Plan Review Details - Project Z20010013
Plan Review Stops For Project Z20010013
Review Stop B BUILDING (STRUCTURAL)
Rev No 1 Status F Date 02-12-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By rbrown Date 02-12-2020 Time 19:18 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rbrown Date 02-12-2020 Time 19:18 Sent To  
Notes
2020-02-12 19:53:49DEVELOPMENT 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. FLOOD ZONE. ACCORDING TO THE ADOPTED FLOOD INSURANCE
 RATE MAPS (FIRMS), THE PROPOSED BUILDING IS IN FLOOD
 ZONE AE, WITH A BASE FLOOD ELEVATION OF 12.7 FT NAVD.
 THE FIRST FLOOR OF THE BUILDING AND ALL ASSOCIATED
 MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT (CHILLERS, GENERATORS ETC.) SHALL
 BE 24 INCHES (FREEBOARD) ABOVE THE BASE FLOOD
 ELEVATION.
  
 3. ACCESSIBLE ROUTE. SHEET SP-1, SITE PLAN, DOES NOT
 SHOW A WHEELCHAIR ACCESSIBLE ROUTE FROM BELVEDERE RD
 SIDEWALK TO THE BUILDING ENTRANCE. WHEN SUBMITTED FOR
 PERMIT, THE PLANS SHALL SHOW, AND HIGHLIGHT, AT LEAST
 ONE ACCESSIBLE ROUTE, COMPLYING WITH SECTIONS 206.2 AND
 402.2 OF FLORIDA ACCESSIBILITY CODE, FROM THE PUBLIC
 RIGHT-OF-WAY TO ALL ACCESSIBLE BUILDING OR FACILITY
 ENTRANCES.
  
 4. EXIT DISCHARGE FROM STAIRS. STAIR 1 AND STAIR 2
 DISCHARGE TO LANDSCAPED AREAS THAT DO NOT HAVE
 UNOBSTRUCTED PATH OF TRAVEL AWAY FROM THE BUILDING.
 SHEET SP-1, SITE PLAN, AND SHEET A101, LEVEL 01 FLOOR
 PLAN, SHOW ONLY A 4 FOOT WIDE PAVED PAD. SHEET LP-2,
 SITE LANDSCAPE PLAN, SHOW SHRUBS WHERE THE UNOBSTRUCTED
 EXIT DISCHARGE PATH OF TRAVEL SHOULD BE.
  
 5. 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.
  
 6. GREASE INTERCEPTOR. A GREASE INTERCEPTOR WILL BE
 REQUIRED FOR THE PANTRY. PLEASE CONTACT NICOLE NELSON,
 ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE SPECIALIST III, PUBLIC
 UTILITIES DEPARTMENT, AT (561) 822-2163, OR BY EMAIL:
 [email protected]
  
 7. 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.
  
 8. 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.
  
 9. BUILDING ADDRESS. EACH SEPARATE BUILDING, AND UNIT
 WITH AN INDEPENDENT ENTRANCE FROM THE STREET, SHALL
 HAVE A SEPARATE ADDRESS. FOR STREET ADDRESSING, CONTACT
 CAROLINE PUELL, ADDRESSING COORDINATOR, AT (561) 805
 6659, OR BY EMAIL: [email protected]
  
 10. 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 4 Status F Date 09-11-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By rrossano Date 09-11-2020 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By rrossano Date 09-11-2020 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-09-11 10:29:07THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS ARE FROM MARK HURLEY, FIELD
 CUSTOMER SERVICE SUPERVISOR, PUBLIC UTILITIES
 CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH ? [email protected] OR
 561-822-2262
  
 -DISCOVERED MAJOR REVISION TO WATER PLAN FROM USE OF
 EXISTING 3 IN. DOMESTIC WATER METER TO A 4 IN. WATER
 METER. THIS WOULD REQUIRE REMOVAL OF EXISTING SMALL
 BYPASS LINE WITH CONVERSION TO ABOVE-GROUND METER
 INSTALLATION (INSTEAD OF VAULT) AND FULL SIZE BYPASS.
 THAT EXISTING WATER SERVICE MAY ALSO BE CONFIGURED
 DIFFERENT THAN SHOWN ON THE PLAN ? SEE WATER SERVICE
 DRAWING FOR 1225 BELVEDERE RD. THE UNUSED REFERENCED
 WATER SERVICE STANDARD DETAILS WILL NEED BE REMOVED AND
 REMAINING ONES UPDATED TO SEP2019 REVISION. IF HISTORIC
 DRAWING FOR 1225 BELVEDERE RD WATER SERVICE IS STILL
 CORRECT, THEN FIRELINE POINT OF SERVICE WILL NEED BE
 MOVED TO THE NEXT GATE VALVE NORTH. A BRAND NEW GATE
 VALVE THAT ISOLATES JUST THE DOMESTIC METER (AND NOT
 THE FIRELINE) MUST BE LOCATED UPSTREAM OF METER.
  
 COMMENT FROM TRACY L. WARD, P.E., SENIOR STORMWATER
 ENG., CITY OF WPB ENG. SERVICES, 561-494-1120 /
 561-351-0510, [email protected]:
  
 IF THERE IS CONSTRUCTION PROPOSED NEAR CITY MAINTAINED
 DRAINAGE SYSTEMS THEN THE SYSTEMS WILL NEED TO BE
 CCTV?D. THAT BEING SAID, BELVEDERE ROAD IS MAINTAINED
 BY THE COUNTY OR FDOT [SAME MAY BE TRUE FOR THE SERVICE
 ROAD - PLEASE CONFIRM] AND THAT ENTITY MAINTAINS THE
 DRAINAGE SYSTEM IN THE R/W SO NO STORM CCTV FOR THE
 CITY MAY BE NEEDED.
 COMMENT FROM RICK ROSSANO, PROJ. COORDINATOR, CITY OF
 WPB ENG. SERVICES, 561-494-1098, [email protected]
  
 PLEASE PROVIDE CCTV VIDEO OF EXISTING SANITARY SEWER
 ALONG ENTIRE PROJECT FRONTAGE. PROVISION OF CCTV IS AN
 ENGINEERING REQUIREMENT OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL BEFORE
 FORMAL ENGINEERING SUBMITTAL.
  
 FEEL FREE TO CONTACT US IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR
 CONCERNS, THANKS.
 RICK ROSSANO, PROJECT COORDINATOR
 ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
 DIRECT: (561) 494-1098 [email protected]
  
Review Stop ENG - PPRC ENGINEERING - PPRC
Rev No 3 Status F Date 07-20-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By rrossano Date 07-20-2020 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By rrossano Date 07-20-2020 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-07-20 07:17:16COMMENTS PER RICK ROSSANO, PROJECT COORDINATOR, CITY OF
 WPB ENG. SERVICES, [email protected] ? 561-494-1098
 CCTV OF STORMWATER IS A SITE PLAN REVIEW REQUIREMENT.
 PLEASE PROVIDE.
 COMMENTS PER MARK HURLEY, FIELD CUSTOMER SERVICE SUPV.,
 CITY OF WPB PUBLIC UTIL. [email protected] 561-822-2262
 PREVIOUS COMMENTS:
 1. RE: SHEET C-8 UTILITY EASEMENT - BACKFLOW ASSEMBLIES
 CANNOT BE IN THE UTILITY EASEMENTS ? PLEASE UPDATE
 PLAN. WOULD ALSO NEED UE FOR NEW IRRIGATION WATER
 SERVICE AND METER BOX. ON BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHY SURVEY
 (SHEET V-2), THERE IS A LISTED UTILITY EASEMENT ? IF
 THAT STILL EXISTS MAYBE IT CAN BE INCORPORATED ON SHEET
 C-8. IF NOT EXISTING, THEN ALSO WOULD LIKE UTILITY
 EASEMENTS FOR EXISTING WATER SERVICES TO EXISTING
 HOTEL. CIVIL PLAN ALSO SHOWS A WATER MAIN APPROACHING
 THOSE WATER SERVICES FROM ROAD. PLEASE VERIFY IF THAT
 IS DRAWN CORRECTLY AND IF CITY-OWNED. IF SO, THEN NEED
 UE FOR THAT ALSO.
 RESPONSE: COMPLIED; PLEASE REFER TO THE REVISED CIVIL
 PLANS.
 CAN'T FIND WHERE UE UPDATED. ALSO SEE SOME BACKFLOWS
 INSIDE THE UE - NEED REVISION.
 2. PLEASE LABEL FIRELINE POINT OF SERVICE GATE VALVE
 ADJACENT TO WATER MAIN.
 RESPONSE: COMPLIED; PLEASE REFER TO THE REVISED CIVIL
 PLANS.
 CAN'T FIND WHERE LABELING WAS ADDED -> LOOKS TO STILL
 NEED IT.
 3. DEMOLITION PLAN DID NOT HAVE A LABEL WITH WHAT IS
 HAPPENING TO OLD EXISTING IRRIGATION WATER SERVICE AND
 BACKFLOW PREVENTER FOR EXISTING HOTEL. AS-BUILT PLAN
 ALSO SHOWS IT ARRANGED DIFFERENTLY. PLEASE VERIFY
 CONFIGURATION. IS IT GOING TO BE CUT & CAPPED, REMOVED,
 OR LEFT IN PLACE AS-IS? THERE WAS ANOTHER COMMENT
 RELATED TO THIS FROM ENGINEERING.
 RESPONSE: COMPLIED; PLEASE REFER TO THE REVISED CIVIL
 PLANS.
 CAN'T FIND WHERE THIS WAS UPDATED.
 NEW COMMENT:
 -FIRELINE SHOWING LABELS AS 8 IN. AND 6 IN. - IS THAT
 CORRECT OR IS ONE OF THEM A MISTAKE?
  
Review Stop ENG - PPRC ENGINEERING - PPRC
Rev No 2 Status F Date 06-11-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By rrossano Date 06-11-2020 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By rrossano Date 06-11-2020 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-06-11 11:58:06COMMENTS FROM RICK ROSSANO, PROJ. COORDINATOR, CITY OF
 WPB ENG. SERVICES, 561-494-1098.
  
 PLEASE CLEARLY LABEL BELVEDERE RD ROW.
 PLEASE PROVIDE STORMWATER CCTV ALONG ENTIRE PROJECT
 FRONTAGE.
 PLEASE REMOVE STANDARD DETAIL WS-2 FROM DETAILS AND
 ADJUST PLANS AS RELATED.
  
 COMMENTS FROM MARK HURLEY, FIELD CUSTOMER SERVICE
 SUPERVISOR, CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH PUBLIC UTILITIES,
 561-822-2262 :
  
 PREVIOUS COMMENTS:
  
 RE: SHEET C-8 UTILITY EASEMENT - BACKFLOW ASSEMBLIES
 CANNOT BE IN THE UTILITY EASEMENTS ? PLEASE UPDATE
 PLAN. WOULD ALSO NEED UE FOR NEW IRRIGATION WATER
 SERVICE AND METER BOX. ON BOUNDARY & TOPOGRAPHY SURVEY
 (SHEET V-2), THERE IS A LISTED UTILITY EASEMENT ? IF
 THAT STILL EXISTS MAYBE IT CAN BE INCORPORATED ON SHEET
 C-8. IF NOT EXISTS, THEN ALSO WOULD LIKE UTILITY
 EASEMENTS FOR EXISTING WATER SERVICES TO EXISTING
 HOTEL. CIVIL PLAN ALSO SHOWS A WATER MAIN APPROACHING
 THOSE WATER SERVICES FROM ROAD. PLEASE VERIFY IF THAT
 IS DRAWN CORRECTLY AND IF CITY-OWNED. IF SO, THEN NEED
 UE FOR THAT ALSO.
  
 RE: SHEET C-8 IRRIGATION - THERE SHOULD BE NO REDUCER.
 1.5 IN. OR 2 IN. METERS BOTH HAVE 2 IN. SERVICE LINES
 PER SD & AML. THE CURBSTOPS ARE THE UNIVERSAL TYPE THAT
 ACCOMMODATES EITHER SIZE METER. PLEASE UPDATE C-8.
  
 NEW COMMENTS:
  
 -PLEASE LABEL FIRELINE POINT OF SERVICE GATE VALVE
 ADJACENT TO WATER MAIN.
  
 -DEMOLITION PLAN DID NOT HAVE A LABEL WITH WHAT IS
 HAPPENING TO OLD EXISTING IRRIGATION WATER SERVICE AND
 BACKFLOW PREVENTER FOR EXISTING HOTEL. AS-BUILT PLAN
 ALSO SHOWS IT ARRANGED DIFFERENTLY. PLEASE VERIFY
 CONFIGURATION. IS IT GOING TO BE CUT & CAPPED, REMOVED,
 OR LEFT IN PLACE AS-IS? THERE WAS ANOTHER COMMENT
 RELATED TO THIS FROM ENGINEERING.
  
 -ON ENGINEERING SUBMITTAL, PLEASE LABEL CONFLICT
 CROSSINGS FOR IRRIGATION WATER SERVICE WITH FM & SS AND
 PROVIDE RESOLUTION.
  
 -A SIDEWALK ABRUPTLY ENDS BEFORE THE IRRIGATION WATER
 METER BOX. IF ANTICIPATE CONTINUING SIDEWALK LATER OR
 HEAVY FOOT TRAFFIC OVER METER BOX, PLEASE RELOCATE
 METER BOX SLIGHTLY NORTH OUT OF THE WAY.
Review Stop ENG - PPRC ENGINEERING - PPRC
Rev No 1 Status F Date 02-12-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By rrossano Date 02-12-2020 Time   Rev Time  
Received By rrossano Date 02-12-2020 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-02-12 09:54:13Z20010013, Z20010014 - 1301 BELVEDERE PB AIRPORT HOTEL
 REZONING AND WAIVER
 1. THE CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH HAS A NUMBER OF
 REGULATIONS AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS WHICH DIRECTLY
 AFFECT THE DEVELOPMENT AND INSTALLATION OF WATER AND
 WASTEWATER UTILITIES WITHIN THE CITY. PLEASE SEE
 DEVELOPMENT PERMIT SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS AT THE LINK
 BELOW: HTTP://WPB.ORG/CMSPAGES/GETAMAZONFILE.ASPX?PATH=
 ~\WPB_WEBSITE\MEDIA\ENGINEERING\DEVELOPMENT-APPLICATION
 -FULL-PACKAGE_2016.PDF&HASH=7BD4DD7EB6115181D8C5977BCC0
 2A97B1960045731D3658206F27451722716EF
 THIS AND OTHER RELATED ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS CAN BE
 FOUND HERE: HTTP://WPB.ORG/DEPARTMENTS/ENGINEERING-PUBL
 IC-WORKS/FORMS,-PERMITS-APPLICATIONS
 2. CODE OF ORDINANCES, CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH,
 FLORIDA, CODIFIED THROUGH ORD. NO. 4183-08, ADOPTED
 SEPT. 22, 2008. (SUPPLEMENT NO. 18)
 CHAPTER 90 UTILITIES, ARTICLE I. SEC. 90-7.
 POLICY REGARDING EXTENSION OF WATER OR SEWER SERVICE
 FACILITIES OF THE CITY.
 THE WATER AND WASTEWATER SERVICE AGREEMENTS AND THE
 CONSTRUCTION PERMITS ADDRESS RESERVATION OF CAPACITY
 BASED ON USAGE, METER SIZE AND FEES, DESIGN STANDARDS,
 BACKFLOW PREVENTION, FIRE SERVICE AND IRRIGATION.
 3. 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
 4. 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 561-494-1040 FOR FURTHER
 ASSISTANCE.
 5. 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.
 PLEASE SHOW SLOPE % ON ALL SANITARY LINES AND CALL OUT
 MATERIAL. 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.
 6. CUT AND CAP UTILITIES NOT IN USE, AND REMOVE ANY
 ABANDONED UTILITY LINES LARGER THAN 2 INCHES FROM CITY
 RIGHT OF WAY.
 7. PLEASE SUBMIT COMPLETED LOS ANALYSIS SUMMARY TABLE
 DIRECTLY TO ENGINEERING (SHEET 33 OF CITY OF WPB
 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION).
 8. PROVIDE CALCULATIONS ON PLANS OF EXISTING AND
 PROPOSED DEMANDS FOR WATER & SEWER (AVERAGE, MAXIMUM
 AND PEAK) AND FIRE FLOW DEMANDS. CALCULATIONS SHALL BE
 PER FAC 64E-6 FOR SEWER AND PER FAC 64-E.008 FOR WATER.
 9. SHOW VERTICAL DATUM AND DATUM CONVERSION INFORMATION
 (NAVD 88 AND NGVD 29).
 10. PROVIDE CCTV VIDEO OF EXISTING SANITARY SEWER ALONG
 ENTIRE PROJECT FRONTAGE.
 11. PLEASE PROVIDE CALCULATIONS OF REVISED PERVIOUS AND
 IMPERVIOUS CALCULATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED IMPACTED
 AREAS.
 12. PROVIDE ONSITE CLEANOUTS NEAR PROPERTY LINE FOR
 PROPOSED SANITARY LATERALS.
 13. PLEASE LABEL WATER LINES AS PRIVATE WHERE
 APPLICABLE.
 14. COORDINATE WITH MARK HURLEY, FIELD CUSTOMER SERVICE
 SUPERVISOR WITH CITY OF WPB PUBLIC UTILITIES, REGARDING
 PLACEMENT OF BACKFLOW DEVICES AND WATER METERS. CONTACT
 HIM AT 561-494-2262 OR [email protected]
 15. PROVIDE DEDICATED UTILITY EASEMENTS TO ALLOW ACCESS
 FOR CITY PERSONNEL TO PROPOSED UTILITY WATER METERS.
 16. PROVIDE CURRENT LIFT STATION CAPACITY.
  
 THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS ARE FROM MARK HURLEY, FIELD
 CUSTOMER SERVICE SUPERVISOR, PUBLIC UTILITIES
 CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH ? [email protected] OR
 561-822-2262
  
 -ALL WATER METER BOXES ON PROPERTY NEED TO BE IN U.E.
 OR ROW. WILL NEED TO CREATE UTILITY EASEMENT FOR ANY
 WATER METER BOXES ON PRIVATE PROPERTY AND NOT IN U.E.
  
 -1.5? IRRIGATION SHOULD HAVE 2? WATER SERVICE LINE
 PIPING. SHOULD BE LABELED WITH ASSOCIATED WATER SERVICE
 STANDARD DETAIL #. MUST HAVE RPZ/RPPA BACKFLOW
 ASSEMBLY.
  
 -EXISTING BACKFLOW ASSEMBLIES APPEAR TO BE DRAWN
 IN-LINE INSTEAD OF PARALLEL. NEED CORRECTED.
  
 -FIRELINE POINT OF SERVICE FOR EXISTING HOTEL IS AT FAR
 SE CORNER OF LARGE PROPERTY. IF PROPOSED HOTEL IS
 DIVIDED SEPARATELY WITH DIFFERENT OWNERS AND PROPERTY
 LINES COULD BE PROBLEMATIC IN FUTURE SHARING FIRELINE
 WITH RESPECT TO BILLING, MAINTENANCE, AND OWNERSHIP.
  
 -CUSTOMER WOULD NEED TO HAVE EXISTING BACKFLOW
 ASSEMBLIES AT SE AREA TESTED WITH PASSING REPORT AND
 REPAIRED/REPLACED AS NEEDED.
  
 -CUSTOMER WOULD NEED TO START ACCOUNT FOR 3? WATER
 SERVICE AT SE AREA OF PROPERTY AND PAY ANY APPLICABLE
 FEES/CHARGES TO USE WATER.
  
 -ON UTILITY PLAN, THE DOMESTIC WATER SERVICE FOR THE
 EXISTING HOTEL NEEDS TO BE CLEARLY LABELED.
  
