Plan Review Details - Project Z22110009
Plan Review Stops For Project Z22110009
Review Stop AIPP ART IN PUBLIC PLACES
Rev No 1 Status N Date 01-03-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By swelter Date 01-03-2023 Time 13:05 Rev Time 0.00
Received By swelter Date 01-03-2023 Time 13:06 Sent To  
Notes
2023-01-03 13:06:03NON-PROFIT - EXEMPT FOR AIPP
Review Stop B BUILDING (STRUCTURAL)
Rev No 2 Status P Date 02-01-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By rbrown Date 02-01-2023 Time 10:21 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rbrown Date 02-01-2023 Time 10:21 Sent To  
Notes
***NONE***
Review Stop B BUILDING (STRUCTURAL)
Rev No 1 Status P Date 12-02-2022 Cont ID  
Sent By rbrown Date 12-02-2022 Time 19:04 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rbrown Date 12-02-2022 Time 19:04 Sent To  
Notes
2022-12-02 19:14:27DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT, BUILDING DIVISION,
 COMMENTS:
  
 1. THIS REVIEW IS A CURSORY REVIEW AS IT RELATES TO THE
 SITE. IT IS NOT A REVIEW FOR FULL COMPLIANCE WITH
 FLORIDA BUILDING CODE. THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS ARE TO BE
 ADDRESSED FOR THE BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION.
  
 2. DEMOLITION OF THE 5 EXISTING 1-STORY BUILDINGS. AN
 ASBESTOS SURVEY SHALL BE PERFORMED AND AN ASBESTOS
 ABATEMENT REPORT SUBMITTED TO THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT
 PALM BEACH COUNTY OFFICE. CONTACT ALEX ORTEGA AT (561)
 837-5963, OR BY EMAIL: [email protected]
  
 3. FLOOD ZONE. ACCORDING TO THE ADOPTED FLOOD INSURANCE
 RATE MAPS (FIRMS), THE PROPOSED BUILDINGS ARE IN FLOOD
 ZONE AE, WITH A BASE FLOOD ELEVATION OF 12.2 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.
  
 4. ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATION. IF ELECTRIC
 VEHICLE (EV) CHARGING STATIONS ARE PROVIDED AT LEAST 1
 IN 25 MUST COMPLY WITH ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE
 REQUIREMENTS.
  
 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. 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.
  
 7. BUILDING ADDRESS. EACH SEPARATE BUILDING, AND UNIT
 WITH AN INDEPENDENT ENTRANCE FROM THE STREET, SHALL
 HAVE A SEPARATE ADDRESS ASSIGNED BASED ON THE LOCATION
 OF THE BUILDING ENTRANCE. FOR STREET ADDRESSING,
 CONTACT CAROLINE PUELL, ADDRESSING COORDINATOR, AT
 (561) 805 6659, OR BY EMAIL: [email protected]
  
  
 ROBERT BROWN
 BUILDING OFFICIAL
 TEL: 561 805 6652
 EMAIL: [email protected]
  
Review Stop ENG - PPRC ENGINEERING - PPRC
Rev No 2 Status P Date 12-30-2022 Cont ID  
Sent By rrossano Date 12-30-2022 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By rrossano Date 12-30-2022 Time   Sent To  
Notes
***NONE***
Review Stop ENG - PPRC ENGINEERING - PPRC
Rev No 1 Status F Date 11-22-2022 Cont ID  
Sent By rrossano Date 11-22-2022 Time   Rev Time  
Received By rrossano Date 11-22-2022 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2022-11-22 15:40:48COMMENTS FROM RICK ROSSANO, SR. PROJECT COORDINATOR,
 ENGINEERING SERVICES AT 561-494-1098 [email protected]
 GENERAL:
 O PROVIDE SEPARATE UTILITY AND PDG SHEETS.
 O PLEASE RESPOND TO ALL COMMENTS IN WRITING, AND
 INCLUDE PROJECT NAME, ADDRESS AND PERMIT NUMBER
 (Z-XXXXXXXX).
 O 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:
 A. HTTP://WPB.ORG/CMSPAGES/GETAMAZONFILE.ASPX?PATH=~\WP
 B_WEBSITE\MEDIA\ENGINEERING\DEVELOPMENT-APPLICATION-FUL
 L-PACKAGE_2016.PDF&HASH=7BD4DD7EB6115181D8C5977BCC02A97
 B1960045731D3658206F27451722716EF
 B. THIS AND OTHER RELATED ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS CAN BE
 FOUND HERE:
 HTTP://WPB.ORG/DEPARTMENTS/ENGINEERING-PUBLIC-WORKS/FOR
 MS,-PERMITS-APPLICATIONS
 C. ALSO SEE: 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. IN GENERAL,
 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.
 O 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:
 A. HTTP://WPB.ORG/DEPARTMENTS/PUBLIC-UTILITIES/FORMS-PU
 BLICATIONS/BACKFLOW-CROSS-CONNECTION- CONTROL-MANUAL
 O PLEASE SUBMIT A FORMAL AS-BUILT REQUEST FOR ALL CITY
 OF WEST PALM BEACH-OWNED UTILITIES WITHIN THE PUBLIC
 RIGHT OF WAY FOR THE ENTIRE EXTENT OF THE LIMITS OF
 YOUR PROJECT. IDENTIFY TYPE OF UTILITY, LOCATION, PIPE
 MATERIAL, AGE AND SIZE. PLEASE CONTACT JANICE TARBILL
 IN THE WPB ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT AT
 [email protected] OR 561-494-1079 FOR FURTHER
 ASSISTANCE. NOTE THAT FIELD RECORDS ARE FOR INFORMATION
 ONLY. FIELD VERIFY UTILITY LOCATIONS USING FIELD
 SURVEY, POT-HOLING, SOFT DIGS ETC.
 O PROVIDE EXISTING AND PROPOSED PERVIOUS AND IMPERVIOUS
 DATA.
  
 BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY AND METERS:
 O SHOW AND LABEL ANY EXISTING OR PROPOSED WATER
 SERVICES AND WATER METERS, ALONG WITH WHAT IS HAPPENING
 TO THEM.
 O PROVIDE ENLARGED VIEW ON PLANS OF PROPOSED LOCATION
 OF WATER METER AND BACKFLOW PREVENTION.
 O CALLOUT DOMESTIC BACKFLOW PREVENTER AS RPPA (MAKE
 NOTE USC APPROVED) AND FIRE BACKFLOW PREVENTER AS DCDA.
  
 WATER/WASTEWATER PLAN:
 O LABEL EXISTING LIFT STATION (REMOVE OR TO REMAIN).
 O PROVIDE VERTICAL DATUM AND DATUM CONVERSION
 INFORMATION (NAVD 1988 AND NGVD 1929).
 O PROVIDE LEGEND ON ALL PLAN SHEETS TO INCLUDE
 STREETLIGHT, SIGN POSTS, TRANSFORMER BOXES ETC.
 O PLANS SHALL SHOW EXISTING AND PROPOSED LOCATIONS AND
 DIMENSIONS OF ALL WATER, STORMWATER, AND SANITARY AND
 SEWER LINES AND CLEANOUTS, INCLUDING STUBS TO EACH
 PROPERTY LINE FOR WATER AND SANITARY SEWERS, THE MAKE
 AND MODEL OF ALL VALVES, POTABLE AND IRRIGATION METERS,
 BACKFLOWS, FIRE HYDRANTS AND FDCS, AND OTHER 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.
 O GATE VALVE BOXES SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED IN CURB OR
 SIDEWALK. ALL AVAILABLE ELEVATION SHALL BE SHOWN ON THE
 PROFILE VIEW.
 O DIRECTION OF FLOW SHALL BE SHOWN ON PLAN VIEW ON PLAN
 VIEW FOR ALL SANITARY AND STORM SEWERS.
 O SHOW SLOPE % ON ALL SANITARY LINES AND CALL OUT
 MATERIAL.
 O PLAN VIEW SHALL SHOW ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED
 UNDERGROUND UTILITY LAYOUT, INCLUDING FIBER OPTIC,
 ELECTRIC, GAS, AND CABLEVISION & TELECOMMUNICATION
 FACILITIES INCLUDING PIPE SIZE AND MATERIAL LOCATED IN
 THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
 O PROVIDE PROFILE AND CLEARANCES BETWEEN WATER, SEWER
 AND STORM LINES PER CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH STANDARD
 DETAIL GN-2 SERIES, AT ALL UTILITY CROSSINGS. PLEASE
 INCLUDE FIBER OPTIC, ELECTRIC, GAS, AND CABLEVISION &
 TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES INCLUDING PIPE SIZE AND
 MATERIAL LOCATED IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
 O SUBMIT COMPLETED LOS ANALYSIS SUMMARY TABLE DIRECTLY
 TO ENGINEERING (SHEET 33 OF CITY OF WPB DEVELOPMENT
 APPLICATION). 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.
 O PROVIDE FIRE FLOW TEST DATA.
 O PROVIDE CCTV VIDEO OF EXISTING SANITARY SEWER FROM
 MH6675 TO MH2076 (CONDITION OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL).
 O CUT AND CAP UTILITIES NOT IN USE AND REMOVE ANY
 ABANDONED UTILITY LINES LARGER THAN 2 INCHES FROM CITY
 ROW.
 O WHEN PROPOSED, WATER MAINS IN CITY RIGHT OF WAY SHALL
 BE MADE OF DUCTILE IRON PIPE (NOT PVC) AND SPECIFY
 PROPOSED LENGTH IN FEET.
 O CHECK TO SEE IF FDEP FORMS FOR PROPOSED SANITARY
 SEWER ARE REQUIRED.
 O ADD NOTE TO PLANS SPECIFYING CITY???S DOWNSTREAM LIFT
 STATION NUMBER.
 O LABEL WATER LINES AS PRIVATE WHERE APPLICABLE.
 O PER CITY STANDARDS MAINTAIN MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN
 OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF CITY PIPE AND ROOT BARRIER.
 O ROAD TO REMAIN OPEN DURING CONSTRUCTION.
  
Review Stop FIRE FIRE DEPARTMENT
Rev No 2 Status P Date 01-31-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By pleduc Date 01-31-2023 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By pleduc Date 01-31-2023 Time 10:18 Sent To  
Notes
2023-01-31 10:19:13AFTER A REVIEW OF THE PPRC RESPONSE PACKET FOR THIS
 PROJECT, THE PREVIOUSLY SUBMITTED FIRE PREVENTION
 BUREAU COMMENTS APPEAR TO HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED.
  
 HOWEVER, THE BUREAU'S APPROVAL OF THIS SUBMITTED
 PROJECT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE ITS FINAL REVIEW OR
 APPROVAL.
  
 THE BUREAU SHALL REVIEW ALL SUBMITTED BUILDING PLANS AT
 THE APPROPRIATE TIME AND IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE
 REQUIREMENTS OF ALL APPLICABLE CODES AND STANDARDS.
  
 PETER LEDUC
 FIRE MARSHAL
 WEST PALM BEACH FIRE DEPARTMENT
 561-804-4709
 [email protected]
  
Review Stop FIRE FIRE DEPARTMENT
Rev No 1 Status P Date 11-29-2022 Cont ID  
Sent By pleduc Date 11-29-2022 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By pleduc Date 11-22-2022 Time 14:41 Sent To  
Notes
2022-11-29 11:11:09THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS WERE SUBMITTED BY PETER LEDUC,
 FIRE MARSHAL, BUREAU OF FIRE PREVENTION, WEST PALM
 BEACH FIRE DEPARTMENT.
  
 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. THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS ARE INTENDED
 TO PROVIDE GUIDANCE FOR BUILDING PLAN SUBMITTAL.
  
 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(S) SHALL COMPLY
 WITH THE 7TH EDITION OF THE FLORIDA FIRE PREVENTION
 CODE, INCLUDING NFPA 1 & 101, AND ALL ASSOCIATED FIRE
 CODES.
  
 6. FOR PLAN REVIEW SUBMITTAL, PLEASE INCLUDE THE
 OCCUPANCY TYPE PER THE FLORIDA FIRE PREVENTION CODE.
  
 7. FOR PLAN REVIEW SUBMITTAL, PLEASE ENSURE THAT A FIRE
 LOAD CALCULATION IS INCLUDED, AND THAT ADEQUATE WATER
 SUPPLY IS EXISTING OR WILL BE PROVIDED.
  
 8. ALL EXISTING AND NEW FIRE HYDRANTS PLANNED FOR THIS
 DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE CLEARLY INDICATED AND IDENTIFIED
 ON THE PLAN AND CLOSELY COORDINATED WITH THE BUREAU OF
 FIRE PREVENTION.
  
 THE PROPOSED LOCATION OF THE FIRE HYDRANT AND FDC SHALL
 BE WITHIN 100' OF EACH OTHER AND CLOSELY COORDINATED
 WITH THE BUREAU OF FIRE PREVENTION.
  
 9. PROVIDE FOR A FIRE SPRINKLER AND/OR FIRE ALARM PER
 THE APPLICABLE OCCUPANCY CODE. FOR ANY LIFE SAFETY
 ENGINEERED SYSTEM, I.E FIRE SPRINKLER AND FIRE ALARM,
 ENSURE THEY COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF F.A.C. 61G
 AND SUBMITTED WITH THE MASTER PERMIT.
  
 9A. THE LOCATION OF ANY APPLICABLE DDCV AND FIRE LINE
 LOCATIONS SHALL MEET AND BE INSTALLED PER THE
 REQUIREMENTS OF NFPA 24 AND SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH
 THE OFFICE OF FIRE MARSHAL, THE CITY'S ENGINEERS
 OFFICE, THE LANDSCAPE PLANNER, AND THE CITY'S PLANNING
 AND ZONING OFFICE.
  
 10. COMPLETE LIFE SAFETY PLANS FOR THE OCCUPANCY SHALL
 BE PROVIDED THAT ILLUSTRATE OCCUPANT LOADS, TRAVEL
 DISTANCES, EXIT SEPARATION DISTANCES, COMMON PATHS OF
 TRAVEL, DEAD-END CORRIDORS, EXIT SIGNS, EMERGENCY
 LIGHTING, EXITS LEADING TO A PUBLIC WAY, FIRE
 EXTINGUISHER LOCATIONS, AND ALL FIRE SAFETY FEATURES
 AND EQUIPMENT.
  
 11. IT IS HIGHLY RECOMMENDED (REQUIRED WITH FIRE
 SPRINKLER SYSTEM) THAT A KNOX BOX WITH KEYS FOR ENTRY
 DOOR LOCKS BE PROVIDED FOR 24 HOUR EMERGENCY ACCESS.
  
 12. AREAS OF REFUGE SHALL BE PROVIDED AS REQUIRED PER
 THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE AND NFPA 101, CH 7, MEANS OF
 EGRESS.
  
 ALL NEW ELEVATORS SHALL CONFORM TO THE FIRE FIGHTER???S
 EMERGENCY OPERATIONS REQUIREMENTS OF ASME A17.1/CSA
 B44, SAFETY CODE FOR ELEVATORS.
  
 13. TWO-WAY RADIO COMMUNICATIONS ENHANCEMENT SYSTEMS.
  
 NFPA 1, CHAPTER 11, BUILDING SERVICES; 11.10 TWO-WAY
 RADIO ENHANCEMENT SERVICES.
  
 11.10.1 IN ALL NEW AND EXISTING BUILDINGS, MINIMUM
 RADIO SIGNAL STRENGTH FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT
 COMMUNICATIONS SHALL BE MAINTAINED AT A LEVEL
 DETERMINED BY THE AHJ.
  
 IF APPLICABLE, CONTACT WILL NEED TO BE MADE TO MARK
 FILLA, PALM BEACH COUNTY PUBLIC SAFETY RADIO SYSTEMS
 MANAGER, [email protected], 561-233-0837; AS OUR RADIOS
 OPERATE ON THEIR SYSTEM FOR DETAILED RADIO FREQUENCY
 AND INSTALLATION INSTRUCTIONS.
  
