREAS NEED TO BE SHOWN WITH SUSPENDED PAVEMENT SYSTEM
	FOR THE ROOT ZONES OF THE TREES. PROVIDE THE LOCATIONS
	AND DETAIL FOR THE SYSTEM.

	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	2	Status	F	Date	08-16-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	rcaranci			Date	08-16-2019	Time	14:31	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	rcaranci			Date	08-16-2019	Time	14:31	Sent To

Notes

2019-08-16 14:31:49	FROM: RAY CARANCI, LANDSCAPE PLANNER 561-822-1462
	PROJECT: 575 ROSEMARY (MACY?S) Z19050019
	AUGUST 16, 2019
	I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PETITION, AND
	PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:

	1. MAKE THE FOLLOWING CORRECTIONS TO THE TREE
	DISPOSITION PLAN:
	? SATISFIED. THE WASHINGTONIA PALMS ARE CATEGORY 4,
	CANOPY VALUE IS 50 SQ FT.
	? PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE
	OF MITIGATION FOR ALL TREES AND PALMS PROPOSED TO BE
	REMOVED.
	? PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE MITIGATION VALUES BY
	CATEGORY FOR THE PROPOSED STREETSCAPE TREES AND PALMS.
	SEE BELOW.

	2. NOT SATISFIED. THE STREETSCAPE CAN BE IMPROVED TO
	ACCOMPLISH THE INTENT OF THE CODE SECTION 94-113. THE
	COCONUT PALMS AND DATE PALMS MAY BE USED, BUT NOT AS
	COUNTING TOWARD THE TREE REQUIREMENT AT THE MAXIMUM 30
	FOOT SPACING. THERE ARE ALSO CONFLICTS WITH PROPOSED
	AWNING AND STREET TREES.
	PLANNING STAFF HAS NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED THE
	STREETSCAPE PLANS FOR THE AREAS ADJACENT TO THIS
	PROJECT. PROVIDE THE 100% PLANS FOR REVIEW.
	3. NOT SATISFIED. REQUIRED STREET TREES MUST MEET THE
	20 FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT AT INSTALLATION. LIST
	OVERALL HEIGHT ON PLANT LIST.
	PLANNING STAFF HAS NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED THE
	STREETSCAPE PLANS FOR THE AREAS ADJACENT TO THIS
	PROJECT. PROVIDE THE 100% PLANS FOR REVIEW.

	4. NOT SATISFIED. SECTION 94-448 (D)(3) REQUIRES NATIVE
	TREES IN GOOD CONDITION TO BE PRESERVED ON SITE OR
	RELOCATED. SUBMIT THE REASON THE TWO EXISTING LIVE OAK
	TREES CANNOT BE RELOCATED OR USED IN THE PROPOSED
	STREETSCAPE.
	PLANNING STAFF HAS NOT REVIEWED OR APPROVED THE
	STREETSCAPE PLANS FOR THE AREAS ADJACENT TO THIS
	PROJECT. PROVIDE THE 100% PLANS FOR REVIEW.


	5. SATISFIED. PUBLIC AND PRIVATE OPEN SPACE AREAS SHOWN
	ON SHEET A0.05 MUST BE BROKEN DOWN TO SHOW THE REQUIRED
	VEGETATED AREA AND ANY TREE CANOPY REQUIREMENT FOR EACH
	AREA. PASSAGEWAY LESS THAN 7500 SQ FT REQUIRE ZERO ANY
	OF EITHER. TERRACE REQUIRES 20% MINIMUM VEGETATED AREA.
	ROOFTOP GARDEN REQUIRES 30% VEGETATED AREA AND 20% TREE
	CANOPY. TREE CANOPY VALUES CAN BE FOUND IN SECTION
	94-109 TABLE IV-8.

	6. SATISFIED. AREA LISTED AS POOL DECK ON LEVEL 3 IS
	NOT AN OPEN SPACE TYPE. CLASSIFY AS A PERMITTED PRIVATE
	OPEN SPACE TYPE (ROOFTOP GARDEN?) AND SHOW
	REQUIREMENTS.

	7. SATISFIED. ADD COLUMNS FOR NATIVE PLANTS AND DROUGHT
	TOLERANCE/ WATER USAGE TO THE PLANT LIST SO THAT
	FLORIDA FRIENDLY POINTS CAN BE SUBSTANTIATED.

	8. SATISFIED. TRA IS MISSING FROM THE PLANT LIST.

	9. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. SHOW LOCATIONS OF ANY ROOT
	BARRIERS REQUIRED TO PROTECT UTILITY LINES.
	BIOBARRIER IS NOT ACCEPTABLE AS ROOT BARRIER, MUST BE
	HARD PLASTIC ROOT BARRIER DEEP ROOT OR SIMILAR.
	SOME ROOT BARRIER LOCATIONS SHOWN ARE NOT APPROPRIATE,
	AS THEY SEPARATE THE ROOTS FROM REQUIRED SOIL AREAS.
	PROVIDE A ROOT BARRIER DETAIL.

	10. NOT SATISFIED. SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 94-445
	L. PLANT SPECIES. A MINIMUM OF 60 PERCENT OF PLANT
	MATERIAL ADDED SHALL BE FLORIDA NATIVE OR DROUGHT
	TOLERANT SPECIES SELECTED FROM THE CITY LIST OR THE
	LIST OF SPECIES IN THE MOST RECENT EDITION OF SOUTH
	FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT WATERWISE SOUTH
	FLORIDA LANDSCAPES.
	PROVIDE THE ACTUAL PERCENTAGE OF DROUGHT TOLERANT AND
	NATIVE SPECIES ADDED BASED ON THE PROPOSED PLANT LIST.

	ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 8/16/19:

	11. PROVIDE THE 50 POINTS REQUIRED FROM THE FLORIDA
	FRIENDLY DESIGN OPTIONS FOUND IN SECTION 94-443(G).

	12. PER RESOLUTION NO. 304-18 UNDER 2. CITYPLACE CENTER
	B., FOUR FICUS TREES WITHIN THE PAVED AREAS NEED TO BE
	SHOWN WITH SUSPENDED PAVEMENT SYSTEM FOR THE ROOT ZONES
	OF THE TREES. PROVIDE THE LOCATIONS AND DETAIL FOR THE
	SYSTEM.

	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	06-10-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	rcaranci			Date	06-10-2019	Time	14:25	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	rcaranci			Date	06-10-2019	Time	14:25	Sent To

Notes

2019-06-10 14:28:37	FROM: RAY CARANCI, LANDSCAPE PLANNER 561-822-1462
	PROJECT: 575 ROSEMARY (MACY?S) Z19050019
	JUNE 10, 2019
	I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PETITION, AND
	PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:

	1. MAKE THE FOLLOWING CORRECTIONS TO THE TREE
	DISPOSITION PLAN:
	? THE WASHINGTONIA PALMS ARE CATEGORY 4, CANOPY VALUE
	IS 50 SQ FT.
	? PROVIDE THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF MITIGATION FOR
	ALL TREES AND PALMS PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED.
	? PROVIDE THE MITIGATION VALUES BY CATEGORY FOR THE
	PROPOSED STREETSCAPE TREES AND PALMS.

	2. THE STREETSCAPE CAN BE IMPROVED TO ACCOMPLISH THE
	INTENT OF THE CODE SECTION 94-113. THE COCONUT PALMS
	AND DATE PALMS MAY BE USED, BUT NOT AS COUNTING TOWARD
	THE TREE REQUIREMENT AT THE MAXIMUM 30 FOOT SPACING.
	THERE ARE ALSO CONFLICTS WITH PROPOSED AWNING AND
	STREET TREES.
	3. REQUIRED STREET TREES MUST MEET THE 20 FOOT HEIGHT
	REQUIREMENT AT INSTALLATION. LIST OVERALL HEIGHT ON
	PLANT LIST.

	4. SECTION 94-448 (D)(3) REQUIRES NATIVE TREES IN GOOD
	CONDITION TO BE PRESERVED ON SITE OR RELOCATED. SUBMIT
	THE REASON THE TWO EXISTING LIVE OAK TREES CANNOT BE
	RELOCATED OR USED IN THE PROPOSED STREETSCAPE.

	5. PUBLIC AND PRIVATE OPEN SPACE AREAS SHOWN ON SHEET
	A0.05 MUST BE BROKEN DOWN TO SHOW THE REQUIRED
	VEGETATED AREA AND ANY TREE CANOPY REQUIREMENT FOR EACH
	AREA. PASSAGEWAY LESS THAN 7500 SQ FT REQUIRE ZERO ANY
	OF EITHER. TERRACE REQUIRES 20% MINIMUM VEGETATED AREA.
	ROOFTOP GARDEN REQUIRES 30% VEGETATED AREA AND 20% TREE
	CANOPY. TREE CANOPY VALUES CAN BE FOUND IN SECTION
	94-109 TABLE IV-8.

	6. AREA LISTED AS POOL DECK ON LEVEL 3 IS NOT AN OPEN
	SPACE TYPE. CLASSIFY AS A PERMITTED PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
	TYPE (ROOFTOP GARDEN?) AND SHOW REQUIREMENTS.

	7. ADD COLUMNS FOR NATIVE PLANTS AND DROUGHT TOLERANCE/
	WATER USAGE TO THE PLANT LIST SO THAT FLORIDA FRIENDLY
	POINTS CAN BE SUBSTANTIATED.

	8. TRA IS MISSING FROM THE PLANT LIST.

	9. SHOW LOCATIONS OF ANY ROOT BARRIERS REQUIRED TO
	PROTECT UTILITY LINES.

	10. SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 94-445 L. PLANT
	SPECIES. A MINIMUM OF 60 PERCENT OF PLANT MATERIAL
	ADDED SHALL BE FLORIDA NATIVE OR DROUGHT TOLERANT
	SPECIES SELECTED FROM THE CITY LIST OR THE LIST OF
	SPECIES IN THE MOST RECENT EDITION OF SOUTH FLORIDA
	WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT WATERWISE SOUTH FLORIDA
	LANDSCAPES.
	PROVIDE THE ACTUAL PERCENTAGE OF DROUGHT TOLERANT AND
	NATIVE SPECIES ADDED BASED ON THE PROPOSED PLANT LIST.

	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	PW			PUBLIC WORKS
Rev No	2	Status	P	Date	08-20-2019		Cont ID
Sent By				Date	08-20-2019	Time	Rev Time	0.00
Received By				Date	08-20-2019	Time	Sent To

Notes

2019-08-20 08:29:48	PUBLIC WORKS HAS NO FURTHER COMMENTS.

	MATT HEJAZI
	561-822-2045

Review Stop	PW			PUBLIC WORKS
Rev No	1	Status	F	Date	06-04-2019		Cont ID
Sent By				Date	06-11-2019	Time	Rev Time
Received By				Date	06-11-2019	Time	Sent To

Notes

2019-06-11 08:35:39	PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWINGS:
	- LOS (LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS) TO REFLECT THE SOLID
	WASTE VOLUME PRODUCED ALONG WITH THE SIZE OF THE
	COMPACTOR THAT WILL BE UTILIZED.
	- AUTO TURN FOR THE SANITATION SERVICE
	- CONTINGENCY PLAN, FOR WHEN THE COMPACTOR IS OUT OF
	SERVICE (I.E. CITY DUMPSTER, ROLL-OFF CONTAINER)
	- DESIGNATED LOCATION FOR THE BULK ITEM PICK UP


	MATT HEJAZI
	DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS
	[email protected]
	561-822-2045

Review Stop	STORM			STORMWATER
Rev No	4	Status	P	Date	10-30-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	tward			Date	10-30-2019	Time	15:43	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	tward			Date	10-30-2019	Time	16:14	Sent To

Notes

2019-10-30 16:04:13	THE PROPOSED DRAINAGE DESIGN IN THE OCTOBER 4, 2019
	SUBMITTAL PACKAGE SHOWS THE STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM THE
	SIDEWALK AND ROOF DRAINS DIRECTED TO ONSITE
	EXFILTRATION TRENCHES WITH NO DIRECT CONNECTION TO THE
	DRAINAGE SYSTEM IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. NO DRAINAGE
	CALCULATION HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO INDICATE THE AMOUNT
	OF RUNOFF THE EXFILTRATION TRENCHES CAN HANDLE. THE EOR
	MAY HAVE SAID THE 5-YEAR 24-HOUR STORM COULD BE HANDLED
	BY THE SYSTEM.