 MARK HURLEY
 FIELD CUSTOMER SERVICE SUPERVISOR
 PUBLIC UTILITIES
 CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH
 561-822-2262
  
 FEEL FREE TO CONTACT US IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR
 CONCERNS, THANKS.
 RICK ROSSANO, PROJECT COORDINATOR
 ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
 DIRECT: (561) 494-1098 [email protected]
  
Review Stop FIRE FIRE DEPARTMENT
Rev No 1 Status P Date 02-07-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By pleduc Date 02-07-2020 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By pleduc Date 02-07-2020 Time 11:23 Sent To  
Notes
2020-02-07 11:27:07THE 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. A NFPA 13 COMPLIANT 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.
  
 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?
  
 7. 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.
  
 8. ALL ELEVATORS SHALL BE EQUIPPED WITH A REGION 7
 KEYWAY SYSTEM.
  
 ALL NEW ELEVATORS SHALL CONFORM TO THE FIRE FIGHTER?S
 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.
  
 9. 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.
  
 10. 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.
  
 THE PROPSED LOCATIONS OF THE FH AND FDC ARE ACCEPTABLE
 WITH ANY CHANGES CLOSELY COORDINATED WITH THE BUREAU OF
 FIRE PREVENTION.
  
 11. 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.
  
 12. THE BUREAU'S APPROVAL OF THIS SUBMITTED PROJECT
 DOES NOT CONSTITUTE IT'S FINAL REVIEW OR APPROVAL.
  
 13. 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 09-21-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By rcaranci Date 09-21-2020 Time 15:28 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rcaranci Date 09-21-2020 Time 15:28 Sent To  
Notes
2020-09-21 15:29:27 
 FROM: RAY CARANCI, SENIOR LANDSCAPE PLANNER
 561-822-1462
 SEPTEMBER 29, 2020
 PROJECT: MINOR SUBDIVISION Z20010014
 1. SATISFIED. SUBDIVISION LINE WITHIN THE OCPD WILL
 REQUIRE A WAIVER TO THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS
 PER SECTION 94-443 (B) ALONG BOTH SIDES OF THE
 SUBDIVISION LINE.
  
 PROJECT: HOLIDAY INN OCPD Z20010013
 I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PETITION, AND
 PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:
  
 1. SATISFIED. THE EXISTING SITE AND PARKING AREA
 LANDSCAPE NONCONFORMITIES MUST BE REDUCED AS PART OF
 THE OCPD REZONING. THERE IS A CERTIFICATE OF CONFORMITY
 ISSUED BY THE CITY FOR PORTIONS OF THE WESTERN BUFFER,
 AND STAFF WILL LOCATE THE INFORMATION TO CLARIFY THE
 EXTENT OF THE APPROVAL. THE SITE IS REVIEWED IN TOTAL
 FOR COMPLIANCE WITH LANDSCAPE CODE REQUIREMENTS AND AS
 INDIVIDUAL PARCELS. IF THE REQUIREMENTS CANNOT BE MET,
 THEN THE APPLICANT MUST REQUEST WAIVERS FROM THOSE
 REQUIREMENTS.
  
 EXISTING LANDSCAPE ISLANDS THAT WILL REMAIN FROM THE
 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLAN NEED TO BE INDICATED ON THE
 LANDSCAPE PLAN. IF A FURTHER REDUCTION IN REQUIRED
 PARKING IS ALLOWED, THE EXISTING LANDSCAPE ISLANDS
 COULD BE EXPANDED TO MEET CURRENT REQUIREMENTS.
  
 7/29 STAFF WILL ACCEPT SOME NONCONFORMITIES REMAINING
 AND BECOMING PART OF THE PLAN APPROVED FOR THE PD IF
 ALL EFFORTS ARE MADE TO CORRECT AS MANY AS POSSIBLE,
 AND OTHER AREAS OF THE PLAN ARE ENHANCED.
  
  
  
 2. SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE CALCULATIONS FOR MINIMUM
 NUMBER OF REQUIRED SHADE TREES, FLOWERING TREES AND
 SHRUBS PER SECTION 94-443(C)(2)B. BASED ON REQUIRED
 OPEN SPACE OF 40% OF THE ENTIRE OCPD, AND SHOW WHAT IS
 PROVIDED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT.
 REQUIRED FLOWERING TREES NOT SHOWN ON CHART SHEET LP-1.
  
  
 3. SATISFIED. SHOW THE REQUIRED 5 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER
 ADJACENT TO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND THE 5 FOOT LANDSCAPE
 BUFFER PLANTINGS ALONG ALL OTHER PROPERTY LINES ON THE
 LANDSCAPE PLAN WITH THE REQUIRED TREES OR NUMBER OF
 SUBSTITUTE PALMS PER CURRENT CODE REQUIREMENTS OF
 SECTION 94-443(B). SHOW ALL CALCULATIONS FOR THE
 REQUIRED TREES FOR BUFFER SEGMENTS ON A PERIMETER
 BUFFER REQUIREMENT CHART INCLUDING LINEAR FOOTAGE OF
 ALL PROPERTY LINE SEGMENTS. IF THE BUFFER CANNOT BE
 PROVIDED ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE, A WAIVER MUST BE
 REQUESTED, AND ALTERNATIVES PRESENTED TO PROVIDE
 COMPARABLE BUFFERING ON THE SITE. LIST EACH BUFFER
 SEGMENT AND SHOW THE REQUIRED AND PROVIDED TREES FOR
 EACH.
 THE NORTHEAST BUFFER WITHIN THE PROPERTY LINE HAS
 UNMAINTAINED FICUS BENJAMINA HEDGE THAT NEEDS TO BE
 REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH THE NEW BUFFER PLANTING. IF
 THE OFFSITE LANDSCAPING PREVIOUSLY APPROVED IS NOT
 BEING MAINTAINED, THIS MUST BE ADDRESSED.
  
  
 4. SATISFIED. SHOW EXISTING LANDSCAPING AND TREES ON
 ADJACENT PROPERTIES WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE
 PER SECTION 94-442(B)(2)Q.
  
 5. SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE LINEAR FEET OF PLANTINGS FOR
 BUILDINGS PER SECTION 94-443(E)(1).
  
  
 6. SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE REQUIRED TREES IN TERMINAL
 LANDSCAPE ISLANDS, INTERIOR ISLANDS AND DIVIDER ISLANDS
 PER SECTION 94-443(C)(3).
 EXISTING LANDSCAPE ISLANDS THAT WILL REMAIN FROM THE
 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLAN NEED TO BE INDICATED ON THE
 LANDSCAPE PLAN.
 STAFF REQUESTS THAT SOME OF THE FEW REMAINING
 NONCONFORMING ISLANDS HAVE TREES ADDED AS REQUIRED.
 STAFF CAN MEET WITH THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO CLARIFY.
  
 7. SATISFIED. PROVIDE AN EXHIBIT SHOWING THE PARKING
 AREA SURFACE CALCULATIONS, PARKING SPACE AREAS AND
 LANDSCAPE AREAS PROVIDED TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE WITH
 SECTIONS 94-443 (C)(3) AND (4), FOLLOWING THE AREA
 CLASSIFICATIONS AS SHOWN IN FIGURE XIV-1.
 CORRECT SHEET LP-1A USING FIGURE XIV-1 AS A GUIDE, PLAN
 NEEDS TO SHOW 3 AREAS AND TOTALS:
 ? PARKING SPACES SHADED AS ONE AREA, SHOW TOTAL SPACES
 TIMES 10 SQ FT PER SPACE. PROVIDE TOTAL
 ? ALL OTHER PAVED AREAS SHADED DIFFERENTLY AND TOTAL
 SQUARE FOOTAGE. DIVIDE BY 100 AND MULTIPLY BY 4 SQ FT.
 PROVIDE TOTAL.
 ? TOTAL THESE 2 SQUARE FOOTAGE AMOUNTS FOR THE REQUIRED
 SQUARE FOOTAGE.
 ? SHOW ALL INTERIOR LANDSCAPE AREAS AS A DIFFERENT
 SHADE AND SHOW PROVIDED SQUARE FOOTAGE.
 GRAPHIC NEED TO BE CORRECTED. STAFF CAN MEET WITH
 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO WALK THROUGH THE REMAINING
 CORRECTIONS.
  
 8. SATISFIED. SECTION 94-443(C)(3) REQUIRES THAT A
 MINIMUM OF 75 PERCENT OF ALL TREES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO
 BE PLANTED WITHIN THE INTERIOR OF AN OFF STREET PARKING
 AREA SHALL BE CATEGORY 1 SHADE TREES. SHOW THE
 PERCENTAGE OF CATEGORY 1 TREES PROVIDED FOR THE
 REQUIRED LANDSCAPE AREAS.
 SHOW THE PERCENTAGE OF THE REQUIRED CATEGORY ONE TREES
 FOR NEW LANDSCAPE AREAS IN THE PARKING AREA AFTER
 MAKING ADJUSTMENTS.
  
  
 9. SATISFIED. MAKE THE FOLLOWING CORRECTIONS TO THE
 TREE DISPOSITION PLAN:
 ? PROVIDE THE TOTAL MITIGATION DUE FOR THE REMOVED
 PALMS.
 ? INCLUDE A CHART FOR TREE MITIGATION PROVIDED BASED ON
 THE PLANT LIST AND PROVIDE THE TOTAL FOR THE SQUARE
 FOOTAGE.
  
 10. SATISFIED. GROUP PLANT LIST AS TREES, PALMS, SHRUBS
 AND GROUNDCOVER /GRASS.
  
 11. SATISFIED. PROVIDE MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 12 FEET FOR
 ALL TREES.
  
 12. SATISFIED. ADD A COLUMN TO THE PLANT LIST TO
 IDENTIFY NATIVE SPECIES RATHER THAN INCLUDING IN THE
 SPECIES COLUMN.
  
 13. SATISFIED. ADD RELOCATED PALMS TO THE PLANT LIST
 AND COUNT THEM TOWARD THE REQUIRED TREES.
  
 14. SATISFIED. SHOW ALL WATER, SEWER AND DRAINAGE LINES
 ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, RESOLVE ANY CONFLICTS WITH
 LANDSCAPING.
  
 15. SATISFIED. PROVIDE LOCATIONS AND SCREENING FOR ALL
 ABOVE GROUND UTILITY VALVES, BACKFLOW PREVENTERS, A/C
 UNITS, AND FPL TRANSFORMERS.
  
 THE LIFT STATION AREA REQUIRES A HEDGE AROUND THE THREE
 NON-ACCESS SIDES.
 HEDGE MUST BE SHOWN AROUND THE LIFT STATION.
  
  
 16. SATISFIED. PROVIDE A PRELIMINARY IRRIGATION PLAN
 PER SECTION 94-442(B)(2)M.
  
 17. SATISFIED. PROVIDE LOCATIONS OF LIGHTING ON THE
 LANDSCAPE PLAN TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH LANDSCAPING.
  
 18. SATISFIED. SHOW LOCATIONS OF ANY ROOT BARRIERS
 REQUIRED TO PROTECT UTILITY LINES AND PROVIDE A ROOT
 BARRIER DETAIL.
  
 19. SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE FLORIDA FRIENDLY LANDSCAPE
 CHART AND THE MINIMUM 50 POINTS PER SECTION 94-443(G)
 BASED ON THE PLANT LIST AND ITEMS THAT QUALIFY.
  
 POINTS CANNOT BE TAKEN IN EACH CATEGORY FOR MORE THAN
 100%.
 DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR ADDITIONAL TREES IN VEHICULAR USE
 AREA.
 MULCH 5 POINTS SHOULD BE INCLUDED, AS THIS IS A CODE
 REQUIREMENT.
 CANNOT TAKE 51% ON TWO ITEMS IN THE SAME CATEGORY ON
 FLORIDA FRIENDLY POINTS.
 EXAMPLE: TREES- IF 51% TAKEN AS NATIVE FOR 15 POINTS,
 CAN ONLY TAKE 25-50% DROUGHT TOLERANT FOR 5 POINTS.
  
  
 20. 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 TOTAL PERCENTAGE OF ADDED PLANT MATERIAL
 THAT QUALIFIES.
  
 PERCENTAGE SHOWN ONLY IDENTIFIES NATIVE PLANTS,
 NON-NATIVE DROUGHT TOLERANT SPECIES MUST ALSO BE
 COUNTED.
 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 6/9/20:
 21. SATISFIED. CHANGE THE NOTE ON SHEET LP-6 TO CITY
 OF WEST PALM BEACH FOR REFERENCE TO CODE REQUIREMENTS.
 SHEET LP-6 WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RESUBMITTAL FOR
 REVIEW.
  
 22. SATISFIED. ADD REQUIREMENT FOR MULCH IN ALL
 PLANTING AREAS PER SECTION 94-446(1)D.
 THIS IS NOT CLEARLY STATED IN THE DETAILS. 2 INCHES
 DEPTH AND 3? FROM TREE TRUNKS DO NOT MEET THE
 REQUIREMENTS.
  
 23. SATISFIED. THERE IS AN AREA IN THE EASTERN BUFFER
 WITH OVERHEAD POWER LINES, AND THE LIVE OAK TREES WOULD
 CONFLICT WITH THEM. INDICATE IF THE POWER LINES WILL BE
 PLACED UNDERGROUND OR A PROPER SPECIES SPECIFIED.
  
 24. SATISFIED. ADDING CANOPY TREES WITHIN ALL PARKING
 DIVIDER STRIPS ON 30 FOOT CENTERS WOULD MEET THE INTENT
 OF THE CURRENT CODE AND WOULD NOT REQUIRE MODIFICATION
 TO THE PAVING OR CURBS.
  
 25. SATISFIED. STAFF SUGGESTS CLUSTERING THE RELOCATED
 SABAL PALMS IN THE TERMINAL ISLANDS WITH ONLY ONE
 EXISTING SABAL PALM AND PLACING CANOPY TREES IN THE
 TERMINAL ISLANDS AND DIVIDER ISLANDS AT THE NORTH END
 OF THE PARKING AREA THAT HAVE SUFFICIENT AREA TO
 SUPPORT A TREE.
  
 MORE CAN BE DONE IN THE SOUTHERN END OF THE EXISTING
 PARKING.
  
 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 7/29/20:
  
 26. SATISFIED. THE JAPANESE BLUEBERRY TREES CANNOT BE
 COUNTED AS TREES IF TRIMMED INTO CONE SHAPES, AS THAT
 IS PROHIBITED BY CODE. SUBSTITUTE TREES THAT CAN
 PROVIDE SHADE FOR ALL TERMINAL ISLAND TREES.
 27. SATISFIED. WAIVER FOR THE 5 FOOT INTERNAL LANDSCAPE
 BUFFER NEED TO BE QUANTIFIED. PROVIDE THE LINEAR
 FOOTAGE OF LANDSCAPE BUFFER PROVIDED ON EACH SIDE OF
 THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION LINE AND THE REQUIRED AND THE
 DIFFERENCE IS THE WAIVER REQUEST.
  
 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
 1. PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL OR RELOCATION OF ANY PALMS ON
 THE PROPERTY, A TREE ALTERATION PERMIT SHALL BE
 SUBMITTED, REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE DEVELOPMENT
 SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING DIVISION.
  
 2. THE APPLICANT, SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS SHALL BE
 RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PERMITTING AND INSTALLATION OF THE
 RIGHT OF WAY LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION APPROVED WITH
 THIS PETITION.
  
 3. THE APPLICANT, SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS SHALL BE
 RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THE ROAD RIGHT OF
 WAY LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION PERMITTED AND INSTALLED.
 THIS WILL BE THROUGH A SEPARATE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT
 WITH THE CITY TRANSFERRING THE MAINTENANCE FROM THE
 CITY TO THE PROPERTY OWNER.
  
Review Stop L LANDSCAPING
Rev No 3 Status F Date 07-29-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By rcaranci Date 07-29-2020 Time 15:17 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rcaranci Date 07-29-2020 Time 15:17 Sent To  
Notes
2020-07-29 15:18:20FROM: RAY CARANCI, SENIOR LANDSCAPE PLANNER
 561-822-1462
 JULY 29, 2020
 PROJECT: MINOR SUBDIVISION Z20010014
 1. SATISFIED. SUBDIVISION LINE WITHIN THE OCPD WILL
 REQUIRE A WAIVER TO THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS
 PER SECTION 94-443 (B) ALONG BOTH SIDES OF THE
 SUBDIVISION LINE.
  
 PROJECT: HOLIDAY INN OCPD Z20010013
 I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PETITION, AND
 PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:
  
 1. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. THE EXISTING SITE AND PARKING
 AREA LANDSCAPE NONCONFORMITIES MUST BE REDUCED AS PART
 OF THE OCPD REZONING. THERE IS A CERTIFICATE OF
 CONFORMITY ISSUED BY THE CITY FOR PORTIONS OF THE
 WESTERN BUFFER, AND STAFF WILL LOCATE THE INFORMATION
 TO CLARIFY THE EXTENT OF THE APPROVAL. THE SITE IS
 REVIEWED IN TOTAL FOR COMPLIANCE WITH LANDSCAPE CODE
 REQUIREMENTS AND AS INDIVIDUAL PARCELS. IF THE
 REQUIREMENTS CANNOT BE MET, THEN THE APPLICANT MUST
 REQUEST WAIVERS FROM THOSE REQUIREMENTS.
  
 EXISTING LANDSCAPE ISLANDS THAT WILL REMAIN FROM THE
 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLAN NEED TO BE INDICATED ON THE
 LANDSCAPE PLAN. IF A FURTHER REDUCTION IN REQUIRED
 PARKING IS ALLOWED, THE EXISTING LANDSCAPE ISLANDS
 COULD BE EXPANDED TO MEET CURRENT REQUIREMENTS.
  
 7/29 STAFF WILL ACCEPT SOME NONCONFORMITIES REMAINING
 AND BECOMING PART OF THE PLAN APPROVED FOR THE PD IF
 ALL EFFORTS ARE MADE TO CORRECT AS MANY AS POSSIBLE,
 AND OTHER AREAS OF THE PLAN ARE ENHANCED.
  
  
  
 2. SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE CALCULATIONS FOR MINIMUM
 NUMBER OF REQUIRED SHADE TREES, FLOWERING TREES AND
 SHRUBS PER SECTION 94-443(C)(2)B. BASED ON REQUIRED
 OPEN SPACE OF 40% OF THE ENTIRE OCPD, AND SHOW WHAT IS
 PROVIDED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT.
 REQUIRED FLOWERING TREES NOT SHOWN ON CHART SHEET LP-1.
  
  
 3. SATISFIED. SHOW THE REQUIRED 5 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER
 ADJACENT TO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND THE 5 FOOT LANDSCAPE
 BUFFER PLANTINGS ALONG ALL OTHER PROPERTY LINES ON THE
 LANDSCAPE PLAN WITH THE REQUIRED TREES OR NUMBER OF
 SUBSTITUTE PALMS PER CURRENT CODE REQUIREMENTS OF
 SECTION 94-443(B). SHOW ALL CALCULATIONS FOR THE
 REQUIRED TREES FOR BUFFER SEGMENTS ON A PERIMETER
 BUFFER REQUIREMENT CHART INCLUDING LINEAR FOOTAGE OF
 ALL PROPERTY LINE SEGMENTS. IF THE BUFFER CANNOT BE
 PROVIDED ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE, A WAIVER MUST BE
 REQUESTED, AND ALTERNATIVES PRESENTED TO PROVIDE
 COMPARABLE BUFFERING ON THE SITE. LIST EACH BUFFER
 SEGMENT AND SHOW THE REQUIRED AND PROVIDED TREES FOR
 EACH.
 THE NORTHEAST BUFFER WITHIN THE PROPERTY LINE HAS
 UNMAINTAINED FICUS BENJAMINA HEDGE THAT NEEDS TO BE
 REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH THE NEW BUFFER PLANTING. IF
 THE OFFSITE LANDSCAPING PREVIOUSLY APPROVED IS NOT
 BEING MAINTAINED, THIS MUST BE ADDRESSED.
  