 14. THE BUREAU'S APPROVAL OF THIS SUBMITTED PROJECT
 DOES NOT CONSTITUTE ITS FINAL REVIEW OR APPROVAL.
  
 15. 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 3 Status P Date 03-09-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By rcaranci Date 03-09-2023 Time 11:31 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rcaranci Date 03-09-2023 Time 11:31 Sent To  
Notes
2023-03-09 11:32:36FROM: RAY CARANCI, SENIOR LANDSCAPE PLANNER
 561-822-1462
 PROJECT: SCIENCE CENTER Z22110009
 MARCH 8, 2023
 I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PETITION, AND
 PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:
  
  
 1. SATISFIED. SECTION 94-448 (D)(3) REQUIRES NATIVE
 TREES AND PALMS IN GOOD CONDITION TO BE PRESERVED ON
 SITE OR RELOCATED. ANSI A 300 (PART 5) STANDARDS
 SPECIFY EXAMPLES OF SUITABILITY RATINGS OF GOOD,
 MODERATE, OR POOR FOR RELOCATION. PROVIDE AN ARBORISTS
 REPORT RATING THE CONDITION AND RELOCATION POTENTIAL
 FOR NATIVE TREES AND PALMS PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED.
  
 2. SATISFIED. THE TREE DISPOSITION PLAN DOES NOT SHOW
 SOME TREES FROM THE SURVEY. AFFECTED AREA LINE MUST BE
 CLEAR ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN TO INDICATE ALL TREES AND
 SHOW THEY WILL REMAIN IN THE UNAFFECTED AREAS.
 THERE ARE TREES NEAR THE SPLASH PAD THAT ARE NOT SHOWN
 ON THE PLAN INCLUDING A LARGE LIVE OAK TREE.
  
  
 3. SATISFIED. PHASING PLAN NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED. THERE
 ARE FOUR CHARTS SHOWN ON THE TREE DISPOSITION PLAN THAT
 NEED TO BE LABELED AS TO THE PHASING.
  
 4. SATISFIED. ALL TREE SPECIES MUST BE IDENTIFIED ON
 THE TREE DISPOSITION CHARTS, CANNOT BE LABELED AS
 UNKNOWN.
 THERE IS AT LEAST ONE TREE STILL NOT IDENTIFIED.
 FURTHER REVIEW IS WARRANTED.
  
 5. SATISFIED. CSPD ZONING REQUIRES 50% OPEN SPACE AREA
 PER SECTION 94-203(B)(8), SO LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS
 CHART NEEDS TO BE REVISED TO USE 228,690 SQ FT FOR
 REQUIRED OPEN SPACE WITHIN THE LEASE LINE.
 SQUARE FOOTAGE HAS BEEN CORRECTED BUT PERCENTAGE IS
 STILL SHOWN AS 40%. REVISE.
  
 6. SATISFIED. PER SECTION 94-443 (E)2., PROVIDE THE 30%
 FOUNDATION PLANTING CALCULATION REQUIRED AND PROVIDED
 FOR EACH BUILDING.
 STYLES NICHOLSON STEM CENTER BUILDING NEEDS TO BE
 SHOWN.
  
 7. SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE CALCULATIONS SHOWING THE
 NUMBER OF REQUIRED TREES IN THE PARKING AREAS AND HOW
 THE 75% CATEGORY 1 SHADE TREE REQUIREMENT IS MET.
  
 8. SATISFIED. INDICATE THE TERMINAL ISLAND TREE
 ADJACENT TO THE ADA SPACES IN FRONT OF THE STYLES
 NICHOLSON STEM CENTER.
  
 9. SATISFIED. REQUIRED HEDGE IS MISSING ON THE NORTH
 SIDE OF THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED
 EAST OF THE EXISTING BUILDING.
  
  
 10. SATISFIED. IF ANY ARTIFICIAL TURF AREAS ARE
 PROPOSED OR EXISTING, THEY MUST MEET THE REQUIREMENTS
 OF SECTION 94-451, INCLUDING ALL AREAS THAT ARE ALLOWED
 BY CODE MUST NOT BE VISIBLE FROM A ROAD OR STREET.
  
 11. SATISFIED. PROPOSED WATER AND SEWER AND DRAINAGE
 LINES ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN SHOW CONFLICTS WITH
 REQUIRED TREES IN THE PARKING AREAS IN SEVERAL
 LOCATIONS. ADJUST LOCATIONS OF UTILITY LINES TO RESOLVE
 CONFLICTS WITH EXISTING AND PROPOSED TREES AND
 LANDSCAPING.
 ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING CONFLICTS:
 ??? FIRE LINE AND HYDRANT IN CONFLICT WITH REQUIRED
 TREE IN ISLAND SOUTH OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING, SHEET
 LP-11.
 ??? THERE ARE LOCATIONS EAST OF THE NEW BUILDING THAT
 ARE SEVERELY LIMITING FOR TREES. RELOCATE UTILITIES
 WHERE POSSIBLE.
 ??? IRRIGATION LINE NORTH OF THE NEW BUILDING SHOULD BE
 RELOCATED TO AVOID CONFLICT WITH THE TREE ROOT SYSTEM.
 THIS WILL ALSO MAKE THE IRRIGATION LINE LESS LIKELY TO
 REQUIRE MAINTENANCE IN THIS AREA.
  
  
 12. SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE 50 REQUIRED FLORIDA FRIENDLY
 POINTS BASED ON THE FINAL PLANT LIST PER SECTION
 94-443(G). THE GROUND COVER LISTED ON THE PLANT LIST IS
 NOT FLORIDA NATIVE, SO POINTS CANNOT BE TAKEN.
 PROVIDE DETAILED ACCOUNTING OF WHERE THE ADDITIONAL
 TREES ARE LOCATED FOR 6(B) OR REMOVE AND TAKE CREDITS
 FOR ANY DROUGHT TOLERANT TREES OR SHRUBS IN 25-50%
 CATEGORIES.
  
 13. SATISFIED. PROVIDE SCREENING HEDGES AND SHOW
 LOCATIONS FOR ALL GROUND MOUNTED VALVES AND EQUIPMENT
 AND ADD A NOTE THAT ALL EQUIPMENT WILL BE SCREENED.
  
 14. SATISFIED. EXPLAIN THE CHOICE OF PLATANUS
 OCCIDENTALIS FOR THE PARKING LOT TREES. THIS IS AT THE
 EXTREME SOUTHERN EDGE OF THE RANGE OF THIS SPECIES.
  
 THIS SPECIES HAS NOT BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN WEST PALM BEACH
 AND IS RATED FOR HARDINESS LIMIT TO ZONE 9B. SOUTHEAST
 PALM BEACH COUNTY IS NOW IN ZONE 10A PER THE CURRENT
 USDA HARDINESS MAP AND IS PREDICTED TO CONTINUE TO
 WARM. THIS SPECIES THEREFORE WILL BECOME EVEN LESS
 SUSTAINABLE IN THE FUTURE. PLEASE CHOOSE A MORE
 SUSTAINABLE SPECIES, AS THIS DOES NOT MEET THE INTENT
 OF THE LANDSCAPE CODE REQUIREMENT.
  
 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.
  
 2. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF THE TREE ALTERATION PERMIT,
 PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT SHALL REVIEW THE FINAL
 TREE DISPOSITION PLAN FOR ANY CHANGES THAT MAY BE
 PROPOSED.
  
Review Stop L LANDSCAPING
Rev No 2 Status F Date 01-17-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By rcaranci Date 01-17-2023 Time 17:18 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rcaranci Date 01-17-2023 Time 17:18 Sent To  
Notes
2023-01-17 17:19:04FROM: RAY CARANCI, SENIOR LANDSCAPE PLANNER
 561-822-1462
 PROJECT: SCIENCE CENTER Z22110009
 JANUARY 17, 2023
 I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PETITION, AND
 PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:
  
  
 1. SATISFIED. SECTION 94-448 (D)(3) REQUIRES NATIVE
 TREES AND PALMS IN GOOD CONDITION TO BE PRESERVED ON
 SITE OR RELOCATED. ANSI A 300 (PART 5) STANDARDS
 SPECIFY EXAMPLES OF SUITABILITY RATINGS OF GOOD,
 MODERATE, OR POOR FOR RELOCATION. PROVIDE AN ARBORISTS
 REPORT RATING THE CONDITION AND RELOCATION POTENTIAL
 FOR NATIVE TREES AND PALMS PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED.
  
 2. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. THE TREE DISPOSITION PLAN DOES
 NOT SHOW SOME TREES FROM THE SURVEY. AFFECTED AREA LINE
 MUST BE CLEAR ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN TO INDICATE ALL
 TREES AND SHOW THEY WILL REMAIN IN THE UNAFFECTED
 AREAS.
 THERE ARE TREES NEAR THE SPLASH PAD THAT ARE NOT SHOWN
 ON THE PLAN INCLUDING A LARGE LIVE OAK TREE.
  
  
 3. SATISFIED. PHASING PLAN NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED. THERE
 ARE FOUR CHARTS SHOWN ON THE TREE DISPOSITION PLAN THAT
 NEED TO BE LABELED AS TO THE PHASING.
  
 4. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. ALL TREE SPECIES MUST BE
 IDENTIFIED ON THE TREE DISPOSITION CHARTS, CANNOT BE
 LABELED AS UNKNOWN.
 THERE IS AT LEAST ONE TREE STILL NOT IDENTIFIED.
 FURTHER REVIEW IS WARRANTED.
  
 5. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. CSPD ZONING REQUIRES 50% OPEN
 SPACE AREA PER SECTION 94-203(B)(8), SO LANDSCAPE
 REQUIREMENTS CHART NEEDS TO BE REVISED TO USE 228,690
 SQ FT FOR REQUIRED OPEN SPACE WITHIN THE LEASE LINE.
 SQUARE FOOTAGE HAS BEEN CORRECTED BUT PERCENTAGE IS
 STILL SHOWN AS 40%. REVISE.
  
 6. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PER SECTION 94-443 (E)2.,
 PROVIDE THE 30% FOUNDATION PLANTING CALCULATION
 REQUIRED AND PROVIDED FOR EACH BUILDING.
 STYLES NICHOLSON STEM CENTER BUILDING NEEDS TO BE
 SHOWN.
  
 7. SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE CALCULATIONS SHOWING THE
 NUMBER OF REQUIRED TREES IN THE PARKING AREAS AND HOW
 THE 75% CATEGORY 1 SHADE TREE REQUIREMENT IS MET.
  
 8. SATISFIED. INDICATE THE TERMINAL ISLAND TREE
 ADJACENT TO THE ADA SPACES IN FRONT OF THE STYLES
 NICHOLSON STEM CENTER.
  
 9. SATISFIED. REQUIRED HEDGE IS MISSING ON THE NORTH
 SIDE OF THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED
 EAST OF THE EXISTING BUILDING.
  
  
 10. SATISFIED. IF ANY ARTIFICIAL TURF AREAS ARE
 PROPOSED OR EXISTING, THEY MUST MEET THE REQUIREMENTS
 OF SECTION 94-451, INCLUDING ALL AREAS THAT ARE ALLOWED
 BY CODE MUST NOT BE VISIBLE FROM A ROAD OR STREET.
  
 11. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROPOSED WATER AND SEWER AND
 DRAINAGE LINES ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN SHOW CONFLICTS
 WITH REQUIRED TREES IN THE PARKING AREAS IN SEVERAL
 LOCATIONS. ADJUST LOCATIONS OF UTILITY LINES TO RESOLVE
 CONFLICTS WITH EXISTING AND PROPOSED TREES AND
 LANDSCAPING.
 ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING CONFLICTS:
 ??? FIRE LINE AND HYDRANT IN CONFLICT WITH REQUIRED
 TREE IN ISLAND SOUTH OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING, SHEET
 LP-11.
 ??? THERE ARE LOCATIONS EAST OF THE NEW BUILDING THAT
 ARE SEVERELY LIMITING FOR TREES. RELOCATE UTILITIES
 WHERE POSSIBLE.
 ??? IRRIGATION LINE NORTH OF THE NEW BUILDING SHOULD BE
 RELOCATED TO AVOID CONFLICT WITH THE TREE ROOT SYSTEM.
 THIS WILL ALSO MAKE THE IRRIGATION LINE LESS LIKELY TO
 REQUIRE MAINTENANCE IN THIS AREA.
  
  
 12. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE 50 REQUIRED
 FLORIDA FRIENDLY POINTS BASED ON THE FINAL PLANT LIST
 PER SECTION 94-443(G). THE GROUND COVER LISTED ON THE
 PLANT LIST IS NOT FLORIDA NATIVE, SO POINTS CANNOT BE
 TAKEN.
 PROVIDE DETAILED ACCOUNTING OF WHERE THE ADDITIONAL
 TREES ARE LOCATED FOR 6(B) OR REMOVE AND TAKE CREDITS
 FOR ANY DROUGHT TOLERANT TREES OR SHRUBS IN 25-50%
 CATEGORIES.
  
 13. SATISFIED. PROVIDE SCREENING HEDGES AND SHOW
 LOCATIONS FOR ALL GROUND MOUNTED VALVES AND EQUIPMENT
 AND ADD A NOTE THAT ALL EQUIPMENT WILL BE SCREENED.
  
 14. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. EXPLAIN THE CHOICE OF PLATANUS
 OCCIDENTALIS FOR THE PARKING LOT TREES. THIS IS AT THE
 EXTREME SOUTHERN EDGE OF THE RANGE OF THIS SPECIES.
  
 THIS SPECIES HAS NOT BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN WEST PALM BEACH
 AND IS RATED FOR HARDINESS LIMIT TO ZONE 9B. SOUTHEAST
 PALM BEACH COUNTY IS NOW IN ZONE 10A PER THE CURRENT
 USDA HARDINESS MAP AND IS PREDICTED TO CONTINUE TO
 WARM. THIS SPECIES THEREFORE WILL BECOME EVEN LESS
 SUSTAINABLE IN THE FUTURE. PLEASE CHOOSE A MORE
 SUSTAINABLE SPECIES, AS THIS DOES NOT MEET THE INTENT
 OF THE LANDSCAPE CODE REQUIREMENT.
  
  
  
  
 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 12-07-2022 Cont ID  
Sent By rcaranci Date 12-07-2022 Time 10:53 Rev Time 0.00
Received By rcaranci Date 12-07-2022 Time 10:53 Sent To  
Notes
2022-12-07 10:57:23FROM: RAY CARANCI, SENIOR LANDSCAPE PLANNER
 561-822-1462
 PROJECT: SCIENCE CENTER Z22110009
 DECEMBER 6, 2022
 I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE REFERENCED PETITION, AND
 PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS:
  
  
 1. SECTION 94-448 (D)(3) REQUIRES NATIVE TREES AND
 PALMS IN GOOD CONDITION TO BE PRESERVED ON SITE OR
 RELOCATED. ANSI A 300 (PART 5) STANDARDS SPECIFY
 EXAMPLES OF SUITABILITY RATINGS OF GOOD, MODERATE, OR
 POOR FOR RELOCATION. PROVIDE AN ARBORISTS REPORT RATING
 THE CONDITION AND RELOCATION POTENTIAL FOR NATIVE TREES
 AND PALMS PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED.
  
 2. THE TREE DISPOSITION PLAN DOES NOT SHOW SOME TREES
 FROM THE SURVEY. AFFECTED AREA LINE MUST BE CLEAR ON
 THE LANDSCAPE PLAN TO INDICATE ALL TREES AND SHOW THEY
 WILL REMAIN IN THE UNAFFECTED AREAS.
  
 3. PHASING PLAN NEEDS TO BE CLARIFIED. THERE ARE FOUR
 CHARTS SHOWN ON THE TREE DISPOSITION PLAN THAT NEED TO
 BE LABELED AS TO THE PHASING.
  
 4. ALL TREE SPECIES MUST BE IDENTIFIED ON THE TREE
 DISPOSITION CHARTS, CANNOT BE LABELED AS UNKNOWN.
  
 5. CSPD ZONING REQUIRES 50% OPEN SPACE AREA PER SECTION
 94-203(B)(8), SO LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS CHART NEEDS TO
 BE REVISED TO USE 228,690 SQ FT FOR REQUIRED OPEN SPACE
 WITHIN THE LEASE LINE.
  
 6. PER SECTION 94-443 (E)2., PROVIDE THE 30% FOUNDATION
 PLANTING CALCULATION REQUIRED AND PROVIDED FOR EACH
 BUILDING.
  
 7. PROVIDE THE CALCULATIONS SHOWING THE NUMBER OF
 REQUIRED TREES IN THE PARKING AREAS AND HOW THE 75%
 CATEGORY 1 SHADE TREE REQUIREMENT IS MET.
  