	UNLESS THE EXFILTRATION TRENCHES ARE PERIODICALLY
	MAINTAINED, THE STORAGE AND DISPOSAL CAPACITY OF THIS
	DRAINAGE SYSTEM WILL DIMINISH OVERTIME. IT WILL TAKE
	LONGER FOR THE STORED WATER TO FLOW OUT OF THE SLOTTED
	PIPE AND INTO THE GROUND TO GROUNDWATER. EVENTUALLY,
	THE TRENCHES ALONG THE PERIMETER OF THE SITE FOR
	CAPTURING THE SIDEWALK STORMWATER RUNOFF WILL NO LONG
	PERFORM THIS FUNCTION BECAUSE THE SYSTEM WILL BE FULL.
	THE OPPOSITE WILL LIKELY OCCUR IN THAT ROOF RUNOFF WILL
	BACKFLOW THROUGH THE PERIMETER TRENCHES AND FLOW ON THE
	SIDEWALK TO THE GUTTER IN THE R/W. SUFFICIENT HEAD
	PRESSURE COULD OCCUR IN THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM FROM THE
	ROOF DRAINS TO FORCE OPEN THE MANHOLES LIDS AND
	MINI-FOUNTAINS ERUPT WITH WATER SPILLING OUT ONTO THE
	SIDEWALK. BY THIS TIME THE EXFILTRATION TRENCHES WILL
	NEED TO BE DUG UP AND REPLACED WITH CLEAN STONE/ROCKS.

	DUE TO THE DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT FOR CAPTURING THE
	STORMWATER RUNOFF, THE CITY COULD ADD AS A CONDITION OF
	APPROVAL THAT THE ONSITE DRAINAGE SYSTEM BE INSPECTED
	AND CERTIFIED ANNUALLY BY A FL P.E. THAT THE DRAINAGE
	SYSTEM IS PERFORMING AS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED.

	TRACY WARD, P.E.
	SENIOR STORMWATER ENGINEER
	ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
	[email protected]
	561-494-1120

Review Stop	STORM			STORMWATER
Rev No	3	Status	F	Date	09-11-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	tward			Date	09-11-2019	Time	17:14	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	tward			Date	09-11-2019	Time	17:40	Sent To

Notes

2019-09-11 17:35:26	THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS ARE FROM THE REVIEW OF THE
	SEPTEMBER 9, 2019 SUBMITTAL REVIEW PACKAGE:

	1. SHEET C0.02 - SURVEY DATA NOTE 1 STATES ELEVATIONS
	ON THE PLANS ARE BASED ON NGVD1929. A NOTE IN THE
	BOTTOM RIGHT OF THE SHEET STATES ALL ELEVATIONS SHOWN
	ON THE PLANS ARE BASED ON NAVD1988.

	2. SHEET C8.00 - SHOW R/W LINE ON SECTION H-H

	3. SHEET C8.01:
	A. SHOW R/W LINE ON THE SECTIONS.
	B. SECTION I-I - SLOT DRAIN NOT SHOWN.
	C. SECTION L-L - WHAT IS THE 8 FOOT AREA NEXT TO THE
	SIDEWALK? NOTE THE PLAN VIEW DOES NOT SHOW THE SLOT
	DRAIN IN THE 8 FOOT AREA.

	4. PROVIDE DETAIL OF THE SLOT DRAIN.

	5. INDICATE HOW ONSITE EXFILTRATION TRENCH DRAINS WILL
	BE DESIGNED/SIZED.

	6. PROVIDE A COPY OF THE STREETSCAPE PLANS (PERMIT NO.
	19031272) FOR THE PROPOSED PLANTING ALONG S. ROSEMARY
	AVE. AND HIBISCUS STREET.

	TRACY WARD, P.E.
	SENIOR STORMWATER ENGINEER
	ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
	[email protected]
	561-494-1120

Review Stop	STORM			STORMWATER
Rev No	2	Status	F	Date	08-19-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	tward			Date	08-19-2019	Time	10:51	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	tward			Date	08-19-2019	Time	11:04	Sent To

Notes

2019-08-19 11:04:25	THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS ARE FROM THE REVIEW OF THE JULY
	30, 2019 SUBMITTAL PACKAGE.

	1. IT APPEARS ONLY ROOF DRAINS AND CONDENSATE LINES ARE
	CONNECTED TO THE EXFILTRATION SYSTEMS. SINCE ALL ROOF
	DRAINAGE IS TO BE CAPTURED AND RETAINED ONSITE, WEIRS
	AND OUTFALL PIPES WILL NOT BE NECESSARY TO CONNECT TO
	THE OFFSITE DRAINAGE SYSTEMS. [REPEAT COMMENT]

	2. GRADING INFORMATION PROVIDED FOR THE DROPOFF AREA ON
	WEST STREET APPEARS TO SHOW A LOW SPOT ELEVATION OF
	20.13. IS THIS AREA DESIGNED TO HOLD WATER INSTEAD OF
	DRAINAGE TO AN INLET?

	3. PREVIOUS COMMENT REGARDING TREES PROPOSED OVER THE
	EXISTING DRAINAGE SYSTEM ON S. ROSEMARY AVE. WAS
	APPARENTLY ADDRESSED BY CROSS HATCHING THE AREA ON THE
	LANDSCAPE PLANS AND INDICATING THE AREA WAS APPROVED BY
	CITY COUNCIL (SIC) AS PART OF FACE OF THE CITY
	RESOLUTION.

	4. ON SHEET LH-03 ARE TWO SAND SET PAVER DETAILS.
	PLEASE INDICATE ON SHEET LH-01 WHERE EACH DETAIL
	APPLIES.

	5. INDICATE ON THE PGD PLAN HOW STORMWATER RUNOFF FROM
	THE PERIMETER SIDEWALK AREAS WILL BE CAPTURED ONSITE.

	TRACY WARD, PE
	SENIOR STORMWATER ENGINEER
	ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
	561-494-1120
	[email protected]

Review Stop	STORM			STORMWATER
Rev No	1	Status	F	Date	06-10-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	tward			Date	06-10-2019	Time	18:25	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	tward			Date	06-10-2019	Time	18:27	Sent To

Notes

2019-06-10 18:27:23	THIS 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/FOR
	MS,-PERMITS-APPLICATIONS

	THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS MUST BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO SITE
	PLAN APPROVAL:

	1. CONFIRM EXISTING STORM PIPE WEST STREET (ALLEY) IS
	15? RCP. THE DRAINAGE AS-BUILTS FOR CITY PLACE PHASE I
	SHOWS 30? RCP.

	2. IT APPEARS ONLY ROOF DRAINS AND CONDENSATE LINES ARE
	CONNECTED TO THE EXFILTRATION SYSTEMS. SINCE ALL ROOF
	DRAINAGE IS TO BE CAPTURED AND RETAINED ONSITE, WEIRS
	AND OUTFALL PIPES WILL NOT BE NECESSARY TO CONNECT TO
	THE OFFSITE DRAINAGE SYSTEMS.

	3. INDICATE HOW THE ROOF DRAINAGE CONVEYED BY ROOF
	LEADERS AT THE NORTHEAST AND SOUTHEAST CORNERS OF THE
	BUILDING WILL BE RETAINED ONSITE.

	4. HOW WILL DRAINAGE AT THE LOADING DOCK BE HANDLED?

	5. INSUFFICIENT GRADING INFORMATION PROVIDED FOR THE
	DROPOFF AREA ON WEST STREET. PROVIDE GRADES AND A CROSS
	SECTION FOR THIS AREA.

	6. TREES PROPOSED OVER THE EXISTING DRAINAGE SYSTEM ON
	S. ROSEMARY AVE.


	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 MAY
	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. EROSION CONTROL PLAN AND DETAILS TO BE SUBMITTED
	WITH THE ENGINEERING PERMIT APPLICATION.

	3. PROVIDE A COPY OF THE SFWMD ERP MODIFICATION PRIOR
	TO STARTING CONSTRUCTION.

	TRACY WARD, PE
	SENIOR STORMWATER ENGINEER
	ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
	561-494-1120
	[email protected]

Review Stop	SURVEY			SURVEYING
Rev No	2	Status	P	Date	08-19-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	vnoel			Date	08-19-2019	Time	09:13	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	vnoel			Date		Time		Sent To

Notes

2019-08-19 09:16:55	PASSED WITH CONDITIONS:

	1. REVIEW OF MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT CONCERNING LIABILITY
	OF UTILITIES IN SIDEWALKS.
	2. APPROVAL BY MARK HURLEY, CUSTOMER SERVICE.

Review Stop	SURVEY			SURVEYING
Rev No	1	Status	F	Date	06-10-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	vnoel			Date	06-10-2019	Time	12:58	Rev Time
Received By	vnoel			Date		Time		Sent To

Notes

2019-06-10 13:37:06	1. MARK HURLEY WITH CUSTOMER SERVICE (METER SHOP) WILL
	NEED TO REVIEW THE PROPOSED VERTICAL STACKS AND METER
	LOCATIONS.
	2. NEED TO REVIEW THE 6 NEW STORM MANHOLES TO BE WITHIN
	THE SIDEWALK AREA. MAY NEED TO RE-VISIT ANY MAINTENANCE
	AGREEMENTS.
	3. SHOULD DOORWAYS BE OPENING INTO SIDEWALK EASEMENTS?
	4. SURVEY IS APPROVED AS SUBMITTED.
	5. OUTDOOR SEATING WITHIN SIDEWALK EASEMENTS MAY
	REQUIRE SIDEWALK CAFE' PERMIT.

Review Stop	TRAFFIC			TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
Rev No	4	Status	P	Date			Cont ID
Sent By				Date	10-15-2019	Time	Rev Time	0.00
Received By				Date		Time	Sent To

Notes

2019-10-15 16:11:33	PASSED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
	CONDITIONS:
	1. THE DEVELOPER SHALL CONDUCT AN EVALUATION AT THE
	INTERSECTION AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SITE FOR
	REMOVAL OF THE EXISTING ALL-WAY STOP AND SHALL CONVERT
	TO TWO-WAY STOP IF AN ALL-WAY STOP IS NOT WARRANTED,
	ONE YEAR AFTER THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS ARE MET:
	A. CO IS ISSUED FOR AT LEAST 50% OF THE PROPOSED
	APARTMENT, OFFICE USE, OR RETAIL USES.
	B. CO IS ISSUED FOR AT LEAST 85% OF THE PROPOSED
	APARTMENT, OFFICE USE, OR RETAIL USES.
	C. THE LAST CO IS ISSUED FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
	2. THE EVALUATION SHALL INCLUDE ANALYSES OF TRAFFIC
	VOLUMES, SAFETY DATA AND SIGHT DISTANCES AND SHALL BE
	COMPLETED BY A LICENSED ENGINEER. THE NECESSARY TRAFFIC
	AND SAFETY DATA SHALL BE COLLECTED BY THE DEVELOPER FOR
	THE ANALYSES.
	3. PROVIDE SURETY FOR THE TRAFFIC EVALUATION AND
	REMOVAL OF THE ALL-WAY STOP UNTIL THE OBLIGATIONS
	RELATED TO THE TWO-WAY STOP CONVERSION ANALYSES OR
	CONSTRUCTION (#1 AND #2 ABOVE) ARE FULLY MET.


	SHING TSOI
	CITY IN-HOUSE TRAFFIC CONSULTANT
	561-494-1141
	[email protected]
	(IN-HOUSE ON TUESDAYS AND WEDNESDAYS)

Review Stop	TRAFFIC			TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
Rev No	3	Status	F	Date			Cont ID
Sent By				Date	09-18-2019	Time	Rev Time	0.00
Received By				Date		Time	Sent To

Notes

2019-09-18 09:27:58	TRAFFIC STUDY COMMENTS:
	1. THE CALCULATION FOR THE TRIP GENERATION WAS
	SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT THAN IN THE PREVIOUS SUBMITTAL,
	AND SOME OF THE PREVIOUSLY CORRECT CALCULATIONS WERE
	INCORRECT IN THE LATEST SUBMITTAL. FOR EXAMPLE, THE
	PASS-BY TRIP PERCENTAGE FOR THE EXISTING MACY'S RETAIL
	WAS PREVIOUSLY CORRECT AT 39%, BUT AN INCORRECT
	PERCENTAGE OF 10% WAS USED IN THE LATEST SUBMITTAL; THE
	MULTIMODAL TRIPS AND PASS-BY TRIPS SHOULD BE APPLIED TO
	THE ADJUSTED TRIPS CALCULATED IMMEDIATELY PRIOR THESE
	TRIP REDUCTIONS. PLEASE REVIEW AND REVISE.
	2. (PREVIOUS COMMENT) IN THE SYNCHRO ANALYSIS AT
	OKEECHOBEE BOULEVARD/TAMARIND AVENUE, ADD WBU VOLUMES
	ONTO WBL VOLUMES AND REMOVE WBU SINCE U-TURN CAUSES
	ISSUES WITH HCM 2000 ANALYSIS IN SYNCHRO, WHICH RESULT
	IN UNREALISTIC DELAYS. APPROPRIATE SIGNAL TIMING SHOULD
	BE USED. ALSO, PLEASE ASSUME 2 NORTHBOUND LANES WHICH
	IS A COMMITTED OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENT FROM THE KRAVIS
	CENTER DEVELOPMENT IN THE FUTURE YEAR ANALYSES.
	SITE PLAN COMMENTS:
	1. PLEASE CONSIDER HAVING THE RESIDENTIAL VALET PICK-UP
	ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF HIBISCUS STREET TO REDUCE
	ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC ON ROSEMARY.
	2. PLEASE CONSIDER HAVING THE OFFICE VALET DROP-OFF
	VEHICLES TO TURN AROUND IN THE ALLEY TO REDUCE
	ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC ON ROSEMARY.
	CONDITIONS:
	1. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST CERTIFICATE OF
	OCCUPANCY, EVALUATE AND REMOVE ALL-WAY STOP AND CONVERT
	TO TWO-WAY STOP AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SITE IF
	ALL-WAY STOP IS NOT WARRANTED.

