| Date |
Text |
| 2015-03-24 18:32:33 | PB 950QQQQ - 1ST RESUBMITTAL 2/25/15 - UPDATED COMMENTS |
| | PALM BEACH COUNTY CONVENTION CENTER GARAGE |
| | 650 OKEECHOBEE BOULEVARD |
| | |
| | - CONTACT ERIC SCHNEIDER @ (561) 822-1446 |
| | |
| | - PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN |
| | WRITTEN FORMAT. |
| | |
| | - WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF FIVE |
| | (5) PAPER COPIES AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY IN .PDF FORMAT |
| | OF ALL PLANS. PLEASE NOTE THAT CHANGES ON THE |
| | RESUBMITTED PLANS OR THE SUBMITTAL OF INFORMATION/PLANS |
| | TO ADDRESS THE COMMENTS MAY RESULT IN ADDITIONAL |
| | COMMENTS. |
| | |
| | - PLEASE NOTE THAT IF THE PLANNING DIVISION HAS NOT |
| | RECEIVED A RESPONSE TO THE PPRC COMMENTS WITHIN 60 DAYS |
| | FROM THE DATE OF THESE COMMENTS/THE PPRC MEETING (BY |
| | MAY 25, 2015), THE CASE SHALL BE CONSIDERED WITHDRAWN. |
| | ANY FURTHER ACTION SHALL REQUIRE A NEW DEVELOPMENT |
| | APPLICATION. |
| | |
| | - PLEASE NOTE THAT YOU WILL BE PERMITTED ONE (1) |
| | RESUBMITTAL AT NO ADDITIONAL COST. IF PREVIOUSLY-ISSUED |
| | COMMENTS CONTINUE TO NOT BE SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED, THE |
| | APPLICANT WILL BE ACCESSED A RESUBMITTAL FEE. SUCH FEE |
| | WILL BE 20% OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FEE ($60). |
| | |
| | GENERAL |
| | |
| | 1) CONDITION: STAFF HAS SPOKEN WITH RELATED REGARDING |
| | THE AREA SOUTH OF THE HOTEL LOADING ZONE THAT IS |
| | CURRENTLY NOT INCLUDED ON EITHER THE HOTEL SITE PLAN OR |
| | THIS SITE PLAN. RELATED HAS AGREED TO SUPPLY PLANS FOR |
| | THE MISSING PIECE ONCE THIS GARAGE APPLICATION IS |
| | APPROVED, SO THEY CAN INTEGRATE THEIR PLANS WITH THE |
| | APPROVED GARAGE DESIGN. RELATED HAS STATED THEY WILL |
| | CONSTRUCT THE LOADING AREA CHANGES IF THE GARAGE IS |
| | UNDER CONSTRUCTION BEFORE THEY HAVE COMPLETED THE HOTEL |
| | CONSTRUCTION. IF THE HOTEL IS COMPLETED AND THE GARAGE |
| | CONSTRUCTION HAS NOT BEGUN, THE LOADING ZONE |
| | MODIFICATION CONSTRUCTION WILL BE BORNE BY THE COUNTY |
| | AS PART OF THE GARAGE CONSTRUCTION. THIS CONDITION WILL |
| | APPLY TO BOTH APPROVALS. |
| | |
| | 2) REPEAT COMMENT: PLEASE PROVIDE DETAILS ON HOW THE |
| | PROPOSED GARAGE COMPLIES WITH THE EXHIBIT D "ENERGY |
| | SAVING METHODS" OF THE CITYPLACE DRI. - THE RESPONSE |
| | SHALL LIST THE SPECIFIC ITEMS IN EXHIBIT D THAT WILL BE |
| | USED AND WHY OTHERS ARE NOT BEING IMPLEMENTED. |
| | |
| | SITE PLAN |
| | |
| | 3) REVISED COMMENT: THE SITE DATA TABLE WAS UPDATED TO |
| | INCLUDE THE ENTIRE CONVENTION CENTER PARCEL. THE AMOUNT |
| | OF LANDSCAPE AREA APPROVED BY RES. NO. 44-99 WAS |