 8. INDICATE THE TERMINAL ISLAND TREE ADJACENT TO THE
 ADA SPACES IN FRONT OF THE STYLES NICHOLSON STEM
 CENTER.
  
 9. REQUIRED HEDGE IS MISSING ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE
 DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED EAST OF THE
 EXISTING BUILDING.
  
  
 10. IF ANY ARTIFICIAL TURF AREAS ARE PROPOSED OR
 EXISTING, THEY MUST MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION
 94-451, INCLUDING ALL AREAS THAT ARE ALLOWED BY CODE
 MUST NOT BE VISIBLE FROM A ROAD OR STREET.
  
 11. PROPOSED WATER AND SEWER AND DRAINAGE LINES ON THE
 LANDSCAPE PLAN SHOW CONFLICTS WITH REQUIRED TREES IN
 THE PARKING AREAS IN SEVERAL LOCATIONS. ADJUST
 LOCATIONS OF UTILITY LINES TO RESOLVE CONFLICTS WITH
 EXISTING AND PROPOSED TREES AND LANDSCAPING.
  
 12. PROVIDE THE 50 REQUIRED FLORIDA FRIENDLY POINTS
 BASED ON THE FINAL PLANT LIST PER SECTION 94-443(G).
 THE GROUND COVER LISTED ON THE PLANT LIST IS NOT
 FLORIDA NATIVE, SO POINTS CANNOT BE TAKEN.
  
 13. PROVIDE SCREENING HEDGES AND SHOW LOCATIONS FOR ALL
 GROUND MOUNTED VALVES AND EQUIPMENT AND ADD A NOTE THAT
 ALL EQUIPMENT WILL BE SCREENED.
  
 14. EXPLAIN THE CHOICE OF PLATANUS OCCIDENTALIS FOR THE
 PARKING LOT TREES. THIS IS AT THE EXTREME SOUTHERN EDGE
 OF THE RANGE OF THIS SPECIES.
  
  
  
 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 PU PUBLIC UTILITIES
Rev No 3 Status P Date   Cont ID  
Sent By   Date   Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By relizond Date 03-17-2023 Time 13:21 Sent To  
Notes
2023-03-17 13:25:56PLANS ARE ACCEPTABLE FROM A CONCEPTUAL STANDPOINT,
 DESIGN DETAILS WILL NEED TO BE EXPLICITLY NOTED DURING
 THE ENGINEERING SUBMITTAL.
  
 RICKY ELIZONDO
 [email protected]
Review Stop PU PUBLIC UTILITIES
Rev No 2 Status F Date 01-06-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By relizond Date 01-06-2023 Time 12:47 Rev Time 0.00
Received By relizond Date 01-06-2023 Time 12:47 Sent To  
Notes
2023-01-06 12:47:34COMMENTS FROM PREVIOUS REVIEW HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED
Review Stop PU PUBLIC UTILITIES
Rev No 1 Status F Date 12-05-2022 Cont ID  
Sent By relizond Date 12-05-2022 Time 14:53 Rev Time 0.00
Received By relizond Date 12-05-2022 Time 14:41 Sent To  
Notes
2022-12-05 14:51:41O PROVIDE VERTICAL DATUM AND DATUM CONVERSION
 INFORMATION (NAVD 1988 AND NGVD 1929).
 O SHOW PROJECT ADDRESS ON ALL PLAN SHEETS.
 O PLANS SHALL SHOW EXISTING AND PROPOSED LOCATIONS AND
 DIMENSIONS OF ALL WATER, STORMWATER, AND SANITARY AND
 SEWER LINES AND CLEANOUTS, INCLUDING STUBS TO EACH
 PROPERTY LINE FOR WATER AND SANITARY SEWERS, THE MAKE
 AND MODEL OF ALL VALVES, POTABLE AND IRRIGATION METERS,
 BACKFLOWS, FIRE HYDRANTS AND FDCS, AND OTHER 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.
 O GATE VALVE BOXES SHALL NOT BE INSTALLED IN CURB OR
 SIDEWALK. ALL AVAILABLE ELEVATION SHALL BE SHOWN ON THE
 PROFILE VIEW.
 O DIRECTION OF FLOW SHALL BE SHOWN ON PLAN VIEW ON PLAN
 VIEW FOR ALL SANITARY AND STORM SEWERS.
 O SHOW SLOPE % ON ALL SANITARY LINES AND CALL OUT
 MATERIAL.
 O PLAN VIEW SHALL SHOW ALL EXISTING AND PROPOSED
 UNDERGROUND UTILITY LAYOUT, INCLUDING FIBER OPTIC,
 ELECTRIC, GAS, AND CABLEVISION & TELECOMMUNICATION
 FACILITIES INCLUDING PIPE SIZE AND MATERIAL LOCATED IN
 THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
 O PROVIDE PROFILE AND CLEARANCES BETWEEN WATER, SEWER
 AND STORM LINES PER CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH STANDARD
 DETAIL GN-2 SERIES, AT ALL UTILITY CROSSINGS. PLEASE
 INCLUDE FIBER OPTIC, ELECTRIC, GAS, AND CABLEVISION &
 TELECOMMUNICATION FACILITIES INCLUDING PIPE SIZE AND
 MATERIAL LOCATED IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
 O SUBMIT COMPLETED LOS ANALYSIS SUMMARY TABLE DIRECTLY
 TO ENGINEERING (SHEET 33 OF CITY OF WPB DEVELOPMENT
 APPLICATION). 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.
 O PROVIDE FIRE FLOW TEST DATA.
 O PROVIDE CCTV VIDEO OF EXISTING SANITARY SEWER ALONG
 ENTIRE PROJECT FRONTAGE WHERE CONNECTION IS PROPOSED
 (CONDITION OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL).
 O CUT AND CAP UTILITIES NOT IN USE AND REMOVE ANY
 ABANDONED UTILITY LINES LARGER THAN 2 INCHES FROM CITY
 ROW.
 O WHEN PROPOSED, WATER MAINS IN CITY RIGHT OF WAY SHALL
 BE MADE OF DUCTILE IRON PIPE (NOT PVC) AND SPECIFY
 PROPOSED LENGTH IN FEET.
 O CHECK TO SEE IF FDEP FORMS FOR PROPOSED SANITARY
 SEWER ARE REQUIRED.
 O PROVIDE CLEANOUTS FOR PROPOSED SANITARY LINE ONSITE
 JUST INSIDE PROPERTY LINE, AT JOINTS AND EVERY 75 FEET.
 O ADD NOTE TO PLANS SPECIFYING CITY???S DOWNSTREAM LIFT
 STATION NUMBER. (AREA SERVES LIFT STATION 4)
 O PROVIDE ONSITE CLEANOUTS NEAR PROPERTY LINE FOR
 PROPOSED SANITARY LATERALS.
 O LABEL WATER LINES AS PRIVATE WHERE APPLICABLE.
 O PLEASE SHOW AND LABEL EXISTING AND PROPOSED GREASE
 TRAPS (IF ANY).
 O PER CITY STANDARDS MAINTAIN MINIMUM DISTANCE BETWEEN
 OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF CITY PIPE AND ROOT BARRIER.
 O EXISTING MANHOLES THAT ARE PROPOSED TO HAVE NEW
 CONNECTIONS WILL NEED TO BE REHABBED
 O CALL OUT MATERIAL PROPOSED FOR USE FOR BOTH WATER AND
 SEWER
 O CALL OUT SEWER MANHOLES AND PROPOSED INVERT
 ELEVATIONS
 O CALLOUT DOMESTIC BACKFLOW PREVENTER AS RPPA (MAKE
 NOTE USC APPROVED) AND FIRE BACKFLOW PREVENTER AS DCDA.
Review Stop PU-CS PUBLIC UTILITIES CUSTOMER SRVC
Rev No 5 Status P Date 03-17-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By mhurley Date 03-17-2023 Time 15:21 Rev Time 0.00
Received By mhurley Date 03-17-2023 Time 15:21 Sent To  
Notes
2023-03-17 15:19:23APPLICANT ADVISED A GATE WAS NOT SHOWN ACCURATELY ON
 ENGINEERING PLANS. UPDATE LOCATION OF GATE ON
 ENGINEERING PLANS TO CORRECT LOCATION AT ENGINEERING
 DEVELOPMENT SUBMITTAL. PROPOSED DAYS AND TIMES OF
 CLOSURE WILL ALSO BE REVIEWED AT THAT TIME TO ENSURE
 WPB UTILITY PERSONNEL WILL HAVE ADEQUATE ACCESS FOR
 THEIR WORK.
Review Stop PU-CS PUBLIC UTILITIES CUSTOMER SRVC
Rev No 4 Status F Date 03-02-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By mhurley Date 03-02-2023 Time 16:14 Rev Time 0.00
Received By mhurley Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
2023-03-02 16:12:39PLEASE PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO THE FOLLOWING:
  
 -THE FOLLOWING REVIEW COMMENT WAS NOT RESPONDED TO
 FULLY. ALSO THE SHEETS ARE SHEET NOT MATCHING WITH
 RESPECT TO THE ROAD GATES. PLEASE ANSWER FULLY, AND
 MAKE SURE ALL THE ROADWAY GATES ARE SHOWN SIMILARLY ON
 ALL THE DIFFERENT PLAN SETS:
 (THERE ARE SEVERAL GATES SHOWN ON PLANS, BUT THREE ARE
 SHOWN ON ARCHITECTURAL PLANS AND TWO SHOWN ON OTHER
 PLAN SETS. PLEASE ENSURE ALL PLAN SETS HAVE THE SAME
 GATES SHOWN AND INDICATE IF THEY ARE EXISTING OR
 PROPOSED. UTILITIES PERSONNEL NEEDS ACCESS FOR
 MAINTENANCE, METER READING, EMERGENCIES, AND
 INSPECTIONS. INDICATE PROPOSED DAYS AND TIMES THAT
 GATES WOULD BE CLOSED AND IF THAT WOULD IMPEDE ACCESS
 TO WPB UTILITIES PERSONNEL TO ANY AREAS WITH CITY
 UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE
 RESPONSE: ACKNOWLEDGED. ALL SHEETS HAVE BEEN CORRECTED
 TO MATCH)
  
 -ENGINEERING PLAN SET MISSING FROM RESUBMITTAL PACKAGE.
 PLEASE INCLUDE IN NEXT RESUBMITTAL.
  
 RESPECTFULLY,
 MARK HURLEY [email protected]
Review Stop PU-CS PUBLIC UTILITIES CUSTOMER SRVC
Rev No 3 Status F Date 02-22-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By mhurley Date 02-22-2023 Time 12:26 Rev Time 0.00
Received By mhurley Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
2023-02-22 12:26:00THE FOLLOWING REVIEW COMMENT WAS NOT RESPONDED TO
 FULLY. ALSO THE PLAN SHEETS ARE NOT MATCHING WITH
 RESPECT TO THE ROAD GATES. PLEASE ANSWER FULLY, AND
 MAKE SURE ALL THE ROADWAY GATES ARE SHOWN SIMILARLY ON
 ALL THE DIFFERENT PLAN SETS:
 (THERE ARE SEVERAL GATES SHOWN ON PLANS, BUT THREE ARE
 SHOWN ON ARCHITECTURAL PLANS AND TWO SHOWN ON OTHER
 PLAN SETS. PLEASE ENSURE ALL PLAN SETS HAVE THE SAME
 GATES SHOWN AND INDICATE IF THEY ARE EXISTING OR
 PROPOSED. UTILITIES PERSONNEL NEEDS ACCESS FOR
 MAINTENANCE, METER READING, EMERGENCIES, AND
 INSPECTIONS. INDICATE PROPOSED DAYS AND TIMES THAT
 GATES WOULD BE CLOSED AND IF THAT WOULD IMPEDE ACCESS
 TO WPB UTILITIES PERSONNEL TO ANY AREAS WITH CITY
 UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE
 RESPONSE: ACKNOWLEDGED. ALL SHEETS HAVE BEEN CORRECTED
 TO MATCH)
 RESPECTFULLY,
 MARK HURLEY [email protected]
Review Stop PU-CS PUBLIC UTILITIES CUSTOMER SRVC
Rev No 2 Status F Date 01-03-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By mhurley Date 01-03-2023 Time 16:50 Rev Time 0.00
Received By mhurley Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
2023-01-03 16:50:43PLEASE PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO THE FOLLOWING:
 -ENSURE THAT ALL FDC???S ARE ACCEPTABLE DISTANCE TO
 FIRE HYDRANTS.
 -UPDATE LANDSCAPING PLANS WITH THE MOST RECENT REVISION
 OF UTILITIES. UTILITIES CURRENTLY SHOWN ON LANDSCAPING
 PLANS APPEAR TO BE OLD LOCATIONS. ONCE COMPLETE, ENSURE
 THAT LANDSCAPING AND UTILITIES ARE ADEQUATELY DISTANCED
 FROM EACH OTHER.
 -THERE ARE SEVERAL GATES SHOWN ON PLANS, BUT THREE ARE
 SHOWN ON ARCHITECTURAL PLANS AND TWO SHOWN ON OTHER
 PLAN SETS. PLEASE ENSURE ALL PLAN SETS HAVE THE SAME
 GATES SHOWN AND INDICATE IF THEY ARE EXISTING OR
 PROPOSED. UTILITIES PERSONNEL NEEDS ACCESS FOR
 MAINTENANCE, METER READING, EMERGENCIES, AND
 INSPECTIONS. INDICATE PROPOSED DAYS AND TIMES THAT
 GATES WOULD BE CLOSED AND IF THAT WOULD IMPEDE ACCESS
 TO WPB UTILITIES PERSONNEL TO ANY AREAS WITH CITY
 UTILITY INFRASTRUCTURE.
 RESPECTFULLY,
 MARK HURLEY [email protected]
Review Stop PU-CS PUBLIC UTILITIES CUSTOMER SRVC
Rev No 1 Status F Date 12-04-2022 Cont ID  
Sent By mhurley Date 12-04-2022 Time 10:02 Rev Time 0.00
Received By mhurley Date 12-04-2022 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2022-12-04 10:02:41PLEASE PROVIDE WRITTEN RESPONSES TO THE FOLLOWING:
 -PLANS SHOW BUILDING OF STRUCTURES IN FPL EASEMENT IN
 THE SOUTHWEST AREA OF PROJECT. IS THAT ALRIGHT WITH
 FPL?
 -THERE IS A STOP SIGN TOO CLOSE TO PROPOSED WATER
 SERVICE ON CIVIL PLANS. PLEASE INCREASE THE HORIZONTAL
 CLEARANCE DISTANCE BETWEEN THEM.
 -CALLOUT SIZE OF PROPOSED WATER METER AND PROPOSED
 FIRELINE BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY.
 -CIVIL PLANS SHOW PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER AND
 STORMWATER CONSTRUCTION IN WESTERN FPL EASEMENT AS WELL
 AS PARKING SPOTS. IS THAT ALRIGHT WITH FPL?
 -EXISTING BE AND IRR SHOWING RUNNING UNDERNEATH
 PROPOSED CHILLER ENCLOSURE.
 -CIVIL PLANS SHOW EXISTING WATER METER AT FAR NORTH
 SIDE. SHOW THE EXISTING WATER SERVICE LINE FOR IT.
 -MASTER SITE PLAN SHOWS A GATE NEAR THE NORTHWEST SIDE
 OF FPL FACILITY. THIS WAS ALSO MENTIONED IN
 JUSTIFICATION DOCUMENT. PLANS DO NOT CLEARLY SHOW
 PROPERTY LINES THERE AND PROPERTY APPRAISER SEEMS TO
 SHOW IT EITHER IN STATE RIGHT OF WAY OR FPL PROPERTY.
 -IS THERE A CURRENT ACCESS AGREEMENT OR EASEMENT ACROSS
 THE FPL STATION PROPERTY FOR VEHICLE TRAFFIC?
 -SURVEY SHOWS RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AND SOLAR AREA WHERE
 LAKE EXPANSION IS PROPOSED. WOULD THE RESTRICTIVE
 COVENANT AND SOLAR AREA PREVENT THAT CONSTRUCTION?
 -SURVEY SHOWS NEGATIVE PLEDGE AGREEMENT AND RESTRICTIVE
 COVENANT. WOULD THAT PREVENT ANY OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF
 BLDG. 3 OR 1?
 -THE LABELING OF THE FPL EASEMENTS ON THE SURVEY AND
 CIVIL PLANS AT THE SOUTHWEST AREA OF THE PROPERTY DO
 NOT MATCH. PLEASE VERIFY POSITIONING AND UPDATE PLANS.
 -LABEL THE NEW GENERATOR ENCLOSURE ON CIVIL PLANS.
 -WHERE WILL THE WASTEWATER FROM THE PROPOSED CITY OF
 WPB RESTROOM GO?
 -WHY IS THERE A PROPOSED SAND/OIL SEPARATOR NEAR NORTH
 SIDE OF PROPOSED SANITARY SEWER SYSTEM?
 -WHERE DOES THE WASTEWATER FROM THE PROPOSED PRIVATE
 LIFT STATION GO? SHOW AND LABEL FORCE MAIN.
 -DOES THE CHILLER ENCLOSURE NEED A SEPARATE METERED
 WATER SERVICE?
 -SIDEWALK LOCATION AT EASTERN SIDE DOES NOT MATCH
 BETWEEN CIVIL PLAN AND MASTER SITE PLAN. IN PARTICULAR,
 THE AREA NEAR WHERE POLE IS PROPOSED TO BE RELOCATED ON
 MSP. PLEASE MAKE SURE ALL THE DIFFERENT PLANS MATCH THE
 GENERAL LAYOUT.
 -RELOCATED WATER SERVICE FOR BUILDING 5 MUST HAVE AN RP
 BACKFLOW ASSEMBLY. PLEASE SHOW THAT SYMBOL ON CIVIL
 PLAN.
 -NO NEW VALVES ARE SHOWN ON PROPOSED WATER MAIN. ADD
 GATE VALVES.
 -DOES THE PRIVATE LIFT STATION NEED A METERED WATER
 SERVICE?
 -ADD WATER AND SEWER DEMAND CALCULATIONS TO CIVIL
 PLANS.
 -WPB GIS IS SHOWING 6 INCH WATER MAIN PIPE SECTION NEAR
 EAST SIDE OF LEASE AREA. PLEASE VERIFY SIZING AND SHOW
 ON PLANS. MAY NEED TO INCREASE PIPE SIZE IF PROPOSED
 WATER SERVICES ARE LARGE DIAMETER.
 -ON SHEET LP10, SHOW EXISTING AND PROPOSED UTILITIES
 NEAR THE EAST SIDE. MISSING AT LEAST THE EXISTING WATER
 MAIN, SANITARY SEWER PIPE, AND PROPOSED RELOCATED
 METERED WATER SERVICE FOR BLDG. 5.
 -ON SHEET LP11, SHOW EXISTING AND PROPOSED UTILITIES.
 AT LEAST THE WATER MAIN IS MISSING.
 -UPDATE LANDSCAPING PLANS WITH THE MOST RECENT REVISION
 OF UTILITIES FROM CIVIL PLANS.
 -JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT MENTIONED CHILLER ENCLOSURE
 WILL HOUSE A FIRE PUMP AND TANK. PLEASE PROVIDE MORE
 INFORMATION ON THE TANK, AND VERIFY IF ANY OF THE
 PRIVATE FIRE SYSTEMS WILL HAVE AUXILIARY WATER SYSTEM
 OR TANKS CONNECTED TO THEM.
 -CIVIL PLANS SAID THERE IS A WELL PUMP. IS THAT WHERE
 IRRIGATION WATER WILL COME FROM?
 RESPECTFULLY,
 MARK HURLEY [email protected]
Review Stop PW PUBLIC WORKS
Rev No 4 Status P Date 03-17-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By   Date 03-17-2023 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By   Date 03-17-2023 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2023-03-17 09:25:45CONDITION OF APPROVAL:
  