  
 4. SATISFIED. SHOW EXISTING LANDSCAPING AND TREES ON
 ADJACENT PROPERTIES WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE
 PER SECTION 94-442(B)(2)Q.
  
 5. SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE LINEAR FEET OF PLANTINGS FOR
 BUILDINGS PER SECTION 94-443(E)(1).
  
  
 6. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE REQUIRED TREES IN
 TERMINAL LANDSCAPE ISLANDS, INTERIOR ISLANDS AND
 DIVIDER ISLANDS PER SECTION 94-443(C)(3).
 EXISTING LANDSCAPE ISLANDS THAT WILL REMAIN FROM THE
 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLAN NEED TO BE INDICATED ON THE
 LANDSCAPE PLAN.
 STAFF REQUESTS THAT SOME OF THE FEW REMAINING
 NONCONFORMING ISLANDS HAVE TREES ADDED AS REQUIRED.
 STAFF CAN MEET WITH THE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO CLARIFY.
  
 7. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE AN EXHIBIT SHOWING THE
 PARKING AREA SURFACE CALCULATIONS, PARKING SPACE AREAS
 AND LANDSCAPE AREAS PROVIDED TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE
 WITH SECTIONS 94-443 (C)(3) AND (4), FOLLOWING THE AREA
 CLASSIFICATIONS AS SHOWN IN FIGURE XIV-1.
 CORRECT SHEET LP-1A USING FIGURE XIV-1 AS A GUIDE, PLAN
 NEEDS TO SHOW 3 AREAS AND TOTALS:
 ? PARKING SPACES SHADED AS ONE AREA, SHOW TOTAL SPACES
 TIMES 10 SQ FT PER SPACE. PROVIDE TOTAL
 ? ALL OTHER PAVED AREAS SHADED DIFFERENTLY AND TOTAL
 SQUARE FOOTAGE. DIVIDE BY 100 AND MULTIPLY BY 4 SQ FT.
 PROVIDE TOTAL.
 ? TOTAL THESE 2 SQUARE FOOTAGE AMOUNTS FOR THE REQUIRED
 SQUARE FOOTAGE.
 ? SHOW ALL INTERIOR LANDSCAPE AREAS AS A DIFFERENT
 SHADE AND SHOW PROVIDED SQUARE FOOTAGE.
 GRAPHIC NEED TO BE CORRECTED. STAFF CAN MEET WITH
 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT TO WALK THROUGH THE REMAINING
 CORRECTIONS.
  
 8. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. SECTION 94-443(C)(3) REQUIRES
 THAT A MINIMUM OF 75 PERCENT OF ALL TREES THAT ARE
 REQUIRED TO BE PLANTED WITHIN THE INTERIOR OF AN OFF
 STREET PARKING AREA SHALL BE CATEGORY 1 SHADE TREES.
 SHOW THE PERCENTAGE OF CATEGORY 1 TREES PROVIDED FOR
 THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE AREAS.
 SHOW THE PERCENTAGE OF THE REQUIRED CATEGORY ONE TREES
 FOR NEW LANDSCAPE AREAS IN THE PARKING AREA AFTER
 MAKING ADJUSTMENTS.
  
  
 9. SATISFIED. MAKE THE FOLLOWING CORRECTIONS TO THE
 TREE DISPOSITION PLAN:
 ? PROVIDE THE TOTAL MITIGATION DUE FOR THE REMOVED
 PALMS.
 ? INCLUDE A CHART FOR TREE MITIGATION PROVIDED BASED ON
 THE PLANT LIST AND PROVIDE THE TOTAL FOR THE SQUARE
 FOOTAGE.
  
 10. SATISFIED. GROUP PLANT LIST AS TREES, PALMS, SHRUBS
 AND GROUNDCOVER /GRASS.
  
 11. SATISFIED. PROVIDE MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 12 FEET FOR
 ALL TREES.
  
 12. SATISFIED. ADD A COLUMN TO THE PLANT LIST TO
 IDENTIFY NATIVE SPECIES RATHER THAN INCLUDING IN THE
 SPECIES COLUMN.
  
 13. SATISFIED. ADD RELOCATED PALMS TO THE PLANT LIST
 AND COUNT THEM TOWARD THE REQUIRED TREES.
  
 14. SATISFIED. SHOW ALL WATER, SEWER AND DRAINAGE LINES
 ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, RESOLVE ANY CONFLICTS WITH
 LANDSCAPING.
  
 15. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE LOCATIONS AND
 SCREENING FOR ALL ABOVE GROUND UTILITY VALVES, BACKFLOW
 PREVENTERS, A/C UNITS, AND FPL TRANSFORMERS.
  
 THE LIFT STATION AREA REQUIRES A HEDGE AROUND THE THREE
 NON-ACCESS SIDES.
 HEDGE MUST BE SHOWN AROUND THE LIFT STATION.
  
  
 16. SATISFIED. PROVIDE A PRELIMINARY IRRIGATION PLAN
 PER SECTION 94-442(B)(2)M.
  
 17. SATISFIED. PROVIDE LOCATIONS OF LIGHTING ON THE
 LANDSCAPE PLAN TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH LANDSCAPING.
  
 18. SATISFIED. SHOW LOCATIONS OF ANY ROOT BARRIERS
 REQUIRED TO PROTECT UTILITY LINES AND PROVIDE A ROOT
 BARRIER DETAIL.
  
 19. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE FLORIDA FRIENDLY
 LANDSCAPE CHART AND THE MINIMUM 50 POINTS PER SECTION
 94-443(G) BASED ON THE PLANT LIST AND ITEMS THAT
 QUALIFY.
  
 POINTS CANNOT BE TAKEN IN EACH CATEGORY FOR MORE THAN
 100%.
 DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR ADDITIONAL TREES IN VEHICULAR USE
 AREA.
 MULCH 5 POINTS SHOULD BE INCLUDED, AS THIS IS A CODE
 REQUIREMENT.
 CANNOT TAKE 51% ON TWO ITEMS IN THE SAME CATEGORY ON
 FLORIDA FRIENDLY POINTS.
 EXAMPLE: TREES- IF 51% TAKEN AS NATIVE FOR 15 POINTS,
 CAN ONLY TAKE 25-50% DROUGHT TOLERANT FOR 5 POINTS.
  
  
 20. 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 TOTAL PERCENTAGE OF ADDED PLANT MATERIAL
 THAT QUALIFIES.
  
 PERCENTAGE SHOWN ONLY IDENTIFIES NATIVE PLANTS,
 NON-NATIVE DROUGHT TOLERANT SPECIES MUST ALSO BE
 COUNTED.
 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 6/9/20:
 21. NOT SATISFIED. CHANGE THE NOTE ON SHEET LP-6 TO
 CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH FOR REFERENCE TO CODE
 REQUIREMENTS.
 SHEET LP-6 WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE RESUBMITTAL FOR
 REVIEW.
  
 22. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. ADD REQUIREMENT FOR MULCH IN
 ALL PLANTING AREAS PER SECTION 94-446(1)D.
 THIS IS NOT CLEARLY STATED IN THE DETAILS. 2 INCHES
 DEPTH AND 3? FROM TREE TRUNKS DO NOT MEET THE
 REQUIREMENTS.
  
 23. SATISFIED. THERE IS AN AREA IN THE EASTERN BUFFER
 WITH OVERHEAD POWER LINES, AND THE LIVE OAK TREES WOULD
 CONFLICT WITH THEM. INDICATE IF THE POWER LINES WILL BE
 PLACED UNDERGROUND OR A PROPER SPECIES SPECIFIED.
  
 24. SATISFIED. ADDING CANOPY TREES WITHIN ALL PARKING
 DIVIDER STRIPS ON 30 FOOT CENTERS WOULD MEET THE INTENT
 OF THE CURRENT CODE AND WOULD NOT REQUIRE MODIFICATION
 TO THE PAVING OR CURBS.
  
 25. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. STAFF SUGGESTS CLUSTERING THE
 RELOCATED SABAL PALMS IN THE TERMINAL ISLANDS WITH ONLY
 ONE EXISTING SABAL PALM AND PLACING CANOPY TREES IN THE
 TERMINAL ISLANDS AND DIVIDER ISLANDS AT THE NORTH END
 OF THE PARKING AREA THAT HAVE SUFFICIENT AREA TO
 SUPPORT A TREE.
  
 MORE CAN BE DONE IN THE SOUTHERN END OF THE EXISTING
 PARKING.
  
 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 7/29/20:
  
 26. THE JAPANESE BLUEBERRY TREES CANNOT BE COUNTED AS
 TREES IF TRIMMED INTO CONE SHAPES, AS THAT IS
 PROHIBITED BY CODE. SUBSTITUTE TREES THAT CAN PROVIDE
 SHADE FOR ALL TERMINAL ISLAND TREES.
 27. WAIVER FOR THE 5 FOOT INTERNAL LANDSCAPE BUFFER
 NEED TO BE QUANTIFIED. PROVIDE THE LINEAR FOOTAGE OF
 LANDSCAPE BUFFER PROVIDED ON EACH SIDE OF THE PROPOSED
 SUBDIVISION LINE AND THE REQUIRED AND THE DIFFERENCE IS
 THE WAIVER REQUEST.
  
 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 06-09-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By rcaranci Date 06-09-2020 Time 14:30 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rcaranci Date 06-09-2020 Time 14:30 Sent To  
Notes
2020-06-09 14:30:54FROM: RAY CARANCI, SENIOR LANDSCAPE PLANNER
 561-822-1462
 JUNE 9, 2020
 PROJECT: MINOR SUBDIVISION Z20010014
 1. SATISFIED. SUBDIVISION LINE WITHIN THE OCPD WILL
 REQUIRE A WAIVER TO THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS
 PER SECTION 94-443 (B) ALONG BOTH SIDES OF THE
 SUBDIVISION LINE.
  
 PROJECT: HOLIDAY INN OCPD Z20010013
 I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PETITION, AND
 PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:
  
 1. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. THE EXISTING SITE AND PARKING
 AREA LANDSCAPE NONCONFORMITIES MUST BE REDUCED AS PART
 OF THE OCPD REZONING. THERE IS A CERTIFICATE OF
 CONFORMITY ISSUED BY THE CITY FOR PORTIONS OF THE
 WESTERN BUFFER, AND STAFF WILL LOCATE THE INFORMATION
 TO CLARIFY THE EXTENT OF THE APPROVAL. THE SITE IS
 REVIEWED IN TOTAL FOR COMPLIANCE WITH LANDSCAPE CODE
 REQUIREMENTS AND AS INDIVIDUAL PARCELS. IF THE
 REQUIREMENTS CANNOT BE MET, THEN THE APPLICANT MUST
 REQUEST WAIVERS FROM THOSE REQUIREMENTS.
  
 EXISTING LANDSCAPE ISLANDS THAT WILL REMAIN FROM THE
 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLAN NEED TO BE INDICATED ON THE
 LANDSCAPE PLAN. IF A FURTHER REDUCTION IN REQUIRED
 PARKING IS ALLOWED, THE EXISTING LANDSCAPE ISLANDS
 COULD BE EXPANDED TO MEET CURRENT REQUIREMENTS.
  
 2. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE CALCULATIONS FOR
 MINIMUM NUMBER OF REQUIRED SHADE TREES, FLOWERING TREES
 AND SHRUBS PER SECTION 94-443(C)(2)B. BASED ON REQUIRED
 OPEN SPACE OF 40% OF THE ENTIRE OCPD, AND SHOW WHAT IS
 PROVIDED TO MEET THE REQUIREMENT.
 REQUIRED FLOWERING TREES NOT SHOWN ON CHART SHEET LP-1.
  
  
 3. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. SHOW THE REQUIRED 5 FOOT
 LANDSCAPE BUFFER ADJACENT TO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND THE 5
 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER PLANTINGS ALONG ALL OTHER
 PROPERTY LINES ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN WITH THE REQUIRED
 TREES OR NUMBER OF SUBSTITUTE PALMS PER CURRENT CODE
 REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 94-443(B). SHOW ALL
 CALCULATIONS FOR THE REQUIRED TREES FOR BUFFER SEGMENTS
 ON A PERIMETER BUFFER REQUIREMENT CHART INCLUDING
 LINEAR FOOTAGE OF ALL PROPERTY LINE SEGMENTS. IF THE
 BUFFER CANNOT BE PROVIDED ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE, A
 WAIVER MUST BE REQUESTED, AND ALTERNATIVES PRESENTED TO
 PROVIDE COMPARABLE BUFFERING ON THE SITE. LIST EACH
 BUFFER SEGMENT AND SHOW THE REQUIRED AND PROVIDED TREES
 FOR EACH.
 THE NORTHEAST BUFFER WITHIN THE PROPERTY LINE HAS
 UNMAINTAINED FICUS BENJAMINA HEDGE THAT NEEDS TO BE
 REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH THE NEW BUFFER PLANTING. IF
 THE OFFSITE LANDSCAPING PREVIOUSLY APPROVED IS NOT
 BEING MAINTAINED, THIS MUST BE ADDRESSED.
  
  
 4. SATISFIED. SHOW EXISTING LANDSCAPING AND TREES ON
 ADJACENT PROPERTIES WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE
 PER SECTION 94-442(B)(2)Q.
  
 5. SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE LINEAR FEET OF PLANTINGS FOR
 BUILDINGS PER SECTION 94-443(E)(1).
  
  
 6. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE REQUIRED TREES IN
 TERMINAL LANDSCAPE ISLANDS, INTERIOR ISLANDS AND
 DIVIDER ISLANDS PER SECTION 94-443(C)(3).
 EXISTING LANDSCAPE ISLANDS THAT WILL REMAIN FROM THE
 PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLAN NEED TO BE INDICATED ON THE
 LANDSCAPE PLAN.
  
  
 7. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE AN EXHIBIT SHOWING THE
 PARKING AREA SURFACE CALCULATIONS, PARKING SPACE AREAS
 AND LANDSCAPE AREAS PROVIDED TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE
 WITH SECTIONS 94-443 (C)(3) AND (4), FOLLOWING THE AREA
 CLASSIFICATIONS AS SHOWN IN FIGURE XIV-1.
 CORRECT SHEET LP-1A USING FIGURE XIV-1 AS A GUIDE, PLAN
 NEEDS TO SHOW 3 AREAS AND TOTALS:
 ? PARKING SPACES SHADED AS ONE AREA, SHOW TOTAL SPACES
 TIMES 10 SQ FT PER SPACE. PROVIDE TOTAL
 ? ALL OTHER PAVED AREAS SHADED DIFFERENTLY AND TOTAL
 SQUARE FOOTAGE. DIVIDE BY 100 AND MULTIPLY BY 4 SQ FT.
 PROVIDE TOTAL.
 ? TOTAL THESE 2 SQUARE FOOTAGE AMOUNTS FOR THE REQUIRED
 SQUARE FOOTAGE.
 ? SHOW ALL INTERIOR LANDSCAPE AREAS AS A DIFFERENT
 SHADE AND SHOW PROVIDED SQUARE FOOTAGE.
  
 8. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. SECTION 94-443(C)(3) REQUIRES
 THAT A MINIMUM OF 75 PERCENT OF ALL TREES THAT ARE
 REQUIRED TO BE PLANTED WITHIN THE INTERIOR OF AN OFF
 STREET PARKING AREA SHALL BE CATEGORY 1 SHADE TREES.
 SHOW THE PERCENTAGE OF CATEGORY 1 TREES PROVIDED FOR
 THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE AREAS.
 SHOW THE PERCENTAGE OF THE REQUIRED CATEGORY ONE TREES
 FOR NEW LANDSCAPE AREAS IN THE PARKING AREA.
  
  
 9. SATISFIED. MAKE THE FOLLOWING CORRECTIONS TO THE
 TREE DISPOSITION PLAN:
 ? PROVIDE THE TOTAL MITIGATION DUE FOR THE REMOVED
 PALMS.
 ? INCLUDE A CHART FOR TREE MITIGATION PROVIDED BASED ON
 THE PLANT LIST AND PROVIDE THE TOTAL FOR THE SQUARE
 FOOTAGE.
  
 10. SATISFIED. GROUP PLANT LIST AS TREES, PALMS, SHRUBS
 AND GROUNDCOVER /GRASS.
  
 11. SATISFIED. PROVIDE MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 12 FEET FOR
 ALL TREES.
  
 12. SATISFIED. ADD A COLUMN TO THE PLANT LIST TO
 IDENTIFY NATIVE SPECIES RATHER THAN INCLUDING IN THE
 SPECIES COLUMN.
  
 13. SATISFIED. ADD RELOCATED PALMS TO THE PLANT LIST
 AND COUNT THEM TOWARD THE REQUIRED TREES.
  
 14. SATISFIED. SHOW ALL WATER, SEWER AND DRAINAGE LINES
 ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN, RESOLVE ANY CONFLICTS WITH
 LANDSCAPING.
  
 15. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE LOCATIONS AND
 SCREENING FOR ALL ABOVE GROUND UTILITY VALVES, BACKFLOW
 PREVENTERS, A/C UNITS, AND FPL TRANSFORMERS.
  
 THE LIFT STATION AREA REQUIRES A HEDGE AROUND THE THREE
 NON-ACCESS SIDES.
  
  
 16. SATISFIED. PROVIDE A PRELIMINARY IRRIGATION PLAN
 PER SECTION 94-442(B)(2)M.
  
 17. SATISFIED. PROVIDE LOCATIONS OF LIGHTING ON THE
 LANDSCAPE PLAN TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH LANDSCAPING.
  
 18. SATISFIED. SHOW LOCATIONS OF ANY ROOT BARRIERS
 REQUIRED TO PROTECT UTILITY LINES AND PROVIDE A ROOT
 BARRIER DETAIL.
  
 19. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE FLORIDA FRIENDLY
 LANDSCAPE CHART AND THE MINIMUM 50 POINTS PER SECTION
 94-443(G) BASED ON THE PLANT LIST AND ITEMS THAT
 QUALIFY.
  
 POINTS CANNOT BE TAKEN IN EACH CATEGORY FOR MORE THAN
 100%.
 DOES NOT QUALIFY FOR ADDITIONAL TREES IN VEHICULAR USE
 AREA.
 MULCH 5 POINTS SHOULD BE INCLUDED, AS THIS IS A CODE
 REQUIREMENT.
  
  
 20. PARTIALLY 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 TOTAL PERCENTAGE OF ADDED PLANT MATERIAL
 THAT QUALIFIES.
  
 PERCENTAGE SHOWN ONLY IDENTIFIES NATIVE PLANTS,
 NON-NATIVE DROUGHT TOLERANT SPECIES MUST ALSO BE
 COUNTED.
 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS 6/9/20:
 21. CHANGE THE NOTE ON SHEET LP-6 TO CITY OF WEST PALM
 BEACH FOR REFERENCE TO CODE REQUIREMENTS.
  
 22. ADD REQUIREMENT FOR MULCH IN ALL PLANTING AREAS PER
 SECTION 94-446(1)D.
  
 23. THERE IS AN AREA IN THE EASTERN BUFFER WITH
 OVERHEAD POWER LINES, AND THE LIVE OAK TREES WOULD
 CONFLICT WITH THEM. INDICATE IF THE POWER LINES WILL BE
 PLACED UNDERGROUND OR A PROPER SPECIES SPECIFIED.
  