| | 15.03%. THE PROPOSED OVERALL CONVENTION CENTER SITE |
| | ONLY HAS 13.6% LANDSCAPE. PROVIDE THE ADDITIONAL |
| | LANDSCAPE AREA. |
| | |
| | 4) REVISED COMMENT: PROVIDE A PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN |
| | THAT CONSOLIDATES THE APPLICANT RESPONSES INCLUDED WITH |
| | ITEMS 8 A THROUGH G IN ONE CENTRAL DOCUMENT THAT WILL |
| | BE INCLUDED WITH THE ULTIMATE APPROVAL LETTER. THE |
| | PARKING MANAGEMENT PLAN SHALL INCLUDE REMEDIES IN THE |
| | EVENT THAT THE PLAN IS NOT SUCCESSFUL IN SAFELY AND |
| | EFFICIENTLY CIRCULATING VEHICULAR TRAFFIC THROUGH THE |
| | AREA. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE CITY'S TRAFFIC ENGINEER HAS |
| | SAFETY CONCERNS WITH THE PROPOSED MOVEMENTS AND SIGNAGE |
| | OF THESE MOVEMENTS IN THE VICINITY OF THE NORTH |
| | ENTRANCE TO THE GARAGE. |
| | |
| | 5) REPEAT COMMENT: THE APPROVED PHASE 2 PLAN SHOWS |
| | APPROXIMATELY 110 FEET OF THE FLORIDA AVENUE FRONTAGE |
| | INTERRUPTED BY VEHICULAR ACCESS POINTS. THE PROPOSED |
| | PLAN EXPANDS THIS TO APPROXIMATELY 140 FEET (NOT |
| | INCLUDING THE STABILIZED FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS |
| | ROADWAY). THERE HAS BEEN NO JUSTIFICATION PROVIDED TO |
| | CHANGE THE CONDITIONS OF THE CURRENT APPROVAL TO |
| | SUPPORT THIS ENLARGEMENT OF THE DRIVEWAYS ALONG THE |
| | FRONTAGE AREA. STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT THE EXPANSION OF |
| | THE FRONTAGE INTERRUPTION FOR VEHICULAR ACCESS TO THE |
| | SITE SHOWN ON THE PROPOSED PLANS. STAFF WILL SUPPORT |
| | ADDITIONAL INTERRUPTION FOR VEHICULAR ACCESS ONLY UNDER |
| | THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS, WHICH SHALL BE SHOWN ON THE |
| | PLANS: |
| | |
| | A. THERE SHALL BE ONLY TWO LANES, NOT THREE, TO ENTER |
| | THE SITE LEADING TO THE VALET AREA (NOTE: WITH ONLY TWO |
| | LANES ON FLORIDA AVENUE, NO MORE THAN TWO LANES INTO |
| | THE SITE ARE NEEDED, WHICH IS THE EXISTING CONDITION |
| | TODAY). THIS MAY EXPAND TO THREE LANES ONCE A DRIVER IS |
| | FURTHER ONTO THE SITE. |
| | B. THE CURRENT PLAN SHOWS LANE WIDTHS OF 12 FEET. THESE |
| | ARE EXCESSIVE AND SHALL BE NARROWED TO NO GREATER THAN |
| | 11 FEET IN WIDTH. |
| | |
| | THE ITEMS LISTED ABOVE WILL ONLY INTERRUPT THE APPROVED |
| | PHASE 2 FRONTAGE OF 110 FEET BY AN ADDITIONAL 11 FEET, |
| | NOT 30 FEET. |
| | |
| | 6) REVISED COMMENT: THE TURNING RADIUS DRAWINGS FOR |
| | FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS ROADWAY DO NOT INCLUDE THE |
| | EXISTING TREES. IT APPEARS THAT THERE IS AT LEAST ONE |
| | TREE THAT WILL BE HIT BY A TRUCK NEGOTIATING THE |
| | SOUTHEAST CURVE. SHOW THE TREES ON THE TURNING RADIUS |
| | DRAWING. |