 THE FINAL SITE PLAN SHALL BE UPDATED TO REFLECT THE
 REVISED LLOCATION AND ORIENTATION OF THE WEST DOUBLE
 DUMPSTER ENCLOSURES TO 45 DEG. NW.
  
  
 MATT HEJAZI
 DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS
 [email protected]
  
Review Stop PW PUBLIC WORKS
Rev No 3 Status F Date 03-08-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By   Date 03-08-2023 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By   Date 03-08-2023 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2023-03-08 13:09:33PLEASE REVISE THE SITE PLAN AND AUTO TURN FOR THE
 SANITATION COLLECTION (FRONT LOAD) TRUCK TO REFLECT THE
 PREFERRED LOCATION AND ORIENTATION OF THE WEST DUMPSTER
 ENCLOSURES TO 45 DEG. NW MINIMIZING THE BACKUP
 MOVEMENTS AND SHORT TURN RADII FOR THE SANITATION
 COLLECTION VEHICLE.
  
 MATT HEJAZI
 DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS
 [email protected]
  
Review Stop PW PUBLIC WORKS
Rev No 2 Status F Date 02-02-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By   Date 02-02-2023 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By   Date 02-02-2023 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2023-02-02 11:33:29 
 1- PLEASE PROVIDE LOS (LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS) TO
 REFLECT THE SOLID WASTE VOLUME PRODUCED ALONG WITH THE
 SIZE, TYPE AND QUANTITY OF THE CONTAINER (I.E.
 DUMPSTER/COMPACTOR) THAT WILL BE UTILIZED FOR THE
 SANITATION SERVICE.
 2- PLEASE PROVIDE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE DETAIL. DETAILS
 FOR SANITATION SERVICE (I.E. SOLID WASTE CONTAINER(S)
 TYPE, COLLECTION LOCATION, ETC.). 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, GC-7.
 (LINK TO THE LATEST REVISION OF THE GC-7 DOCUMENT:
 HTTPS://WWW.W
 PB.ORG/HOME/SHOWPUBLISHEDDOCUMENT/3690/6376290604221000
 00)
 3- OWNERS AND/OR OCCUPANTS OF PROPERTY THAT REQUIRE
 GREASE HAULING SERVICES SHALL ENSURE THAT THEIR GREASE
 TANKS OR CONTAINERS REMAIN CLEAN, AND ARE ENCLOSED AND
 NOT IN PUBLIC VIEW.
  
  
 MATT HEJAZI
 DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS
 [email protected]
 561-822-2045
  
Review Stop PW PUBLIC WORKS
Rev No 1 Status F Date 12-05-2022 Cont ID  
Sent By   Date 12-05-2022 Time   Rev Time  
Received By   Date 12-05-2022 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2022-12-05 08:34:44 
 PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWINGS:
 1- LOS (LEVEL OF SERVICE ANALYSIS) TO REFLECT THE SOLID
 WASTE VOLUME PRODUCED ALONG WITH THE SIZE, TYPE AND
 QUANTITY OF THE CONTAINER (I.E. DUMPSTER/COMPACTOR)
 THAT WILL BE UTILIZED FOR THE SANITATION SERVICE.
 2- DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE DETAIL. DETAILS FOR SANITATION
 SERVICE (I.E. SOLID WASTE CONTAINER(S) TYPE, COLLECTION
 LOCATION, ETC.). 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, GC-7. (LINK TO
 THE LATEST REVISION OF THE GC-7 DOCUMENT: HTTPS://WWW.W
 PB.ORG/HOME/SHOWPUBLISHEDDOCUMENT/3690/6376290604221000
 00)
 3- AUTOTURN EXHIBIT WITH DYNAMIC ENVELOPE AND THE
 VEHICLE???S WHEEL PATH IDENTIFIED WITH DIFFERENT COLORS
 FOR THE SANITATION SERVICE, FRONT LOADER TRUCK WITH THE
 FOLLOWING SPECS:
 - DUAL AXLES
 - 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
 4- IN CASE OF PROPOSING ADDITION OF ANY NEW CAN(S) IN
 THE CITY`S RIGHT-OF-WAY , THE LOCATION AND QUANTITY OF
 THE CAN(S) SHALL BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY PUBLIC
 WORKS DEPARTMENT AND THE CAN(S) SHALL BE TYPE, SIZE AND
 COLOR APPROVED BY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. THE BUILDING
 MAINTENANCE IS RESPONSIBLE TO MAINTAIN AND SERVICE THE
 CAN(S).
 5- ALL THE PARKING STALL PAINTING SHALL COMPLY WITH THE
 CITY`S MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 94-485 AND FLORIDA
 STATUES [553.5041 F.S.].
 6- SIGNAGE PLAN. ALL STRIPING AND SIGNAGE SHALL COMPLY
 WITH THE LATEST CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH STANDARD
 DETAILS AND MEET THE M.U.T.C.D. LATEST EDITION.
 7- ALL PAVEMENT MARKING , SIGNING AND SIDEWALK DAMAGED
 DURING CONSTRUCTION SHALL BE RESTORED.
  
  
  
 MATT HEJAZI
 DEPT. OF PUBLIC WORKS
 [email protected]
 561-822-2045
  
Review Stop STORM STORMWATER
Rev No 2 Status P Date 03-17-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By tward Date 03-17-2023 Time 10:07 Rev Time 0.00
Received By tward Date 03-17-2023 Time 10:07 Sent To  
Notes
2023-03-17 10:07:28TJHE FOLLOWING COMMENTS ARE FROM THE REVIEW OF THE
 2/16/2023 SUBMITTAL:
  
  
 1. [SATISFIED] THE CITY'S OFFICIAL VERTICAL DATUM IS
 NGVD1929. THE CITY HAS ALLOWED THE USE OF NAVD1988 AS
 LONG AS THE CONVERSION EQUATION TO NGVD1929 AT THE
 PROJECT LOCATION IS PROVIDED. PROVIDE VERTICAL DATUM
 REFERENCE AND CONVERSION TO NGVD1929 ON EVERY SHEET
 WITH ELEVATION INFORMATION.
  
 2. [SATISFIED] ORIENT THE NORTH ARROW IN THE CORRECT
 DIRECTION ON THE CONCEPTUAL PAVING, DRAINAGE, WATER AND
 WASTEWATER PLAN.
  
 3. [PARTIALLY SATISFIED - RESPONSE INDICATED FINAL
 DESIGN TO CONSIDER THE COMMENT] CONSIDER REDUCING THE
 AMOUNT OF DRAINAGE STRUCTURES BY SLOPING THE PARKING
 LOTS NORTH OF THE PARK ACCESS ROAD (SOUTH OF BUILDING
 5) SOUTHWARD TO FLOW INTO THE LANDSCAPE AREA BETWEEN
 THE PARKING LOT AND ROADWAY. THE LANDSCAPE SPACE WILL
 PROVIDE MORE WATER QUALITY TREATMENT THAN IF THE INLETS
 WERE WITHIN THE PARKING LOT.
  
 4. [SATISFIED - SFWMD TO APPROVE WQ TREATMENT METHOD]
 WHERE IS STORMWATER QUALITY TREATMENT BEING PROVIDED?
 PREVIOUS IMPROVEMENTS AT THE SCIENCE CENTER UTILIZED
 EXFILTRATION TRENCH.
  
 5. [SATISFIED] THE CITY DOES NOT ALLOW THE USE OF
 BLEEDERS IN NEW EXFILTRATION SYSTEMS.
  
 6. [SATISFIED] ARE SIDEWALKS NEEDED ON BOTH SIDES OF
 THE ACCESS ROADWAY? CONSIDER ONLY ONE 6-FEET WIDE
 (EXCLUSIVE OF PARKING OVERHANG) SIDEWALK ON ONLY ONE
 SIDE OF THE ACCESS ROADWAY.
  
 7. [SATISFIED] SHOW EXISTING AND PROPOSED TOP OF BANKS
 FOR THE LAKES.
  
 8. [NOT SATISFIED - RESPONSE INDICATED THE CROSS
 SECTIONS WILL BE PROVIDED WITH FINAL DESIGN] PROVIDE
 CROSS SECTIONS FOR:
 A. LAKE EXPANSION
 B. PARKING LOTS
 C. ROADWAY (WITH AND WITHOUT PARKING)
  
 9. [NOT SATISFIED - DEMOLITION PHASING SHOULD NOT
 AFFECT THE SITE PLAN] PROVIDE PHASING DEMOLITION PLANS.
  
 10. [NOT SATISFIED RESPONSE INDICATED INFORMATION WILL
 BE PROVIDED WITH FINAL DESIGN] PROVIDE EXISTING AND
 PROPOSED SPOT GRADES FOR THE ROADWAY, PARKING LOTS AND
 LANDSCAPE AREAS.
  
 11. [NOT SATISFIED - RESPONSE INDICATED INFORMATION
 WILL BE PROVIDED WITH THE FINAL DESIGN] PROVIDE CURRENT
 SFWMD STAGE CRITERIA FOR SETTING MINIMUM ROAD
 ELEVATION, PERIMETER BERMS, FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATIONS.
  
 12. [SATISFIED] THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN AN AE SPECIAL
 FLOOD HAZARD AREA WITH BASE FLOOD ELEVATION OF 12.2
 FEET NAVD. STRUCTURES WITHIN A SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD
 AREA ARE TO HAVE A MINIMUM OF 2 FEET OF FREEBOARD ABOVE
 THE BASE FLOOD ELEVATION.
  
 13. [NOT SATISFIED] ON SHEET 8 OF 10 OF THE SURVEY, THE
 SCALE IS INCORRECTLY LABELED IN THE TITLE BLOCK (1 INCH
 = 20 FEET) AND ON THE SCALE BAR (1 INCH = 100 FEET).
 THE CORRECT SCALE APPEARS TO BE 1 INCH = 50 FEET.
  
 NEW COMMENTS (2/13/2023 SUBMITTAL):
 14. EOR INFORMED STAFF THAT SFWMD C-51 100-YEAR FLOOD
 STAGE IS HIGHER THAN THE FEMA BASE FLOOD ELEVATION. THE
 BUILDING OFFICIAL SHOULD BE CONSULTED AS TO WHICH FLOOD
 ELEVATION THE FREEBOARD IS TO BE APPLIED TO.
  
 15. THE BUIDLING OFFICIAL SHOULD BE CONSULTED TO
 DETERMINE IF THE PROPOSED EXPANSION WILL TRIGGER THE
 "SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT" NEED FOR FLOOD PROTECTING THE
 EXISTING BUILDINGS.
  
 CONDITIONS FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL:
 1. NO SPOT GRADES OR CROSS SECTIONS WERE PROVIDED. WHEN
 THIS INFORMATION IS PROVIDED DURING FINAL ENGINEERING
 DESIGN, IT MAY AFFECT THE SITE PLAN AND A SITE PLAN
 AMENDMENT MAY BE NECESSARY.
  
 2. SURVEY SCALES ON SHEET 8 OF 10 OF THE SURVEY NEEDS
 TO BE CORRECTED.
  
 3. EXISTING BUILDINGS MAY NEED TO BE BROUGHT INTO
 COMPLIANCE WITH THE CITY'S FLOOD PROTECTION
 REQUIREMENTS IF THE PROPOSED EXPANSION WILL BE
 CONSIDERED A SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENT FOR THE EXSITING
 BUILDINGS.
  
 4. FFE ELEVATION TO BE SET ACCORDING THE FLOOD SET
 ACCORDING TO THE FLOOD STAGE THAT THE DEVELOPMENTAL
 SERVICES DEPARTMENT CONSIDERS AS THE BASE FLOOD
 ELEVATION (FEMA FIRM OR SFWMD C-51 BASIN CRITERIA).
  
  
 TRACY WARD, PE
 SENIOR STORMWATER ENGINEER
 ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
 561-494-1120 (O)
 561-351-0510 (M)
 [email protected]
  
Review Stop STORM STORMWATER
Rev No 1 Status F Date 12-15-2022 Cont ID  
Sent By tward Date 12-15-2022 Time 16:55 Rev Time 0.00
Received By tward Date 12-15-2022 Time 16:56 Sent To  
Notes
2022-12-15 16:56:46THIS IS A CONCEPTUAL LEVEL REVIEW. CONSTRUCTION LEVEL
 DETAILS, DESIGN CALCULATIONS AND THE POLLUTION
 PREVENTION PLAN WILL BE REVIEWED AS PART OF THE
 ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL AND BUILDING PERMIT
 APPLICATION PROCESSES.
 THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS MUST BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO SITE
 PLAN APPROVAL. PROVIE A WRITTEN RESPONSE ON HOW EACH
 COMMENT WAS ADDRESSED.
  
 1. THE CITY???S OFFICIAL VERTICAL DATUM IS NGVD1929.
 THE CITY HAS ALLOWED THE USE OF NAVD1988 AS LONG AS THE
 CONVERSION EQUATION TO NGVD1929 AT THE PROJECT LOCATION
 IS PROVIDED. PROVIDE VERTICAL DATUM REFERENCE AND
 CONVERSION TO NGVD1929 ON EVERY SHEET WITH ELEVATION
 INFORMATION.
  