	SHING TSOI
	CITY IN-HOUSE TRAFFIC CONSULTANT
	561-494-1141
	[email protected]
	(IN-HOUSE ON TUESDAYS AND WEDNESDAYS)

Review Stop	TRAFFIC			TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
Rev No	2	Status	F	Date			Cont ID
Sent By				Date	08-14-2019	Time	Rev Time	0.00
Received By				Date		Time	Sent To

Notes

2019-08-14 15:19:01	TRAFFIC STUDY COMMENTS:
	1. THE TRAFFIC STUDY SHOULD BE THOROUGHLY CHECKED BY
	THE PE TO MAKE SURE THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS IS COMPLETED
	CORRECTLY AND PROPERLY REFLECTS THE EXPECTED TRAFFIC
	CONDITIONS.
	2. CLARIFY IF THE PROJECT TRIPS INCLUDE CIRCULATION DUE
	TO VALET VEHICLES, AND HOW MANY (OR PERCENTAGE OF)
	VALET VEHICLES ARE EXPECTED. IF NOT, PLEASE INCLUDE
	VALET VEHICLES IN PROJECT TRIP CALCULATIONS. ALL VALET
	VEHICLES BOUND FOR PICK-UP WOULD NEED TO CIRCULATE
	AROUND THE BLOCK USING FERN STREET, ROSEMARY AVENUE AND
	HIBISCUS STREET AND DEPART FROM SAPODILLA
	AVENUE/HIBISCUS STREET. ALL VALET VEHICLES BOUND FOR
	DROP-OFF WOULD NEED TO ACCESS THE VALET AREA FROM
	ROSEMARY AVENUE/HIBISCUS STREET.
	3. THE TRIP GENERATION RATE FOR LAND USE CODE 710
	OFFICE SHOULD BE BASED ON GROSS FLOOR AREA. THE SITE
	PLAN SHOWS A GFA OF 56,928 SF BUT 51,250 SF IS USED IN
	THE TRIP GENERATION ANALYSIS. PLEASE REVISE.
	4. THE TRIP GENERATION RATE FOR LAND USE CODE 820
	SHOPPING CENTER SHOULD BE BASED ON GROSS LEASABLE AREA.
	PLEASE VERIFY AND REVISE.
	5. TRIP GENERATION CALCULATIONS FOR SOME OF THE LAND
	USES DO NOT APPEAR TO BE CONSISTENT, E.G. THE APARTMENT
	LAND USE DURING PM PEAK HOUR. ALSO, THE PASS-BY
	PERCENTAGE FOR SHOPPING CENTER DEPENDS ON THE INTENSITY
	AND SHOULD BE VERIFIED IF THE INTENSITY IS CHANGED.
	6. IN THE INTERNAL TRIP CALCULATION, PLEASE CLARIFY THE
	SOURCE OF THE 12% UNCONSTRAINED INTERNAL TRIP CAPTURE
	RATE BETWEEN EACH INDIVIDUAL USE. ITE TRIP GENERATION
	HANDBACK 3RD EDITION SUGGESTS DIFFERENT PERCENTAGES.
	7. IN THE SYNCHRO ANALYSIS AT OKEECHOBEE
	BOULEVARD/TAMARIND AVENUE, ADD WBU VOLUMES ONTO WBL
	VOLUMES AND REMOVE WBU SINCE U-TURN CAUSES ISSUES WITH
	HCM 2000 ANALYSIS IN SYNCHRO, WHICH RESULT IN
	UNREALISTIC DELAYS. APPROPRIATE SIGNAL TIMING SHOULD BE
	USED. ALSO, PLEASE ASSUME 2 NORTHBOUND LANES WHICH IS A
	COMMITTED OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENT FROM THE KRAVIS CENTER
	DEVELOPMENT IN THE FUTURE YEAR ANALYSIS.

	CONDITIONS:
	1. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST CERTIFICATE OF
	OCCUPANCY, EVALUATE AND REMOVE ALL-WAY STOP AND CONVERT
	TO TWO-WAY STOP AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SITE IF
	ALL-WAY STOP IS NOT WARRANTED.


	SHING TSOI
	CITY IN-HOUSE TRAFFIC CONSULTANT
	561-494-1141
	[email protected]
	(IN-HOUSE ON TUESDAYS AND WEDNESDAYS)

Review Stop	TRAFFIC			TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
Rev No	1	Status	F	Date			Cont ID
Sent By				Date	06-11-2019	Time	Rev Time
Received By				Date		Time	Sent To

Notes

2019-06-11 18:00:23	1. PROVIDE BENCHES FOR THE TROLLEY STOP ON ROSEMARY
	AVENUE.
	2. CLARIFY IF THERE WILL BE VALET ON THE CURBSIDE ALONG
	HIBISCUS STREET. IF SO, PROVIDE VALET QUEUING ANALYSIS.
	3. MOVE THE DROP OFF AREA ON HIBISCUS STREET TO THE
	EAST AWAY FROM THE INTERSECTION.
	4. EVALUATE AND REMOVE ALL-WAY STOP AND CONVERT TO
	TWO-WAY STOP AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SITE IF
	ALL-WAY STOP IS NOT WARRANTED.
	5. PROVIDE CURBSIDE MANAGEMENT PLAN INCLUDING CURBSIDE
	USAGE MONITORING.
	6. PROVIDE BICYCLE PARKING ALONG ROSEMARY AVENUE
	7. PROVIDE FREIGHT DELIVERY PLAN IDENTIFYING THE
	DELIVERY ROUTE, HOURS AND THE TYPE OF FREIGHT VEHICLES.
	VERIFY THE FREIGHT VEHICLES CAN BE ACCOMMODATED ALONG
	THE ROUTE, AND ANY IMPACT FROM THE FREIGHT VEHICLE TO
	TRAFFIC.
	8. PROVIDE A PARKING UTILIZATION STUDY TO VERIFY
	SUFFICIENT PARKING SPACES ARE AVAILABLE IN THE GARAGE.
	9. CONSIDER PROVIDING THE FOLLOWING TRANSPORTATION
	DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) STRATEGIES:
	A. UNBUNDLE PARKING SPACES FROM THE RESIDENTIAL LEASE
	B. IMPLEMENT PARKING CASH OUT PROGRAM FOR EMPLOYEES

	TRAFFIC STUDY COMMENTS:
	10. REPORT HCM 2010 OR HCM 6TH RESULTS INSTEAD OF
	SYNCHRO RESULTS. IF HCM 2010 OR HCM 6TH RESULTS ARE NOT
	AVAILABLE, REPORT HCM 2000 RESULTS.
	11. INTERSECTIONS WITH TRAFFIC COUNTS COLLECTED IN 2018
	SHOULD INCLUDE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT TRIPS WITH NO
	CREDIT FROM THE EXISTING USE SINCE THE EXISTING USE
	CEASED TO OPERATE STARTING FROM MARCH 2017.
	12. SOME OF THE TRIP GENERATION RATES ARE NOT
	CONSISTENT WITH THE LATEST TRIP RATES FROM PALM BEACH
	COUNTY. PLEASE REVISE.
	13. CLARIFY THE INTERNAL TRIP CAPTURE METHODOLOGY, OR
	USE INTERNAL TRIP CAPTURE CALCULATIONS BASED ON ITE
	METHODOLOGY.
	14. IDENTIFY THE ACCESS POINTS OF THE PARKING GARAGE.
	15. CLARIFY IF IT IS REASONABLE TO HAVE MORE THAN 50%
	OF TRIPS USING FERN STREET TO ACCESS OKEECHOBEE
	BOULEVARD, WHILE THERE ARE SHORTER ROUTES AVAILABLE.



	SHING TSOI
	CITY IN-HOUSE TRAFFIC CONSULTANT
	561-494-1141
	[email protected]
	(IN-HOUSE ON TUESDAYS AND WEDNESDAYS)

Review Stop	Z			ZONING
Rev No	5	Status	P	Date	11-11-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	eschneid			Date	11-11-2019	Time	11:35	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	eschneid			Date	11-11-2019	Time	11:35	Sent To

Notes

***NONE***

Review Stop	Z			ZONING
Rev No	4	Status	F	Date	10-21-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	eschneid			Date	10-21-2019	Time	15:07	Rev Time	0.00
Received By	eschneid			Date	10-18-2019	Time	13:50	Sent To

Notes

2019-10-21 15:08:05	CASE NO. PB 950 OOOOO - OCTOBER 4, 2019 RESUBMITTAL
	REVIEW
	HIBISCUS TOWER
	575 SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE

	- CONTACT ERIC SCHNEIDER @ (561) 822-1446

	- PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN
	WRITTEN FORMAT.

	- WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF ELEVEN
	(11) PAPER COPIES AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY IN .PNG 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.

	- COMMENT #1 MUST BE SHOWN ON THE PLANS SUBMITTED TO
	THE PLANNING DIVISION BY NOON, FRIDAY, OCTOBER 25,
	2019, TO BE ELIGIBLE TO BE SCHEDULED FOR THE NOVEMBER
	19, 2019 PLANNING BOARD MEETING.

	- COMMENT #2 MUST BE ADDRESSED ON THE PLANS PRIOR TO
	THE SCHEDULING OF THE CITY COMMISSION HEARING. IF THE
	COMMENT IS ADDRESSED ON THE PLANS SUBMITTED TO THE
	PLANNING DIVISION BY NOON, FRIDAY, OCTOBER 25, 2019,
	STAFF WILL PROVIDE THE MAILER FOR THE DECEMBER 16, 2019
	CITY COMMISSION MEETING, TO BE MAILED AT THE SAME TIME
	AS THE PLANNING BOARD MAILER. OTHERWISE, THE PLANS NEED
	TO BE UPDATED BY 5 P.M., WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2019,
	TO RECEIVE THE MAILER FOR THE DECEMBER 16, 2019 CITY
	COMMISSION MEETING.

	1) UPDATED COMMENT: THANK YOU FOR INCLUDING THE ADA
	RAMP TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE ROSEMARY AVENUE FACING
	MAINTENANCE ROOM ON THE GROSS AREA PLANS, BUT THIS ALSO
	INCREASES THE FAR FOR THE BUILDING AS IT IS A
	PASSAGEWAY. THE RAMP NEEDS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE FAR
	CALCULATIONS. STAFF ASSUMED, INCORRECTLY, THAT YOU
	WOULD MAKE BOTH CHANGES AS PART OF THE RESUBMITTAL.
	NOTE: THE PLANS ONLY SHOW 320 SQUARE FEET AVAILABLE
	BEFORE THE 6.0 FAR IS EXCEEDED. ADDITIONALLY, IF AT THE
	TIME OF BUILDING PERMIT THE BUILDING OR FIRE PLAN
	REVIEWERS REQUIRE A DESIGNATED ROUTE FROM THE ADA RAMP
	TO THE MAINTENANCE ROOM ENTRANCE(S), THEN THE SQUARE
	FOOTAGE OF THE DESIGNATED ROUTE WILL ALSO COUNT TOWARD
	THE FAR SQUARE FOOTAGE.

	2) UPDATED COMMENT: THE STREETSCAPE ELEMENTS AND
	LANDSCAPE MUST BE ADDED TO THE SITE, LANDSCAPE AND
	CIVIL PLANS AND THE CROSS HATCHING REMOVED.

	CONDITION: THE AC UNITS MOUNTED ON RACKS ON THE WEST
	BUILDING WALL OF 477 SOUTH ROSEMARY MUST BE REMOVED
	PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE 575 SOUTH ROSEMARY
	BUILDING.

