| 2020-06-03 13:05:46 | PLANS AND PLATS REVIEW COMMITTEE (PPRC) ZONING REVIEW |
| | ________________________________________ |
| | |
| | DATE OF REVIEW: 06.03.2020 |
| | PROJECT NO.: Z20040031 |
| | CASE NO.: PB 1111WW |
| | ________________________________________ |
| | |
| | PLEASE PROVIDE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING |
| | REVIEW COMMENTS: |
| | |
| | 1. PLEASE EXPLAIN THE RELOCATION OF THE BIKE RACKS FROM |
| | THE REAR OF THE BUILDING. THE OBJECTIVE OF THE ORIGINAL |
| | DESIGN WAS TO HAVE THEM DISTRIBUTED AMONGST THE VARIOUS |
| | ENTRANCES INTO THE BUILDING. |
| | |
| | 2. PLEASE EXPLAIN THE CHANGE IN THE EAST AND WEST |
| | SETBACKS; AND WHY IS THIS JUST NOW BEING INCLUDED AS |
| | AMENDMENT AFTER THE BUILDING IS NEARING COMPLETION? |
| | THIS IS THE FIRST I AM BEING MADE AWARE OF THIS CHANGE. |
| | NOTE THAT PURSUANT TO SEC. 94-207.E.1.E. OF THE CITY?S |
| | ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS PROVIDE THAT A |
| | RELOCATION OF A MORE THAN FIVE (5) PERCENT OF THE |
| | SQUARE FOOTAGE IS A MAJOR AMENDMENT. |
| | |
| | 3. THE SETBACKS SHOWN ON THE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN |
| | DIFFER FROM THOSE WHICH ARE SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN. |
| | |
| | 4. THE EASTERN SETBACK ON THE SITE PLAN IS DIMENSIONED |
| | TO A POINT THAT IS LOCATED INSIDE THE EXTERIOR WALL. |
| | ALL SETBACKS SHALL BE MEASURED FROM THEIR CLOSEST |
| | POINTS ON THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING. |
| | |
| | 5. THE EASTERN SETBACK ON THE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN |
| | SHALL BE MEASURED FROM THE CLOSEST POINT ON THE |
| | EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING. |
| | |
| | 6. THE SIDEWALK SHOWN AT THE EXIT DOOR ON THE EAST |
| | FA?ADE DIFFERS BETWEEN THE SITE PLAN AND THE LANDSCAPE |
| | PLAN. ALL PLANS SHALL BE CONSISTENT AND ACCURATELY |
| | REFLECT THE PROPOSED IMPROVEMENTS. |
| | |
| | 7. THE SIGHT TRIANGLE ON THE CORNER OF PEMBROKE PLACE |
| | AND SOUTH DIXIE HIGHWAY IS NOT SHOWN. |
| | |
| | 8. PLEASE PROVIDE DETAIL REGARDING THE ?PLANS HAVE BEEN |
| | REVISED CONSISTENT WITH THE CIVIL ENGINEERING PLANS |
| | APPROVED DURING PERMITTING.? WHAT CHANGES WERE NEEDED |
| | TO MAKE THEM CONSISTENT? ZONING IS NOT A PART OF THE |
| | ENGINEERING PERMIT REVIEW, THEREFORE, MORE DETAIL IS |
| | NEEDED AS TO WHAT CHANGES NEEDED TO OCCUR. |
| | |
| | 9. WHILE THE CHANGE IN THE FOOTPRINT MAY NOT HAVE |
| | MODIFIED THE PERCENTAGES, IT DOES CHANGE THE SQUARE |
| | FOOTAGES SHOWN ON THE MASTER PLAN. THEREFORE, THE |
| | MASTER PLAN SHOULD BE AMENDED ACCORDINGLY. |
| | ________________________________________ |
| | |
| | PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING WHEN RESUBMITTING: |
| | |
| | A) WRITTEN RESPONSES TO COMMENTS MADE BY ALL |
| | DEPARTMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED UPON RESUBMISSION. |
| | |
| | B) 4 SETS OF REVISED PLANS AND/OR DOCUMENTS SHALL BE |
| | PROVIDED, ALONG WITH ONE (1) REDUCED COPY (11IN X |
| | 17IN), AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY OF ALL PLANS. |
| | |
| | C) PLEASE NOTE THAT RE-SUBMITTALS MAY BE SUBJECT TO |
| | ADDITIONAL COMMENTS. |
| | |
| | D) IF NO RESPONSE IS RECEIVED WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THE |
| | ISSUANCE OF THESE COMMENTS, THE APPLICATION WILL BE |
| | CONSIDERED WITHDRAWN AND ANY FURTHER ACTION WILL |
| | REQUIRE SUBMISSION OF A NEW DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION. |
| | |
| | E) PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU WILL BE PERMITTED ONE (1) |
| | RESUBMITTAL AT NO ADDITIONAL COST. IF PREVIOUSLY-ISSUED |
| | COMMENTS CONTINUE TO NOT BE SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED, THE |
| | APPLICANT WILL BE ACCESSED A RESUBMITTAL FEE. SUCH FEE |
| | WILL BE 20% OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FEE. |
| | ________________________________________ |
| | |
| | QUESTIONS/COMMENTS, PLEASE CONTACT THE FOLLOWING: |
| | |
| | JOHN P. ROACH, AICP, PRINCIPAL PLANNER |
| | CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH |
| | DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT ? PLANNING DIVISION |
| | 401 CLEMATIS STREET - P.O. BOX 3147 |
| | WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33402 |
| | |
| | P: 561.822.1448 |
| | TTY: 800.955.8771 |
| | E: [email protected] |
| | |
| | W: WPB.ORG |
| | |
| | |