 2. ORIENT THE NORTH ARROW IN THE CORRECT DIRECTION ON
 THE CONCEPTUAL PAVING, DRAINAGE, WATER AND WASTEWATER
 PLAN.
  
 3. CONSIDER REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF DRAINAGE STRUCTURES
 BY SLOPING THE PARKING LOTS NORTH OF THE PARK ACCESS
 ROAD (SOUTH OF BUILDING 5) SOUTHWARD TO FLOW INTO THE
 LANDSCAPE AREA BETWEEN THE PARKING LOT AND ROADWAY. THE
 LANDSCAPE SPACE WILL PROVIDE MORE WATER QUALITY
 TREATMENT THAN IF THE INLETS WERE WITHIN THE PARKING
 LOT.
  
 4. WHERE IS STORMWATER QUALITY TREATMENT BEING
 PROVIDED? PREVIOUS IMPROVEMENTS AT THE SCIENCE CENTER
 UTILIZED EXFILTRATION TRENCH.
  
 5. THE CITY DOES NOT ALLOW THE USE OF BLEEDERS IN NEW
 EXFILTRATION SYSTEMS.
  
 6. ARE SIDEWALKS NEEDED ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ACCESS
 ROADWAY? CONSIDER ONLY ONE 6-FEET WIDE (EXCLUSIVE OF
 PARKING OVERHANG) SIDEWALK ON ONLY ONE SIDE OF THE
 ACCESS ROADWAY.
  
 7. SHOW EXISTING AND PROPOSED TOP OF BANKS FOR THE
 LAKES.
  
 8. PROVIDE CROSS SECTIONS FOR:
 A. LAKE EXPANSION
 B. PARKING LOTS
 C. ROADWAY (WITH AND WITHOUT PARKING)
  
 9. PROVIDE PHASING DEMOLITION PLANS.
  
 10. PROVIDE EXISTING AND PROPOSED SPOT GRADES FOR THE
 ROADWAY, PARKING LOTS AND LANDSCAPE AREAS.
  
 11. PROVIDE CURRENT SFWMD STAGE CRITERIA FOR SETTING
 MINIMUM ROAD ELEVATION, PERIMETER BERMS, FINISHED FLOOR
 ELEVATIONS.
  
 12. THE PROPERTY IS WITHIN AN AE SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD
 AREA WITH BASE FLOOD ELEVATION OF 12.2 FEET NAVD.
 STRUCTURES WITHIN A SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA ARE TO
 HAVE A MINIMUM OF 2 FEET OF FREEBOARD ABOVE THE BASE
 FLOOD ELEVATION.
 12. ON SHEET 8 OF 10 OF THE SURVEY, THE SCALE IS
 INCORRECTLY LABELED IN THE TITLE BLOCK (1 INCH = 20
 FEET) AND ON THE SCALE BAR (1 INCH = 100 FEET). THE
 CORRECT SCALE APPEARS TO BE 1 INCH = 50 FEET.
  
 THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS MUST BE ADDRESSED PRIOR TO
 ISSUANCE OF CONSTRUCTION AUTHORIZATION INCLUDING
 BUILDING PERMITS AND ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL.
  
 1. DRAINAGE SYSTEM TO BE DESIGNED TO MEET SFWMD ERP
 CRITERIA. STORMWATER CALCULATIONS WILL BE REVIEWED WITH
 THE ENGINEERING PERMIT SUBMITTAL.
  
 2. PROVIDE COPY OF SFWMD ERP PERMIT MODIFICATION BEFORE
 START OF CONSTRUCTION. NOTE SITE IS WITHIN THE C-51
 DRAINAGE BASIN.
  
 3. PROVIDE EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN WITH THE
 ENGINEERING PERMIT SUBMITTAL.
  
 TRACY WARD, PE
 SENIOR STORMWATER ENGINEER
 ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
 561-494-1120 (O)
 561-351-0510 (M)
 [email protected]
  
  
Review Stop SURVEY SURVEYING
Rev No 2 Status P Date 03-16-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By vnoel Date 03-16-2023 Time 06:37 Rev Time 0.00
Received By vnoel Date   Time   Sent To  
Notes
***NONE***
Review Stop SURVEY SURVEYING
Rev No 1 Status F Date 11-28-2022 Cont ID  
Sent By vnoel Date 11-28-2022 Time 09:08 Rev Time  
Received By vnoel Date 11-28-2022 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2022-11-28 10:51:131. SURVEY NEEDS TO BE SIGNED/SEALED.
 2. PROVIDE COPY OF TITLE REPORT.
 3. LAYOUT OF WATER/SEWER WILL REQUIRE FURTHER REVIEW.
 4. SHOW PROPOSED UTILITIES ON LANDSCAPE PLANS AS IT
 APPEARS THERE ARE CONFLICTS.
 5. CCTV MAY NEED BE TO EASTERLY MANHOLE AT POINT OF
 ROAD CURVATURE. UTILITIES TO CONFIRM AFTER REVIEW.
  
 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM SUZANNE BERGLUND, ENGINEERING
 MANAGER:
  
 ADDRESS NOW:
 1) PROVIDE WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM PARKS AND RECREATION
 ON THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED RESTROOM FACILITY.
 2) RELOCATE THE METER SERVICING THE RESTROOM FACILITY
 OUTSIDE OF THE LEASE BOUNDARY.
 3) THE CITY WILL NOT ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY OF THE
 MAINTENANCE OF THE SAND/OIL SEPARATOR. CONFIRM THIS
 WILL BE MAINTAINED BY THE SCIENCE CENTER.
 4) SHOW WHAT THE EXISTING WATER METERS ARE SERVING AND
 WHERE THE EXISTING WATER METERS SHOWN ON THE PLANS TIE
 INTO THE EXISTING WATER MAIN.
 5) PROVIDE FFE OF THE PROPOSED RESTROOM FACILITY AND
 CONFIRM WHAT RAMPS WOULD BE NEEDED FOR ADA ACCESS TO
 PROPOSED RESTROOM FACILITY. THE DESIGN OF THE RAMP AS
 SHOWN WILL NOT BE ACCEPTABLE.
  
 ADDRESS PRIOR TO ENGINEERING PERMIT
 6) PLEASE COORDINATE WITH DON GUSTAFSON,
 [email protected] ON SPECIFICATIONS FOR THE RESTROOM
 PAD AND FINAL LOCATIONS OF THE POINT OF SERVICE TO THE
 PROPOSED RESTROOM FACILITY
  
Review Stop TRAFFIC TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
Rev No 3 Status P Date 03-31-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By   Date 03-31-2023 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By   Date 03-31-2023 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2023-03-31 17:25:50TRAFFIC COMMENTS
 1) SATISFIED. PROVIDE AN UPDATED TRAFFIC STUDY, AS IT
 IS BASED ON OLD TRAFFIC COUNTS, ASSUMPTIONS AND
 METHODOLOGIES. PLEASE PERFORM A NEW SET OF TRAFFIC
 COUNTS, AND PROVIDE A DETAILED ELABORATION ON THE TRIP
 GENERATION CALCULATION
 2) SATISFIED. INCLUDE THE INTERSECTIONS OF DREHER TRAIL
 N WITH SUMMIT AND SOUTHERN BLVD IN THE ANALYSIS
 3) SATISFIED. PROVIDE AN UPDATED PARKING STUDY. ACTUAL
 DATA SHOULD BE COLLECTED IN ORDER TO CORROBORATE THE
 THEORETICAL FORMULAS. TYPICAL DAILY/WEEKEND USAGE AND
 AT LEAST ONE SPECIAL EVENT SHOULD BE ACCOUNTED FOR
 4) SATISFIED. BOTH THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT AND
 PARKING DEMAND STUDY NEED TO CONSIDER THE MULTI-PHASE
 APPROACH OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND PROVIDE
 NARRATIVE EXPLAINING AND ILLUSTRATING TRAFFIC IMPACTS,
 CIRCULATION, PARKING AND MITIGATION MEASUREMENTS FOR
 EACH PHASE
 5) WAVED BY ADMIN. PROVIDE A CRASH ANALYSIS ALONG THE
 MAIN ACCESS DRIVEWAYS AND IDENTIFY MITIGATION
 MEASUREMENTS. THE S4 DATABASE SHOWED 4 INCIDENTS IN THE
 PAST 2 YEARS. CITY WAS ALSO CONTACTED IN 2020
 PERTAINING IMPROVEMENTS BY THE SHARP TURN ALONG N
 DREHER TRAIL JUST WEST OF THE SCIENCE CENTER. PLEASE
 PROVIDE AN ELABORATION PARAGRAPH PERTAINING THE
 RESULTS, AND RECOMMEND MITIGATION MEASURES, IF NEEDED
 OR IDENTIFIED
 6) SATISFIED. PROVIDE COUNTY TPS LETTER
 7) WAVED BY ADMIN. DEPENDING ON THE OUTCOME OF THE
 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT
 (TDM) MEASURES MAY BE ENCOURAGED. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IS
 NOT A SUFFICIENT ANSWER.
 SITE COMMENTS
 8) WAVED BY ADMIN. PROVIDE A TRANSPORTATION SPECIFIC
 SITE PLAN FOR THE GROUND FLOOR. SHOWCASING
 TRANSPORTATION RELATED FEATURES (E.G. ROADWAY WIDTHS,
 DRIVING AISLES, PARKING STALLS, SIDEWALK, CURB, GUTTER,
 DRIVEWAY, GATES, CROSSWALKS, VISIBILITY TRIANGLE,
 CORNER & DRIVEWAY SEPARATION DISTANCES, SLOPES, ETC.)
 PROPERLY LABELED AND DIMENSIONED. THE SITE PLAN SHOULD
 BE NAMED T-1.0. SEVERAL DIMENSIONS ARE MISSING IN THE
 LATEST RESUBMISSION, PLEASE REVISE AND VERIFY THAT
 DRIVE AISLES AND PARKING STALLS ARE COMPLIANT WITH CITY
 CODE MINIMUM WIDTH/LENGTH REQUIREMENTS
 9) SATISFIED. IN THE T-1.0 SITE PLAN, PLEASE SHOWCASE
 BASIC CURB DETAILS (E.G. DRIVEWAY, CURB CUTS, PAVEMENT
 MARKINGS, PARKING STALLS, ETC.) ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF
 THE ROADS SURROUNDING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
 10) SATISFIED. PROVIDE A SIGNAGE AND PAVEMENT MARKING
 PLAN. INCLUSIVE OF ALL FEATURES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
 DEVELOPMENT AND ALONG ALL ROADS FRONTING THE SITE. SUCH
 PLAN IS PART OF THE TRANSPORTATION REVIEW AND SHOULD BE
 NAMED ACCORDINGLY (E.G. T-1.1 OR T-2.0)
 11) SATISFIED. PROVIDE AUTOTURN ANALYSIS FOR GARBAGE
 TRUCK AND/OR SERVICE VEHICLES DRIVING IN AND OUT OF THE
 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITH VEHICLE DYNAMIC ENVELOPES AND
 WHEEL PATHS CLEARLY DISTINCT AND DEFINED IN DIFFERENT
 COLORS. PROVIDE THE ANALYSIS IN A SEPARATE SHEET. SUCH
 PLAN(S) CONTAINING THE ANALYSIS ARE PART OF THE
 TRANSPORTATION REVIEW AND SHOULD BE NAMED ACCORDINGLY
 (E.G. T1.2, T-3.0)
 12) SATISFIED. PROVIDE A PARKING TABLE SHOWCASING THE
 NUMBER OF REQUIRED AND PROVIDED PARKING SPACES,
 INCLUSIVE OF ADA AND BICYCLE ONES
 13) SATISFIED. IN THE PAVEMENT, MARKING & SIGN PLAN,
 PROVIDE A TABLE SHOWCASING THE NUMBER OF EXISTING AND
 PROPOSED ON-STREET PARKING STALLS. PROVIDE THE NUMBER
 OF METERED STALLS THAT ARE BEING REMOVED OR RELOCATED,
 IF ANY
 14) WAVED BY ADMIN. ARE THERE ANY GATES PROPOSED? IF
 SO, CLEARLY SHOWCASE THE REQUIRED 20 FEET SETBACK
 DISTANCE FROM THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK. IN CASE A
 SIDEWALK IS MISSING, PLEASE SHOWCASE THE SETBACK
 DISTANCE FROM THE EDGE OF THE TRAVEL LANE. PLEASE
 PROVIDE SHEET/DOCUMENT NUMBER SHOWCASING SUCH ITEM
 15) SATISFIED. IS VALET SERVICE PROPOSED? IF SO,
 PROVIDE A THOROUGH OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS. DETAILS OF THE
 ANALYSIS SHOULD BE DISCUSSED DURING THE METHODOLOGY
 MEETING
 16) SATISFIED. ARE THERE ANY BUS STOPS BEING IMPACTED?
 17) SATISFIED. IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IMPACTING AN
 EXISTING BICYCLE FACILITY?
 18) TO BE SATISFIED AT BUILDING PERMIT. PROVIDE A
 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN. PLEASE REFER TO CITY CODE
 86-246 FOR DETAILS.
  
  
 VALERIO ORICCHIO
 CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER
 561-494-1092
 [email protected]
  