 24. ADDING CANOPY TREES WITHIN ALL PARKING DIVIDER
 STRIPS ON 30 FOOT CENTERS WOULD MEET THE INTENT OF THE
 CURRENT CODE AND WOULD NOT REQUIRE MODIFICATION TO THE
 PAVING OR CURBS.
  
 25. STAFF SUGGESTS CLUSTERING THE RELOCATED SABAL PALMS
 IN THE TERMINAL ISLANDS WITH ONLY ONE EXISTING SABAL
 PALM AND PLACING CANOPY TREES IN THE TERMINAL ISLANDS
 AND DIVIDER ISLANDS AT THE NORTH END OF THE PARKING
 AREA THAT HAVE SUFFICIENT AREA TO SUPPORT A TREE.
  
  
 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
 1. PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL OR RELOCATION OF ANY TREES ON
 THE PROPERTY, A TREE ALTERATION PERMIT SHALL BE
 SUBMITTED, REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE DEVELOPMENT
 SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING DIVISION.
  
Review Stop L LANDSCAPING
Rev No 1 Status F Date 02-12-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By rcaranci Date 02-12-2020 Time 11:45 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rcaranci Date 02-12-2020 Time 11:45 Sent To  
Notes
2020-02-12 11:45:53FROM: RAY CARANCI, LANDSCAPE PLANNER 561-822-1462
 FEBRUARY 12, 2020
 PROJECT: MINOR SUBDIVISION Z20010014
 1. SUBDIVISION LINE WITHIN THE OCPD WILL REQUIRE A
 WAIVER TO THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER REQUIREMENTS PER SECTION
 94-443 (B) ALONG BOTH SIDES OF THE SUBDIVISION LINE.
  
 PROJECT: HOLIDAY INN OCPD Z20010013
 I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PETITION, AND
 PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:
  
 1. THE EXISTING SITE AND PARKING AREA LANDSCAPE
 NONCONFORMITIES MUST BE REDUCED AS PART OF THE OCPD
 REZONING. THERE IS A CERTIFICATE OF CONFORMITY ISSUED
 BY THE CITY FOR PORTIONS OF THE WESTERN BUFFER, AND
 STAFF WILL LOCATE THE INFORMATION TO CLARIFY THE EXTENT
 OF THE APPROVAL. THE SITE IS REVIEWED IN TOTAL FOR
 COMPLIANCE WITH LANDSCAPE CODE REQUIREMENTS AND AS
 INDIVIDUAL PARCELS. IF THE REQUIREMENTS CANNOT BE MET,
 THEN THE APPLICANT MUST REQUEST WAIVERS FROM THOSE
 REQUIREMENTS.
  
 2. PROVIDE THE CALCULATIONS FOR MINIMUM NUMBER OF
 REQUIRED SHADE TREES, FLOWERING TREES AND SHRUBS PER
 SECTION 94-443(C)(2)B. BASED ON REQUIRED OPEN SPACE OF
 40% OF THE ENTIRE OCPD, AND SHOW WHAT IS PROVIDED TO
 MEET THE REQUIREMENT.
  
 3. SHOW THE REQUIRED 5 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER ADJACENT
 TO THE RIGHT OF WAY AND THE 5 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER
 PLANTINGS ALONG ALL OTHER PROPERTY LINES ON THE
 LANDSCAPE PLAN WITH THE REQUIRED TREES OR NUMBER OF
 SUBSTITUTE PALMS PER CURRENT CODE REQUIREMENTS OF
 SECTION 94-443(B). SHOW ALL CALCULATIONS FOR THE
 REQUIRED TREES FOR BUFFER SEGMENTS ON A PERIMETER
 BUFFER REQUIREMENT CHART INCLUDING LINEAR FOOTAGE OF
 ALL PROPERTY LINE SEGMENTS. IF THE BUFFER CANNOT BE
 PROVIDED ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE, A WAIVER MUST BE
 REQUESTED, AND ALTERNATIVES PRESENTED TO PROVIDE
 COMPARABLE BUFFERING ON THE SITE. LIST EACH BUFFER
 SEGMENT AND SHOW THE REQUIRED AND PROVIDED TREES FOR
 EACH.
  
 4. SHOW EXISTING LANDSCAPING AND TREES ON ADJACENT
 PROPERTIES WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE PER
 SECTION 94-442(B)(2)Q.
  
 5. PROVIDE THE LINEAR FEET OF PLANTINGS FOR BUILDINGS
 PER SECTION 94-443(E)(1).
  
  
 6. PROVIDE THE REQUIRED TREES IN TERMINAL LANDSCAPE
 ISLANDS, INTERIOR ISLANDS AND DIVIDER ISLANDS PER
 SECTION 94-443(C)(3).
  
 7. PROVIDE AN EXHIBIT SHOWING THE PARKING AREA SURFACE
 CALCULATIONS, PARKING SPACE AREAS AND LANDSCAPE AREAS
 PROVIDED TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE WITH SECTIONS 94-443
 (C)(3) AND (4), FOLLOWING THE AREA CLASSIFICATIONS AS
 SHOWN IN FIGURE XIV-1.
  
 8. SECTION 94-443(C)(3) REQUIRES THAT A MINIMUM OF 75
 PERCENT OF ALL TREES THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE PLANTED
 WITHIN THE INTERIOR OF AN OFF STREET PARKING AREA SHALL
 BE CATEGORY 1 SHADE TREES. SHOW THE PERCENTAGE OF
 CATEGORY 1 TREES PROVIDED FOR THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE
 AREAS.
  
 9. MAKE THE FOLLOWING CORRECTIONS TO THE TREE
 DISPOSITION PLAN:
 ? PROVIDE THE TOTAL MITIGATION DUE FOR THE REMOVED
 PALMS.
 ? INCLUDE A CHART FOR TREE MITIGATION PROVIDED BASED ON
 THE PLANT LIST AND PROVIDE THE TOTAL FOR THE SQUARE
 FOOTAGE.
  
 10. GROUP PLANT LIST AS TREES, PALMS, SHRUBS AND
 GROUNDCOVER /GRASS.
  
 11. PROVIDE MINIMUM HEIGHT OF 12 FEET FOR ALL TREES.
  
 12. ADD A COLUMN TO THE PLANT LIST TO IDENTIFY NATIVE
 SPECIES RATHER THAN INCLUDING IN THE SPECIES COLUMN.
  
 13. ADD RELOCATED PALMS TO THE PLANT LIST AND COUNT
 THEM TOWARD THE REQUIRED TREES.
  
 14. SHOW ALL WATER, SEWER AND DRAINAGE LINES ON THE
 LANDSCAPE PLAN, RESOLVE ANY CONFLICTS WITH LANDSCAPING.
  
 15. PROVIDE LOCATIONS AND SCREENING FOR ALL ABOVE
 GROUND UTILITY VALVES, BACKFLOW PREVENTERS, A/C UNITS,
 AND FPL TRANSFORMERS.
  
 16. PROVIDE A PRELIMINARY IRRIGATION PLAN PER SECTION
 94-442(B)(2)M.
  
 17. PROVIDE LOCATIONS OF LIGHTING ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN
 TO AVOID CONFLICTS WITH LANDSCAPING.
  
  
 18. SHOW LOCATIONS OF ANY ROOT BARRIERS REQUIRED TO
 PROTECT UTILITY LINES AND PROVIDE A ROOT BARRIER
 DETAIL.
  
 19. PROVIDE THE FLORIDA FRIENDLY LANDSCAPE CHART AND
 THE MINIMUM 50 POINTS PER SECTION 94-443(G) BASED ON
 THE PLANT LIST AND ITEMS THAT QUALIFY.
  
 20. 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 TOTAL PERCENTAGE OF ADDED PLANT MATERIAL
 THAT QUALIFIES.
  
 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
 1. PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL OR RELOCATION OF ANY TREES ON
 THE PROPERTY, A TREE ALTERATION PERMIT SHALL BE
 SUBMITTED, REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE DEVELOPMENT
 SERVICES DEPARTMENT, PLANNING DIVISION.
  
Review Stop PARK PARKING
Rev No 1 Status   Date   Cont ID  
Sent By   Date   Time   Rev Time  
Received By   Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
***NONE***
Review Stop POLICE POLICE
Rev No 1 Status   Date   Cont ID  
Sent By   Date   Time   Rev Time  
Received By   Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
***NONE***
Review Stop PW PUBLIC WORKS
Rev No 3 Status P Date 07-17-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By   Date 07-17-2020 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By   Date 07-17-2020 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-07-23 10:39:03DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE DETAILS PROVIDED ON SHEET C-13, IS
 ACCEPTABLE.
  
 NO FURTHER COMMENTS FORM PUBLIC WORKS.
  
 MATT HEJAZI
 DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS
 [email protected]
Review Stop PW PUBLIC WORKS
Rev No 2 Status F Date 06-01-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By   Date 06-01-2020 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By   Date 06-01-2020 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-06-01 14:26:43 
 PLEASE PROVDIDE REVISED SITE PLAN DETAILS, SPD-2, TO
 REFLECT THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THE LATEST REVISION OF
 CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH GENERAL CONSTRUCTION-GARBAGE
 ENCLOSURE STANDARD, CG-7 (I.E. GATE OPENING, STOP BAR,
 ETC.)
  
  
 MATT HEJAZI
 DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS
 [email protected]
 561-822-2045
  
Review Stop PW PUBLIC WORKS
Rev No 1 Status F Date 02-11-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By   Date 02-11-2020 Time   Rev Time  
Received By   Date 02-11-2020 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-02-11 11:23:301- PLEASE PROVIDE LOS (LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS) TO
 REFLECT THE SOLID WASTE VOLUME PRODUCED ALONG WITH THE
 SIZE AND TYPE OF THE CONTAINER (I.E.
 DUMPSTER/COMPACTOR) THAT WILL BE UTILIZED THAT WILL BE
 UTILIZED FOR THE SANITATION SERVICE.
 2- WHERE VISIBLE TO THE PUBLIC, COMMERCIAL CONTAINERS
 SHALL BE STORED IN A CITY APPROVED ENCLOSURE
 OBSTRUCTING THE CONTAINERS VIEW FROM PERSONS USING THE
 SIDEWALK, STREET, OR THE COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENT'S
 FACILITIES, EXCEPT WHEN ENCLOSURES ARE PROHIBITED, SUCH
 AS IN DOWNTOWN ALLEYS, OR OTHERWISE APPROVED BY THE
 CITY. THIS REQUIREMENT INDICATED IN THE CODE OF
 ORDINANCES, SECTION 74-34-A-2-D.
 3- FOR A FREESTANDING SITE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE, THE
 ENCLOSURE SHALL COMPLY WITH THE LATEST REVISION OF CITY
 OF WEST PALM BEACH GENERAL CONSTRUCTION-GARBAGE
 ENCLOSURE STANDARD, CG-8.
 4- PLEASE PROVIDE AUTO TURN FOR THE SANITATION SERVICE,
 FRONT LOADER TRUCK WITH THE FOLLOWING SPECS:
 - TRUCK LENGTH: 35 FT
 - TRUCK WIDTH: 11 FT
 - TURNING RADIUS:
 - SAE TURNING RADIUS: 32.5 FT
 - CURB-TO-CURB DIAMETER: 74 FT
 - WALL-TO-WALL DIAMETER: 86.3 FT
  
  
 DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS
 MATT HEJAZI
 [email protected]
 561-822-2045
Review Stop STORM STORMWATER
Rev No 1 Status P Date 10-27-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By tward Date 10-27-2020 Time 15:06 Rev Time 0.00
Received By tward Date 10-27-2020 Time 15:07 Sent To  
Notes
2020-10-27 15:07:05EARLIER COMMENTS WERE POSTED TO Z20010014.
Review Stop SURVEY SURVEYING
Rev No 4 Status P Date 09-17-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By vnoel Date 09-17-2020 Time 11:01 Rev Time 0.00
Received By vnoel Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-09-17 11:03:08SEE Z20010014
Review Stop SURVEY SURVEYING
Rev No 3 Status F Date 08-04-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By vnoel Date 08-04-2020 Time 08:12 Rev Time 0.00
Received By vnoel Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-08-04 08:16:461. NO RESPONSE TO COMMENTS #4 AND 5 FROM CRAVEN
 THOMPSON.
 2. 20' X 20' EASEMENT TOO LARGE AND ENCOMPASSES
 BACKFLOWS. SHOW REVISED PROPOSED EASEMENT ON
 ENGINEERING PLANS.
 3. PLAT REVIEW LETTER WILL BE ISSUED BY 8/6.
Review Stop SURVEY SURVEYING
Rev No 2 Status F Date 06-08-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By vnoel Date 06-08-2020 Time 12:12 Rev Time 0.00
Received By vnoel Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-06-08 12:22:371. A SEPARATE PLAT REVIEW LETTER WILL BE ISSUED.
 2. AS THE CITY IS NOT PARTY TO THE CROSS
 ACCESS/UTILITY/DRAINAGE AGREEMENT, OUR LAW DEPT. MAY
 NOT REVIEW.
 3. CROSS-ACCESS EASEMENT ON PLAT IS NOT NEEDED IF
 AGREEMENT IS PROVIDED.
 4. ACCESS EASEMENT TO LIFT STATION NEEDS ALSO TO BE A
 UTILITY EASEMENT.
 5. WHAT CITY UTILITIES ARE IN THE PROPOSED 10 FOOT UE
 ALONG THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE?
 6. THE 20' X 20' UE NEEDS ONLY TO INCLUDE THE METER AS
 THE BACK-FLOWS ARE PRIVATE.
Review Stop SURVEY SURVEYING
Rev No 1 Status F Date 02-07-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By vnoel Date 02-07-2020 Time 09:40 Rev Time  
Received By vnoel Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-02-07 10:03:111. PLAT OF ENTIRE SITE WILL BE REQUIRED. NONE WAS
 PROVIDED WITH APPLICATION.
 2. CROSS ACCESS, UTILITY, DRAINAGE AGREEMENT WILL BE
 REQUIRED.
 3. IS THE ACCESS ROAD FDOT OR COUNTY?
 4. ADDITIONAL UTILITY EASEMENT WILL BE REQUIRED FROM
 WEST END OF ACCESS ROAD TO CITY'S LIFT STATION
 EASEMENT.
 5. SHOW CONVERSION TO NGVD-29 ON SURVEY AND ENG. PLANS.
  
Review Stop TRAFFIC TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
Rev No 4 Status P Date 10-30-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By   Date 10-30-2020 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By   Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-10-30 14:18:04ALL CONDITIONS MET. NO FURTHER COMMENTS.
  
 VALERIO ORICCHIO
 CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER
 561-494-1092
 [email protected]
  
Review Stop TRAFFIC TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
Rev No 3 Status P Date 09-25-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By   Date 09-29-2020 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By   Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-09-25 14:12:34TRAFFIC STATEMENT COMMENTS:
 NO FURTHER COMMENTS
  
 SITE PLAN COMMENTS:
 PASSED WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
 1. REVISE CIVIL PLAN SET, SHEET C-20 PER PRIOR
 COMMENTS. AUTOTURN ANALYSIS SHOWS VEHICLE ENCROACHMENT
 WITH ONE OF THE PARKING ISLANDS
 3. REVISE SITE PLANS TO INCORPORATE A HALF PORKCHOP
 ISLAND AT THE DRIVEWAY ON BELVEDERE ROAD, SO TO
 CHANNELIZE AND FORBID VEHICLES' LEFT-TURN MOVEMENTS OUT
 OF THE PROPERTY NOT ONLY BY PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND
 SIGNAGE, BUT ALSO BY DESIGN.
  
  
 VALERIO ORICCHIO
 CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER
 561-494-1092
 [email protected]
  
Review Stop TRAFFIC TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
Rev No 2 Status F Date 07-17-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By   Date 07-17-2020 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By   Date 07-16-2020 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-07-17 10:53:52TRAFFIC STATEMENT COMMENTS:
 1. PROVIDE COMPLIMENTARY HOTEL SHUTTLE SERVICES TO THE
 AIRPORT AND DOWNTOWN WEST PALM BEACH TO HOTEL GUESTS AS
 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) STRATEGY TO BE
 CONSISTENT WITH CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND TO
 MITIGATE FOR PARKING REDUCTION
  
 SITE PLAN COMMENTS:
 1. CIVIL PLAN SET, SHEET C-20 WAS NOT PROPERLY REVISED.
 AUTOTURN ANALYSIS STILL SHOWS VEHICLE ENCROACHMENT WITH
 ONE OF THE PARKING ISLANDS ON THE NORTH-WEST SIDE
 2. INSTALL A HALF PORKCHOP ISLAND AT THE DRIVEWAY ON
 BELVEDERE ROAD, SO TO CHANNELIZE AND FORBID VEHICLES'
 LEFT-TURN MOVEMENTS OUT OF THE PROPERTY NOT ONLY BY
 PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND SIGNAGE, BUT ALSO BY DESIGN
  
  
 VALERIO ORICCHIO
 CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER
 561-494-1092
 [email protected]
  
Review Stop TRAFFIC TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
Rev No 1 Status F Date   Cont ID  
Sent By   Date 02-12-2020 Time   Rev Time  
Received By   Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-02-12 09:34:36TRAFFIC STATEMENT COMMENTS:
 1. TRAFFIC STATEMENT SHOULD BE SIGNED AND SEALED.
 2. THE DRIVEWAY VOLUMES SHOULD INCLUDE TRIPS FROM THE
 STORAGE FACILITY EAST OF THE SITE.
 3. THE DRIVEWAY IS EXPECTED TO OPERATE WITH LOS F IN
 THE PM PEAK HOUR WITH DELAY OVER 200 SECONDS PER
 VEHICLE. PLEASE RESTRICT LEFT-OUT ACCESS AND ANALYZE
 THE SCENARIO ASSUMING NO LEFT-OUT FROM THE DRIVEWAY
 WITH VEHICLES MAKING U-TURN AT BELVEDERE ROAD/MERCER
 AVENUE. PLEASE ALSO ANALYZE BELVEDERE ROAD/MERCER
 AVENUE.
 4. PLEASE ALSO EVALUATE SIGNALIZATION AT THE
 INTERSECTION WITH THE DRIVEWAY.
 5. PROVIDE COMPLIMENTARY HOTEL SHUTTLE SERVICES TO THE
 AIRPORT AND DOWNTOWN WEST PALM BEACH TO HOTEL GUESTS AS
 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) STRATEGY TO BE
 CONSISTENT WITH CITY?S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND TO
 MITIGATE FOR PARKING REDUCTION.
 SITE PLAN COMMENTS:
 6. INCLUDE BICYCLE PARKING SPACES IN THE SITE DATA
 TABLE AND INDICATE LOCATIONS OF THE REQUIRED BICYCLE
 PARKING.
 7. INTERIOR ISLANDS ARE REQUIRED EVERY 10 PARKING
 SPACES PER CITY CODE SECTION 94-443.
 8. PROVIDE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS TO BELVEDERE ROAD.
 9. PROVIDE AUTOTURN PATH FOR PASSENGER CARS MAKING
 U-TURN INTO THE PORTE COCHERE.
 10. PROVIDE WIDER SIDEWALK ON BELVEDERE ROAD ALONG THE
 SITE FRONTAGE.
  
  
 SHING TSOI
 CITY IN-HOUSE TRAFFIC CONSULTANT
 561-494-1141
 [email protected]
 (IN-HOUSE ON TUESDAYS AND WEDNESDAYS)
  
Review Stop Z ZONING
Rev No 4 Status P Date 10-06-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By llouie Date 10-06-2020 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By llouie Date 10-06-2020 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-10-06 15:44:31CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
  
 1.) PRIOR TO SCHEDULING THE PETITION FOR CITY
 COMMISSION:
  
 A) ALL OUTSTANDING CIVIL PLAN SET COMMENTS SHALL BE
 ADDRESSED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE ENGINEERING
 SERVICES AND PUBLIC UTILITIES DEPARTMENTS.
  