| | |
| | 7) NEW COMMENT: THE RECONFIGURED FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS |
| | ROADWAY IS SHOWN CROSSING TRACT 7. TRACT 7 IS NOT UNDER |
| | OWNERSHIP OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, BUT RATHER THE |
| | COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND MAY NOT BE USED AS |
| | PART OF THE PLANS APPROVED BY A MINOR AMENDMENT. TRACT |
| | 7 INCLUDES LANDSCAPE TO BUFFER THE REAR OF THE BUFFER |
| | TOWNHOUSES THAT MAY NOT BE REMOVED AS PART OF THE |
| | GARAGE PROJECT. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE RESTRICTIVE |
| | COVENANT REQUIRED AS PART OF CRA RESOLUTION 99-10 ONLY |
| | PERMITS TRACT 7 TO BE USED FOR LANDSCAPED AREA, |
| | UNDERGROUND UTILITIES AND APPROVED SIGNAGE. ROADWAYS |
| | ARE PROHIBITED. |
| | |
| | 8) REVISED COMMENT: STAFF STRONGLY SUGGESTS INSTALLING |
| | A SIDEWALK ON THE WEST SIDE OF FLORIDA AVENUE, ALONG |
| | THE CONVENTION CENTER PROPERTY LINE, TO CONNECT THE |
| | SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF THE HOTEL TO THE EXISTING SIDEWALK |
| | ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE TOWNHOUSES TO PROVIDE MAXIMUM |
| | PEDESTRIAN OPTIONS IN THE AREA. DURING THE MAJORITY OF |
| | THE TIME THE CONVENTION CENTER GARAGE WILL NOT BE |
| | OPERATING AT PEAK FLOW, SO A CROSSWALK AT THE PROPOSED |
| | INTERSECTIONS IS A SAFER ALTERNATIVE THAN A SIDEWALK AT |
| | A MIDBLOCK CROSSING. DURING THE TIMES OF PEAK FLOW WHEN |
| | CONVENTION CENTER TRAFFIC PERSONNEL ARE DEPLOYED, THEY |
| | CAN FACILITATE THE MOVEMENT OF PEDESTRIANS ACROSS THE |
| | INTERSECTIONS. THIS IS THE EXISTING CONDITION TODAY |
| | WITH SIDEWALKS CROSSING THE ACCESS POINTS ON THE WEST |
| | SIDE OF FLORIDA AVENUE. |
| | |
| | IF A MIDBLOCK CROSSING OF FLORIDA AVENUE CONTINUES TO |
| | BE UTILIZED, STAFF WILL NOT SUPPORT ITS LOCATION AS |
| | SHOWN ON THE SUBMITTED PLANS BETWEEN THE HOTEL SERVICE |
| | COURT AND THE CONVENTION CENTER ENTRANCE DRIVE. INSTEAD |
| | THE CROSSWALK SHALL BE RELOCATED NORTH OF THE HOTEL |
| | SERVICE COURT AND BISECT THE FLORIDA AVENUE MEDIAN |
| | ISLAND TO PROVIDE FOR A PROTECTED PEDESTRIAN. THE CITY |
| | DOES NOT ACCEPT RUMBLE STRIPS AS A WARNING DEVICE FOR |
| | MIDBLOCK PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS, BUT INSTEAD REQUIRES |
| | RECTANGULAR RAPID FLASHING BEACONS. THESE SHALL BE |
| | CLEARLY LABELED ON THE PLANS. THE MIDBLOCK CROSSING |
| | SHALL BE TEN FEET WIDE AND SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF A |
| | DIFFERENT MATERIAL THAN THE ROADWAY, FOR EXAMPLE |
| | STAMPED ASPHALT. |
| | |
| | THE SIDEWALK/PEDESTRIAN CROSSING SHALL INCLUDE |