Review Stop TRAFFIC TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
Rev No 2 Status F Date 03-14-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By   Date 03-14-2023 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By   Date 03-14-2023 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2023-03-14 10:52:12TRAFFIC COMMENTS
 1) SATISFIED. PROVIDE AN UPDATED TRAFFIC STUDY, AS IT
 IS BASED ON OLD TRAFFIC COUNTS, ASSUMPTIONS AND
 METHODOLOGIES. PLEASE PERFORM A NEW SET OF TRAFFIC
 COUNTS, AND PROVIDE A DETAILED ELABORATION ON THE TRIP
 GENERATION CALCULATION
 2) SATISFIED. INCLUDE THE INTERSECTIONS OF DREHER TRAIL
 N WITH SUMMIT AND SOUTHERN BLVD IN THE ANALYSIS
 3) SATISFIED. PROVIDE AN UPDATED PARKING STUDY. ACTUAL
 DATA SHOULD BE COLLECTED IN ORDER TO CORROBORATE THE
 THEORETICAL FORMULAS. TYPICAL DAILY/WEEKEND USAGE AND
 AT LEAST ONE SPECIAL EVENT SHOULD BE ACCOUNTED FOR
 4) SATISFIED. BOTH THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT AND
 PARKING DEMAND STUDY NEED TO CONSIDER THE MULTI-PHASE
 APPROACH OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND PROVIDE
 NARRATIVE EXPLAINING AND ILLUSTRATING TRAFFIC IMPACTS,
 CIRCULATION, PARKING AND MITIGATION MEASUREMENTS FOR
 EACH PHASE
 5) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE A CRASH ANALYSIS ALONG
 THE MAIN ACCESS DRIVEWAYS AND IDENTIFY MITIGATION
 MEASUREMENTS. THE S4 DATABASE SHOWED 4 INCIDENTS IN THE
 PAST 2 YEARS. CITY WAS ALSO CONTACTED IN 2020
 PERTAINING IMPROVEMENTS BY THE SHARP TURN ALONG N
 DREHER TRAIL JUST WEST OF THE SCIENCE CENTER. PLEASE
 PROVIDE AN ELABORATION PARAGRAPH PERTAINING THE
 RESULTS, AND RECOMMEND MITIGATION MEASURES, IF NEEDED
 OR IDENTIFIED
 6) SATISFIED. PROVIDE COUNTY TPS LETTER
 7) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. DEPENDING ON THE OUTCOME OF THE
 TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT
 (TDM) MEASURES MAY BE ENCOURAGED. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT IS
 NOT A SUFFICIENT ANSWER.
 SITE COMMENTS
 8) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE A TRANSPORTATION
 SPECIFIC SITE PLAN FOR THE GROUND FLOOR. SHOWCASING
 TRANSPORTATION RELATED FEATURES (E.G. ROADWAY WIDTHS,
 DRIVING AISLES, PARKING STALLS, SIDEWALK, CURB, GUTTER,
 DRIVEWAY, GATES, CROSSWALKS, VISIBILITY TRIANGLE,
 CORNER & DRIVEWAY SEPARATION DISTANCES, SLOPES, ETC.)
 PROPERLY LABELED AND DIMENSIONED. THE SITE PLAN SHOULD
 BE NAMED T-1.0. SEVERAL DIMENSIONS ARE MISSING IN THE
 LATEST RESUBMISSION, PLEASE REVISE AND VERIFY THAT
 DRIVE AISLES AND PARKING STALLS ARE COMPLIANT WITH CITY
 CODE MINIMUM WIDTH/LENGTH REQUIREMENTS
 9) SATISFIED. IN THE T-1.0 SITE PLAN, PLEASE SHOWCASE
 BASIC CURB DETAILS (E.G. DRIVEWAY, CURB CUTS, PAVEMENT
 MARKINGS, PARKING STALLS, ETC.) ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF
 THE ROADS SURROUNDING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
 10) SATISFIED. PROVIDE A SIGNAGE AND PAVEMENT MARKING
 PLAN. INCLUSIVE OF ALL FEATURES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
 DEVELOPMENT AND ALONG ALL ROADS FRONTING THE SITE. SUCH
 PLAN IS PART OF THE TRANSPORTATION REVIEW AND SHOULD BE
 NAMED ACCORDINGLY (E.G. T-1.1 OR T-2.0)
 11) SATISFIED. PROVIDE AUTOTURN ANALYSIS FOR GARBAGE
 TRUCK AND/OR SERVICE VEHICLES DRIVING IN AND OUT OF THE
 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITH VEHICLE DYNAMIC ENVELOPES AND
 WHEEL PATHS CLEARLY DISTINCT AND DEFINED IN DIFFERENT
 COLORS. PROVIDE THE ANALYSIS IN A SEPARATE SHEET. SUCH
 PLAN(S) CONTAINING THE ANALYSIS ARE PART OF THE
 TRANSPORTATION REVIEW AND SHOULD BE NAMED ACCORDINGLY
 (E.G. T1.2, T-3.0)
 12) SATISFIED. PROVIDE A PARKING TABLE SHOWCASING THE
 NUMBER OF REQUIRED AND PROVIDED PARKING SPACES,
 INCLUSIVE OF ADA AND BICYCLE ONES
 13) SATISFIED. IN THE PAVEMENT, MARKING & SIGN PLAN,
 PROVIDE A TABLE SHOWCASING THE NUMBER OF EXISTING AND
 PROPOSED ON-STREET PARKING STALLS. PROVIDE THE NUMBER
 OF METERED STALLS THAT ARE BEING REMOVED OR RELOCATED,
 IF ANY
 14) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. ARE THERE ANY GATES PROPOSED?
 IF SO, CLEARLY SHOWCASE THE REQUIRED 20 FEET SETBACK
 DISTANCE FROM THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK. IN CASE A
 SIDEWALK IS MISSING, PLEASE SHOWCASE THE SETBACK
 DISTANCE FROM THE EDGE OF THE TRAVEL LANE. PLEASE
 PROVIDE SHEET/DOCUMENT NUMBER SHOWCASING SUCH ITEM
 15) SATISFIED. IS VALET SERVICE PROPOSED? IF SO,
 PROVIDE A THOROUGH OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS. DETAILS OF THE
 ANALYSIS SHOULD BE DISCUSSED DURING THE METHODOLOGY
 MEETING
 16) SATISFIED. ARE THERE ANY BUS STOPS BEING IMPACTED?
 17) SATISFIED. IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IMPACTING AN
 EXISTING BICYCLE FACILITY?
 18) TO BE SATISFIED AT BUILDING PERMIT. PROVIDE A
 CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN. PLEASE REFER TO CITY CODE
 86-246 FOR DETAILS.
  
 VALERIO ORICCHIO
 CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER
 561-494-1092
 [email protected]
  
Review Stop TRAFFIC TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
Rev No 1 Status F Date 12-16-2022 Cont ID  
Sent By   Date 12-16-2022 Time   Rev Time  
Received By   Date 12-16-2022 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2022-12-16 18:08:30TRAFFIC COMMENTS
 1) PROVIDE AN UPDATED TRAFFIC STUDY, AS IT IS BASED ON
 OLD TRAFFIC COUNTS, ASSUMPTIONS AND METHODOLOGIES.
 PLEASE PERFORM A NEW SET OF TRAFFIC COUNTS, AND PROVIDE
 A DETAILED ELABORATION ON THE TRIP GENERATION
 CALCULATION
 2) INCLUDE THE INTERSECTIONS OF DREHER TRAIL N WITH
 SUMMIT AND SOUTHERN BLVD IN THE ANALYSIS
 3) PROVIDE AN UPDATED PARKING STUDY. ACTUAL DATA SHOULD
 BE COLLECTED IN ORDER TO CORROBORATE THE THEORETICAL
 FORMULAS. TYPICAL DAILY/WEEKEND USAGE AND AT LEAST ONE
 SPECIAL EVENT SHOULD BE ACCOUNTED FOR
 4) BOTH THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STATEMENT AND PARKING DEMAND
 STUDY NEED TO CONSIDER THE MULTI-PHASE APPROACH OF THE
 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND PROVIDE NARRATIVE EXPLAINING
 AND ILLUSTRATING TRAFFIC IMPACTS, CIRCULATION, PARKING
 AND MITIGATION MEASUREMENTS FOR EACH PHASE
 5) PROVIDE A CRASH ANALYSIS ALONG THE MAIN ACCESS
 DRIVEWAYS AND IDENTIFY MITIGATION MEASUREMENTS. THE S4
 DATABASE SHOWED 4 INCIDENTS IN THE PAST 2 YEARS. CITY
 WAS ALSO CONTACTED IN 2020 PERTAINING IMPROVEMENTS BY
 THE SHARP TURN ALONG N DREHER TRAIL JUST WEST OF THE
 SCIENCE CENTER
 6) PROVIDE COUNTY TPS LETTER
 7) DEPENDING ON THE OUTCOME OF THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS,
 TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT (TDM) MEASURES MAY BE
 ENCOURAGED
  
 SITE COMMENTS
 8) PROVIDE A TRANSPORTATION SPECIFIC SITE PLAN FOR THE
 GROUND FLOOR. SHOWCASING TRANSPORTATION RELATED
 FEATURES (E.G. ROADWAY WIDTHS, DRIVING AISLES, PARKING
 STALLS, SIDEWALK, CURB, GUTTER, DRIVEWAY, GATES,
 CROSSWALKS, VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, CORNER & DRIVEWAY
 SEPARATION DISTANCES, SLOPES, ETC.) PROPERLY LABELED
 AND DIMENSIONED. THE SITE PLAN SHOULD BE NAMED T-1.0
 9) IN THE T-1.0 SITE PLAN, PLEASE SHOWCASE BASIC CURB
 DETAILS (E.G. DRIVEWAY, CURB CUTS, PAVEMENT MARKINGS,
 PARKING STALLS, ETC.) ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE ROADS
 SURROUNDING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
 10) PROVIDE A SIGNAGE AND PAVEMENT MARKING PLAN.
 INCLUSIVE OF ALL FEATURES WITHIN THE PROPOSED
 DEVELOPMENT AND ALONG ALL ROADS FRONTING THE SITE. SUCH
 PLAN IS PART OF THE TRANSPORTATION REVIEW AND SHOULD BE
 NAMED ACCORDINGLY (E.G. T-1.1 OR T-2.0)
 11) PROVIDE AUTOTURN ANALYSIS FOR GARBAGE TRUCK AND/OR
 SERVICE VEHICLES DRIVING IN AND OUT OF THE PROPOSED
 DEVELOPMENT WITH VEHICLE DYNAMIC ENVELOPES AND WHEEL
 PATHS CLEARLY DISTINCT AND DEFINED IN DIFFERENT COLORS.
 PROVIDE THE ANALYSIS IN A SEPARATE SHEET. SUCH PLAN(S)
 CONTAINING THE ANALYSIS ARE PART OF THE TRANSPORTATION
 REVIEW AND SHOULD BE NAMED ACCORDINGLY (E.G. T1.2,
 T-3.0)
 12) PROVIDE A PARKING TABLE SHOWCASING THE NUMBER OF
 REQUIRED AND PROVIDED PARKING SPACES, INCLUSIVE OF ADA
 AND BICYCLE ONES
 13) IN THE PAVEMENT, MARKING & SIGN PLAN, PROVIDE A
 TABLE SHOWCASING THE NUMBER OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED
 ON-STREET PARKING STALLS. PROVIDE THE NUMBER OF METERED
 STALLS THAT ARE BEING REMOVED OR RELOCATED, IF ANY
 14) ARE THERE ANY GATES PROPOSED? IF SO, CLEARLY
 SHOWCASE THE REQUIRED 20 FEET SETBACK DISTANCE FROM THE
 BACK OF THE SIDEWALK
 15) IS VALET SERVICE PROPOSED? IF SO, PROVIDE A
 THOROUGH OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS. DETAILS OF THE ANALYSIS
 SHOULD BE DISCUSSED DURING THE METHODOLOGY MEETING
 16) ARE THERE ANY BUS STOPS BEING IMPACTED?
 17) IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IMPACTING AN EXISTING
 BICYCLE FACILITY?
 18) PROVIDE A CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN. PLEASE
 REFER TO CITY CODE 86-246 FOR DETAILS.
  
 VALERIO ORICCHIO
 CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER
 561-494-1092
 [email protected]
  
Review Stop Z ZONING
Rev No 3 Status P Date 03-14-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By llouie Date 03-14-2023 Time   Rev Time 0.00
Received By llouie Date 03-14-2023 Time   Sent To  
Notes
2023-03-14 16:57:13PLANS AND PLATS REVIEW COMMITTEE (PPRC) ZONING REVIEW
 ________________________________________
  
 DATE OF REVIEW: 03.14.2023
 ________________________________________
  
 PLEASE PROVIDE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING
 REVIEW COMMENTS:
  
 1. SATISFIED - AN APPROVED TRAFFIC PERFORMANCE
 STANDARDS LETTER SHALL BE PROVIDED FROM THE PALM BEACH
 COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT - TRAFFIC DIVISION.
  
 2. PARTIALLY SATISFIED- OUTSTANDING PUBLIC UTILITY
 LETTERS SHALL BE PROVIDED. A LETTER FROM FPU IS STILL
 MISSING. THIS CAN BE CONDITIONED PRIOR TO CITY
 COMMISSION; HOWEVER, THE LETTER MUST BE PROVIDED AS
 SOON AS POSSIBLE
  
 3. SATISFIED (THIS REVIEW/DISCUSSION WILL CONTINUE AS
 THE PROJECT MOVES INTO PERMITTING) - SIGNIFICANT
 DISCUSSIONS WILL NEED TO CONTINUE THROUGHOUT THE SITE
 PLAN REVIEW/PERMITTING PROCESS REGARDING THE PHASING.
 ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS AND DATA TABLES WILL LIKELY NEED TO
 BE PROVIDED. WILL NEED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT SUFFICIENT
 PARKING, ACCESS, ETC. WILL BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT
 CONSTRUCTION.
  
 4. SATISFIED - THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT INDICATES
 THAT THERE ARE 76 SPACES PROPOSED TO BE CONSTRUCTED
 OUTSIDE OF THE LEASE AREA, AND ARE A PART OF THE WAIVER
 REQUEST; THE SITE PLAN SHOWS 78 SPACES.
  
 5. SATISFIED (BEING ADDRESSED AS PART OF LEASE
 PROVISIONS) - DISCUSSIONS WILL NEED TO CONTINUE
 REGARDING THE LIMITS OF THE MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS.
 ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS WILL LIKELY NEED TO BE PROVIDED.
  
 6. SATISFIED (SUBJECT TO MAINTENACE OF NORTH PARKING BY
 THE SCIENCE CENTER) - IS IT POSSIBLE TO MAKE THE LEASE
 LINE SUCH THAT IT DOES NOT SPLIT THE ACCESSIBLE PARKING
 SPACE? IF THE PARKING OUTSIDE OF THE LEASE AREA WILL BE
 THE MAINTENANCE OBLIGATION OF THE SCIENCE CENTER,
 IT???S NOT SO MUCH OF AN ISSUE.
  
 7. SATISFIED - PLEASE CLARIFY THE PARKING WAIVER ???
 THERE IS NO REQUEST TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED
 SPACES, BUT SIMPLY TO ALLOW THE SPACES TO BE LOCATED
 OUTSIDE OF THE LEASE AREA.
  
 8. SATISFIED - THERE ARE MULTIPLE LOCATIONS WHERE
 TREES, GATES, ETC. ARE PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED WITHIN AN
 EASEMENT. EITHER THE TREES SHALL BE RELOCATED TO POINTS
 OUTSIDE THE EASEMENT, OR CONSENT SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM
 THE EASEMENT HOLDER.
  
 8.1. SATISFIED - THERE ARE STILL LOCATIONS WHERE TREES
 ARE BEING SHOWN IN AN EASEMENT.
  
 9. SATISFIED - ON THE SITE PLAN THERE IS A SYMBOL OF W2
 ALONG THE EAST LEASE LINE ??? I BELIEVE THIS SHOULD BE
 W3 TO CORRESPOND WITH THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER WAIVER.
  
 10. SATISFIED - ON THE SITE PLAN THERE IS A SYMBOL OF
 W3 ALONG THE WEST LEASE LINE ??? NO WAIVER IS BEING
 REQUESTED ALONG THIS PROPERTY LINE, CORRECT? THIS SEEMS
 CONFUSING. THE SYMBOLS FOR THE WAIVERS SHOULD BE
 LOCATED IN THE AREAS IN WHICH THE WAIVER IS PROPOSED TO
 OCCUR (IF SPECIFIC TO A LOCATION).
  
 10.1. SATISFIED - THERE IS A SYMBOL OF W4 ALONG THE
 WEST PROPERTY LINE. IN THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT THIS
 INDICATES A WAIVER FROM FENCE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS, BUT
 THIS IS NOT CONTAINED IN THE WAIVER TABLE ON THE SITE
 PLAN.
  
 11. SATISFIED - IS THE DIESEL TANK PROPOSED TO BE ABOVE
 OR BELOW GROUND? IF ABOVE GROUND, AN OPAQUE ENCLOSURE
 AND HEDGING SHALL BE PROVIDED ??? PLEASE PROVIDE
 DETAILS.
  
 11.1. SATISFIED - THE ENCLOSURE AROUND THE DIESEL TANK
 AND BRANCH PICK-UP AREA ENCROACHES INTO AN EASEMENT.
 EASEMENT CONSENT SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM THE EASEMENT
 HOLDER. ADDITIONALLY, THE WALL IS WITHIN THE "FRONT"
 SETBACK AND WOULD NEED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE WAIVER
 REQUEST AS IT IS MORE THAN FOUR (4) FEET IN HEIGHT.
  
 11.2. SATISFIED- THE ENCLOSURE AROUND THE DIESEL TANK
 AND BRANCH PICK-UP AREA DOES NOT HAVE THE REQUIRED
 LANDSCAPE MATERIAL SURROUNDING IT.
  
 12. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - DETAILS SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR
 THE GENERATOR ENCLOSURE, AS WELL AS ENCLOSURE OF THE
 AQUARIUM EQUIPMENT, ETC. ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION MAY NEED
 TO OCCUR ON THE HOW EQUIPMENT/SERVICE AREAS ARE BEING
 SCREENED AND WHAT DETAILS NEED TO BE PROVIDED.
  
 12.1. SATISFIED - THE ENCLOSURE AROUND THE GENERATORS
 DOES NOT HAVE THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE MATERIAL
 SURROUNDING IT.
  
 12.2. SATISFIED - THE ENCLOSURE AROUND THE GENERATORS
 SHALL BE OPAQUE AND THE GENERATOR SHALL NOT BE VISIBLE.
  
 12.3. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - HOW IS THE AQUARIUM
 EQUIPMENT YARD PROPOSED TO BE SCREENED/LANDSCAPED? THE
 CHAINLINK FENCE SHALL BE REPLACED WITH AN OPAQUE FENCE
 AND LANDSCAPING.
  
 12.4. SATISFIED - DETAIL #5 ON SHEET AS-203 IS LABELED
 AS THE ELEVATION FOR THE DIESEL TANK STORAGE, HOWEVER
 THIS APPEARS TO BE FOR THE LOADING/SERVICE AREA.
  
 12.5. SATISFIED - IN THE SERVICE AREA SURROUNDING
 BUILDING 2A, THERE APPEARS TO BE REMNANTS OF FENCING
 STILL BEING SHOWN, IN ADDITION TO THE PROPOSED WALL.
 PLEASE CLARIFY.
  