 B) THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE A CCTV VIDEO OF THE
 EXISTING SANTARY SEWER ALONG THE ENTIRE PROJECT
 FRONTAGE TO THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT FOR
 REVIEW AND APPROVAL.
  
 C) SHEET C-20 OF THE CIVIL PLAN SET SHALL BE REVISED TO
 ELIMINATE VEHICLE ENCROACHMENT WITH ONE OF THE PARKING
 ISLANDS.
  
 D) THE SITE PLAN SHALL BE REVISED TO INCORPORATE A HALF
 PORKCHOP ISLAND AT THE DRIVEWAY ON BELVEDERE ROAD, SO
 TO CHANNELIZE AND FORBID VEHICLE LEFT-TURN MOVEMENTS
 OUT OF THE PROPERTY NOT ONLY BY PAVEMENT MARKINGS AND
 SIGNAGE, BUT ALSO BY DESIGN.
  
  
 2.) PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF
 OCCUPANCY FOR THE NEW HOTEL BUILDING, THE APPLICANT
 SHALL EXECUTE A CROSS-ACCESS AGREEEMENT BETWEEN PARCELS
 A AND B FOR PARKING, UTILITIES AND DRAINAGE. THE
 CROSS-ACCESS AGREEMENT SHALL BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED
 BY THE CITY.
  
 3.) PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF
 OCCUPANCY FOR THE NEW HOTEL BUILDING, THE APPLICANT,
 SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
 PERMITTING AND INSTALLATION OF THE STREET TREES AND
 RIGHT-OF-WAY LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION APPROVED BY
 THIS PETITION.
  
 4.) THE APPLICANT, SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS SHALL BE
 RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THE ROAD
 RIGHT-OF-WAY LANDSCAPING AND IRRIGATION PERMITTED AND
 INSTALLED. A SEPARATE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE
 CITY, TRANSFERRING THE MAINTENANCE OF THE LANDSCAPING
 AND IRRIGATION WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE PROPERTY
 OWNER SHALL BE EXECUTED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF FINAL
 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR THE NEW HOTEL BUILDING.
  
 5.) PRIOR TO THE REMOVAL OR RELOCATION OF ANY
 TREES/PALMS ON THE PROPERTY, A TREE ALTERATION PERMIT
 SHALL BE SUBMITTED, REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE
 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT ? PLANNING DIVISION.
  
 6.) ALL PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS, INCLUDING NEW
 CONSTRUCTION, OR THE RENOVATION OR IMPROVEMENT OF AN
 EXISTING BUILDING, WHERE THE TOTAL CONSTRUCTION COSTS
 ARE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN $750,000.00 IS SUBJECT TO
 THE ART IN PUBLIC PLACES REQUIREMENTS OF CHAPTER 78,
 ARTICLE V, OF THE CITY?S CODE OF ORDINANCES.
  
  
Review Stop Z ZONING
Rev No 3 Status F Date 07-29-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By llouie Date 07-29-2020 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By llouie Date 07-29-2020 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-07-29 14:56:15** STAFF IS REQUESTING THAT THE APPLICANT SET UP A
 PHONE/TELECONFERENCE WITH CITY STAFF TO DISCUSS THE
 LATEST COMMENTS. THERE SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN A SETBACK IN
 ADDRESSING STAFF'S COMMENTS AND CONCERNS FROM THE LAST
 SUBMITTAL. **
  
  
 GENERAL COMMENTS:
  
 1.) A DRAFT CROSS-ACCESS AGREEMENT SHALL BE SUBMITTED
 TO STAFF FOR REVIEW PRIOR TO SCHEDULING THE PROJECT FOR
 THE PUBLIC HEARING STAGE. THE CROSS-ACCESS AGREEMENT
 SHALL COVER (BUT WILL NOT BE LIMITED TO) MAINTENANCE OF
 THE PARKING AREA, PROVISION FOR SHARED LOADING ZONE,
 ETC.
  
 2.) AS DISCUSSED WITH THE APPLICANT'S AGENTS, THERE IS
 LITIGATION LANGUAGE PROVIDED IN THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION
 OF THE PROPERTY. IT WAS REQUESTED THAT THE AGENTS
 RESOLVE THE MATTER SO THAT THE PENDING LITIGATION
 LANGUAGE CAN BE REMOVED FROM THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION.
 THIS WAS NOT ADDRESSED, AS THE LITIGATION LANGUAGE IS
 STILL REFERENCED IN THE SURVEY. THIS MAY IMPACT THE
 SUBDIVISION OF THE PROPERTY.
  
 3.) STAFF HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH THE AGENTS ON
 ELIMINATING THE PARK N' FLY SPACES TO SUPPORT THE
 PARKING WAIVER REQUEST. HOWEVER, THE PLANS AND
 JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT STILL REFERENCE THE PARK N' FLY
 SPACES AS PART OF THE PROJECT AND THAT THERE IS A
 RESTRICTIVE COVENANT FOR THESE SPACES (NO EVIDENCE).
 STAFF IS REQUESTING CLARIFICATION ON THE MATTER. PLEASE
 NOTE THAT IT IS DIFFICULT FOR STAFF TO SUPPORT THE
 REQUEST FOR A PARKING WAIVER WHEN PARK N' FLY SPACES
 (WHICH COULD BE COUNTED TOWARDS THE REQUIRED PARKING
 NEEDS OF THE PROJECT) IS REMOVED FROM THE REQUIRED
 PARKING CALCULATIONS SO THAT THE SPACES CAN BE LEASED
 TO AN OUTSIDE PARTY FOR PROFIT.
  
 4.) THERE STILL SEEMS TO BE SOME CONFUSION WITH THE
 NUMBER OF ROOMS IN THE EXISTING HOTEL (I.E. 200 ROOMS
 VS. 199 ROOMS). STAFF HAS DOCUMENTATION THAT THERE ARE
 200 ROOMS IN THE EXISTING HOTEL, AND INFORMATION
 PROVIDED IN THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT, PARKING STUDY,
 SITE PLAN, ETC., SEEMS TO BE INCONSISTENT (I.E.
 INTERCHANGE BETWEEN 200 ROOMS AND 199 ROOMS IN THE
 SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS). AT THIS POINT, STAFF IS
 REQUESTING DOCUMENTATION THAT THE NUMBER OF ROOMS HAD
 BEEN REDUCED FROM 200 ROOMS TO 199 ROOMS; ALSO, PLEASE
 ENSURE THE INFORMATION ON THE NUMBER OF ROOMS IS
 CORRECTED IN ALL PLANS AND DOCUMENTS FOR CONSISTENCY.
 [6/11/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: NOT ADDRESSED. APPLICANT HAS
 NOT PROVIDED ANY DOCUMENTATION THAT SHOWS THE TRUE ROOM
 COUNT FOR THE EXISTING HOTEL, AND THE NUMBERS HAVE NOT
 BEEN CLARIFIED IN ALL DOCUMENTS (I.E. JUSTIFICATION
 STATEMENT)]
  
 5.) IN ADDITION TO THE COMMENTS PROVIDED ABOVE, PLEASE
 CLARIFY AND/OR CORRECT THE FOLLOWING IN THE
 JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT: A) THERE'S A STATEMENT THAT
 SUGGESTS THAT THERE IS MORE THAN ONE (1) RESTAURANT FOR
 THE PROJECT. PLEASE CLARIFY. B) CLARIFICATION IS NEEDED
 ON THE DINING TERRACE. WHAT USE DOES IT SERVE WITHIN
 THE PROJECT, AS THERE DOES NOT SEEM TO BE A RESTAURANT
 PROPOSED ON PARCEL B. C) THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS NOT
 IN CONFORMANCE WITH ALL APPLICABLE PORTIONS OF THE
 ZLDRS. OTHERWISE, THERE WOULD BE NO NEED FOR WAIVERS.
 D) MITIGATION MEASURES MUST BE PROVIDED FOR ALL
 REQUESTED WAIVERS. E.) LOADING ZONE WAIVER MISSING FROM
 THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT .
  
 6.) PLEASE CHECK THE CALCULATIONS PROVIDED IN THE
 REDUCED PARKING STATEMENT DOCUMENT AND IN THE SITE DATA
 TABULARS. THE NUMBERS PROVIDED IN THE DOCUMENT DOES NOT
 MATCH THE NUMBERS PROVIDED IN THE PLANS. PLEASE ADDRESS
 FOR CONSISTENCY.
  
 7.) STAFF HAD DISCUSSED WITH THE AGENT WRITING INTO THE
 JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT TO ALLOW HOTELS/MOTELS BY RIGHT
 WITHIN THE PROPOSED PD. THIS LANGUAGE SEEMS TO BE
 MISSING FROM THE JUSTIFICATION. IT IS IMPERATIVE THAT
 THIS LANGUAGE IS INCLUDED IN THE REQUEST, AS
 HOTELS/MOTELS ARE PERMITTED IN THE OC ZONING DISTRICT
 AS A PXR. ALSO, FOR FUTURE REDEVELOPMENT (IF
 NECESSARY), A LIST OF PERMITTED USES WITHIN THE
 PROPOSED PD SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED INTO THE DESIGN
 GUIDELINES AT THIS TIME.
  
 8.) ANY CHANGES TO ANY INFORMATION AND/OR CALCULATIONS
 ON THE PLAN SHEET(S) SHALL BE MADE CONSISTENT WITH ALL
 OTHER SHEETS IN THE PLAN SET. [6/11/2020 REPEAT
 COMMENT: INCONSISTENCIES DETECTED IN THE PARCEL LINES
 AND BUILDING SETBACKS, NUMBER OF CROSSWALKS, ETC.]
  
 9.) STAFF HAD DISCUSSED MINIMIZING THE NUMBER OF PLAN
 SHEETS WITHIN THE PLAN SET WITH THE AGENT, AS SOME OF
 THE PLAN SHEETS ARE UNNECESSARY AND EXCESSIVE (I.E. THE
 OVERALL SITE PLAN SHOULD DEPICT THE SITE LAYOUT FOR
 BOTH PARCELS A AND B - NO HATCHED AREAS; SEPARATE SITE
 PLANS FOR PARCEL A AND PARCEL B, CONSOLIDATE ALL
 REQUIRED INFORMATION AND DIMENSION ON ONE SHEET, ETC.).
  
 10.) THERE SEEMS TO BE A LACK OF UNDERSTANDING TO
 FORMULATING DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR THE PROPOSED PLANNED
 DEVELOPMENT. STAFF IS REQUESTING A TELECONFERENCE WITH
 THE AGENT(S)/ARCHITECT(S) TO DISCUSS THE
 APPROACH/PURPOSE OF DESIGN GUIDELINES.
  
 11.) AFTER SOME DISCUSSION WITH THE P&Z ADMINISTRATOR,
 IT WAS DETERMINED THAT EXISTING NON-CONFORMITIES (I.E.
 FRONT SETBACK AND LANDSCAPE ISLAND, LOADING ZONES) ARE
 NOT REQUIRED FOR THE EXISTING STRUCTURES ON PARCEL A.
 ANY NEWLY CREATED NON-CONFORMITIES (I.E. SIDE SETBACKS,
 INTERIOR BUFFERS, ETC.) WILL NEED WAIVERS.
  
  
 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (CRITERIA) COMMENTS:
  
 1.) THE ORIENTATION OF THE BUILDINGS, ARCHITECTURAL
 STYLE/ELEMENTS (EXISTING AND PROPOSED) AND SITE DESIGN
 LACKS ENGAGEMENT WITH THE STREET AND CONNECTIVITY WITH
 ADJACENT/NEARBY USES, DESIRED ELEMENTS OF A PLANNED
 DEVELOPMENT. MORE EFFORT IS NEEDED TO ADDRESS THIS
 DESIGN DEFICIENCY. [2/10/2020 AND 6/11/2020 REPEAT
 COMMENT: STAFF BELIEVES MORE EFFORT COULD BE MADE TO
 ADDRESSING THE SOUTH END OF THE PROPOSED PD, WHICH IS
 MOST VISIBLE FROM THE STREET VIEW (I.E. WATER FEATURE,
 ADDITIONAL AND COLORFUL LANDSCAPING, ETC.). LATEST
 MODIFICATIONS ARE BLAND WITH VERY LITTLE IMPROVEMENT.
 IT IS STRONGLY ADVISED THAT THE AGENT/ARCHITECT SET UP
 A TELECONFERENCE TO DISCUSS ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS
 WITH STAFF TO SATISFY THE CRITERIA.]
  
  
 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS (SHEET MP-1):
  
 1.) THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE IS NOT SHOWN CLEARLY IN THE
 PLAN. PROPERTY LINES IN THE PLAN SHOULD BE CLEARLY
 DEFINED, WITH BUILDING/STRUCTURAL SETBACKS CLEARLY
 SHOWN.
  
 2.) PARCEL LINE BETWEEN PARCEL A AND PARCEL B IS
 INCONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER PLAN SHEETS AND NEEDS TO BE
 CLARIFIED TO MATCH ALL PLAN SHEETS AND WITH THE
 PROPOSED PLAT DOCUMENT. THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN
 SEEMS TO IMPLY THAT THE BUILDING (EXISTING HOTEL)
 SETBACK FOR PARCEL A ALONG THE EAST PROPERTY LINE IS
 5.17 FT.; HOWEVER, IT IS ILLUSTRATED IN OTHER PLAN
 SHEETS THAT THE BUILDING SETBACK OF THE EXISTING HOTEL
 TO THE PROPOSED EAST PARCEL PROPERTY LINE IS 0 FT.
  
 3.) ACCORDING TO THE PLAN, THE GFA OF PARCEL A CAN BE
 INCREASED UP TO 158,981 SQ. FT. (DIFFERENCE OF 22,321
 SQ. FT. FROM THE EXISTING PARCEL A HOTEL) AND THE GFA
 OF PARCEL B CAN BE INCREASED UP TO 101,063 SQ. FT.
 (DIFFERENCE OF 40,429 SQ. FT. FROM THE PROPOSED PARCEL
 B HOTEL). THIS IMPLIES THAT 62,750 SQ. FT. MAY BE ADDED
 TO THE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. PLEASE PROVIDE AN
 EXPLANATION TO HOW THE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CAN
 ACCOMMODATE THE ADDITIONAL BUILDING AND HOW THE
 ADDITIONAL BUILDING WILL MAINTAIN CONSISTENCY WITH THE
 ZLDRS SINCE THE SITE IS ALREADY SHORT ON THE MINIMUM
 PARKING REQUIREMENTS. THE BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGES AND
 ROOM NUMBERS SHOULD MATCH WHAT IS EXISTING AND
 PROPOSED. [6/11/2020 MODIFIED/REPEAT COMMENT: PLEASE
 SEE MODIFIED COMMENT ABOVE.]
  
 4.) INCLUDE INFORMATION ON THE FUTURE LAND USE (FLU)
 DESIGNATION, ZONING DESIGNATION AND EXISTING USES FOR
 THE ADJACENT USES TO THE NORTH, SOUTH, EAST AND WEST TO
 DEMONSTRATE COMPATIBILITY BETWEEN THE EXISTING USES AND
 THE PROPOSED USES WITHIN THE CPD. [2/10/2020 AND
 6/11/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: ZONING INFORMATION IS STILL
 MISSING FROM THE PLAN; SOME EXISTING USES ARE INCORRECT
 AND MUST BE CORRECTED FOR CONSISTENCY.]
  
 5.) PARCEL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE MASTER
 DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE DIMENSIONS SHALL BE CONSISTENT
 WITH THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE PROPOSED PLAT AND
 SURVEY FOR CONSISTENCY. [6/11/2020 REPEAT COMMENT:
 PARCEL DIMENSIONS IN THE PLAT AND IN THE PLAN ARE STILL
 INCONSISTENT WITH THE PARCEL DIMENSIONS PROVIDED IN THE
 SURVEY. PLEASE CLARIFY AND/OR ADDRESS FOR CONSISTENCY.]
  
 6.) THE REAR BUILDING SETBACK ON PARCEL A IS
 INCORRECTLY MEASURED (IT IS NOT 165.8 FT.). PLEASE
 CORRECT. THE REAR SETBACK IS THE SHORTEST DISTANCE FROM
 THE REAR OF THE BUILDING TO THE PROPERTY LINE).
  
 7.) BUILDING SETBACKS FOR THE PROPOSED HOTEL ON PARCEL
 B ARE NOT ILLUSTRATED IN THE PLAN.
  
 8.) PLEASE ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING IN THE "OVERALL
 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DATA" TABULAR: A) REQUIRED LOT
 COVERAGE, IMPERMEABLE SURFACE, LANDSCAPING AND OPEN
 SPACE SQUARE FOOTAGE CALCULATIONS ARE INCORRECT. B)
 PROVIDED PERCENTAGES FOR LOT COVERAGE AND OPEN SPACE
 ARE INCORRECT. C) PROVIDED BUILDING SEPARATION IS
 MISSING. D) MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FAR INFORMATION IS STILL
 MISSING. E) PARKING DATA IS MISSING.
  
 9.) PLEASE ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING IN THE "PARCEL A SITE
 DATA" TABULAR: A) WHERE DID THE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH OF
 19.5 FT. COME FROM? THIS IS INCORRECT. B) PROVIDED
 INTERIOR SIDE SETBACK IS 5.17 FT. IN THE TABLE,
 HOWEVER, OTHER PLAN SHEETS INDICATE THAT THE SETBACK IS
 0 FT. PLEASE CLARIFY. C) THE PROVIDED REAR SETBACK IS
 NOT 165.80 FT. (AS NOTED IN THE TABLE). D) THE PROVIDED
 LOT COVERAGE IS 19,590 SQ. FT. IN THE TABLE (DOES NOT
 MATCH SURVEY BUILDING FOOTPRINT OF 15,928 SQ. FT.).
 PLEASE CLARIFY. E) PROVIDED PERCENTAGES FOR LOT
 COVERAGE, IMPERMEABLE SURFACE, LANDSCAPE AND OPEN SPACE
 ARE INCORRECT.
  
 10.) PLEASE ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING IN THE "PARCEL B SITE
 DATA" TABULAR: A) PARCEL SIZE OF PARCEL B IS 2.32 ACRES
 (NOT 2.31 ACRES). PLEASE ADDRESS FOR CONSISTENCY. B)
 WHERE DID THE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH OF 66.10 FT. COME FROM?
 C) PROVIDE BREAKDOWN OF IMPERMEABLE SURFACE BY PAVED
 AREA AND BUILDING GROUND FLOOR AREA. D) REQUIRED SQUARE
 FOOTAGE CALCULATIONS FOR LOT COVERAGE, IMPERMEABLE
 SURFACE, LANDSCAPE AND OPEN SPACE ARE INCORRECT. E)
 PROVIDED OPEN SPACE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND PERCENTAGE IS
 INCORRECT. F) BUILDING HEIGHT IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE
 HEIGHT IN THE ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS (46'-8").
  
 11.) PLEASE ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING WAIVER NOTES: A)
 WAIVER #1: CLARIFICATION/EXPLANATION REQUIRED. HOW DOES
 THE WAIVER TO FRONT SETBACKS FOR BOTH PARCELS A AND B
 FIT INTO THE DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR THE OVERALL CPD?
 (I.E. MINIMUM FRONT SETBACK FOR BOTH PARCELS). B)
 WAIVER #2: CLARIFICATION AND/OR CORRECTION REQUIRED.
 WAIVER STATES A MINIMUM 5'-2" SETBACK FROM THE BUILDING
 TO THE EAST PROPERTY LINE, HOWEVER, OTHER PLAN SHEETS
 INDICATE A 0 FT. SETBACK. C) WAIVER #4: LANGUAGE IS
 CONFUSING. PLEASE CLARIFY/SIMPLIFY. D) WAIVER #5:
 IDENTIFY BUFFER WAIVER FOR EACH APPLICABLE SIDE (USE
 PALMS GATEWAY CPD MASTER PLAN AS AN EXAMPLE).
  