	CONDITION: WAYFINDING SIGNS ARE REQUIRED TO DIRECT
	PEDESTRIANS FROM THE GARAGE TO THE OFFICE, RESIDENTIAL
	AND RETAIL ENTRANCES.

	CONDITION: THE LEVEL III SITE PLAN APPROVAL WILL
	CONTAIN THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATION THAT NO LEASES CAN
	INCLUDE DESIGNATED PARKING IN THE D GARAGE AND THAT NO
	BARRIERS MAY BE INSTALLED IN THE GARAGE TO CREATE
	SEPARATED PARKING AREAS FOR SPECIFIC TENANTS UNLESS A
	MINOR AMENDMENT IS APPROVED THAT BOTH DESIGNATES THE
	LOCATION OF THE RESERVED PARKING SPACES AND THE
	BARRIERS AS WELL AS VERIFIES THAT THERE IS SUFFICIENT
	PARKING WITHIN THE ROSEMARY SQUARE CONTROLLED GARAGES
	TO ACCOMMODATE THE REQUIRED PARKING FOR THE ENTIRE
	PROJECT.

	CONDITION: RECORD A PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT, IN A FORM
	ACCEPTABLE TO THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, FOR THE
	PUBLIC SPACE TERMINATING THE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE -
	PASSAGE.

	CONDITION: IF VALET SERVICE IS UTILIZED FOR THE
	RESIDENTIAL TOWER, THEN PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE
	C.O. FOR THE RESIDENTIAL TOWER, A VALET PLAN MUST BE
	SUBMITTED TO THE CITY AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND
	TRAFFIC ENGINEERING STAFF.

	CONDITION: IF VALET SERVICE IS UTILIZED FOR THE OFFICE
	TOWER, THEN IT MUST EITHER UTILIZE THE SERVICE ALLEY
	LOADING SPACES FOR VEHICLES TO TURN AROUND, OR AN
	ALTERNATIVE VALET PLAN MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY
	AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING AND TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
	STAFF.

Review Stop	Z			ZONING
Rev No	3	Status	F	Date	09-24-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	eschneid			Date	09-24-2019	Time	15:51	Rev Time	6.00
Received By	eschneid			Date	09-20-2019	Time	13:46	Sent To

Notes

2019-09-24 15:52:02	CASE NO. PB 950 OOOOO - 2ND RESUBMITTAL REVIEW
	HIBISCUS TOWER
	575 SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE

	- CONTACT ERIC SCHNEIDER @ (561) 822-1446

	- PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN
	WRITTEN FORMAT.

	- WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF ELEVEN
	(11) PAPER COPIES AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY IN .PNG 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 FRIDAY,
	SEPTEMBER 27, 2019, TO BE ELIGIBLE TO BE SCHEDULED FOR
	THE NOVEMBER 19, 2019 PLANNING BOARD MEETING.

	- PLEASE NOTE THAT IF THESE COMMENTS ARE NOT
	SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED, THE APPLICANT WILL BE ASSESSED
	A RESUBMITTAL FEE. SUCH FEE IS 20% OF THE ORIGINAL
	APPLICATION FEE ($600).

	1) UPDATED COMMENT: THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING THE
	DIMENSION LINE SHOWING THE HEIGHT OF PODIUM ALONG
	HIBISCUS STREET.

	A. THE PLANS SHOW THE RAILING THAT WAS AT THE EDGE OF
	THE PODIUM HAS BEEN REMOVED. DOES THIS RESULT IN THE
	5TH FLOOR RESIDENTIAL UNITS FACING HIBISCUS STREET NO
	LONGER HAVING A TERRACE? NO 5TH FLOOR PLAN WAS PROVIDED
	TO SHOW WHAT OCCURS UNDERNEATH THE BALCONIES. SINCE
	THIS AREA IS STILL THE TOP OF THE PODIUM, NO RAILING
	CAN BE PROVIDED TO CREATE TERRACES SINCE THIS WOULD
	EXCEED THE MAXIMUM PODIUM HEIGHT. IF A TERRACE IS
	DESIRED ON TOP OF THE PODIUM, THEN STAFF SUGGESTS
	LOWERING THE FLOOR HEIGHTS BY ENOUGH (BARRIER NEEDS TO
	BE 42 INCHES ABOVE THE WALKING SURFACE PER ROBERT
	BROWN, BUILDING OFFICIAL) TO ALLOW ACCESS TO THE
	TERRACE.
	B. THE COLUMNS THAT ARE SHOWN SUPPORTING THE UNDERSIDE
	OF THE BALCONIES EXTEND ABOVE THE 60 FOOT PODIUM
	MAXIMUM HEIGHT. THESE COLUMNS AT THE PODIUM LEVEL ARE
	NOT BALCONY ENCROACHMENTS (THE LOWEST LEVEL BALCONY
	SLAB MAY NOT HAVE COLUMNS UNDERNEATH IT), BUT RATHER
	PART OF THE TOWER; THEREFORE, THE TOWER DOES NOT MEET
	THE MINIMUM 50 FOOT TOWER SETBACK. NOTE: THE COLUMNS
	ARE PERMITTED ABOVE THE FIRST BALCONY SLAB.


	2) UPDATED COMMENT: STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE REVISED
	ACTIVE USE DIAGRAMS FOR THE SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE
	FRONTAGE AND HAS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:

	A. THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING THE REQUIRED WINDOWS FOR THE
	TWO MAINTENANCE OFFICES. PLEASE LABEL THESE ON THE
	ELEVATIONS. THE REQUIRED DIRECT VIEW FOR THE RETAIL ON
	THE 2ND STORY NEEDS TO BE SHOWN WITH THIS SUBMITTAL AND
	NOT DELAYED UNTIL THE BUILDING PERMIT SO THAT AN
	ACCURATE REPRESENTATION OF CODE COMPLIANCE CAN BE SHOWN
	AS PART OF THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS.
	B. THE ADDITION OF THE ADA RAMP TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO
	THE ROSEMARY AVENUE FACING MAINTENANCE ROOM INCLUDED
	THE EXPANSION OF THE TENANT STORAGE ROOM BY 50 SQUARE
	FEET (WALLS MOVED FROM ONE SIDE OF THE COLUMNS TO THE
	OTHER), YET THE STORAGE ROOM GSF CALCULATION DID NOT
	INCREASE. THE LEVEL 3 GROSS AREA DIAGRAM NEEDS TO BE
	UPDATED TO REFLECT THE EXPANDED STORAGE ROOM, THE ADA
	ACCESS RAMP AND THE REDUCTION OF THE MECHANICAL ROOM,
	WITH ALL TABLES UPDATED ACCORDINGLY.

	3) UPDATED COMMENT: STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE PRIVATE OPEN
	SPACE AND HAS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:

	A. LEVEL 4 OPEN SPACE AREAS A & B ARE A ROOFTOP
	GARDENS, SO THEY DOES NOT REQUIRE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY
	ABUTMENT. REMOVE THAT LINE ITEM FROM THE TABLE.
	B. LEVEL 4 OPEN SPACE AREA C DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE
	MINIMUM PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ABUTMENT TO BE CONSIDERED A
	TERRACE. THE WEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING ABUTS AN ACCESS
	EASEMENT, NOT A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
	AT THIS LOCATION CAN ONLY BE A ROOFTOP GARDEN. PLEASE
	UPDATE THE TABLE AND PLANS ACCORDINGLY.
	C. LEVEL 5 OPEN SPACE AREA A DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE
	MINIMUM PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ABUTMENT TO BE CONSIDERED A
	TERRACE. THE WEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING ABUTS AN ACCESS
	EASEMENT, NOT A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
	AT THIS LOCATION CAN ONLY BE A ROOFTOP GARDEN. PLEASE
	UPDATE THE TABLE AND PLANS ACCORDINGLY.

	4) PUBLIC OPEN SPACE - PASSAGE REQUIREMENTS

	A. UPDATED COMMENT: A PASSAGEWAY IS REQUIRED TO CONNECT
	TWO OR MORE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY OR PUBLIC SPACES. THE
	ACCESS EASEMENT ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING IS NOT
	A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY SO THIS SIDE OF THE PASSAGEWAY
	NEEDS TO TERMINATE AT A PUBLIC SPACE (GENERALLY THE
	AREA UNDER THE BUILDING ALONG THE ACCESS EASEMENT). IN
	ORDER FOR THIS AREA TO BE CLASSIFIED AS PUBLIC SPACE,
	IT WILL NEED A PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT RECORDED FOR IT
	AS WELL AS HAVE SEATING INSTALLED. THE PASSAGEWAY WILL
	END AT THE COVERED PUBLIC SPACE. --- THE RESPONSE
	STATES THAT THE APPLICANT AGREES TO A PUBLIC ACCESS
	EASEMENT. THIS WILL BE INCLUDED AS A REQUIREMENT PRIOR
	TO THE FINAL INSPECTION FOR THE BUILDING. THE PLANS
	FAIL TO SHOW SEATING FOR THE PUBLIC SPACE.

	5) UPDATED COMMENT: THE ELEMENTS PROJECTING FROM THE
	ROSEMARY AVENUE AND HIBISCUS STREET FACADES CAN FALL
	UNDER ONE OF THE FOLLOWING CLASSIFICATIONS:
	ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE, AWNING, BALCONY AND CANOPY.

	A. ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE: THIS IS LISTED AS KEYNOTE 15
	ON THE ELEVATION KEY AND SHOWN ON THE PLANS AS EYEBROWS
	NO MORE THAN TWO FEET (SCALED) FROM THE RESIDENTIAL
	PODIUM BUILDING FACADE. HOWEVER, THERE ARE ADDITIONAL
	ITEMS, KEYNOTE 3 GLASS AND ALUMINUM AWNINGS, LOCATED ON
	THE 2ND AND 3RD FLOORS OF THE OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL
	PORTIONS OF THE SITE THAT ARE CALLED AWNINGS, BUT DO
	NOT MEET THE DMP DEFINITION OF AN AWNING. DUE TO THE
	DESIGN, LOCATION AND SIZE OF THESE ITEMS, THEY CAN ONLY
	BE CONSIDERED ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES, AND NEED TO BE
	DESIGNATED AS SUCH ON THE PLANS.
	B. AWNING: THERE ARE NO AWNINGS DEPICTED ON THE PLANS.
	C. BALCONY: THE BALCONY ALONG ROSEMARY AVENUE COMPLIES
	WITH THE PROJECTION STANDARDS.
	D. CANOPY: THERE ARE THREE PROJECTIONS WHICH ARE
	CONSIDERED CANOPIES (TWO ON HIBISCUS STREET AND ONE ON
	ROSEMARY AVENUE) OVER THE FIRST FLOOR ENTRIES TO THE
	RESIDENTIAL AND RETAIL AREAS. THEY ARE LISTED AS
	KEYNOTE 3 GLASS AND ALUMINUM AWNINGS. THIS DESIGNATION
	NEEDS TO CHANGE AS THEY DO NOT MEET THE DEFINITION OF
	AN AWNING (LOCATED BETWEEN, RATHER THAN ACROSS,
	SIGNIFICANT VERTICAL ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES THAT MAKE
	UP THE COMPOSITION OF THE FACADE). SINCE THESE ITEMS
	ARE CANOPIES, THEY NEED TO BE A MINIMUM OF EIGHT (8)
	FEET IN DEPTH. THIS DIMENSION LINE NEEDS TO BE SHOWN ON
	THE ELEVATION PLANS.

	6) UPDATED COMMENT: THE TYPICAL BALCONY PLAN DOES NOT
	MATCH THE ELEVATION PLANS FOR THE NORTHERN SIDE OF THE
	BUILDING. THE COLUMN WITHIN THE BALCONY AREA (EAST
	POINT AREA) IS SHOWN TWO FEET CLOSER TO THE BUILDING
	THAN IT IS ON THE ELEVATION DRAWINGS. THE EAST
	ELEVATION SHOWS THE BALCONY EXTENDING TWO FEET LESS
	THAN THE FLOOR PLANS.

	7) REPEAT COMMENT: STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE PROPOSED
	RESIDENTIAL TOWER VALET PLAN AND DOES NOT SUPPORT THE
	USE OF FERN STREET AND SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE TO RETURN
	THE VEHICLES. THIS PUTS ADDITIONAL VEHICLE TRIPS ON
	THESE TWO STREETS. AN ALTERNATIVE VALET PICK-UP IS
	REQUIRED. WHERE IS THE VALET AREA IN THE GARAGE?