| | APPROPRIATE PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING. |
| | |
| | 9) NEW COMMENT: IF THE SIDEWALK IS ONLY SUPPLIED ON THE |
| | EAST SIDE OF FLORIDA AVENUE, THEN THE COUNTY SHALL BE |
| | RESPONSIBLE FOR REMOVING THE STRETCH OF SIDEWALK THAT |
| | WILL NO LONGER SERVE A PURPOSE IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY |
| | NORTH OF TRACT 7. THIS IS NOT UNIFORMLY SHOWN ON ALL |
| | THE PLANS. |
| | |
| | 10) CONDITION: PLEASE NOTE THAT ALL LIGHT POLES AND |
| | FIXTURES IN THE ENTRY AREA AND BEING AFFECTED BY |
| | CONSTRUCTION SHALL MATCH THE STYLE BEING INSTALLED BY |
| | THE HOTEL. |
| | |
| | 11) CONDITION: THE DRI REQUIRES THE SUBMITTAL OF A |
| | SIGNAGE PROGRAM FOR ANY NEW SIGNS. THE SIGNAGE PROGRAM |
| | SHALL BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW AS A MINOR PLANNED |
| | DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT PRIOR TO THE SIGNAGE FOR THE |
| | CONVENTION CENTER GARAGE REVIEW AS PART OF A BUILDING |
| | PERMIT. |
| | |
| | 12) REPEAT COMMENT: THE STAFF HAS DETERMINED THAT THE |
| | CURRENT PLANS DO NOT SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH THE |
| | REQUIREMENT THAT ROOFTOP PARKING SPACES BE SCREENED. |
| | THE RECENT APPROVAL OF THE GARAGE ROOFTOP TREATMENTS |
| | FOR THE SEA PALM DEVELOPMENT AT THE LANDS OF THE |
| | PRESIDENTS BY THE CITY COMMISSION GIVES GUIDANCE ON |
| | WHAT COULD BE USED TO COVER ADDITIONAL ROOFTOP PARKING |
| | AREA. |
| | |
| | 13) NEW COMMENT: DUE TO THE PROVISION OF COVERED |
| | PARKING SPACES ON THE ROOF, THERE NEED TO BE AT LEAST |
| | ADA SPACES THAT ARE COVERED. PLEASE CONTACT ROBERT |
| | BROWN, CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL, DIRECTLY FOR FURTHER |
| | DETAILS. |
| | |
| | 14) NEW COMMENT: PLEASE DESCRIBE WHAT THE DIAMOND |
| | SHAPES ARE THAT ARE SHOWN SURROUNDING THE SUPPORT |
| | COLUMNS. IF THESE EXTEND ABOVE THE HEIGHT OF THE WHEEL |
| | STOPS, THEN SOME, TO INCLUDE ONES AT THE HEAD OF THE |
| | ADA SPACES MAKE THOSE SPACES NON-FUNCTIONING FOR |
| | PARKING (INSUFFICIENT DEPTH). |
| | |
| | 15) REVISED COMMENT: THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING THE |
| | REQUIRED/PROVIDED NUMBER OF BICYCLE PARKING SPACES FOR |
| | THE SITE. PLEASE PROVIDE THE LOCATIONS AND NUMBER OF |
| | THE EXISTING BICYCLE PARKING SPACES SO THAT STAFF CAN |
| | VERIFY THAT THE DISTRIBUTION ADEQUATELY SERVES THE |
| | SITE. THE NEW SPACES ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE GARAGE ARE |
| | NOT READILY VISIBLE TO THE BICYCLE USER. SOME OF THE |
| | SPACES SHOULD BE MOVED TO THE WESTERN EDGE OF THE PLAZA |
| | AREA AT THE CONVENTION CENTER ENTRANCE TO BE MORE |
| | VISIBLE. |
| | |