  
 PARCEL A SITE PLAN COMMENTS (SHEET OSP-1):
  
 1.) PLEASE REFER TO SHEET MP-1 FOR CORRECTIONS TO THE
 SITE DATA TABULAR.
  
 2.) SOME INFORMATION ON THE ADJACENT EXISTING USES AND
 FLU ARE INCORRECT IN THE PLAN. ALSO, ZONING INFORMATION
 IS STILL MISSING. PLEASE ADDRESS.
  
 3.) CLARIFICATION IS NEEDED ON THE LOCATION OF THE
 PROPERTY LINE BETWEEN PARCELS A AND B AND PROPOSED
 BUILDING SETBACK FOR THE EXISTING HOTEL ON PARCEL A.
 THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE OTHER PLAN SHEETS ARE
 UNCLEAR AND INCONSISTENT.
  
 4.) STAFF HAD DISCUSSED WITH THE AGENT THE POSSIBILITY
 OF CONSOLIDATING THE INFORMATION ON PARCEL A TO SIMPLY
 THE INFORMATION, AS THERE SEEMS TO BE PIECEMEAL
 INFORMATION ON THE VARIOUS SHEETS (I.E. ELIMINATE THE
 ENLARGEMENT SHEETS). THIS WAS NOT ADDRESSED. PLEASE
 SPEAK TO STAFF IF THERE IS A REASON FOR NOT
 CONSOLIDATING THE INFORMATION ON A SINGLE SHEET, AS
 STAFF IS ONLY MAKING SUGGESTIONS TO IMPROVE AND
 SIMPLIFY THE INFORMATION PRESENTED IN THE SUBMITTAL.
  
 5.) THE REAR BUILDING SETBACK FOR PARCEL A IS
 INCORRECTLY MEASURED (IT IS NOT 165.8 FT.). PLEASE
 CORRECT. THE REAR SETBACK IS THE SHORTEST DISTANCE FROM
 THE REAR OF THE BUILDING TO THE PROPERTY LINE).
 [6/11/2020 MODIFIED/REPEAT COMMENT: REFERENCE COMMENT
 #5 FROM 6/11/2020. NOT ADDRESSED CORRECTLY.]
  
 6.) EXPLAIN THE WAIVER REQUEST TO THE MINIMUM LOT
 WIDTH. [6/11/2020 MODIFIED/REPEAT COMMENT: REFERENCE
 COMMENT #6. INCORRECTLY ADDRESSED BY THE AGENT. MINIMUM
 LOT WIDTH IS MEASURED BY THE LOT FRONTAGE. PLEASE
 ADDRESS.]
  
 7.) BICYCLE PARKING CALCULATIONS IS INCORRECT. ONE (1)
 BICYCLE PARKING SPACE SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR EVERY 20
 AUTOMOBILE PARKING SPACES, OR FRACTION THEREOF,
 REQUIRED FOR THE USE. [ZLDR S.94-485(Q)]
  
 8.) PLACEMENT OF BICYCLE PARKING ON THE SUBJECT
 PROPERTY SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
 S.94-485(Q). RACKS MUST BE PLACED IN A HIGHLY VISIBLE
 AREA (NOT NEXT TO THE LOADING ZONE) AND BE LOCATED NEAR
 THE PRINCIPAL ENTRANCE OF THE BUILDING AS PRACTICABLE.
 [ZLDR S.94-485(Q)]
  
 9.) CLARIFY THE REQUIRED AND PROVIDED LOADING ZONES FOR
 PARCEL A, INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO: NUMBER OF
 LOADING ZONES PROVIDED (THERE SEEMS TO BE 2 NOT 1) AND
 DIMENSIONS (REQUIRED AND PROVIDED). PLAN SHOULD ALSO
 DIMENSION OUT THE LOADING ZONE(S) IN THE SITE PLAN.
  
 10.) PLEASE CLARIFY IF THE 136,660 SQ. FT. GROSS FLOOR
 AREA INCLUDES THE EXISTING RESTAURANT AND MEETING AREAS
 WITHIN THE HOTEL BUILDING.
  
 11.) CLARIFY WHERE THE 170 PARKING SPACES FOR THE
 REQUIRED PARKING SPACES REQUIRED PER PARKING STUDY CAME
 FROM. THIS CALCULATION IS NOT FOUND IN THE REDUCED
 PARKING STATEMENT DOCUMENT.
  
 12.) PARCEL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE
 INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE PROPOSED PLAT AND SURVEY.
 [6/11/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: ALTHOUGH DIMENSIONS HAVE
 BEEN PROVIDED. THE DIMENSIONS ARE NOT CONSISTENT
 BETWEEN THE SURVEY, PLAT AND SITE PLAN. PLEASE ADDRESS
 FOR CONSISTENCY.]
  
  
 PARCEL B SITE PLAN COMMENTS (SHEET OSP-2):
  
 1.) PLEASE REFER TO SHEET MP-1 FOR CORRECTIONS TO THE
 SITE DATA TABULAR.
  
 2.) SOME INFORMATION ON THE ADJACENT EXISTING USES AND
 FLU ARE INCORRECT IN THE PLAN. ALSO, ZONING INFORMATION
 IS STILL MISSING. PLEASE ADDRESS.
  
 3.) CLARIFICATION IS NEEDED ON THE LOCATION OF THE
 PROPERTY LINE BETWEEN PARCELS A AND B AND PROPOSED
 BUILDING SETBACK FOR THE EXISTING HOTEL ON PARCEL A.
 THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE OTHER PLAN SHEETS ARE
 UNCLEAR AND INCONSISTENT.
  
 4.) STAFF HAD DISCUSSED WITH THE AGENT THE POSSIBILITY
 OF CONSOLIDATING THE INFORMATION ON PARCEL B TO SIMPLY
 THE INFORMATION, AS THERE SEEMS TO BE PIECEMEAL
 INFORMATION ON THE VARIOUS SHEETS (I.E. ELIMINATE THE
 ENLARGEMENT SHEETS). THIS WAS NOT ADDRESSED. PLEASE
 SPEAK TO STAFF IF THERE IS A REASON FOR NOT
 CONSOLIDATING THE INFORMATION ON A SINGLE SHEET, AS
 STAFF IS ONLY MAKING SUGGESTIONS TO IMPROVE AND
 SIMPLIFY THE INFORMATION PRESENTED IN THE SUBMITTAL.
  
 5.) A WAIVER IS REQUIRED FOR THE EAST PERIMETER
 LANDSCAPE BUFFER, SINCE THE BUFFER DOES NOT COVER THE
 ENTIRE EAST PROPERTY LINE.
  
 6.) PROVIDE SETBACK DIMENSIONS OF THE LIGHT POLES TO
 THE PROPERTY LINES. PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL POLE FIXTURES
 MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS OF
 ZLDR S.94-143.
  
 7.) PLEASE ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING IN THE PARKING TABLE:
 A) CHECK PARKING CALCULATIONS FOR THE PROVIDED PARKING
 (DOES NOT MATCH NUMBER OF SPACES PROVIDED IN THE SITE
 PLAN). B) CLARIFY WHERE THE 87 PARKING SPACES FOR THE
 REQUIRED PARKING SPACES REQUIRED PER PARKING STUDY CAME
 FROM. THIS CALCULATION IS NOT FOUND IN THE REDUCED
 PARKING STATEMENT DOCUMENT. C) CLARIFY THE REQUIRED AND
 PROVIDED LOADING ZONES FOR PARCEL B, INCLUDING, BUT NOT
 LIMITED TO: DIMENSIONS (REQUIRED AND PROVIDED.). D)
 TABLE INDICATES COMPACT PARKING SPACES WILL BE
 PROVIDED. WHERE ARE THEY LOCATED IN THE SITE PLAN? E)
 THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF COMPACT PARKING SPACES SHALL BE
 BASED ON THE REDUCED PARKING REQUIREMENTS.
  
 8.) IDENTIFY THE TRELLIS (BY NOTATION) IN THE SITE
 PLAN. ALSO NOTE THAT THE DETAIL ON SHEET SPD-1 DOES NOT
 MATCH THE SITE PLAN. PLEASE ADDRESS FOR CONSISTENCY.
  
 9.) PARCEL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE
 INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE PROPOSED PLAT AND SURVEY.
 [6/11/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: ALTHOUGH DIMENSIONS HAVE
 BEEN PROVIDED. THE DIMENSIONS ARE NOT CONSISTENT
 BETWEEN THE SURVEY, PLAT AND SITE PLAN. PLEASE ADDRESS
 FOR CONSISTENCY.]
  
 10.) WAIVERS SHALL BE REQUESTED FOR THE FOLLOWING: A)
 FRONT SETBACK B) LANDSCAPE BUFFERS C) LOADING ZONES.
 [6/11/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: NOT ALL REQUIRED WAIVERS
 HAVE BEEN NOTATED IN THE PLAN.]
  
  
 SITE PLAN DETAILS COMMENTS:
  
 1.) PARKING STALL DETAIL SHALL BE REVISED FOR
 CONSISTENCY WITH THE CITY'S STANDARDS FOR STALL
 STRIPING. [6/11/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: DETAIL PROVIDED IN
 SHEET SPD-1 IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY?S STANDARDS
 FOR STRIPING. ALSO MISSING IS THE COMPACT PARKING STALL
 DETAIL, AND STALL DETAIL FOR THOSE SPACES WITH A 2 FT.
 CURB OVERHANG WITHIN LANDSCAPE ISLANDS/BUFFERS].
  
 2.) BICYCLE RACK DETAIL AND PLACEMENT IS INCONSISTENT
 WITH THE SITE PLAN. PLEASE ADDRESS FOR CONSISTENCY.
  
  
 ARCHITECTURAL COMMENTS:
  
 1.) IT IS REQUESTED THAT ADDITIONAL ARCHITECTURAL
 FEATURES BE PROVIDED ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION SINCE IT IS
 THE ELEVATION THAT IS MOST VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.
 ALSO, NOTE THAT IT MAY BE HELPFUL O PROVIDE COLORED
 ELEVATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED HOTEL. [6/11/2020 REPEAT
 COMMENT: BASED ON STAFF?S REVIEW OF THE REVISED
 ELEVATIONS AND SITE ELEMENTS, STAFF BELIEVES GREATER
 EFFORT CAN BE MADE TO IMPROVE THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE
 BUILDING TO MAKE IT MORE ATTRACTIVE AND INVITING.]
  
 2.) SHEET A101 IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE DRIVEWAY
 LAYOUT. PLEASE ADDRESS FOR CONSISTENCY.
  
  
 PHOTOMETRIC PLAN COMMENTS:
  
 1.) PHOTOMETRIC SPILLOVER NOT PROVIDED ON THE SOUTH
 SIDE OF PARCEL B. ILLUMINATION SHALL NOT EXCEED
 ONE-FOOT CANDLE AT OR BEYOND THE BOUNDS OF THE
 DEVELOPMENT. PLEASE ILLUSTRATE FOOT CANDLE SPILLOVER
 ALONG THE SOUTH SIDE OF PARCEL B TO DEMONSTRATE
 COMPLIANCE. [2/10/2020 AND 6/11/2020 MODIFIED/REPEAT
 COMMENT: NOT ADDRESSED. STAFF WAS EXPECTING THE
 PHOTOMETRIC SPILLOVER ALONG ALL SIDES NOT PART OF THE
 PROPOSED PD FOR PARCEL B (I.E. SOUTH SIDE ABUTTING THE
 FRONTAGE ROAD).]
  
 2.) ALL EXTERIOR LIGHTING SHALL BE SHIELDED TO REDUCE
 GLARE AND SHALL BE ARRANGED TO REFLECT LIGHT OR GLARE
 AWAY FROM PUBLIC THOROUGHFARES. [ZLDR S.94-309(A)]
 [2/10/2020 AND 6/11/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: AT MINIMUM, A
 NOTE SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN FOR
 COMPLIANCE. THIS NOTE IS STILL MISSING FROM THE PLANS.]
  
  
 INSTRUCTIONS FOR RESUBMITTAL:
  
 * PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN
 WRITTEN FORMAT.
  
 * ANY CHANGES ON THE RESUBMITTED PLANS MAY RESULT IN
 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
  
 * WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF THREE
 (3) PAPER COPIES, ONE (1) REDUCED COPY IN 8.5 INCHES BY
 11 INCHES AND ONE (1) SET IN 11 INCHES X 17 INCHES, AND
 AN ELECTRONIC COPY OF ALL PLANS.
  
 * 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
 RESUBMITTAL FEE WILL BE 20% ($600.00) OF THE ORIGINAL
 APPLICATION FEE. THE $600.00 PENALTY FEE WILL BE
 REQUIRED FOR THE NEXT RESUBMITTAL.
  
 * CONTACT LINDA LOUIE @ (561) 822-1458 IF THERE ARE
 QUESTIONS.
Review Stop Z ZONING
Rev No 2 Status F Date 06-11-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By llouie Date 06-11-2020 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By llouie Date 06-11-2020 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-06-11 10:59:58*** THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED FOR THE
 PLANS RECEIVED/STAMPED BY STAFF ON 5/22/2020 ***
  
 GENERAL COMMENTS:
  
 1.) SINCE THE PROJECT IS PROPOSED FOR AN OFFICE
 COMMERCIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (OCPD), THE PROJECT
 SHOULD BE RENAMED "HOLIDAY INN PBI OFFICE COMMERCIAL
 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (OCPD)."
  
 2.) ANY CHANGES TO ANY INFORMATION AND/OR CALCULATIONS
 ON THE PLAN SHEET(S) SHALL BE MADE CONSISTENT WITH ALL
 OTHER SHEETS IN THE PLAN SET.
  
 3.) BASED ON THE NUMBER OF WAIVERS THE APPLICATION IS
 SEEKING, THE APPLICANT MAY WISH TO GENERATE DESIGN
 REGULATIONS (I.E. MINIMUM SETBACKS) FOR THE PROPOSED
 OCPD.
  
 4.) THERE STILL SEEMS TO BE SOME CONFUSION WITH THE
 NUMBER OF ROOMS IN THE EXISTING HOTEL (I.E. 200 ROOMS
 VS. 199 ROOMS). STAFF HAS DOCUMENTATION THAT THERE ARE
 200 ROOMS IN THE EXISTING HOTEL, AND INFORMATION
 PROVIDED IN THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT, PARKING STUDY,
 SITE PLAN, ETC. SEEMS TO BE INCONSISTENT (I.E.
 INTERCHANGE BETWEEN 200 ROOMS AND 199 ROOMS IN THE
 SUBMITTED DOCUMENTS) . AT THIS POINT, STAFF IS
 REQUESTING DOCUMENTATION THAT THE NUMBER OF ROOMS HAD
 BEEN REDUCED FROM 200 ROOMS TO 199 ROOMS; OTHERWISE,
 PLEASE ENSURE THE INFORMATION ON THE NUMBER OF ROOMS IS
 CORRECTED FOR ACCURACY.
  
 5.) PLEASE ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING IN THE JUSTIFICATION
 STATEMENT: A) SURROUNDING USES TABLE IS INACCURATE. B)
 THE PROPOSED PROJECT DOES NOT CONFORM TO THE APPLICABLE
 PORTIONS OF THE CITY CODE (OTHERWISE THERE WOULD BE NO
 NEED TO REQUEST ANY WAIVERS!). C) MUST IDENTIFY ALL
 WAIVERS IN THE PROPOSED PD, INCLUDING ANY
 JUSTIFICATION, BENEFITS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (IF
 ANY) TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT OF THE WAIVER REQUESTS. D)
 JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PARKING WAIVER IS INSUFFICIENT.
  
 [2/10/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: ALTHOUGH THE APPLICANT HAS
 ADDRESSED THE MAJORITY OF STAFF'S ISSUES AND CONCERNS
 WITH THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT, THE ABOVE ARE STILL
 OUTSTANDING.]
  
 6.) PLEASE CLARIFY IF THE DATE OF THE HOTEL MARKET
 FEASIBILITY STUDY IS CORRECT. THE MARKET FESIBILITY
 STUDY IS DATED APRIL 8, 2019.
  
  
 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (CRITERIA) COMMENTS:
  
 1.) THE PLANS SHOW THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WILL BE DIVIDED
 INTO SEPARATE PARCELS/TRACTS BY PROPERTY LINE. IF THE
 APPLICANT INTENDS TO SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY, ALL
 EXISTING AND PROPOSED STRUCTURES WITHIN EACH SUBDIVIDED
 PARCEL WILL BE REQUIRED TO MEET THE MINIMUM DEVELOPMENT
 REGULATIONS, BUILDING SETBACKS, LANDSCAPING
 REQUIREMENTS, ETC., AS STAND-ALONE PARCELS AND AS A
 PARCEL AS A WHOLE. IF THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF THE
 ZLDRS CANNOT BE MET, THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO
 SEEK WAIVERS FROM THOSE REQUIREMENTS. ALL WAIVERS MUST
 BE IDENTIFIED AND REQUESTED IN THE APPLICATION. BASED
 ON STAFF'S REVIEW OF THE CURRENT PLANS/APPLICATION,
 ADDITIONAL WAIVERS WILL NEED TO BE REQUESTED.
  
 [2/10/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: NOT ALL REQUIRED WAIVERS
 HAVE BEEN REQUESTED IN THE APPLICATION (I.E. LOADING
 ZONE. THERE IS ALSO CONFLICTING INFORMATION REGARDING
 THE WAVIER REQUEST FROM THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE BUFFERS
 AND WHAT IS DEPICTED IN THE PLANS.]
  
 2.) COMMENTS ON THE REQUESTED PARKING WAIVER: A) FAILS
 TO MEET THE MINIMUM THREE STANDARDS REQUIRED FOR A
 PARKING WAIVER. THEREFORE, STAFF CANNOT SUPPORT THE
 PARKING WAIVER AT THIS TIME.
  
 [2/10/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: STAFF DOES NOT BELIEVE THE
 PROJECT HAS MADE ALL THE NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS TO
 ADDRESS THE CONCEPTS OF NEW URBANISM FOR PROJECT
 SUPPORT.]
  
 3.) THE ORIENTATION OF THE BUILDINGS, ARCHITECTURAL
 STYLE/ELEMENTS (EXISTING AND PROPOSED) AND SITE DESIGN
 LACKS ENGAGEMENT WITH THE STREET AND CONNECTIVITY WITH
 ADJACENT/NEARBY USES, DESIRED ELEMENTS OF A PLANNED
 DEVELOPMENT. MORE EFFORT IS NEEDED TO ADDRESS THIS
 DESIGN DEFICIENCY.
  
 [2/10/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: EMPHASIS ON THE
 ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS AND SITE DESIGN SHOULD BE ALONG
 BELVEDERE ROAD, SINCE THE PROJECT FRONTS AND IS HIGHLY
 VISIBLE ALONG THIS STREET FRONTAGE. ALSO, THE PROJECT
 LACKS THE CONNECTIVITY WITH THE PARCELS AND EXISTING
 STREET NETWORK OUTSIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND BUILDING
 ENGAGEMENT WITH THE STREET.]
  
 4.) SINCE THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A REZONING TO A
 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, IT IS EXPECTED THAT AS PART OF THE
 APPLICATION FOR A PD THAT ALL PARCELS (PARCELS A AND B
 AND AS A PD AS A WHOLE) ARE IMPROVED/UPGRADED TO MEET
 AND/OR EXCEED THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZLDRS.
 THE SUBMITTAL SUGGESTS THAT ONLY IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE
 MADE TO PARCEL B (NEW HOTEL SITE), WHICH IS NOT
 ACCEPTABLE.
  