	8) REPEAT COMMENT: STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT THE USE OF
	FERN STREET AND SAPODILLA AVENUE FOR THE VALET AS THIS
	PUTS ADDITIONAL VEHICLE TRIPS ON THESE ROADWAYS. AN
	ALTERNATIVE IS TO HAVE THE VALETS USE ONE OF THE
	SERVICE AREA SPACES AS A TURNAROUND SPACE SO THEY CAN
	GET THE GARAGE WITHOUT USING THE STREET NETWORK.

	9) UPDATED COMMENT: THE PASSAGEWAY BICYCLE RACK DETAIL
	DOES NOT MEET CODE REQUIREMENTS. THE RACKS SHOWN ON THE
	INSTALLATION PLANS DO NOT COMPLY WITH ANY OF THE MODELS
	SHOWN ON THE BIKE RACK REQUIREMENTS DETAIL. NOTE: WHILE
	STAFF FEELS IT IS ALWAYS BETTER TO PROVIDE EXTRA SPACE
	FOR PARK BICYCLES, THE 13 FEET IS WIDER THAN IS
	REQUIRED FOR 6 BICYCLE PARKING SPACES.

	10) UPDATED COMMENT: PROVIDE BICYCLE RACKS ALONG
	ROSEMARY FOR THE RETAIL CUSTOMERS. THE BICYCLE RACKS
	(AND THE OTHER ROSEMARY AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS) MUST BE
	SHOWN ON THESE PLANS. NOTE: THE CITY COMMISSION DID NOT
	APPROVE 100% DRAWINGS AS PART OF THE FACE OF THE CITY
	RESOLUTION, SO THESE PLANS NEED TO BE SHOWN ON THIS SET
	OF DRAWINGS.

	11) UPDATED COMMENT: THE ROOF AREAS THAT ARE NOT
	INCLUDED AS OPEN SPACE OR HAVE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT ARE
	REQUIRED TO HAVE GREEN ROOF OR SOLAR INSTALLATION. THE
	DETAILS WILL BE INCLUDED AT TIME OF BUILDING PERMIT;
	HOWEVER, THE PLANS MUST STATE THAT GREEN ROOF OR SOLAR
	INSTALLATIONS ARE REQUIRED ON THE ROOVES. NOTE: THE
	COMMENT RESPONSE SEEMS TO INDICATE THAT DUE THE
	BUILDING HAVING DIFFERENT ROOF AREAS, ONLY ONE OF THESE
	AREAS NEEDS TO HAVE GREEN OR SOLAR INSTALLATION TO
	COMPLY WITH THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, WHICH IS NOT
	CORRECT. ALL ROOF AREAS NEED TO HAVE EITHER OPEN SPACE,
	MECHANICAL OR GREEN/SOLAR.

	12) REPEAT COMMENT: THE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN SHOWS LIGHTING
	LEVELS AT THE CURB IN EXCESS OF THE PERMITTED ONE FOOT
	CANDLE. ---- RESUBMITTED SHEET E-0.1 STILL SHOWS LIGHT
	LEVELS AT THE CURB EXCEEDING ONE FOOTCANDLE.

	CONDITION: THE AC UNITS MOUNTED ON RACKS ON THE WEST
	BUILDING WALL OF 477 SOUTH ROSEMARY MUST BE REMOVED
	PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE 575 SOUTH ROSEMARY
	BUILDING.

	CONDITION: WAYFINDING SIGNS ARE REQUIRED TO DIRECT
	PEDESTRIANS FROM THE GARAGE TO THE OFFICE, RESIDENTIAL
	AND RETAIL ENTRANCES.

	CONDITION: THE LEVEL III SITE PLAN APPROVAL WILL
	CONTAIN THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATION THAT NO LEASES CAN
	INCLUDE DESIGNATED PARKING IN THE D GARAGE AND THAT NO
	BARRIERS MAY BE INSTALLED IN THE GARAGE TO CREATE
	SEPARATED PARKING AREAS FOR SPECIFIC TENANTS UNLESS A
	MINOR AMENDMENT IS APPROVED THAT BOTH DESIGNATES THE
	LOCATION OF THE RESERVED PARKING SPACES AND THE
	BARRIERS AS WELL AS VERIFIES THAT THERE IS SUFFICIENT
	PARKING WITHIN THE ROSEMARY SQUARE CONTROLLED GARAGES
	TO ACCOMMODATE THE REQUIRED PARKING FOR THE ENTIRE
	PROJECT.

Review Stop	Z			ZONING
Rev No	2	Status	F	Date	08-26-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	eschneid			Date	08-26-2019	Time	17:51	Rev Time	12.00
Received By	eschneid			Date	08-22-2019	Time	09:47	Sent To

Notes

2019-08-26 17:51:48	CASE NO. PB 950 OOOOO - 1ST RESUBMITTAL REVIEW
	HIBISCUS TOWER
	575 SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE

	- CONTACT ERIC SCHNEIDER @ (561) 822-1446

	- PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN
	WRITTEN FORMAT.

	- WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF ELEVEN
	(11) PAPER COPIES AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY IN .PNG 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 FRIDAY,
	AUGUST 30, 2019, TO BE ELIGIBLE TO BE SCHEDULED FOR THE
	OCTOBER 15, 2019 PLANNING BOARD MEETING.

	- PLEASE NOTE THAT SINCE PREVIOUSLY-ISSUED COMMENTS
	WERE NOT BE SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED, THE APPLICANT WILL
	BE ASSESSED A RESUBMITTAL FEE. SUCH FEE IS 20% OF THE
	ORIGINAL APPLICATION FEE ($600).

	- 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) THE SCALE BAR ON SHEET A0.04.2 PRINTED MULTIPLE
	SCALES AND IS UNREADABLE. THIS OCCURS ON A FEW SHEETS,
	SO PLEASE CORRECT.

	2) REPEAT COMMENT: PROVIDE THE DIMENSION LINE SHOWING
	THE FULL HEIGHT OF THE PODIUM, PLUS THE HIGHEST POINT
	OF THE HEIGHT ENCROACHMENT ON THE ELEVATION PLANS. THE
	PODIUM HEIGHT DIMENSION WAS NOT PROVIDED FOR THE
	HIBISCUS STREET FRONTAGE. THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE
	PODIUM ALONG HIBISCUS STREET (PRIMARILY THE PRIVATE
	TERRACE) SCALES TO EXCEED 60 FEET AND ADDITIONALLY HAS
	A VERTICAL ENCROACHMENT (RAILING) EXCEEDING THE 60 FOOT
	ALLOWANCE.

	3) UPDATED COMMENT: THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING ADDITIONAL
	INFORMATION REGARDING THE FACADE ARTICULATION. BASED ON
	THE RESUBMITTED INFORMATION, STAFF HAS IDENTIFIED THE
	FOLLOWING ITEMS WHICH STILL MUST BE PROVIDED:

	A. THE AMOUNT OF GROUND FLOOR TRANSPARENCY PROVIDED
	ALONG SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE AND HIBISCUS STREET IS NOT
	LISTED ON THE PLANS. THE ONLY CALCULATION LISTED IS HOW
	MUCH IS REQUIRED.
	B. THE AMOUNT OF FENESTRATION FOR THE PODIUM AND THE
	TOWER IS NOT LISTED ON THE PLANS. ONLY A STATEMENT THAT
	THE FENESTRATION EXCEEDS 15% IS LISTED ON THE PLANS.
	C. THE TAG LINES FOR THE WEST ELEVATIONS FOR MATERIAL
	01 AND 02 SEEM TO POINT TO THE WRONG MATERIAL.
	D. PLEASE CONSIDER ADDITIONAL WINDOWS OVERLOOKING THE
	OUTDOOR SEATING AREA FROM THE GROUND LEVEL RETAIL AND
	UPPER LEVEL OFFICE.

	4) UPDATED COMMENT: PLANAR BREAKS ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL
	LEVELS OF THE PODIUM. THE PLANS DO NOT CLEARLY SHOW
	EVIDENCE THAT THIS OCCURS.

	A. THE SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE FRONTAGE (GROUND FLOOR)
	ADDED DOORWAYS THAT ARE BEING COUNTED TOWARD MEETING
	THE MINIMUM LINEAR FEET OF PLANAR BREAK. IN ORDER FOR
	DOORWAYS TO COUNT TOWARD MEETING THIS REQUIREMENT, THE
	DOORWAY RECESS (THE PLANER BREAK) NEEDS TO CONTINUE
	FROM GRADE FOR THE FULL HEIGHT OF THE GROUND FLOOR. THE
	DRAWINGS DO NOT CLEARLY INDICATE THAT THE DOORWAYS
	EXTEND THE FULL HEIGHT OF THE GROUND FLOOR, AND IN FACT
	IT APPEARS THAT THE DOORWAYS ARE NOT THE FULL HEIGHT OF
	THE GROUND FLOOR.
	B. ON THE SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE FRONTAGE (2ND AND 3RD
	FLOOR), WHILE THE OUTDOOR SEATING RECESS AND THE OFFICE
	TERRACE COMBINE TO MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIRED PLANAR
	BREAK AND THE RETAIL ONE CONTINUES TO EXCEED THIS
	REQUIREMENT, PLEASE CHECK THE SECTION DRAWING ON SHEET
	A3.01 AS IS APPEARS THAT THE PROPOSED PLANAR BREAK IS
	NOT DEPICTED ACCURATELY.
	C. THE HIBISCUS STREET FRONTAGE (2ND FLOOR) ADDED A
	RECESS THAT IS BEING COUNTED TOWARD MEETING THE MINIMUM
	LINEAR FEET OF PLANAR BREAK. IN ORDER FOR RECESS TO
	COUNT TOWARD MEETING THIS REQUIREMENT, THE IT (THE
	PLANER BREAK) NEEDS TO CONTINUE THE FULL HEIGHT OF THE
	2ND FLOOR. THE DRAWINGS DO NOT CLEARLY INDICATE THAT
	THE RECESS EXTENDS THE FULL HEIGHT OF THE 2ND FLOOR.

	5) UPDATED COMMENT: STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE REVISED
	ACTIVE USE DIAGRAMS FOR THE SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE
	FRONTAGE AND HAS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:

	A. THE MAINTENANCE OFFICE ADDED TO THE 3RD FLOOR DOES
	NOT APPEAR TO HAVE ADA ACCESSIBILITY. PLEASE DESCRIBE
	HOW THIS SPACE WILL MEET BUILDING CODE REQUIREMENTS. IF
	THIS ROOM CANNOT BE CONSTRUCTED AS SHOWN ON THE PLANS,
	THEN IT WILL CAUSE ISSUES DURING THE PERMITTING
	PROCESS.
	B. THE ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS REQUIRE
	THAT ACTIVE USES HAVE A DIRECT VIEW TO THE ADJACENT
	STREETS OR PUBLIC OPEN SPACE. THIS DOES NOT OCCUR FOR
	THE 2ND STORY RETAIL ALONG SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE OR
	HIBISCUS STREETS SINCE THE PROPOSED FLUTED CHANNEL
	GLASS IS NOT TRANSPARENT. ADDITIONALLY, THE TWO
	MAINTENANCE OFFICES (BOTH COUNTED AS ACTIVE USE) HAVE
	NO DIRECT VIEW TO THE ADJACENT STREETS

	6) UPDATED COMMENT: STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE PUBLIC OPEN
	SPACE COMPLIANCE TABLE FOR THE OUTDOOR SEATING AREA
	ALONG SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE AND NOTED THAT IT
	INCORRECTLY INCLUDES THE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THE AREA
	UNDER THE 2ND AND 3RD FLOORS OF THE BUILDING. THIS AREA
	DOES NOT MEET THE DEFINITION OF OVERHEAD COVER, WHICH
	INCLUDES AWNINGS, CANOPIES, COLONNADES, PERGOLAS,
	TRELLISES OR OTHER SIMILAR STRUCTURES. THE STAFF
	CALCULATES THE ACTUAL OPEN SPACE AREA AS APPROXIMATELY
	937 SF AND IT APPEARS THAT THE OPEN SPACE MINIMUMS HAVE
	BEEN MET AS SHOWN. UPDATE THE TABLE WITH THE ACCURATE
	OPEN SPACE AREA AND CORRESPONDING COMPLIANCE
	VERIFICATION. NOTE: THE LANDSCAPE UNDER THE BUILDING
	MAY NOT BE INCLUDED IN THE PROVIDED LANDSCAPE
	CALCULATION.