 13. SATISFIED - WHAT IS THE BUILDING SEPARATION BETWEEN
 BUILDING 1 AND BUILDING 2? IS THIS A PART OF THE WAIVER
 REQUEST?
  
 14. SATISFIED - WOULD IT BE PREFERRED TO REMOVE FROM
 THE SITE/LANDSCAPE PLANS ANY EASEMENTS THAT HAVE
 ALREADY BEEN ABANDONED?
  
 14.1. SATISFIED - THERE APPEAR TO BE LABELS FOR
 ABANDONED EASEMENTS THAT STILL EXIST ON THE LANDSCAPE
 PLANS.
  
 15. SATISFIED - THERE IS DETAIL LACKING ON THE SITE
 PLAN, SPECIFICALLY REGARDING THOSE AREAS IN FRONT OF
 THE PROPOSED EXPANSION. GATES ARE SHOWN, BUT THERE IS
 NOT INFORMATION AS TO WHETHER THESE GATES TIE INTO
 PROPOSED FENCING OR WALLS, WHAT THE FENCING/WALLS (IF
 APPLICABLE) ARE PROPOSED TO CONSIST OF, ETC.
  
 15.1. SATISFIED - THE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN INDICATES
 A SECURITY GATE, FENCING, ETC. ALONG THE SOUTH LEASE
 BOUNDARY; THIS IS NOT SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN AND WOULD
 NEED TO BE A PART OF THE WAIVER #4 REQUEST AS A PORTION
 OF IT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE "FRONT" SETBACK.
  
 16. SATISFIED ??? SHOULDN???T BUILDING 4 BE SHADED AS A
 ???PROPOSED BUILDING???? IS THIS BUILDING ACCOUNTED FOR
 IN SQUARE FOOTAGES, ETC.?
  
 17. SATISFIED - PLEASE CLARIFY WHAT IS BEING IDENTIFIED
 AS THE FRONT, SIDE, REAR, ETC. AS THE PROPOSED SETBACKS
 INDICATED IN THE SITE DATA TABLE DO NOT SEEM TO
 CORRESPOND WITH THE SETBACKS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN.
  
 18. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - FENCES, GATES, ETC. LOCATED
 WITHIN THE FRONT SETBACK ARE NOT TO EXCEED FOUR (4)
 FEET IN HEIGHT. A WAIVER IS REQUESTED.
  
 18.1. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - SEE COMMENTS #11.1. AND
 #15.1. REGARDING ADDITIONAL LOCATIONS THAT NEED TO BE
 IDENTIFIED FOR THE WAIVER REQUEST.
  
 19. SATISFIED - THE BIKE RACK AT BUILDING 5 IS ORIENTED
 IN SUCH A WAY THAT BOTH SPACES CANNOT BE ACCESSED.
  
 20. SATISFIED - IN ADDITION TO THE HEIGHT OF THE
 BUILDING AT THE ROOF DECK, PLEASE PROVIDE THE HEIGHT OF
 THE BUILDING AS MEASURED TO THE TOP OF THE PARAPET.
  
 20.1. SATISFIED - THE HEIGHT TO THE TOP OF THE PARAPET
 WAS PROVIDED IN THE "RESPONSE TO COMMENTS" BUT DOES NOT
 APPEAR TO BE SHOWN ON THE PLANS.
  
 21. SATISFIED - THE LANDSCAPE AREA PROPOSED, PLUS THE
 IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA PROPOSED, SHOULD ADD UP TO
 100%. ACCORDING TO THE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT
 REQUIREMENTS TABLE, THE TOTAL IS ONLY 93%.
  
 22. SATISFIED - EXPLANATION IS NEEDED REGARDING THE
 SECURITY GATE AT THE NORTH END OF THE FPL SUBSTATION.
 HOW WILL FPL MAINTAIN ACCESS FOR MAINTENANCE PURPOSES?
 WHEN IS THE GATE OPEN/CLOSED? WILL PATRONS OF THE
 SCIENCE CENTER BE PRESENT WHEN THIS GATE IS CLOSED AND
 IF SO, WILL A TURNAROUND NEED TO BE PROVIDED?
  
 23. SATISFIED - THE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN REFERENCES
 A COVERED WALKWAY BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS. THIS IS NOT
 SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN AND THERE IS NOT ENOUGH
 INFORMATION/DETAIL TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS PROPOSED. WHAT
 IS THIS COVERING TO CONSIST OF? WHAT ARE THE LIMITS OF
 THE COVERING? IS THE COVERING CONNECTED TO EACH OF THE
 BUILDINGS? IF SO, THEN ALL OF THE CONNECTED BUILDINGS
 COULD POTENTIALLY BE CLASSIFIED AS ONE BUILDING (FROM A
 ZONING PERSPECTIVE). MORE INFORMATION IS NEEDED.
  
 26. SATISFIED - THE GRAPHIC SCALE ON THE ARCHITECTURAL
 SITE PLAN IS INCORRECT.
  
 27. SATISFIED - THE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN DOES NOT
 MATCH THE SITE PLAN. SPECIFIC AREAS INCLUDE:
 - CHILLER ENCLOSURE IS STILL LABELED AS BUILDING #4
 - BUILDING #4 ON THE SITE PLAN IS LABELED AS BUILDING
 #5 ON THE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN.
 - THE BIKE RACK SOUTH OF BUILDING #4 (AS LABELED ON THE
 SITE PLAN) IS IN A DIFFERENT LOCATION.
 - THE SIDEWALK NEAR THE ACCESSIBLE PARKING SOUTH OF
 BUILDING #4 (AS LABELED ON THE SITE PLAN) IS DIFFERENT.
 ________________________________________
  
 PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING WHEN RESUBMITTING:
  
 A) WRITTEN RESPONSES TO COMMENTS MADE BY ALL
 DEPARTMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED UPON RESUBMISSION.
  
 B) ELECTRONIC COPIES OF ALL REVISED PLANS AND/OR
 DOCUMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED.
  
 C) PLEASE NOTE THAT RE-SUBMITTALS MAY BE SUBJECT TO
 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
  
 D) IF NO RESPONSE IS RECEIVED WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THE
 ISSUANCE OF THESE COMMENTS, THE APPLICATION WILL BE
 CONSIDERED WITHDRAWN AND ANY FURTHER ACTION WILL
 REQUIRE SUBMISSION OF A NEW DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION.
  
 E) PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU WILL BE PERMITTED ONE (1)
 RESUBMITTAL AT NO ADDITIONAL COST. IF PREVIOUSLY-ISSUED
 COMMENTS CONTINUE TO NOT BE SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED, THE
 APPLICANT WILL BE ACCESSED A RESUBMITTAL FEE. SUCH FEE
 WILL BE 20% OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FEE.
  
 F) IN ORDER TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FEBRUARY 22, 2023,
 PLANNING BOARD AGENDA, ALL COMMENTS SHALL BE
 SATISFACTORILY ADDRESSED. PLEASE SUBMIT ALL REVISED
 DOCUMENTS/PLANS NO LATER THAN FRIDAY, DECEMBER 23,
 2022.
  
 G) TO BE PLACED ON THE FEBRUARY 22, 2023, PLANNING
 BOARD AGENDA, SIGNS SHALL BE POSTED ON THE PROPERTY NO
 LATER THAN FEBRUARY 7, 2023. SIGNAGE SHALL CONFORM, AND
 BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
 CITY???S ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; SUCH
 REQUIREMENTS ARE ALSO PROVIDED IN THE DEVELOPMENT
 APPLICATION. A SIGNED AND NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT SHALL BE
 PROVIDED BY THE DEADLINE REFERENCED ABOVE.
  
 H) IF AFTER THE CASE HAS BEEN ADVERTISED THE APPLICANT
 DESIRES TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE, A FEE OF $50 PLUS THE
 COST OF ADVERTISING WILL BE CHARGED.
 ________________________________________
  
 QUESTIONS/COMMENTS, PLEASE CONTACT THE FOLLOWING:
  
 LINDA LOUIE, AICP, SENIOR PLANNER
 CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH
 DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT ??? PLANNING DIVISION
 401 CLEMATIS STREET - P.O. BOX 3147
 WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33402
  
 P: 561.822.1458
 TTY: 800.955.8771
 E: [email protected]
  
 W: WPB.ORG
  
Review Stop Z ZONING
Rev No 2 Status F Date 01-31-2023 Cont ID  
Sent By jroach Date 01-31-2023 Time 08:05 Rev Time 0.00
Received By jroach Date 01-31-2023 Time 08:05 Sent To  
Notes
2023-01-31 10:07:46PLANS AND PLATS REVIEW COMMITTEE (PPRC) ZONING REVIEW
 ________________________________________
  
 DATE OF REVIEW: 01.31.2023
 ________________________________________
  
 PLEASE PROVIDE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING
 REVIEW COMMENTS:
  
 1. NOT SATISFIED - AN APPROVED TRAFFIC PERFORMANCE
 STANDARDS LETTER SHALL BE PROVIDED FROM THE PALM BEACH
 COUNTY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ??? TRAFFIC DIVISION.
  
 2. NOT SATISFIED - OUTSTANDING PUBLIC UTILITY LETTERS
 SHALL BE PROVIDED.
  
 2.1. NEW COMMENT - COMCAST AND FPL LETTERS STILL
 OUTSTANDING.
  
 3. SATISFIED (THIS REVIEW/DISCUSSION WILL CONTINUE AS
 THE PROJECT MOVES INTO PERMITTING) - SIGNIFICANT
 DISCUSSIONS WILL NEED TO CONTINUE THROUGHOUT THE SITE
 PLAN REVIEW/PERMITTING PROCESS REGARDING THE PHASING.
 ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS AND DATA TABLES WILL LIKELY NEED TO
 BE PROVIDED. WILL NEED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT SUFFICIENT
 PARKING, ACCESS, ETC. WILL BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT
 CONSTRUCTION.
  
 4. SATISFIED - THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT INDICATES
 THAT THERE ARE 76 SPACES PROPOSED TO BE CONSTRUCTED
 OUTSIDE OF THE LEASE AREA, AND ARE A PART OF THE WAIVER
 REQUEST; THE SITE PLAN SHOWS 78 SPACES.
  
 5. SATISFIED (BEING ADDRESSED AS PART OF LEASE
 PROVISIONS) - DISCUSSIONS WILL NEED TO CONTINUE
 REGARDING THE LIMITS OF THE MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS.
 ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS WILL LIKELY NEED TO BE PROVIDED.
  
 6. SATISFIED (SUBJECT TO MAINTENACE OF NORTH PARKING BY
 THE SCIENCE CENTER) - IS IT POSSIBLE TO MAKE THE LEASE
 LINE SUCH THAT IT DOES NOT SPLIT THE ACCESSIBLE PARKING
 SPACE? IF THE PARKING OUTSIDE OF THE LEASE AREA WILL BE
 THE MAINTENANCE OBLIGATION OF THE SCIENCE CENTER,
 IT???S NOT SO MUCH OF AN ISSUE.
  
 7. SATISFIED - PLEASE CLARIFY THE PARKING WAIVER ???
 THERE IS NO REQUEST TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED
 SPACES, BUT SIMPLY TO ALLOW THE SPACES TO BE LOCATED
 OUTSIDE OF THE LEASE AREA.
  
 8. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - THERE ARE MULTIPLE LOCATIONS
 WHERE TREES, GATES, ETC. ARE PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED
 WITHIN AN EASEMENT. EITHER THE TREES SHALL BE RELOCATED
 TO POINTS OUTSIDE THE EASEMENT, OR CONSENT SHALL BE
 OBTAINED FROM THE EASEMENT HOLDER.
  
 8.1. NEW COMMENT - THERE ARE STILL LOCATIONS WHERE
 TREES ARE BEING SHOWN IN AN EASEMENT.
  
 9. SATISFIED - ON THE SITE PLAN THERE IS A SYMBOL OF W2
 ALONG THE EAST LEASE LINE ??? I BELIEVE THIS SHOULD BE
 W3 TO CORRESPOND WITH THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER WAIVER.
  
 10. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - ON THE SITE PLAN THERE IS A
 SYMBOL OF W3 ALONG THE WEST LEASE LINE ??? NO WAIVER IS
 BEING REQUESTED ALONG THIS PROPERTY LINE, CORRECT? THIS
 SEEMS CONFUSING. THE SYMBOLS FOR THE WAIVERS SHOULD BE
 LOCATED IN THE AREAS IN WHICH THE WAIVER IS PROPOSED TO
 OCCUR (IF SPECIFIC TO A LOCATION).
  
 10.1. NEW COMMENT - THERE IS A SYMBOL OF W4 ALONG THE
 WEST PROPERTY LINE. IN THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT THIS
 INDICATES A WAIVER FROM FENCE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS, BUT
 THIS IS NOT CONTAINED IN THE WAIVER TABLE ON THE SITE
 PLAN.
  
 11. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - IS THE DIESEL TANK PROPOSED
 TO BE ABOVE OR BELOW GROUND? IF ABOVE GROUND, AN OPAQUE
 ENCLOSURE AND HEDGING SHALL BE PROVIDED ??? PLEASE
 PROVIDE DETAILS.
  
 11.1. NEW COMMENT - THE ENCLOSURE AROUND THE DIESEL
 TANK AND BRANCH PICK-UP AREA ENCROACHES INTO AN
 EASEMENT. EASEMENT CONSENT SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM THE
 EASEMENT HOLDER. ADDITIONALLY, THE WALL IS WITHIN THE
 "FRONT" SETBACK AND WOULD NEED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE
 WAIVER REQUEST AS IT IS MORE THAN FOUR (4) FEET IN
 HEIGHT.
  
 11.2. NEW COMMENT - THE ENCLOSURE AROUND THE DIESEL
 TANK AND BRANCH PICK-UP AREA DOES NOT HAVE THE REQUIRED
 LANDSCAPE MATERIAL SURROUNDING IT.
  
 12. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - DETAILS SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR
 THE GENERATOR ENCLOSURE, AS WELL AS ENCLOSURE OF THE
 AQUARIUM EQUIPMENT, ETC. ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION MAY NEED
 TO OCCUR ON THE HOW EQUIPMENT/SERVICE AREAS ARE BEING
 SCREENED AND WHAT DETAILS NEED TO BE PROVIDED.
  
 12.1. NEW COMMENT - THE ENCLOSURE AROUND THE GENERATORS
 DOES NOT HAVE THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE MATERIAL
 SURROUNDING IT.
  
 12.2. NEW COMMENT - THE ENCLOSURE AROUND THE GENERATORS
 SHALL BE OPAQUE AND THE GENERATOR SHALL NOT BE VISIBLE.
  
 12.3. NEW COMMENT - HOW IS THE AQUARIUM EQUIPMENT YARD
 PROPOSED TO BE SCREENED/LANDSCAPED?
  
 12.4. NEW COMMENT - DETAIL #5 ON SHEET AS-203 IS
 LABELED AS THE ELEVATION FOR THE DIESEL TANK STORAGE,
 HOWEVER THIS APPEARS TO BE FOR THE LOADING/SERVICE
 AREA.
  
 12.5. NEW COMMENT - IN THE SERVICE AREA SURROUNDING
 BUILDING 2A, THERE APPEARS TO BE REMNANTS OF FENCING
 STILL BEING SHOWN, IN ADDITION TO THE PROPOSED WALL.
 PLEASE CLARIFY.
  
 13. SATISFIED - WHAT IS THE BUILDING SEPARATION BETWEEN
 BUILDING 1 AND BUILDING 2? IS THIS A PART OF THE WAIVER
 REQUEST?
  
 14. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - WOULD IT BE PREFERRED TO
 REMOVE FROM THE SITE/LANDSCAPE PLANS ANY EASEMENTS THAT
 HAVE ALREADY BEEN ABANDONED?
  
 14.1. NEW COMMENT - THERE APPEAR TO BE LABELS FOR
 ABANDONED EASEMENTS THAT STILL EXIST ON THE LANDSCAPE
 PLANS.
  
 15. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - THERE IS DETAIL LACKING ON
 THE SITE PLAN, SPECIFICALLY REGARDING THOSE AREAS IN
 FRONT OF THE PROPOSED EXPANSION. GATES ARE SHOWN, BUT
 THERE IS NOT INFORMATION AS TO WHETHER THESE GATES TIE
 INTO PROPOSED FENCING OR WALLS, WHAT THE FENCING/WALLS
 (IF APPLICABLE) ARE PROPOSED TO CONSIST OF, ETC.
  