| | 16) NEW COMMENT: SHOW HOW THE 19 BICYCLE RACKS WILL BE |
| | ALIGNED IN THE WESTERN BUILDING LOCATION BY THE LOADING |
| | DOCKS. THIS INCLUDES THE CORRECT BICYCLE PAD |
| | DIMENSIONS. PLEASE REMEMBER THAT A MINIMUM OF TWO (2) |
| | FEET ARE REQUIRED AT THE END OF THE ROW WHEN AGAINST A |
| | FIXED OBJECT SUCH AS A WALL. |
| | |
| | 17) REPEAT COMMENT: THE STAIRWELL THAT LEADS TO THE PAY |
| | STATION ON THE BASEMENT LEVEL IN NORTHEAST CORNER OF |
| | THE GARAGE LEADS TO A SIDEWALK THAT DEAD ENDS INTO THE |
| | DRIVE AISLE. THIS SIDEWALK HAS TO CONNECT INTO A |
| | SIDEWALK SO PEOPLE ARE NOT FORCED INTO THE DRIVE AISLE. |
| | IN REVIEWING THE APPLICANT'S RESPONSE, A CONDITION WILL |
| | BE ADDED TO THE ULTIMATE GARAGE APPROVAL THAT REQUIRES |
| | INTERNAL SIGNAGE SHALL BE INSTALLED TO GUIDE USERS TO |
| | THE ELEVATORS AND STAIRWELLS AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF |
| | THE GARAGE. THE REMAINING STAIRWELLS SHALL BE SIGNED AS |
| | EMERGENCY EGRESS ONLY. HOWEVER; BOTH ROBERT BROWN, |
| | CHIEF BUILDING OFFICIAL, AND BRIAN COLLINS, CITY |
| | TRAFFIC ENGINEER, RAISED CONCERNS WITH PEOPLE PARKING |
| | IN THE GARAGE AND UTILIZING THE NORTHEAST STAIR AS |
| | EGRESS FROM THE GARAGE, DUE TO THE PROXIMITY TO THE |
| | CONVENTION CENTER AND THE HOTEL DESTINATIONS, AND THEN |
| | BEING ISOLATED AT THE DRIVE AISLE. BOTH REVIEWERS, IN |
| | ADDITION TO THE ZONING REVIEWER, ARE REQUIRING THAT A |
| | PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION TO THE SIDEWALK NETWORK BE |
| | PROVIDED FROM THE NORTHEAST STAIRWELL EXIT. MR. BROWN |
| | WILL PERMIT THE INSTALLATION OF THE INTERNAL SIGNAGE TO |
| | SUFFICE TO NOT REQUIRE A PEDESTRIAN CONNECTION FOR THE |
| | STAIRWELL EXIT POINTS ON THE SOUTH PORTION OF THE |
| | GARAGE SINCE THERE IS NO DESTINATION FOR SOMEONE USING |
| | THOSE STAIRWELLS. NOTE: THE PLANS STILL INCLUDE THE PAY |
| | STATION AT ON THE BASEMENT LEVEL AT THE NORTHEAST EXIT |
| | STAIRWELL. |
| | |
| | 18) REPEAT COMMENT: THE EVENT STAGING AREA SHALL BE |
| | SEPARATED FROM THE WESTERN GARAGE EXIT LANES BY A |
| | LANDSCAPE BUFFER AND IT SHALL BE BROKEN UP BY THE |
| | PLACEMENT OF INTERNAL LANDSCAPE. THE BUFFER WILL SERVE |
| | TO VISUALLY SCREEN THE STAGING AREA FROM THE GARAGE |
| | PATRONS. ADDITIONALLY THE BUFFER AND THE INTERNAL |
| | LANDSCAPE WILL BREAK UP THE LARGE EXPANSE OF PAVING AT |
| | THE STAGING AREA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DRI REQUIREMENT |
| | TO "REDUCE COVERAGE BY ASPHALT, CONCRETE, ROCK, AND |
| | SIMILAR SUBSTANCES IN STREETS, PARKING LOTS, AND OTHER |
| | AREAS TO REDUCE LOCAL AIR TEMPERATURES AND REFLECT |
| | LIGHT AND HEAT." |
| | |