	7) UPDATED COMMENT: STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE PRIVATE OPEN
	SPACE AND HAS THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:

	A. LEVEL 4 OPEN SPACE AREA B DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE
	MINIMUM PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ABUTMENT TO BE CONSIDERED A
	TERRACE. THIS PRIVATE OPEN SPACE IS MORE THAN 60 FEET
	FROM THE SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY AND
	THE SEPARATION INCLUDES MECHANICAL ROOMS AND THE
	CHILLER ENCLOSURES. PRIVATE OPEN SPACE AT THIS LOCATION
	CAN ONLY BE A ROOFTOP GARDEN. PLEASE UPDATE THE TABLE
	AND PLANS ACCORDINGLY.
	B. LEVEL 4 OPEN SPACE AREA C DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE
	MINIMUM PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ABUTMENT TO BE CONSIDERED A
	TERRACE. THE WEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING ABUTS AN ACCESS
	EASEMENT, NOT A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
	AT THIS LOCATION CAN ONLY BE A ROOFTOP GARDEN. PLEASE
	UPDATE THE TABLE AND PLANS ACCORDINGLY.
	C. LEVEL 5 OPEN SPACE INCORRECTLY CALCULATES THE AMOUNT
	OF PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ABUTMENT. ONLY THE 96 FOOT 9
	INCH SECTION OF THE TERRACE MAY COUNT (AS PREVIOUSLY
	STATED THE ACCESS EASEMENT DOES NOT MEET THE PUBLIC
	RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIREMENT). WHILE THE MINIMUM 20% HAS
	BEEN MET, THE TABLE NEEDS TO BE UPDATED ACCORDINGLY.
	NOTE: THE SQUARE FOOTAGE ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PRIVATE
	OPEN SPACE MAY BE AFFECTED BY CORRECTING THE RAILING
	HEIGHT FROM COMMENT #2.

	8) UPDATED COMMENT: PLEASE DESCRIBE HOW THE LEVEL 4
	ROOFTOP GARDEN WILL BE USED (ACCESSED) BY THE RESIDENTS
	OR THE OFFICE TENANTS.

	9) PUBLIC OPEN SPACE - PASSAGE REQUIREMENTS

	A. UPDATED COMMENT: A PASSAGEWAY IS REQUIRED TO CONNECT
	TWO OR MORE PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY OR PUBLIC SPACES. THE
	ACCESS EASEMENT ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING IS NOT
	A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY SO THIS SIDE OF THE PASSAGEWAY
	NEEDS TO TERMINATE AT A PUBLIC SPACE (GENERALLY THE
	AREA UNDER THE BUILDING ALONG THE ACCESS EASEMENT). IN
	ORDER FOR THIS AREA TO BE CLASSIFIED AS PUBLIC SPACE,
	IT WILL NEED A PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT RECORDED FOR IT
	AS WELL AS HAVE SEATING INSTALLED. THE PASSAGEWAY WILL
	END AT THE COVERED PUBLIC SPACE.
	B. REPEAT COMMENT: PROVIDE THE DIMENSIONS FOR THE
	NARROW POINTS SHOWN IN THE PASSAGEWAY. EX. BETWEEN THE
	BUILDING WALLS, THE EDGE OF THE LANDSCAPE AREAS AND THE
	COLUMNS. THESE ALL APPEAR TO BE CHOKE POINTS IN THE
	PASSAGEWAY.
	C. UPDATED COMMENT: THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE
	PASSAGEWAY IS COVERED BY THE UPPER RESIDENTIAL STORIES,
	INCLUDING BALCONIES. THIS AREA DOES NOT MEET THE
	DEFINITION OF OVERHEAD COVER, WHICH INCLUDES AWNINGS,
	CANOPIES, COLONNADES, PERGOLAS, TRELLISES OR OTHER
	SIMILAR STRUCTURES, BUT DOES NOT INCLUDE AN AREA THAT
	HAS THE UPPER STORIES OF THE BUILDING. THE 1,460 SQUARE
	FEET OF COVERED AREA MAY NOT BE COUNTED TOWARD MEETING
	THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT. UPDATE ALL TABLES
	ACCORDINGLY.
	D. UPDATED COMMENT: THE OPEN SPACE MEASUREMENTS FOR THE
	PASSAGEWAY MAY NOT INCLUDE AREAS WITHIN THE MINIMUM
	SETBACK. PROVIDE THE REQUIRED NFPA SETBACK DIMENSION
	FOR THE WEST SIDE OF THE 477 SOUTH ROSEMARY BUILDING
	WHERE IT ABUTS THE PASSAGEWAY. THIS SETBACK AREA MAY
	NOT BE COUNTED TOWARD MEETING THE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE
	SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENT. ALTERNATIVELY, SINCE THE
	PLANS STATE THAT THE OPENINGS WILL BE PROTECTED,
	PROVIDE THE METHOD FOR THIS PROTECTION THAT WOULD
	PERMIT THE NEW 575 SOUTH ROSEMARY BUILDING TO BE BUILT
	TO THE PROPERTY LINE. NOTE: THE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THE
	EGRESS WALKWAY BEHIND THE TWO DOORS ON THE WEST SIDE OF
	477 SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE CANNOT BE INCLUDED IN THE
	PASSAGEWAY SINCE IT IS NOT PART OF THE PASSAGEWAY.
	UPDATE ALL TABLES ACCORDINGLY.

	10) UPDATED COMMENT: PROVIDE DIMENSION ON THE ELEVATION
	DRAWINGS FOR THE PROJECTING ELEMENTS, WHICH INCLUDE THE
	BALCONIES, BOTH RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL, THE AWNINGS
	(EX. KEYNOTE 03 ON THE NORTH ELEVATION - TEMPERED GLASS
	AND ALUMINUM AWNING).

	11) NEW COMMENT: PROVIDE A SAMPLE FLOOR PLAN LEVEL
	WHICH SHOWS THE SHORT BALCONIS AND ON THAT SHOWS THE
	LONG BALCONIES FOR THAT SPECIFIC FLOOR.

	12) UPDATED COMMENT: THE NET AREA DRAWINGS FOR THE
	RESTAURANT, RETAIL AND OFFICE USES MUST INCLUDE THE
	FOLLOWING AREAS AND ALL THE PARKING TABLES NEED TO BE
	UPDATED ACCORDINGLY:

	A. RESTAURANT KITCHEN AND STORAGE - THESE AREAS ARE NOT
	INCLUDED IN THE EXEMPTIONS LISTED IN THE NET INTERIOR
	AREA DEFINITION OF SECTION 94-109 OF THE ZONING AND
	LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.
	B. DOCK MANAGER OFFICE - THE LOADING DOCKS SERVICE BOTH
	THE RESIDENTIAL AND THE NON-RESIDENTIAL COMPONENTS OF
	THE BUILDING, SO DOCK MANAGER'S OFFICE NEEDS TO BE
	INCLUDED IN THE PARKING CALCULATION.
	C. SHOP BY THE LOADING DOCKS - IF THE SHOP ONLY
	SERVICES THE RESIDENTIAL TOWER, THEN IT IS EXEMPTED;
	HOWEVER, BY ITS LOCATION, IT APPEARS TO SERVICE THE
	ENTIRE BUILDING AND MUST BE INCLUDED IN THE NET AREA.
	D. MAINTENANCE OFFICES ON LOFT LEVEL 3 - MAINTENANCE
	OFFICES SERVING THE NON-RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF THE
	BUILDING MUST BE INCLUDE IN THE NET AREA.
	E. RETAIL STORAGE - THESE AREAS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE
	EXEMPTIONS LISTED IN THE NET INTERIOR AREA DEFINITION
	SECTION 94-109 OF THE ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT
	REGULATIONS.

	13) UPDATED COMMENT: THE SHARED PARKING MAY ONLY BE
	USED IF THERE ARE NO PARKING SPACES DESIGNATED FOR A
	PARTICULAR USE. THE RESPONSE STATES THAT THERE ARE NO
	DESIGNATED PARKING SPACES WITHIN GARAGE D, WHEN IN FACT
	THERE IS AT LEAST ONE AREA THAT IS GATED OFF FOR THE
	USE OF THE GARDENS RESIDENTS. HOW WILL OPERATIONALLY
	THE PARKING BE PROVIDED FOR THE USERS OF THE 575 SOUTH
	ROSEMARY BUILDING- EX: WILL THE RESIDENTIAL TENANTS
	HAVE AN AREA THAT IS DESIGNATED FOR "575 TOWER
	RESIDENTIAL PARKING ONLY"? IF THIS IS THE CASE, THEN
	THE SHARED PARKING MAY NOT BE USED. IF THERE WILL BE NO
	DESIGNATED PARKING, THEN THE LEVEL III SITE PLAN
	APPROVAL WILL CONTAIN THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATION THAT
	NO LEASES CAN INCLUDE DESIGNATED PARKING IN THE D
	GARAGE AND THAT NO BARRIERS MAY BE INSTALLED IN THE
	GARAGE TO CREATE SEPARATED PARKING AREAS FOR SPECIFIC
	TENANTS.

	14) UPDATED COMMENT: THE RECENT PARKING TABLE PROVIDED
	BY JORDAN RATHLEV SHOWS 724 PARKING SPACES AVAILABLE IN
	GARAGE D. THIS TABLE NEEDS TO INCLUDE A SUB TABLE
	SHOWING HOW THE 724 PARKING SPACES (OR AS MODIFIED BY
	THE BUILDING DIVISION ADA COMMENT) ARE ALLOCATED TO THE
	575 SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE USERS (379 SPACES IF NOT
	RESERVED), THE GARDENS RESIDENCES (33 + 2 GUEST), 477
	SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE (RETAIL AND OFFICE - DO ANY
	OFFICE USERS HAVE RESERVED SPACES?), AND DESIGNATED
	VALET. NOTE: THE PARKING AVAILABILITY TABLE INDICATES
	THAT THERE IS EXCESS CAPACITY THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE
	CITYPLACE CPD, BUT STAFF IS TRYING TO VERIFY THAT
	GARAGE D IS NOT OVER CAPACITY.

	15) UPDATED COMMENT: THE TWO LOCATIONS WHERE THE
	PEDESTRIAN CROSSING OF THE ACCESS EASEMENT NEED TO BE A
	DIFFERENT PAVING MATERIAL THAN THE ACCESS EASEMENT
	SURFACE SO THAT IT IS A VISUAL CLUE TO DRIVERS TO SLOW
	DOWN. THIS CURRENTLY OCCURS THROUGH THE USE OF THE
	EXISTING PAVER CROSSWALK, WHICH IS STAFF'S PREFERRED
	OPTION. RAISED CROSSWALKS (EQUAL TO CURB LEVEL) SHOULD
	BE EXPLORED.

	16) NEW COMMENT: THE SIDEWALK AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER
	OF THE TOWER INCLUDES A LANDSCAPE BED TO THE EDGE OF
	THE BUILDING WHICH NARROWS THE SIDEWALK TO FIVE (5)
	FEET IN WIDTH. THE LANDSCAPE BED NEEDS TO BE SHORTENED
	SO THAT THE SIDEWALK AT THIS BLIND CORNER IS WIDER TO
	PREVENT SITUATIONS WHERE SOMEONE NEEDS TO STEP INTO THE
	ALLEY TO PASS IN OPPOSITE DIRECTIONS.

	17) UPDATED COMMENT: STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE PROPOSED
	RESIDENTIAL TOWER VALET PLAN AND DOES NOT SUPPORT THE
	USE OF FERN STREET AND SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE TO RETURN
	THE VEHICLES. THIS PUTS ADDITIONAL VEHICLE TRIPS ON
	THESE TWO STREETS. AN ALTERNATIVE VALET PICK-UP IS
	REQUIRED. WHERE IS THE VALET AREA IN THE GARAGE?

	18) UPDATED COMMENT: THE PROPOSED OFFICE VALET PLAN IS
	NOT CLEAR (THE BLUE DASHED LINE STOPS ON FERN STREET.
	IT APPEARS THE INTENT IS TO HAVE THE VALETS DRIVE THE
	CARS AROUND THE BLOCK AND USE FERN STREET, SOUTH
	ROSEMARY AVENUE AND/OR SAPODILLA AVENUE. STAFF DOES NOT
	SUPPORT THE USE OF THESE STREETS FOR THE VALET AS THIS
	PUTS ADDITIONAL VEHICLE TRIPS ON THESE ROADWAYS. AN
	ALTERNATIVE IS TO HAVE THE VALETS USE ONE OF THE
	SERVICE AREA SPACES AS A TURNAROUND SPACE SO THEY CAN
	GET THE GARAGE WITHOUT USING THE STREET NETWORK.