 [2/10/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: FEW IMPROVEMENTS HAVE BEEN
 MADE TO PARCEL A (EXISTING HOTEL SITE). ADDITIONAL
 IMPROVEMENTS CAN BE MADE TO ADDRESS BUILDING ENGAGEMENT
 WITH THE STREET AND CONNECTION WITH THE EXISTING STREET
 NETWORK.]
  
  
 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS (SHEET MP-1):
  
 1.) INCLUDE INFORMATION ON THE FUTURE LAND USE (FLU)
 DESIGNATION, ZONING DESIGNATION AND EXISTING USES FOR
 THE ADJACENT USES TO THE NORTH, SOUTH, EAST AND WEST TO
 DEMONSTRATE COMPATIBILITY BETWEEN THE EXISTING USES AND
 THE PROPOSED USES WITHIN THE CPD.
  
 [2/10/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: REQUESTED INFORMATION NOT
 PROVIDED IN THE 5/22 RESUBMITTAL PLANS.]
  
 2.) SHOW THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED USE OF ALL LAND WITH
 IN THE PROJECT BOUNDARIES, INCLUDING THE LOCATION OF
 ALL AREAS PROPOSED TO BE DEDICATED OR RESERVED FOR
 COMMUNITY OR PUBLIC USE.
  
 [2/10/2020: REQUESTED INFORMATION NOT PROVIDED IN THE
 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN.]
  
 3.) SHOW THE LOCATION AND SIZE AS APPROPRIATE OF ALL
 EXISTING AND PROPOSED DRAINAGE, WATER, SEWER AND OTHER
 UTILITY SERVICE SYSTEMS.
  
 [2/10/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: EXISTING LIFT STATION, FPL
 AND UTILITY EASEMENTS, AS PROVIDED IN THE SIGNED AND
 SEALED SURVEY ARE NOT DEPICTED AND/OR LABELED IN THE
 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN.]
  
 4.) PERIMETER LANDSCAPE BUFFERS FOR PARCELS A AND B
 HAVE BEEN ILLUSTRATED IN THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
 THE LOCATION OF SOME OF THE BUFFERS ARE IN CONFLICT
 WITH THE WAIVER REQUEST TO THE REQUIRED BUFFERS.
 LANDSCAPE BUFFERS SHOULD ONLY BE ILLUSTRATED WHERE
 BUFFERS ARE PROVIDED IN THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
  
 5.) ACCORDING TO THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE MASTER
 PLAN, THE EXISTING BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR PARCEL A
 (EXISTING HOTEL) IS 136,660 SQ. FT. BUT CAN BE
 INCREASED UP TO 158,981 SQ. FT. (DIFFERENCE OF +22,321
 SQ. FT.). SIMILAR BUILDING INFORMATION IS PROVIDED FOR
 PARCEL B (PROPOSED HOTEL): THE PROPOSED HOTEL IS 60,634
 SQ. FT. BUT CAN BE INCREASED UP TO 101,063 SQ. FT.
 (DIFFERENCE OF +40,429 SQ. FT.). PLEASE EXPLAIN THE
 PURPOSE OF THE EXCESS BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE, AS STAFF
 HAS CONCERNS THAT THE PROPOSED CPD FALLS SHORT ON THE
 CITY'S PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND THE APPLICATION IS
 SEEKING A PARKING REDUCTION TO ADDRESS THE PARKING
 NEEDS OF THE PROJECT.
  
 6.) PROPOSED INTERNAL ROADWAY SYSTEM AND CROSS ACCESS
 POINTS DEPICTED IN THE MASTER PLAN IS INCONSISTENT WITH
 THE INTERNAL ROADWAY SYSTEM AND CROSS ACCESS POINTS
 DEPICTED IN THE PLAT. PLEASE ADDRESS FOR CONSISTENCY.
  
 7.) A TWO-WAY INTERNAL DRIVE AISLE SHALL BE A MINIMUM
 OF 24 FT. WIDE. PLEASE DIMENSION OUT THE INTERNAL DRIVE
 AISLE TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE. [ZLDR S.94-485]
  
 8.) THE EXISTING AND PROPOSED PARCEL LAYOUTS SHALL BE
 SHOWN IN THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO ILLUSTRATE HOW
 THE PARCELS AND USES WILL BE INTEGRATED WITHIN THE CPD.
  
 9.) PARCEL DIMENSIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE MASTER
 DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE DIMENSIONS SHALL BE CONSISTENT
 WITH THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE PROPOSED PLAT FOR
 CONSISTENCY.
  
 10.) PLEASE ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING IN THE "OVERALL
 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DATA TABULAR": A) GROSS SITE AREA
 SHALL MATCH THE NUMBERS PROVIDED IN THE SIGNED AND
 SEALED SURVEY. B) PARCEL SIZE INFORMATION SHALL BE
 CORRECTED FOR CONSISTENCY WITH ANY CHANGES MADE TO THE
 CALCULATIONS. C) THE PROPOSED CUMULATIVE FAR FOR
 PARCELS A AND B SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE APPROPRIATE
 UNIT MEASUREMENT (I.E. FAR IS NOT MEASURED IN SQUARE
 FEET). D) TABULAR IS MISSING MINIMUM REQUIRED/PROVIDED
 LOT SIZE INFORMATION. E) REQUIRED AND PROVIDED
 CALCULATION SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR THE FOLLOWING:
 MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE, MAXIMUM IMPERMEABLE SURFACE,
 MINIMUM LANDSCAPING, MINIMUM OPEN SPACE, MINIMUM
 BUILDING SEPARATION. F) REQUIRED AND PROVIDED LANDSCAPE
 BUFFER CALCULATIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED.
  
 11.) PLEASE ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING IN THE "PARCEL A SITE
 DATA TABULAR": A) LABEL COLUMNS FOR THE REQUIRED AND
 PROVIDED CALCULATIONS, AND VERIFY THE CALCULATIONS ARE
 PROVIDED IN THE CORRECT COLUMNS. B) PLEASE EXPLAIN THE
 PROPOSED 19.5 FT. LOT WIDTH. C) SOME OF THE
 INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE TABLE CAN BE MINIMIZED
 (I.E. FAR "ALLOWED" INFORMATION CAN BE ELIMINATED, AS
 IT IS ALREADY PROVIDED IN THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT
 TABULAR). D) "BUILDING NAME" SHALL BE CHANGED TO
 "BUILDING USE" WHICH IS MORE APPROPRIATE. E) IT IS
 UNNECESSARY TO STATE IF THE STANDARDS OF THE CODE HAVE
 BEEN MET (I.E. YES/NO). PLEASE ELIMINATE TO SIMPLIFY
 THE TABLE. F) PROVIDE THE HEIGHT OF THE EXISTING HOTEL
 IN FEET. G) CHECK CALCULATIONS FOR THE FOLLOWING:
 MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE, MAXIMUM IMPERMEABLE SURFACE,
 MINIMUM LANDSCAPING AND MINIMUM OPEN SPACE. H) CORRECT
 BUILDING SETBACK INFORMATION (SOME SETBACKS PROVIDED IN
 THE TABULAR DO NOT SEEM TO THE BE SHORTEST DISTANCE
 FROM THE BUILDING TO THE PROPERTY LINE). I) ASTERISKS
 SHALL ONLY BE PROVIDED BY THE WAIVER REQUEST (NOT
 REQUIRED STANDARDS). J) WAIVER REQUIRED FOR: FRONT
 SETBACK
  
 12.) PLEASE ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING IN THE "PARCEL B SITE
 DATA TABULAR": A) LABEL COLUMNS FOR THE REQUIRED AND
 PROVIDED CALCULATIONS, AND VERIFY THE CALCULATIONS ARE
 PROVIDED IN THE CORRECT COLUMNS. B) THERE SHOULD BE NO
 CORNER SETBACK FOR PARCEL B ? PLEASE ADDRESS. C) SOME
 OF THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE TABLE CAN BE
 MINIMIZED (I.E. FAR ?ALLOWED? INFORMATION CAN BE
 ELIMINATED, AS IT IS ALREADY PROVIDED IN THE OVERALL
 DEVELOPMENT TABULAR). D) "BUILDING NAME" SHALL BE
 CHANGED TO "BUILDING USE" WHICH IS MORE APPROPRIATE. E)
 IT IS UNNECESSARY TO STATE IF THE STANDARDS OF THE CODE
 HAVE BEEN MET (I.E. YES/NO). PLEASE ELIMINATE TO
 SIMPLIFY THE TABLE. F) PROVIDE THE HEIGHT OF THE
 EXISTING HOTEL IN FEET. G) CHECK CALCULATIONS FOR THE
 FOLLOWING: MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE, MAXIMUM IMPERMEABLE
 SURFACE, MINIMUM LANDSCAPING AND MINIMUM OPEN SPACE. H)
 CORRECT BUILDING SETBACK INFORMATION (SOME SETBACKS
 PROVIDED IN THE TABULAR DO NOT SEEM TO THE BE SHORTEST
 DISTANCE FROM THE BUILDING TO THE PROPERTY LINE). I)
 ASTERISKS SHALL ONLY BE PROVIDED BY THE WAIVER REQUEST
 (NOT REQUIRED STANDARDS).
  
 13.) BUILDING SETBACKS SHALL BE MEASURED AS THE
 SHORTEST DISTANCE FROM THE BUILDING TO THE PROPERTY
 LINES. SOME OF THE SETBACKS PROVIDED IN THE PLANS DO
 NOT SEEM TO BE THE SHORTEST DISTANCE FROM THE
 BUILDING(S) TO THE PROPERTY LINES.
  
  
 PARCEL A SITE PLAN COMMENTS:
  
 1.) PROVIDE EVIDENCE THAT THERE IS AN EXISTING
 RESTRICTIVE COVENANT FOR THE 22 PARK N' FLY SPACES.
 STAFF DOES NOT HAVE ANY DOCUMENTATION THAT A
 RESTRICTIVE COVENANT EXISTS. THE LANGUAGE IN THE SITE
 PLAN SHALL BE CORRECTED FOR CONSISTENCY IF NO
 RESTRICTIVE COVENANT FOR THE PARK N? FLY SPACES EXISTS.
  
 2.) PARCEL DIMENSIONS MISSING FOR PARCEL A. DIMENSIONS
 FOR THE PARCEL SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE PLAN AND SHALL
 BE CONSISTENT WITH THE DIMENSIONS PROVIDED IN THE
 PROPOSED PLAT DOCUMENT.
  
 3.) DIMENSIONS (I.E. PARKING STALLS/CURB OVERHANGS (IF
 APPLICABLE), DRIVE AISLES, LOADING ZONES, ETC.) ARE
 MISSING FROM THE SITE PLAN. THE DIMENSIONS ARE
 NECESSARY TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE WITH THE MINIMUM
 DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS OF THE ZLDRS.
  
 4.) ARE WHEEL STOPS PROVIDED OR WILL THERE BE A 2 FT.
 CURB OVERHANG? WHEEL STOPS WILL NEED TO BE ILLUSTRATED
 IN THE PLAN IF PROVIDED.
  
 5.) SOME BUILDING SETBACKS DO NOT SEEM TO BE MEASURED
 FROM THE SHORTEST DISTANCE FROM THE BUILDING TO THE
 PROPERTY LINE. PLEASE RECALCULATE FOR ACCURACY.
  
 6.) EXPLAIN THE WAIVER REQUEST TO THE MINIMUM LOT
 WIDTH. IF IS DIFFICULT FOR STAFF TO VERIFY THE REQUEST
 WHEN THERE ARE NO DIMENSIONS IN THE PLANS.
  
 7.) WAIVERS SHALL BE REQUESTED FOR THE FOLLOWING: A)
 FRONT SETBACK B) SIDE SETBACK C) LOADING ZONES D)
 LANDSCAPE BUFFERS.
  
 8.) HOW HIGH IS THE EXISTING WALL THAT CONNECTS TO THE
 PROPOSED 4 FT. HIGH DECORATIVE SECURITY FENCE? PLEASE
 NOTATE IN THE PLAN.
  
 9.) BICYCLE PARKING REQUIRED. SHOW LOCATION OF BICYCLE
 RACKS AND CALCULATIONS IN THE PLANS.
  
 10.) ANY INCONSISTENCIES IN THE SITE DATA TABULAR FOR
 PARCEL A SHALL BE CORRECTED.
  
  
 PARCEL B SITE PLAN COMMENTS:
  
 1.) PARCEL DIMENSIONS MISSING FOR PARCEL B. DIMENSIONS
 FOR THE PARCEL SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE PLAN AND SHALL
 BE CONSISTENT WITH THE DIMENSIONS PROVIDED IN THE
 PROPOSED PLAT DOCUMENT.
  
 2.) DIMENSIONS (I.E. PARKING STALLS/CURB OVERHANGS (IF
 APPLICABLE), DRIVE AISLES, LOADING ZONES,
 WALKWAYS/SIDEWALKS, ETC.) ARE MISSING FROM THE SITE
 PLAN. THE DIMENSIONS ARE NECESSARY TO DEMONSTRATE
 COMPLIANCE WITH THE MINIMUM DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS OF
 THE ZLDRS.
  
 3.) THERE IS A NEW SIDEWALK FROM THE MAIN FRONT
 ENTRANCE OF THE PROPOSED HOTEL THAT ENDS ALONG THE
 FRONTAGE ROAD. THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE. THE SIDEWALK SHALL
 CONNECT TO AN EXISTING/NEW SIDEWALK FOR CONTINUOUS
 CONNECTION AND INTEGRATION OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.
  
 4.) WAIVERS SHALL BE REQUESTED FOR THE FOLLOWING: A)
 FRONT SETBACK B) LANDSCAPE BUFFERS C) LOADING ZONE
 REQUIREMENTS.
  
 5.) LOADING ZONE SEEMS TO BE MISSING FROM THE SITE
 PLAN.
  
 6.) THE WEST SIDE SETBACK SEEMS TO BE 52.97 FT. AND NOT
 67.70 FT. PLEASE EXPLAIN THIS DISCREPANCY.
  
 7.) PARCEL B DOES NOT ABUT A CORNER, AND THEREFORE,
 THERE SHOULD BE NO CORNER SETBACK. PLEASE ADDRESS.
  
 8.) THE PARKING TABULAR INDICATES A TOTAL OF 6 COMPACT
 PARKING SPACES. PLEASE IDENTIFY THE LOCATION OF THESE
 COMPACT SPACES WITHIN THE PLAN.
  
 9.) PLEASE ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING IN THE PARKING
 TABULAR: A) 114 PARKING SPACES HAVE BEEN
 COUNTED/IDENTIFIED IN THE PROJECT (NOT 115 PARKING
 SPACES). B) A MAXIMUM OF 40 COMPACT SPACES ARE
 PERMITTED (NOT 41 COMPACT SPACES).
  
 10.) ANY INCONSISTENCIES IN THE SITE DATA TABULAR FOR
 PARCEL B SHALL BE CORRECTED.
  
  
 SITE PLAN DETAILS COMMENTS:
  
 1.) PARKING STALL DETAIL SHALL BE REVISED FOR
 CONSISTENCY WITH THE CITY'S STANDARDS FOR STALL
 STRIPING.
  
 2.) PROVIDE A SITE-SPECIFIC DETAIL (WITH DIMENSIONS) OF
 THE BICYCLE RACKS. THE LOCATION AND RACK SEPARATION
 SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY?S BICYCLE PARKING
 DESIGN GUIDELINES.
  
  
 ARCHITECTECTURAL COMMENTS:
  
 1.) IT IS REQUESTED THAT ADDITIONAL ARCHITECTURAL
 FEATURES BE PROVIDED ON THE SOUTH ELEVATION SINCE IT IS
 THE ELEVATION THAT IS MOST VISIBLE FROM THE STREET.
 ALSO, NOTE THAT IT MAY BE HELPFUL TO PROVIDE COLORED
 ELEVATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED HOTEL.
  
 2.) ALL ROOFTOP MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT SHALL BE SCREENED
 FROM VIEW. PLEASE DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE/PROVIDE A NOTE
 IN THE PLAN.
  
  
 SIGNAGE COMMENTS:
  
 1.) THE MAXIMUM SUM TOTAL AREA OF ALL LOW FREESTANDING
 SIGNS ON FRONT STREET: 1 SQ. FT. FOR EACH 1 LINEAR FOOT
 OF FRONT STREET FRONTAGE OF THE LOT WHICH IT IS
 LOCATED. THERE ARE NO PARCEL DIMENSIONS PROVIDED IN THE
 PLANS TO CALCULATE AND VERIFY THE SIGN AREA COMPLIANCE
 WITH THE ZLDRS. [ZLDR S.94-408(A)(2)]
  
 [2/10/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: PROPOSED SIGN AREA SQUARE
 FOOTAGE NOT PROVIDED.]
  
  
 PHOTOMETRIC PLAN COMMENTS:
  
 1.) ANY SOURCE OF ILLUMINATION LOCATED WITHIN THE
 PROPOSED PD SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE-FOOT CANDLE AT OR
 BEYOND THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DEVELOPMENT. ILLUSTRATE
 FOOT CANDLE SPILLOVER TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE. [ZLDR
 S.94-309(A)]
  
 [2/10/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: SPILLOVER WAS NOT PROVIDED
 FOR THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT (PARCELS A AND B)]
  
 2.) ALL EXTERIOR LIGHTING SHALL BE SHIELDED TO REDUCE
 GLARE AND SHALL BE ARRANGED TO REFLECT LIGHT OR GLARE
 AWAY FROM PUBLIC THOROUGHFARES. [ZLDR S.94-309(A)]
  
 [2/10/2020 REPEAT COMMENT: AT MINIMUM, A NOTE SHALL BE
 PROVIDED IN THE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN FOR COMPLIANCE.]
  
  
 INSTRUCTIONS FOR RESUBMITTAL:
  
 * PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN
 WRITTEN FORMAT.
  
 * ANY CHANGES ON THE RESUBMITTED PLANS MAY RESULT IN
 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
  
 * WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF
 FIFTEEN (15) PAPER COPIES, ONE (1) REDUCED COPY IN 8.5
 INCHES X 11 INCHES AND ONE (1) SET IN 11 INCHES X 17
 INCHES, AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY OF ALL PLANS.
  
 * 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
 RESUBMITTAL FEE WILL BE 20% ($600.00) OF THE ORIGINAL
 APPLICATION FEE.
  
 * CONTACT LINDA LOUIE @ (561) 822-1458 IF THERE ARE
 QUESTIONS.
Review Stop Z ZONING
Rev No 1 Status F Date 02-10-2020 Cont ID  
Sent By llouie Date 02-10-2020 Time   Rev Time  
Received By llouie Date 02-10-2020 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2020-02-11 08:20:26GENERAL COMMENTS:
  
 1.) IS THERE ARE NAME FOR THE PROPOSED PLANNED
 DEVELOPMENT (PD)?
  
 2.) A DETAILED MARKET STUDY DEMONSTRATING THE ECONOMIC
 FEASIBILITY OF A HOTEL IN THE AREA OF THE SUBJECT
 PROPERTY IS REQUIRED. THE STUDY SHALL BE PREPARED
 UTILIZING COMMONLY ACCEPTED ANALYSIS TECHNIQUES. [NOTE:
 A MARKET STUDY WAS PRESENTED; HOWEVER, THE DEFINED
 SUBMARKET IS FOCUSED ON THE CONVENTION CENTER AND CITY
 PLACE HOTEL DEVELOPMENTS (I.E DMP). A SITE-SPECIFIC
 MARKET STUDY IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE EVIDENCE THAT A
 HOTEL IS NEEDED IN THE VICINITY OF THE SUBJECT
 PROPERTY.
  