| | 19) NEW COMMENT: THE APPLICANT'S RESPONSE STATES THAT |
| | ONLY ONE STATIC EXIT LANE WILL BE PROVIDED AT THE |
| | NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE GARAGE; HOWEVER, THIS IS NOT |
| | VERIFIED BY THE STRIPING PLAN, WHICH DOES NOT INCLUDE |
| | PAVEMENT MARKINGS TO GUIDE A DRIVER TO THE SINGLE EXIT |
| | LANE. |
| | |
| | LANDSCAPE |
| | |
| | 20) REPEAT COMMENT: THE APPROVED PLAN REQUIRES PLANTER |
| | BOXES 42 INCHES ABOVE EACH PARKING DECK TO BREAK UP THE |
| | FACADE OF THE GARAGE. IF THE ROOFTOP PARKING WILL NOT |
| | BE SCREENED, THEN THE PLANTER BOXES SHOWN ON THE PHASE |
| | 2 SITE PLAN APPROVED AS PART OF RESOLUTION NO. 44-99 |
| | SHALL BE INSTALLED UNLESS THE CONDITION IS AMENDED BY |
| | CITY COMMISSION ACTION TO CHANGE THE CONDITION OF |
| | APPROVAL. |
| | |
| | 21) NEW COMMENT: THE TOTAL SITE AREA LISTED ON SHEET |
| | AS000 IS 848,549 SQ. FT., BUT THE TOTAL SITE AREA |
| | LISTED ON SHEET LD-4 OF 4 IS 841,373. WHICH IS CORRECT? |
| | ALL DATA CALCULATIONS SHALL BE BASED ON ACCURATE |
| | NUMBERS. |
| | |
| | 22) REVISED COMMENT: THE EAST PROPERTY CONTAINS 17, NOT |
| | 16 PROVIDED TREES. PLEASE UPDATE THE TABLE. |
| | |
| | 23) REPEAT COMMENT: THE CONVENTION CENTER HAS NOT |
| | MAINTAINED ITS PARKING LOT TREES SINCE THEY WERE |
| | ORIGINALLY INSTALLED AS EVIDENCED BY THE MANY PARKING |
| | LOT ISLANDS WITHOUT TREES. THESE MISSING TREES ARE |
| | STILL REQUIRED TO BE MITIGATED AS PART OF THE TREE |
| | ALTERATION PERMIT. A TABLE VERIFYING THAT ALL OF THE |
| | REMOVED TREES HAVE BEEN MITIGATED IS REQUIRED AS PART |
| | OF THE TREE ALTERATION PERMIT. PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE |
| | WAS NOT INFORMATION PROVIDED AS TO THE CANOPY SIZE OF |
| | ANY OF THE TREES PROPOSED FOR REMOVAL. DO ANY OF THESE |
| | TREES HAVE GREATER THAN 35 FEET OF CANOPY? |
| | |
| | ELEVATION |
| | |
| | 24) REVISED COMMENT: THE FINAL COLOR ELEVATIONS THAT |
| | INCORPORATE THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMENTS WERE NOT |
| | PROVIDED. |
| | |
| | 25) REPEAT COMMENT: PROVIDE A LINE OF SIGHT DRAWING |
| | NORTH ALONG GEORGIA AVENUE FROM SOUTH OF O STREET. |
| | |
| | 26) NEW COMMENT: THE SOUTH AND WEST ELEVATION DRAWINGS |
| | CALL OUT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS ROADWAY GATE AS |
| | GALVANIZED, NOT COATED, CHAIN LINK AS IS SHOWN ON THE |
| | SITE PLANS. |
| | |
| | 27) NEW COMMENT: THE EAST ELEVATION DRAWING CALLS OUT A |
| | DIGITAL MONUMENT SIGN. THIS SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE |
| | PLAN. |
| | |
| | 28) NEW COMMENT: WHY DOES THE NORTH/SOUTH BUILDING |
| | SECTION SHOW BICYCLE RACKS IN THE BUILDING? |
| | |
| |
Print |