	19) REPEAT COMMENT: PROVIDE THE PASSAGEWAY BICYCLE PAD
	AND RACK DETAIL AND THE DIMENSIONS ON THE PLANS. THEY
	DO NOT APPEAR TO MEET CODE REQUIREMENTS. NOTE: THE
	BICYCLE PARKING AREA ALONG THE PEDESTRIAN PASSAGE HAS 6
	RACKS, NOT 3 AS LISTED ON THE PLANS.

	20) REPEAT COMMENT: PROVIDE BICYCLE RACKS ALONG
	ROSEMARY FOR THE RETAIL CUSTOMERS. THE HIBISCUS AND
	ROSEMARY RECONSTRUCTION PLANS DO NOT SHOW ANY BICYCLE
	RACKS ADJACENT TO 575 SOUTH ROSEMARY.

	21) UPDATED COMMENT: PROVIDE GREEN ROOF DETAILS FOR
	LEVELS 4 AND 5 AND THE TOWER ROOF. NOTE: IN ACCORDANCE
	WITH THE DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, THE LEVEL 4 AND 5 AND
	TOWER ROOF AREA THAT DO NOT INCLUDE THE MECHANICAL AND
	SKYLIGHT AREAS MUST HAVE EITHER GREEN ROOF OR SOLAR. IF
	SOLAR IS USED THIS NEEDS TO BE SHOWN. THE PLANS NEED TO
	FACTOR THIS IN NOW.

	22) UPDATED COMMENT: PLEASE TURN ON THE FOREGROUND
	BUILDINGS ON THE NORTHWEST AND SOUTHWEST RENDERINGS ON
	SHEET R0.01.

	23) REPEAT COMMENT: PROVIDE A SHADOW STUDY. --- STAFF
	HAS NOT SEEN A SHADOW STUDY AND THE DISC WAS NOT
	INCLUDED WITH THE RESUBMITTAL.

	24) REPEAT COMMENT: THE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN SHOWS LIGHTING
	LEVELS AT THE CURB IN EXCESS OF THE PERMITTED ONE FOOT
	CANDLE. ---- RESUBMITTED SHEET E-0.1 STILL SHOWS LIGHT
	LEVELS AT THE CURB EXCEEDING ONE FOOTCANDLE.

	25) REPEAT COMMENT: WHAT IS THE CONSTRUCTION PHASING
	PLAN FOR THE BUILDING, ROSEMARY AND THE ALLEY? WILL THE
	HIBISCUS RIGHT-OF-WAY, INCLUDING THE SIDEWALK, BE
	COMPLETED PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING?
	HOW WILL ACCESS BE PROVIDED TO THE TOWNHOUSES AND THE
	SERVICE TO 477 SOUTH ROSEMARY DURING CONSTRUCTION? ----
	THE RESPONSE PRESENTED DOES NOT ADEQUATELY ADDRESS THE
	QUESTION.

	26) REPEAT COMMENT: EXPLAIN THE BAR IN THE RESIDENTIAL
	LOBBY AREA. WHO DOES THIS SERVE? WHAT DOES IT SERVE?
	--- THE RESPONSE PRESENTED DOES NOT ADDRESS THE
	QUESTION. IF THIS IS A BAR, THAT IN ANYWAY COULD SERVE
	THE PUBLIC, THEN YOU HAVE A NON-RESIDENTIAL USE HERE.

	27) UPDATED COMMENT: RESOLUTION 304-18 REQUIRES THAT
	THE ROOFTOP RAINWATER IS RETAINED ON-SITE AND IF NOT
	USED THEN IT HAS ON-SITE INFILTRATION. USING AN
	EXFILTRATION TRENCH TO DISCHARGE THE WATER OFF-SITE IS
	NOT PERMITTED. DESCRIBE HOW THE ROOFTOP RAINWATER WILL
	BE STORED ON-SITE. THE METHOD MAY IMPACT THE SITE PLAN.
	THE PAVING AND DRAINAGE PLAN DOES NOT SEEM TO COVER
	THIS REQUIREMENT.

	28) UPDATED COMMENT: RESOLUTION 304-18 REQUIRES THAT
	THE PLAZA AREAS OF THE SITE RETAIN THE STORMWATER
	ON-SITE. IT APPEARS THAT THE PLAZA AREA ALONG SOUTH
	ROSEMARY AVENUE IS DESIGNED TO FLOW OFF-SITE.

	CONDITION: THE AC UNITS MOUNTED ON RACKS ON THE WEST
	BUILDING WALL OF 477 SOUTH ROSEMARY MUST BE REMOVED
	PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE 575 SOUTH ROSEMARY
	BUILDING.

	CONDITION: WAYFINDING SIGNS ARE REQUIRED TO DIRECT
	PEDESTRIANS FROM THE GARAGE TO THE OFFICE, RESIDENTIAL
	AND RETAIL ENTRANCES.

Review Stop	Z			ZONING
Rev No	1	Status	F	Date	06-12-2019			Cont ID
Sent By	eschneid			Date	06-12-2019	Time	11:28	Rev Time	12.00
Received By	eschneid			Date	06-12-2019	Time	11:28	Sent To

Notes

2019-06-12 11:28:28	CASE NO. PB 950 OOOOO
	HIBISCUS TOWER
	575 SOUTH ROSEMARY AVENUE

	- CONTACT ERIC SCHNEIDER @ (561) 822-1446

	- PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN
	WRITTEN FORMAT.

	- WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF ELEVEN
	(11) PAPER COPIES AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY IN .PNG 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 FRIDAY,
	JUNE 28, 2019, TO BE ELIGIBLE TO BE SCHEDULED FOR THE
	AUGUST 20, 2019 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 (BY AUGUST 12, 2019),
	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 ASSESSED A RESUBMITTAL FEE. SUCH FEE
	WILL BE 20% OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FEE ($600).

	- 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) THE CITYPLACE CENTER SUBAREA BOUNDARY LINE IS NOT
	SHOWN IN THE SAME PLACE ON EVERY PLAN ALONG THE WEST
	SIDE OF 477 SOUTH ROSEMARY. ALL PLANS MUST BE
	CONSISTENT.

	2) SHEET V-2 SHOWS A PORTION OF THE 477 SOUTH ROSEMARY
	BUILDING WITHIN THE CITYPLACE CENTER SUBAREA. THIS
	OVERLAPPING SQUARE FOOTAGE MUST BE COUNTED AS PART OF
	THE FAR CALCULATION.

	3) THE 50 FOOT MAXIMUM PODIUM SETBACK LINE FOR ROSEMARY
	IS NOT IN THE CORRECT LOCATION. IT SCALES TO
	APPROXIMATELY 56 FEET FROM THE ROSEMARY CENTERLINE.

	4) STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE FAR CALCULATIONS AND NOTED
	THE FOLLOWING:

	A. ON THE GROUND LEVEL, THE TWO VESTIBULES, THE SHOP
	AND THE FIRE COMMAND ROOM ARE REQUIRED TO BE COUNTED IN
	THE FAR SQUARE FOOTAGE.
	B. ON THE RESIDENTIAL LEVELS, THE VESTIBULE FOR THE
	TRASH CHUTES IS REQUIRED TO BE COUNTED IN THE FAR
	SQUARE FOOTAGE (THE TRASH CHUTES THEMSELVES ARE
	CORRECTLY NOT COUNTED).
	C. ON THE RESIDENTIAL LEVELS, PROVIDE INFORMATION ON
	WHAT THE ROOM ADJACENT TO THE TRASH CHUTE VESTIBULE IS.
	DEPENDING ON THE USE, THIS MAY NEED TO BE COUNTED IN
	THE FAR SQUARE FOOTAGE.

	5) PROVIDE THE DIMENSION LINE SHOWING THE FULL HEIGHT
	OF THE PODIUM, PLUS THE HIGHEST POINT OF THE HEIGHT
	ENCROACHMENT, MUST BE SHOWN ON THE ELEVATION PLANS.
	STAFF MEASURES THE HIGHEST POINT OF PODIUM, INCLUDING
	VERTICAL ENCROACHMENTS, AT APPROXIMATELY 63 FEET, WHICH
	EXCEEDS THE PERMITTED PODIUM HEIGHT ALLOWANCE. NOTE:
	INCLUDE THE CABANAS, WITH THE HEIGHT, ON THE ELEVATION
	DRAWINGS.

	6) THE FACADE ARTICULATION DIAGRAMS AND MATRICES DO NOT
	PROVIDE THE DIMENSIONS FOR THE VARIOUS REQUIRED
	FEATURES. STAFF MUST BE ABLE TO VERIFY COMPLIANCE WITH
	THE REQUIREMENTS. NOTE: THE LETTERS ON THE DIAGRAMS ON
	SHEETS A0.01.1 AND A0.01.2 MUST KEY TO TEXT IN THE
	TABLE.

	7) PLANAR BREAKS ARE REQUIRED FOR ALL LEVELS OF THE
	PODIUM. THE PLANS DO NOT SHOW EVIDENCE THAT THIS
	OCCURS.

	8) STAFF DOES NOT FEEL THAT THE TOWER HAS ENOUGH
	ARTICULATION GIVEN ITS SCALE, MASS AND FACADE LENGTH.

	9) PROVIDE DESCRIPTION OF HOW THE MATERIALS FOR THE 30
	FOOT ARCHITECTURAL TREATMENT ALONG WEST STREET (THE
	PORTION THAT IS NOT FENESTRATION) WILL SATISFY THE
	REQUIREMENT.

	10) THE ACTIVE USE DIAGRAMS CONTAIN INACCURACIES
	(INCONSISTENT FRONTAGES, INCORRECT TOTALS, AND
	INCORRECT MEASURE POINTS). PLEASE REVIEW THE DRAWINGS
	FOR ACCURACY. ANY CHANGES NEED TO BE REFLECTED ON THE
	ACTIVE USE SUMMARY TABLE ON SHEET A0.01

	A. IT APPEARS THAT THE HIBISCUS FRONTAGE MEETS THE
	ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS.
	B. LEVEL 3 DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM 60% ACTIVE USE
	REQUIREMENT. THE OUTDOOR DINING AND PASSAGEWAY MAY NOT
	BE COUNTED AS ACTIVE USE ABOVE THE GROUND FLOOR.

	11) THE PORTION OF THE BUILDING ALONG ROSEMARY BEHIND
	THE OUTDOOR DINING DOES NOT MEET THE SETBACK
	REQUIREMENT THAT THE BUILDING BE BETWEEN 35 AND 50 FEET
	FROM THE CENTERLINE OF ROSEMARY. IF THE OUTDOOR DINING
	AREA IS DESIGNED AS A PUBLIC OPEN SPACE, THEN THE
	BUILDING AS DESIGNED MEETS THE SETBACK ALLOWANCES.
	PLEASE PROVIDE HOW THE OUTDOOR DINING AREA COMPLIES
	WITH ONE OF THE TYPES OF PUBLIC OPEN SPACE.

	12) THE POOL DECK AND LEVEL 5 GREEN ROOF NEED TO HAVE
	NOTES AS TO WHICH TYPE OF PRIVATE OPEN SPACE THEY ARE,
	SO THAT STAFF CAN VERIFY COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIRED
	STANDARDS.

	13) PRIVATE OPEN SPACE IS FOR THE USE OF THE BUILDING
	RESIDENTS. PLEASE DESCRIBE HOW THE LEVEL 5 GREEN ROOF
	AND THE LEVEL 4 ROOFTOP GARDEN WILL BE USED BY THE
	RESIDENTS.

	14) PUBLIC OPEN SPACE IS NOT PERMITTED TO BE ADJACENT
	TO BUILDING MECHANICAL SPACES, EQUIPMENT OR SERVICE
	AREAS, ETC.

	A. THE PORTION OF THE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE ADJACENT TO
	WEST STREET IS ADJACENT TO TRANSFORMERS THAT ARE
	REMAINING FOR 477 SOUTH ROSEMARY. THE TRANSFORMERS MUST
	BE SCREENED FROM VIEW OF THE PROPOSED PUBLIC OPEN
	SPACE, OR THE AREA MAY NOT BE COUNTED AS PUBLIC OPEN
	SPACE.
	B. THERE ARE AC UNITS MOUNTED ON RACKS THAT ARE ON THE
	BUILDING WALL OF 477 SOUTH ROSEMARY. THIS MECHANICAL
	EQUIPMENT MUST ALSO BE SCREENED FROM THE PUBLIC OPEN
	SPACE. PLEASE NOTE: IT APPEARS THAT THIS MECHANICAL
	EQUIPMENT DIRECTLY CONFLICTS WITH THE PROPOSED TREES
	ALONG THE WALL. PROVIDE A DETAIL ON HOW THE WALL
	MOUNTED MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT DOES NOT INTERFERE WITH
	THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPE AND ITS LONG TERM GROWTH.