 15.1. NEW COMMENT - THE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN
 INDICATES A SECURITY GATE, FENCING, ETC. ALONG THE
 SOUTH LEASE BOUNDARY; THIS IS NOT SHOWN ON THE SITE
 PLAN AND WOULD NEED TO BE A PART OF THE WAIVER #4
 REQUEST AS A PORTION OF IT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE
 "FRONT" SETBACK.
  
 16. SATISFIED - SHOULDN???T BUILDING 4 BE SHADED AS A
 ???PROPOSED BUILDING???? IS THIS BUILDING ACCOUNTED FOR
 IN SQUARE FOOTAGES, ETC.?
  
 17. SATISFIED - PLEASE CLARIFY WHAT IS BEING IDENTIFIED
 AS THE FRONT, SIDE, REAR, ETC. AS THE PROPOSED SETBACKS
 INDICATED IN THE SITE DATA TABLE DO NOT SEEM TO
 CORRESPOND WITH THE SETBACKS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN.
  
 18. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - FENCES, GATES, ETC. LOCATED
 WITHIN THE FRONT SETBACK ARE NOT TO EXCEED FOUR (4)
 FEET IN HEIGHT.
  
 18.1. NEW COMMENT - SEE COMMENTS #11.1. AND #15.1.
 REGARDING ADDITIONAL LOCATIONS THAT NEED TO BE
 IDENTIFIED FOR THE WAIVER REQUEST.
  
 19. SATISFIED - THE BIKE RACK AT BUILDING 5 IS ORIENTED
 IN SUCH A WAY THAT BOTH SPACES CANNOT BE ACCESSED.
  
 20. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - IN ADDITION TO THE HEIGHT OF
 THE BUILDING AT THE ROOF DECK, PLEASE PROVIDE THE
 HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING AS MEASURED TO THE TOP OF THE
 PARAPET.
  
 20.1. NEW COMMENT - THE HEIGHT TO THE TOP OF THE
 PARAPET WAS PROVIDED IN THE "RESPONSE TO COMMENTS" BUT
 DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE SHOWN ON THE PLANS.
  
 21. SATISFIED - THE LANDSCAPE AREA PROPOSED, PLUS THE
 IMPERVIOUS SURFACE AREA PROPOSED, SHOULD ADD UP TO
 100%. ACCORDING TO THE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT
 REQUIREMENTS TABLE, THE TOTAL IS ONLY 93%.
  
 22. SATISFIED - EXPLANATION IS NEEDED REGARDING THE
 SECURITY GATE AT THE NORTH END OF THE FPL SUBSTATION.
 HOW WILL FPL MAINTAIN ACCESS FOR MAINTENANCE PURPOSES?
 WHEN IS THE GATE OPEN/CLOSED? WILL PATRONS OF THE
 SCIENCE CENTER BE PRESENT WHEN THIS GATE IS CLOSED AND
 IF SO, WILL A TURNAROUND NEED TO BE PROVIDED?
  
 23. NEW COMMENT - THE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN
 REFERENCES A COVERED WALKWAY BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS.
 THIS IS NOT SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN AND THERE IS NOT
 ENOUGH INFORMATION/DETAIL TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS
 PROPOSED. WHAT IS THIS COVERING TO CONSIST OF? WHAT ARE
 THE LIMITS OF THE COVERING? IS THE COVERING CONNECTED
 TO EACH OF THE BUILDINGS? IF SO, THEN ALL OF THE
 CONNECTED BUILDINGS COULD POTENTIALLY BE CLASSIFIED AS
 ONE BUILDING (FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE). MORE
 INFORMATION IS NEEDED.
  
 26. NEW COMMENT - THE GRAPHIC SCALE ON THE
 ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN IS INCORRECT.
  
 27. NEW COMMENT ??? THE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN DOES
 NOT MATCH THE SITE PLAN. SPECIFIC AREAS INCLUDE:
 - CHILLER ENCLOSURE IS STILL LABELED AS BUILDING #4
 - BUILDING #4 ON THE SITE PLAN IS LABELED AS BUILDING
 #5 ON THE ARCHITECTURAL SITE PLAN.
 - THE BIKE RACK SOUTH OF BUILDING #4 (AS LABELED ON THE
 SITE PLAN) IS IN A DIFFERENT LOCATION.
 - THE SIDEWALK NEAR THE ACCESSIBLE PARKING SOUTH OF
 BUILDING #4 (AS LABELED ON THE SITE PLAN) IS DIFFERENT.
 ________________________________________
  
 PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING WHEN RESUBMITTING:
  
 A) WRITTEN RESPONSES TO COMMENTS MADE BY ALL
 DEPARTMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED UPON RESUBMISSION.
  
 B) ELECTRONIC COPIES OF ALL REVISED PLANS AND/OR
 DOCUMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED.
  
 C) PLEASE NOTE THAT RE-SUBMITTALS MAY BE SUBJECT TO
 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
  
 D) IF NO RESPONSE IS RECEIVED WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THE
 ISSUANCE OF THESE COMMENTS, THE APPLICATION WILL BE
 CONSIDERED WITHDRAWN AND ANY FURTHER ACTION WILL
 REQUIRE SUBMISSION OF A NEW DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION.
  
 E) PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU WILL BE PERMITTED ONE (1)
 RESUBMITTAL AT NO ADDITIONAL COST. IF PREVIOUSLY-ISSUED
 COMMENTS CONTINUE TO NOT BE SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED, THE
 APPLICANT WILL BE ACCESSED A RESUBMITTAL FEE. SUCH FEE
 WILL BE 20% OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FEE.
  
 F) IN ORDER TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FEBRUARY 22, 2023,
 PLANNING BOARD AGENDA, ALL COMMENTS SHALL BE
 SATISFACTORILY ADDRESSED. PLEASE SUBMIT ALL REVISED
 DOCUMENTS/PLANS NO LATER THAN FRIDAY, DECEMBER 23,
 2022.
  
 G) TO BE PLACED ON THE FEBRUARY 22, 2023, PLANNING
 BOARD AGENDA, SIGNS SHALL BE POSTED ON THE PROPERTY NO
 LATER THAN FEBRUARY 7, 2023. SIGNAGE SHALL CONFORM, AND
 BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
 CITY???S ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; SUCH
 REQUIREMENTS ARE ALSO PROVIDED IN THE DEVELOPMENT
 APPLICATION. A SIGNED AND NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT SHALL BE
 PROVIDED BY THE DEADLINE REFERENCED ABOVE.
  
 H) IF AFTER THE CASE HAS BEEN ADVERTISED THE APPLICANT
 DESIRES TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE, A FEE OF $50 PLUS THE
 COST OF ADVERTISING WILL BE CHARGED.
 ________________________________________
  
 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
Review Stop Z ZONING
Rev No 1 Status F Date 12-13-2022 Cont ID  
Sent By jroach Date 12-13-2022 Time 08:21 Rev Time 0.00
Received By jroach Date 12-13-2022 Time 08:21 Sent To  
Notes
2022-12-13 08:22:13PLANS AND PLATS REVIEW COMMITTEE (PPRC) ZONING REVIEW
 ________________________________________
  
 DATE OF REVIEW: 12.08.2009
 ________________________________________
  
 PLEASE PROVIDE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING
 REVIEW COMMENTS:
  
 1. AN APPROVED TRAFFIC PERFORMANCE STANDARDS LETTER
 SHALL BE PROVIDED FROM THE PALM BEACH COUNTY
 ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT ??? TRAFFIC DIVISION.
  
 2. OUTSTANDING PUBLIC UTILITY LETTERS SHALL BE
 PROVIDED.
  
 3. SIGNIFICANT DISCUSSIONS WILL NEED TO CONTINUE
 THROUGHOUT THE SITE PLAN REVIEW/PERMITTING PROCESS
 REGARDING THE PHASING. ADDITIONAL EXHIBITS AND DATA
 TABLES WILL LIKELY NEED TO BE PROVIDED. WILL NEED TO
 DEMONSTRATE THAT SUFFICIENT PARKING, ACCESS, ETC. WILL
 BE MAINTAINED THROUGHOUT CONSTRUCTION.
  
 4. THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT INDICATES THAT THERE ARE
 76 SPACES PROPOSED TO BE CONSTRUCTED OUTSIDE OF THE
 LEASE AREA, AND ARE A PART OF THE WAIVER REQUEST; THE
 SITE PLAN SHOWS 78 SPACES.
  
 5. DISCUSSIONS WILL NEED TO CONTINUE REGARDING THE
 LIMITS OF THE MAINTENANCE OBLIGATIONS. ADDITIONAL
 EXHIBITS WILL LIKELY NEED TO BE PROVIDED.
  
 6. IS IT POSSIBLE TO MAKE THE LEASE LINE SUCH THAT IT
 DOES NOT SPLIT THE ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACE? IF THE
 PARKING OUTSIDE OF THE LEASE AREA WILL BE THE
 MAINTENANCE OBLIGATION OF THE SCIENCE CENTER, IT???S
 NOT SO MUCH OF AN ISSUE.
  
 7. PLEASE CLARIFY THE PARKING WAIVER ??? THERE IS NO
 REQUEST TO REDUCE THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED SPACES, BUT
 SIMPLY TO ALLOW THE SPACES TO BE LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE
 LEASE AREA.
  
 8. THERE ARE MULTIPLE LOCATIONS WHERE TREES, GATES,
 ETC. ARE PROPOSED TO BE LOCATED WITHIN AN EASEMENT.
 EITHER THE TREES SHALL BE RELOCATED TO POINTS OUTSIDE
 THE EASEMENT, OR CONSENT SHALL BE OBTAINED FROM THE
 EASEMENT HOLDER.
  
 9. ON THE SITE PLAN THERE IS A SYMBOL OF W2 ALONG THE
 EAST LEASE LINE ??? I BELIEVE THIS SHOULD BE W3 TO
 CORRESPOND WITH THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER WAIVER.
  
 10. ON THE SITE PLAN THERE IS A SYMBOL OF W3 ALONG THE
 WEST LEASE LINE ??? NO WAIVER IS BEING REQUESTED ALONG
 THIS PROPERTY LINE, CORRECT? THIS SEEMS CONFUSING. THE
 SYMBOLS FOR THE WAIVERS SHOULD BE LOCATED IN THE AREAS
 IN WHICH THE WAIVER IS PROPOSED TO OCCUR (IF SPECIFIC
 TO A LOCATION).
  
 11. IS THE DIESEL TANK PROPOSED TO BE ABOVE OR BELOW
 GROUND? IF ABOVE GROUND, AN OPAQUE ENCLOSURE AND
 HEDGING SHALL BE PROVIDED ??? PLEASE PROVIDE DETAILS.
  
 12. DETAILS SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR THE GENERATOR
 ENCLOSURE, AS WELL AS ENCLOSURE OF THE AQUARIUM
 EQUIPMENT, ETC. ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION MAY NEED TO OCCUR
 ON THE HOW EQUIPMENT/SERVICE AREAS ARE BEING SCREENED
 AND WHAT DETAILS NEED TO BE PROVIDED.
  
 13. WHAT IS THE BUILDING SEPARATION BETWEEN BUILDING 1
 AND BUILDING 2? IS THIS A PART OF THE WAIVER REQUEST?
  
 14. WOULD IT BE PREFERRED TO REMOVE FROM THE
 SITE/LANDSCAPE PLANS ANY EASEMENTS THAT HAVE ALREADY
 BEEN ABANDONED?
  
 15. THERE IS DETAIL LACKING ON THE SITE PLAN,
 SPECIFICALLY REGARDING THOSE AREAS IN FRONT OF THE
 PROPOSED EXPANSION. GATES ARE SHOWN, BUT THERE IS NOT
 INFORMATION AS TO WHETHER THESE GATES TIE INTO PROPOSED
 FENCING OR WALLS, WHAT THE FENCING/WALLS (IF
 APPLICABLE) ARE PROPOSED TO CONSIST OF, ETC.
  
 16. SHOULDN???T BUILDING 4 BE SHADED AS A ???PROPOSED
 BUILDING???? IS THIS BUILDING ACCOUNTED FOR IN SQUARE
 FOOTAGES, ETC.?
  
 17. PLEASE CLARIFY WHAT IS BEING IDENTIFIED AS THE
 FRONT, SIDE, REAR, ETC. AS THE PROPOSED SETBACKS
 INDICATED IN THE SITE DATA TABLE DO NOT SEEM TO
 CORRESPOND WITH THE SETBACKS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN.
  
 18. FENCES, GATES, ETC. LOCATED WITHIN THE FRONT
 SETBACK ARE NOT TO EXCEED FOUR (4) FEET IN HEIGHT.
  
 19. THE BIKE RACK AT BUILDING 5 IS ORIENTED IN SUCH A
 WAY THAT BOTH SPACES CANNOT BE ACCESSED.
  
 20. IN ADDITION TO THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING AT THE
 ROOF DECK, PLEASE PROVIDE THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING AS
 MEASURED TO THE TOP OF THE PARAPET.
  
 21. THE LANDSCAPE AREA PROPOSED, PLUS THE IMPERVIOUS
 SURFACE AREA PROPOSED, SHOULD ADD UP TO 100%. ACCORDING
 TO THE PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS TABLE, THE
 TOTAL IS ONLY 93%.
  
 22. EXPLANATION IS NEEDED REGARDING THE SECURITY GATE
 AT THE NORTH END OF THE FPL SUBSTATION. HOW WILL FPL
 MAINTAIN ACCESS FOR MAINTENANCE PURPOSES? WHEN IS THE
 GATE OPEN/CLOSED? WILL PATRONS OF THE SCIENCE CENTER BE
 PRESENT WHEN THIS GATE IS CLOSED AND IF SO, WILL A
 TURNAROUND NEED TO BE PROVIDED?
 ________________________________________
  
 PLEASE NOTE THE FOLLOWING WHEN RESUBMITTING:
  
 A) WRITTEN RESPONSES TO COMMENTS MADE BY ALL
 DEPARTMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED UPON RESUBMISSION.
  
 B) ELECTRONIC COPIES OF ALL REVISED PLANS AND/OR
 DOCUMENTS SHALL BE PROVIDED.
  
 C) PLEASE NOTE THAT RE-SUBMITTALS MAY BE SUBJECT TO
 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
  
 D) IF NO RESPONSE IS RECEIVED WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THE
 ISSUANCE OF THESE COMMENTS, THE APPLICATION WILL BE
 CONSIDERED WITHDRAWN AND ANY FURTHER ACTION WILL
 REQUIRE SUBMISSION OF A NEW DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION.
  
 E) PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU WILL BE PERMITTED ONE (1)
 RESUBMITTAL AT NO ADDITIONAL COST. IF PREVIOUSLY-ISSUED
 COMMENTS CONTINUE TO NOT BE SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED, THE
 APPLICANT WILL BE ACCESSED A RESUBMITTAL FEE. SUCH FEE
 WILL BE 20% OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FEE.
  
 F) IN ORDER TO BE CONSIDERED FOR THE FEBRUARY 22, 2023,
 PLANNING BOARD AGENDA, ALL COMMENTS SHALL BE
 SATISFACTORILY ADDRESSED. PLEASE SUBMIT ALL REVISED
 DOCUMENTS/PLANS NO LATER THAN FRIDAY, DECEMBER 23,
 2022.
  
 G) TO BE PLACED ON THE FEBRUARY 22, 2023, PLANNING
 BOARD AGENDA, SIGNS SHALL BE POSTED ON THE PROPERTY NO
 LATER THAN FEBRUARY 7, 2023. SIGNAGE SHALL CONFORM, AND
 BE INSTALLED ACCORDING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
 CITY???S ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS; SUCH
 REQUIREMENTS ARE ALSO PROVIDED IN THE DEVELOPMENT
 APPLICATION. A SIGNED AND NOTARIZED AFFIDAVIT SHALL BE
 PROVIDED BY THE DEADLINE REFERENCED ABOVE.
  
 H) IF AFTER THE CASE HAS BEEN ADVERTISED THE APPLICANT
 DESIRES TO REQUEST A CONTINUANCE, A FEE OF $50 PLUS THE
 COST OF ADVERTISING WILL BE CHARGED.
 ________________________________________
  
 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
  
  Print


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