 3.) PLEASE RESPOND TO THE ADDITIONAL STANDARDS FOR THE
 PROPOSED USE (HOTELS AND MOTELS - PXR) IN SEC.
 94-273(D)(33)B. OF THE ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT
 REGULATIONS (ZLDRS). WAIVERS MUST BE REQUESTED IF THE
 PROJECT CANNOT MEET THE ADDITIONAL STANDARDS.
  
 4.) PLEASE PROVIDE THE REQUEST LETTER(S) SENT TO EACH
 OF THE UTILITY SERVICE PROVIDERS. AS DISCUSSED, THE
 LETTERS ARE NEEDED TO SUPPLEMENT THE RESPONSE LETTERS
 OBTAINED FROM THE PROVIDERS TO ENSURE THAT THE
 PROPOSAL, AS PRESENTED TO STAFF, HAD BEEN REVIEWED.
  
 5.) INFORMATION (I.E. HOTEL ROOM NUMBERS) PROVIDED IN
 THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT AND REDUCED PARKING
 STATEMENT DOCUMENTS SEEM TO BE INCONSISTENT AND SHALL
 BE CORRECTED FOR CONSISTENCY.
  
 6.) THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO OBTAIN AN AMENDED
 TPS LETTER TO REFLECT THE CORRECT NUMBERS FOR
 CONSISTENCY WITH THE REVISED TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT
 DOCUMENT.
  
 7.) A DRAFT UNITY OF CONTROL DOCUMENT WAS SUBMITTED
 WITH THE APPLICATION. THIS DOCUMENT WILL REQUIRE REVIEW
 FROM THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT.
  
 8.) A REPLAT OF THE PROPERTY IS REQUIRED. [NOTE: AN
 APPLICATION FOR A MINOR SUBDIVISION (REFERENCE: PB CASE
 NO. 1846A) WAS SUBMITTED; HOWEVER, THERE WAS NO PLAT
 DOCUMENT TO REVIEW.]
  
 9.) PLEASE ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING IN THE JUSTIFICATION
 STATEMENT: A) WHAT IS THE CONVENTION CENTER AND AIRPORT
 DISTRICTS? (I.E. WHERE DID THIS REFERENCE COME FROM?);
 B)JUSTIFICATION DOES NOT MAKE ANY REFERENCE TO A SITE
 SPECIFIC MARKET STUDY, WHICH SHOULD ADDRESS THE NEED
 FOR A HOTEL IN THE VICINITY OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.
 HOW MANY EXISTING HOTELS ARE THERE IN THE AREA?; C)
 STATEMENT MENTIONS RESTAURANTS IN THE PROJECT. THERE IS
 AN EXISTING RESTAURANT IN THE EXISTING HOTEL. IS THERE
 A PROPOSAL FOR MORE?; E) PROPERTY HISTORY MAKES A
 REFERENCE TO AN EXHIBIT A ON PAGE 2; HOWEVER, THIS
 EXHIBIT CANNOT BE FOUND; F) SURROUNDING USES TABLE IS
 INACCURATE; G) THE PROPOSED PROJECT DOES NOT CONFORM TO
 THE APPLICABLE PORTIONS OF THE CITY CODE (OTHERWISE,
 THERE WOULD BE NO NEED TO REQUEST ANY WAIVERS!); H)
 MUST IDENTIFY ALL WAIVERS IN THE PROPOSED PD, INCLUDING
 ANY JUSTIFICATION, BENEFITS AND MITIGATION MEASURES (IF
 ANY) TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT OF THE WAIVER REQUESTS; I)
 JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PARKING WAIVER REQUEST IS
 INSUFFICIENT. (SEE STAFF'S COMMENTS BELOW)
  
  
 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (CRITERIA) COMMENTS:
  
 1.) THE PLANS SHOW THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WILL BE DIVIDED
 INTO SEPARATE PARCELS/TRACTS BY PROPERTY LINE. IF THE
 APPLICANT INTENDS TO SUBDIVIDE THE PROPERTY, ALL
 EXISTING AND PROPOSED STRUCTURES WITHIN EACH SUBDIVIDED
 PARCEL WILL BE REQUIRED TO MEET THE MINIMUM DEVELOPMENT
 REGULATIONS, BUILDING SETBACKS, LANDSCAPING
 REQUIREMENTS, ETC., AS STAND-ALONE PARCELS AND AS A
 PARCEL AS A WHOLE. IF THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF THE
 ZLDRS CANNOT BE MET, THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO
 SEEK WAIVERS FROM THOSE REQUIREMENTS. ALL WAIVERS MUST
 BE IDENTIFIED AND REQUESTED IN THE APPLICATION. BASED
 ON STAFF'S REVIEW OF THE CURRENT PLANS/APPLICATION,
 ADDITIONAL WAIVERS WILL NEED TO BE REQUESTED.
  
 2.) ALL WAIVERS REQUESTED MUST CLEARLY STATE THE
 BENEFITS TO THE PD AND TO THE SURROUNDING AREA.
 MITIGATION MEASURES (IF NECESSARY) MUST ALSO BE
 INCLUDED IN THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT AND ILLUSTRATED
 IN THE PLANS.
  
 3.) COMMENTS ON THE REQUESTED PARKING WAIVER: A) FAILS
 TO MEET THE MINIMUM THREE STANDARDS REQUIRED FOR A
 PARKING WAIVER. THEREFORE, STAFF CANNOT SUPPORT THE
 PARKING WAIVER AT THIS TIME; B) AS NOTED IN THE
 JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT (AND CITY RECORDS), 22 EXISTING
 PARKING SPACES ARE CURRENTLY RESERVED FOR PARK N' FLY
 CUSTOMERS PURSUANT TO AN EXISTING RESTRICTIVE COVENANT.
 IT IS DIFFICULT FOR STAFF TO SUPPORT THE PARKING WAIVER
 WHEN THE RESERVED PARKING IS ASSOCIATED WITH AN
 UNRELATED USE (I.E. OFF-SITE LEASE) AND HAS EXACERBATED
 THE INABILITY OF THE PROJECT TO MEET THE MINIMUM
 PARKING REQUIREMENTS (I.E. BY ELIMINATING 22 PARKING
 SPACES THAT COULD COUNT TOWARDS REQUIRED PARKING).
  
 4.) THE ORIENTATION OF THE BUILDINGS, ARCHITECTURAL
 STYLE/ELEMENTS (EXISTING AND PROPOSED) AND SITE DESIGN
 LACKS ENGAGEMENT WITH THE STREET AND CONNECTIVITY WITH
 ADJACENT/NEARBY USES, DESIRED ELEMENTS OF A PLANNED
 DEVELOPMENT. MORE EFFORT IS NEEDED TO ADDRESS THIS
 DESIGN DEFICIENCY.
  
 5.) SINCE THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A REZONING TO A
 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, IT IS EXPECTED THAT AS PART OF THE
 APPLICATION FOR A PD THAT ALL PARCELS (PARCELS A AND B
 AND AS A PD AS A WHOLE) ARE IMPROVED/UPGRADED TO MEET
 AND/OR EXCEED THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZLDRS.
 THE SUBMITTAL SUGGESTS THAT ONLY IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE
 MADE TO PARCEL B (NEW HOTEL SITE), WHICH IS NOT
 ACCEPTABLE.
  
  
 MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS (SHEET MP-1):
  
 [NOTE: THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS A GUIDING
 DOCUMENT FOR THE OVERALL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. STAFF CAN
 PROVIDE AN EXAMPLE OF A MASTER DEVELOPMENT AS A
 REFERENCE TO ASSIST THE APPLICANT WITH SATISFYING THE
 REQUIREMENTS OF ZLDR S.94-207(B)(9)]
  
 1.) THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL BE PROVIDED AS A
 SEPARATE DOCUMENT FROM THE SITE PLAN TO AVOID ANY
 CONFUSION WITH THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS OF THE SUBMITTAL.
  
 2.) A TITLE/NAME SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR THE PROPOSED
 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.
  
 3.) LOCATION MAP OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY SHALL BE
 PROVIDED WITHIN THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
  
 4.) SHOW THE PROPOSED USE OF ALL LAND WITHIN THE
 PROJECT BOUNDARIES, INCLUDING THE LOCATION OF ALL AREAS
 PROPOSED TO BE DEDICATED OR RESERVED FOR COMMUNITY OR
 PUBLIC USE.
  
 5.) SHOW THE LOCATION AND SIZE AS APPROPRIATE OF ALL
 EXISTING AND PROPOSED DRAINAGE, WATER, SEWER, AND OTHER
 UTILITY SERVICE SYSTEMS.
  
 6.) SHOW THE LOCATION OF PROPOSED MASS TRANSIT
 FACILITIES (IF ANY).
  
 7.) PROVIDE INFORMATION ON AGREEMENTS, PROVISIONS, OR
 COVENANTS WHICH GOVERN THE USE, MAINTENANCE AND
 CONTINUED PROTECTION OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND ANY
 OF ITS COMMON AREAS OR FACILITIES.
  
 8.) EXISTING USES, FUTURE LAND USE AND ZONING
 INFORMATION OF THE ADJACENT PARCELS SHALL BE PROVIDED
 IN THE PLAN.
  
 9.) SITE DATA CALCULATIONS SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR THE
 FOLLOWING: 1) OVERALL PD PARCEL; 2) PARCEL A; AND 3)
 PARCEL B. THE CALCULATIONS ARE REQUIRED TO DEMONSTRATE
 THAT THE PARCELS (AS A WHOLE AND INDIVIDUALLY) CAN MEET
 THE MINIMUM STANDARDS OF THE ZLDRS.
  
 10.) GENERAL PARCEL DIMENSIONS AND PARCEL SIZE
 INFORMATION (CONSISTENT WITH THE SURVEY) SHALL BE
 PROVIDED IN THE MASTER PLAN DOCUMENT.
  
 11.) IN THE MASTER PLAN SITE DATA TABULAR: A) CHECK
 PARCEL SIZE INFORMATION. NUMBERS ARE INCONSISTENT WITH
 THE SURVEY AND DO NOT ADD UP; B) THE PROPOSED ZONING OF
 THE SUBJECT SITE IS OFFICE COMMERCIAL PLANNED
 DEVELOPMENT (OCPD); C) CHECK CALCULATIONS FOR THE
 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT REGULATIONS FOR OCPDD.
  
 12.) PARKING CALCULATIONS ARE INACCURATE. PLEASE REVIEW
 AND CORRECT FOR CONSISTENCY.
  
 13.) SHOW A PORTION OF THE SITE ACCESS/LAYOUT OF THE
 PARCEL IMMEDIATELY EAST (EXISTING SELF-STORAGE FACILITY
 SITE) TO ILLUSTRATE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PARCELS,
 AS BOTH PARCELS SHARE THE SAME ROAD FRONTAGE.
  
  
 SITE PLAN COMMENTS:
  
 1.) THE PROPOSED ZONING DESIGNATION OF THE PARCEL IS
 "OFFICE COMMERCIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (OCPD)" NOT
 COMMERCIAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT (CPD).
  
 2.) PLEASE REVIEW SITE DATA CALCULATIONS FOR BOTH
 PARCELS A AND B (I.E. PARCEL SIZE, SETBACKS, PARKING
 CALCULATIONS, LOT COVERAGE, PERVIOUS/IMPERVIOUS
 SURFACE, ETC.). THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME MISSING
 INFORMATION AND/OR INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE NUMBERS
 PROVIDED.
  
 3.) PARCEL DIMENSIONS AND BUILDING/STRUCTURAL SETBACKS
 SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE PLANS FOR PARCELS A AND B.
 DIMENSIONS ARE REQUIRED TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE WITH
 THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZLDRS. ADDITIONALLY, THE
 INFORMATION SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN A SINGLE PLAN SHEET
 FOR THE PARCELS (I.E. NOT SEPARATE/SPLIT SHEETS AS
 PRESENTED).
  
 4.) CLEARLY SHOW THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED 6 FT.
 HIGH CMU SCREEN WALL IN THE PLAN.
  
 5.) THE MONUMENT SIGN DETAIL SHALL BE CLEARLY
 REFERENCED IN THE PLAN (AS WITH THE OTHER DETAILS ON
 SHEETS SPD-1 AND SPD-2).
  
 6.) THE TRELLIS STRUCTURE DETAIL IS INCORRECTLY
 REFERENCED IN THE PLAN. PLEASE ADDRESS FOR CONSISTENCY.
  
 7.) CLEARLY SHOW THE LOCATION OF THE 4 FT. HIGH
 DECORATIVE POOL FENCE IN THE PLAN.
  
 8.) THERE DOES NOT SEEM TO BE ANY INFORMATION ON TRASH
 HANDLING AND REMOVAL ON PARCEL B (I.E. TRASH COMPACTORS
 OR DUMPSTER ENCLOSURES NO FOUND IN THE PLAN). PLEASE
 ADDRESS.
  
 9.) FENCES/WALLS WITHIN THE REQUIRED FRONT SETBACK
 SHALL NOT EXCEED 4 FT. IN HEIGHT. [ZLDR S.94-302(C)]
  
 10.) THE LOCATION OF ANY MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT (I.E.
 GENERATORS, A/C COMPRESSOR UNITS, ETC.) SHALL BE
 IDENTIFIED IN THE PLANS. ALL GROUND FLOOR EQUIPMENT
 SHALL BE SCREENED FROM VIEW WITH A WALL/FENCE AND/OR
 LANDSCAPING, AND ANY ROOFTOP EQUIPMENT SHALL BE
 SCREENED FROM VIEW WITH A PARAPET/WALL. [ZLDR
 S.94-305(B)(4) AND S.94-315]
  
 11.) DETECTED LIGHT POLE FIXTURES SEEM TO BE IN
 CONFLICT WITH THE 2 FT. VEHICULAR CURB OVERHANG. PLEASE
 RELOCATE ANY CONFLICTING LIGHT POLES.
  
 12.) LIGHT POLE FIXTURES SHALL BE SETBACK AT LEAST 15
 FT. FROM THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE(S). PLEASE PROVIDE
 DIMENSIONS TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE.
  
 13.) COMPACT PARKING SPACES HAVE BEEN DETECTED IN THE
 SITE PLAN. PER THE ZLDRS, ONLY 30% OF THE OVERALL TOTAL
 PARKING REQUIREMENT MAY BE COMPACT. PLEASE ILLUSTRATE
 AND PROVIDE CALCULATIONS TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE.
 [ZLDR S.94-485(N)(1)]
  
 14.) A DETAIL FOR THE LAYOUT OF OFF-STREET PARKING
 FACILITIES SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MINIMUM
 REQUIREMENTS SET FORTH IN FIGURE XV-2. THE DETAIL
 PROVIDED IN SHEET SPD-1 IS INCONSISTENT WITH THE
 PARKING PROVIDED (I.E. DETAIL FOR
 STANDARD/COMPACT/DISABLED STALLS; ALL PARKING SPACES
 SEEM TO HAVE 2 FT. CURB OVERHANG, WHICH IS INCONSISTENT
 WITH THE DETAIL, ETC.). [ZLDR S.94-485(N)(2)]
  
 15.) LOADING ZONES REQUIRED FOR EACH INDIVIDUAL PARCEL.
 PROVIDE CALCULATIONS AND IDENTIFY THE LOCATION OF THE
 LOADING ZONE FOR EACH PROPOSED PARCEL IN THE PLAN IN
 ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF ZLDR S.94-485(P).
  
 16.) BICYCLE PARKING IS REQUIRED. PROVIDE CALCULATIONS
 AND SHOW THE LOCATION OF BICYCLE RACKS FOR EACH
 PROPOSED PARCEL IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
 ZLDR S.94-485(Q).
  
  
 LANDSCAPE COMMENTS:
  
 1.) LANDSCAPING SHALL BE UPGRADED ON ALL PARCELS
 AFFECTED BY THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION (NOT
 JUST PARCEL B).
  
 2.) ALL OTHER COMMENTS ON LANDSCAPING SHALL BE PROVIDED
 BY THE CITY'S LANDSCAPE PLANNER.
  
  
 ARCHITECTURAL COMMENTS:
  
 1.) LABEL THE DIRECTION OF THE ELEVATIONS (I.E. NORTH,
 SOUTH, EAST AND WEST).
  
 2.) A NOTE STATING THAT ANY WALL SIGNAGE ON THE
 PROPOSED BUILDING SHALL COMPLY WITH ARTICLE XIII, SIGN
 REGULATIONS, OF THE ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT
 REGULATIONS.
  
  
 SIGNAGE COMMENTS:
  
 1.) THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED MONUMENT SIGN
 SHALL NOT EXCEED 10 FT. IN HEIGHT AT GRADE. PROVIDE
 DIMENSIONS IN THE MONUMENT SIGN DETAIL (SHEET SPD-1) TO
 DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE. IT IS UNCLEAR IF THE NOTATION
 TO THE SIGN HEIGHT IS MEASURED AT GRADE. [ZLDR
 S.94-408(A)(2)]
  
 2.) THE MAXIMUM SUM TOTAL AREA OF ALL LOW FREESTANDING
 SIGNS ON FRONT STREET: ONE (1) SQ. FT. FOR EACH ONE (1)
 LINEAR FOOT OF FRONT STREET FRONTAGE OF THE LOT WHICH
 IT IS LOCATED. THERE ARE NO PARCEL DIMENSIONS PROVIDED
 IN THE PLANS TO CALCULATE AND VERIFY THE SIGN AREA'S
 COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZLDRS. [ZLDR S.94-408(A)(2)]
  
 3.) SHOW DISTANCE OF THE PROPOSED MONUMENT SIGN ON
 PARCEL B TO THE PROPERTY LINES. LOCATION OF THE
 MONUMENT SIGN SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE SIGN SETBACK
 REQUIREMENTS OF ZLDR S.94-408(A)(2)E.
  
 4.) THE ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS SHOW A TOTAL OF FOUR
 (4) WALL SIGNS ON THE PROPOSED HOTEL BUILDING. PER ZLDR
 S.94-408(A)(1), THE BUILDING SHALL NOT EXCEED THREE (3)
 WALL SIGNS. PLEASE ADDRESS FOR CONSISTENCY.
  
  
 PHOTOMETRIC PLAN COMMENTS:
  
 1.) ANY SOURCE OF ILLUMINATION LOCATED WITHIN THE
 PROPOSED PD SHALL NOT EXCEED ONE FOOTCANDLE AT OR
 BEYOND THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DEVELOPMENT. ILLUSTRATE
 FOOTCANDLE SPILLOVER TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE. [ZLDR
 S.94-207(D)(8)]
  
 2.) ALL EXTERIOR LIGHTING SHALL BE SHIELDED TO REDUCE
 GLARE AND SHALL BE ARRANGED TO REFLECT LIGHT OR GLARE
 AWAY FROM PUBLIC THOROUGHFARES. [ZLDR S.94-309(A)]
  
  
 INSTRUCTIONS FOR RESUBMITTAL:
  
 * PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN
 WRITTEN FORMAT.
  
 * ANY CHANGES ON THE RESUBMITTED PLANS MAY RESULT IN
 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
  
 * WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF
 FIFTEEN (15) PAPER COPIES, ONE (1) REDUCED COPY IN 8.5
 INCHES X 11 INCHES AND ONE (1) SET IN 11 INCHES X 17
 INCHES, AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY OF ALL PLANS.
  
 * 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 PERCENT ($600.00) OF THE ORIGINAL
 APPLICATION FEE.
  
 * CONTACT LINDA LOUIE @ (561) 822-1458 IF THERE ARE
 QUESTIONS.
  
  Print


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