	15) PUBLIC OPEN SPACE - PASSAGE REQUIREMENTS

	A. THE PASSAGE IS REQUIRED TO HAVE A MINIMUM OF 25 FEET
	OPENING ON BOTH SIDES.
	B. A PASSAGEWAY IS REQUIRED TO CONNECT TWO OR MORE
	PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY OR PUBLIC SPACES. WEST STREET IS
	NOT A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY (IT IS AN ACCESS EASEMENT) SO
	IT NEEDS TO INCLUDE PUBLIC ACCESS AND VISUAL
	IMPROVEMENTS TO ALLOW IT TO QUALIFY AS A PUBLIC SPACE.
	SEE COMMENT #29 FOR ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS AND COMMENT #14
	FOR VISUAL ITEMS THAT NEED TO BE ADDRESSED.
	C. PROVIDE THE DIMENSIONS FOR THE NARROW POINTS SHOWN
	IN THE PASSAGEWAY. EX. WALL TO DECORATIVE POT,
	LANDSCAPE AREA TO COLUMNS, COLUMNS TO OFFICE ENTRANCE
	WALL, ETC. THESE ALL APPEAR TO BE CHOKE POINTS IN THE
	PASSAGEWAY.
	D. THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE PASSAGEWAY IS COVERED BY
	THE UPPER RESIDENTIAL STORIES, INCLUDING BALCONIES.
	PROVIDE THE CALCULATION TO VERIFY THAT NO MORE THAN 25%
	OF THE REQUIRED OPEN SPACE IS COVERED.

	16) OPEN SPACE MEASUREMENTS SHALL NOT INCLUDE AREAS
	WITHIN THE MINIMUM SETBACK. PROVIDE THE SETBACK
	DIMENSION REQUIRED BY THE NFPA REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
	PORTIONS OF THE HIBISCUS TOWER LOCATED ADJACENT TO THE
	EXISTING 477 SOUTH ROSEMARY BUILDING. THIS SETBACK AREA
	MAY NOT BE COUNTED TOWARD MEETING THE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE
	SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENT.

	17) THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT COMPLIANCE TABLE AND
	THE PLANS SHOW DIFFERING VALUES FOR THE PROVIDED AMOUNT
	OF OPEN SPACE, BOTH PRIVATE AND PUBLIC.

	18) PROVIDE DIMENSION ON THE ELEVATION DRAWINGS FOR THE
	PROJECTING ELEMENTS. THIS INCLUDES CLEARANCE HEIGHT
	DIMENSIONS FOR THE AWNINGS AND THE TOWER BALCONIES.

	19) THE ALUMINUM AWNING ALONG HIBISCUS HAS A 14 FOOT
	CLEARANCE AND WILL EXTEND INTO THE BLACK OLIVE TREES IN
	THE PLANTER AREAS ADJACENT TO THE DROP OFF. THE ZLDR DO
	NOT PERMIT HORIZONTAL ENCROACHMENTS THAT INTERFERE WITH
	NORMAL ENVELOP OF STREET TREE CANOPY.

	20) A 24 INCH DEEP ALUMINUM AWNING IS NOT PERMITTED.
	AWNINGS ARE REQUIRED TO PROJECT A MINIMUM OF 3 FEET
	FROM THE BUILDING. THE ELEVATION PLANS LABEL THIS AS AN
	ALUMINUM SUNSHADE. SINCE ONLY ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES
	MAY EXTEND 2 FEET FROM THE BUILDING, THIS NEEDS TO BE
	LABELED AS AN ARCHITECTURAL FEATURE ON THE PLANS.

	21) PROVIDE THE STREET LEVEL ELEVATION BLOW-UPS WITHOUT
	THE LANDSCAPE LAYER. STAFF IS UNABLE TO SEE DETAILS.

	22) THE DATA IN THE PARKING TABLE FOR THE RETAIL,
	RESTAURANT AND OFFICE LINES IS LESS SQUARE FOOTAGE THAN
	WHAT IS SHOWN IN THE PROJECT DATA TABLE. ALL VALUES
	SHALL BE CONSISTENT AND CORRECT.

	23) PROVIDE NET AREA DRAWINGS FOR THE RESTAURANT,
	RETAIL AND OFFICE USES SO THAT STAFF CAN VERIFY THE
	PARKING SQUARE FOOTAGE PRESENTED FOR THE PARKING
	CALCULATIONS.

	24) THE SHARED PARKING MAY ONLY BE USED IF THERE ARE NO
	PARKING SPACES DESIGNATED FOR A PARTICULAR USE. THIS
	THEN DOES NOT PERMIT THE ABILITY TO HAVE DESIGNATED
	PARKING FOR EITHER THE RESIDENTIAL OR OFFICE USERS.

	25) THE PROVIDED PARKING TABLE (RE-REVIEW ONCE COMMENT
	#S 22-24 ARE ADDRESSED) SHOWS 390 PARKING SPACES
	REQUIRED FOR THE NEW HIBISCUS TOWER VS. THE 222 PARKING
	SPACES REQUIRED FOR THE MACY?S. THE PARKING
	AVAILABILITY TABLE PROVIDED BY JORDAN RATHLEV NEEDS TO
	BE FURTHER BROKEN DOWN TO VERIFY THAT THE HIBISCUS
	TOWER, THE SAPODILLA RESIDENCES AND 477 S. ROSEMARY
	HAVE SUFFICIENT PARKING SPACES IN THE GARAGE. NOTE: THE
	PARKING AVAILABILITY TABLE INDICATES THAT THERE IS
	EXCESS CAPACITY THROUGHOUT THE ENTIRE CITYPLACE CPD.

	26) PROVIDE THE GARAGE PLAN SHOWING WHERE THE
	RESIDENTIAL PARKING WILL OCCUR, TO INCLUDE ANY
	BARRIERS, AS WELL AS THE LOCATIONS OF THE REQUIRED
	CHARGING STATIONS AND CAR SHARE STATION.

	27) THE GARAGE LAYOUT IS AFFECTED BY THE NEW BRIDGE
	LOCATION SO THIS WILL NEED TO BE INCLUDED AS PART OF
	THIS APPLICATION AND SHOWN ON THE PLANS REQUIRED AS
	PART OF #26. NOTE: A SETBACK WAIVER IS REQUIRED FOR THE
	BRIDGE.

	28) SHOW THE ADA ROUTE FROM THE ADA PARKING SPACES IN
	THE GARAGE TO THE OFFICE AND RETAIL ENTRANCES.

	29) THE WEST STREET PEDESTRIAN CROSSING LOCATIONS, TO
	INCLUDE IN FRONT OF THE LOADING DOCKS, MUST BE CLEARLY
	DEFINED, PREFERABLY THROUGH THE USE OF A DIFFERENT
	PAVING MATERIAL THAN THE ROADWAY SURFACE.

	30) YOU WILL BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE WAY FINDING SIGNS
	FROM THE GARAGE TO THE OFFICE, RESIDENTIAL AND RETAIL
	ENTRANCES.

	31) EXPLAIN THE USE OF THE RESIDENTIAL DROP OFF. IS THE
	INTENTION TO HAVE A VALET FOR THE TOWER AT THIS
	LOCATION? IF SO, PROVIDE THE VALET OPERATION PLAN, TO
	INCLUDE WHERE THE VALET AREA IS IN THE GARAGE.

	32) EXPLAIN THE USE OF THE OFFICE DROP OFF. IS THE
	INTENTION TO HAVE A VALET FOR THE OFFICE AT THIS
	LOCATION? IF SO, PROVIDE THE VALET OPERATION PLAN, TO
	INCLUDE WHERE THE VALET AREA IS IN THE GARAGE.

	33) PROVIDE THE BICYCLE WALL INSTALLATION DETAIL AT A
	BIGGER SCALE. IT IS NOT LEGIBLE ON THE PAPER PLANS.

	34) PROVIDE THE DIMENSIONS OF THE BICYCLE STORAGE ROOMS
	ON THE PLANS. STAFF NEEDS TO VERIFY THE NUMBER OF
	BICYCLES THAT CAN BE STORED.
	35) PROVIDE THE PASSAGEWAY BICYCLE PAD AND RACK DETAIL
	AND THE DIMENSIONS ON THE PLANS. THEY DO NOT APPEAR TO
	MEET CODE REQUIREMENTS.

	36) PROVIDE BICYCLE RACKS ALONG ROSEMARY FOR THE RETAIL
	CUSTOMERS. ZONING STAFF HAS NOT SEEN THE PLANS FOR THE
	HIBISCUS OR ROSEMARY RECONSTRUCTION SO IF RACKS ARE
	INCLUDED IN THESE PLANS SHOW THEM ON THE HIBISCUS TOWER
	PLANS TO ADDRESS THIS COMMENT.

	37) THE LANDSCAPE PLANS SHOW TRA, BUT THIS IS NOT
	LISTED ON THE PLANT LIST.

	38) PROVIDE GREEN ROOF DETAILS FOR LEVELS 4 AND 5 AND
	THE TOWER ROOF. NOTE: IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
	DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, THE LEVEL 4 ROOF THAT DOES NOT
	INCLUDE THE MECHANICAL AND SKYLIGHT AREAS. IF SOLAR IS
	USED THIS NEEDS TO BE SHOWN. THE PLANS NEED TO FACTOR
	THIS IN NOW.

	39) THE LANDSCAPE PLAN SET LABELS BOLLARDS AT THE
	CORNER OF ROSEMARY AND HIBISCUS AS LIGHT POLES.

	40) PROVIDE VERIFICATION THAT THE FPL TRANSFORMERS
	BEING REMOVED DO NOT SERVICE 477 SOUTH ROSEMARY. NOTE:
	ANY TRANSFORMERS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE RELOCATED MUST
	BE SHOWN IN THEIR NEW LOCATION AS PART OF THIS PROJECT.

	41) THE GROUND FLOOR PLAN ON SHEET A1.01 MUST SHOW ALL
	THE PROPOSED MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT. IT FAILS TO SHOW THE
	PROPOSED BACKFLOW AND GAS METERS ALONG THE WEST STREET
	SHOWN ON SHEET P1.01. NOTE: STAFF WILL NOT SUPPORT THE
	PROPOSED LOCATION OF THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT IT IS
	BLOCKING THE SIDEWALK. ADDITIONALLY, THE CITYPLACE DRI
	REQUIRES THE SCREENING OF MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, WHICH
	THE PROPOSED PLAN DOES NOT SHOW.

	42) PROVIDE THE RENDERING OF THE BUILDING IN CONTEXT
	(SIMILAR TO R0.02) FROM THE NORTH, SOUTH AND WEST

	43) PROVIDE GROUND LEVEL RENDERINGS OF THE BUILDING
	FROM WEST ON HIBISCUS, AND NORTH AND SOUTH ALONG
	ROSEMARY.

	44) PROVIDE A SHADOW STUDY.

	45) THE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN SHOWS LIGHTING LEVELS AT THE
	CURB IN EXCESS OF THE PERMITTED ONE FOOT CANDLE.

	46) WHAT IS THE CONSTRUCTION PHASING PLAN FOR THE
	BUILDING, ROSEMARY AND THE ALLEY? WILL THE HIBISCUS
	RIGHT-OF-WAY, INCLUDING THE SIDEWALK, BE COMPLETED
	PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING? HOW WILL
	ACCESS BE PROVIDED TO THE TOWNHOUSES AND THE SERVICE TO
	477 SOUTH ROSEMARY DURING CONSTRUCTION?

	47) EXPLAIN THE BAR IN THE RESIDENTIAL LOBBY AREA. WHO
	DOES THIS SERVE? WHAT DOES IT SERVE?

	48) TURN THE LIFE SAFETY DISTANCE LAYER OF ON THE
	RESUBMITTAL PLANS.

	49) DESCRIBE HOW THE ROOFTOP RAINWATER WILL BE STORED
	ON-SITE. THE METHOD MAY IMPACT THE SITE PLAN. THE
	PAVING AND DRAINAGE PLAN DOES NOT SEEM TO COVER THIS
	REQUIREMENT.

	50) THE PLAZA ON-SITE STORMWATER RETENTION NEEDS TO BE
	EXPLAINED SINCE THE DIFFERING METHODS AFFECT THE SITE
	PLAN. THE PAVING AND DRAINAGE PLAN DOES NOT SEEM TO
	COVER THIS REQUIREMENT.

	51) STAFF IS STILL ANALYZING THE VEHICLE TRIP
	GENERATION AS IT RELATES TO THE TROLLEY OPERATION
	CONTRIBUTION.