| Date |
Text |
| 2015-10-26 16:24:15 | PB 1600E |
| | PALM BEACH DAY ACADEMY MINOR PD AMENDMENT |
| | 1901 SOUTH FLAGLER DRIVE |
| | |
| | - CONTACT ERIC SCHNEIDER @ (561) 822-1446 |
| | |
| | - PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN |
| | WRITTEN FORMAT. |
| | |
| | - WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF SIX |
| | (6) 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 (BY DECEMBER 26, 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| | THE CASE SHALL BE CONSIDERED WITHDRAWN.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) |
| | ADDITIONAL 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). |
| | |
| | 1) REPEAT COMMENT: ALL PLANS SHALL MATCH THE CURRENT |
| | "AS BUILT" CONDITIONS OF THE WESTERN PORTION OF THE |
| | SITE. AN EXAMPLE OF WHERE PLANS DO NOT MATCH - THREE |
| | COMPACT PARKING SPACES WERE CONSTRUCTED, NOT TWO AS |
| | SHOWN ON THE SITE AND LANDSCAPE PLANS. ALL PLANS AND |
| | DATA TABLES SHALL BE UPDATED ACCORDINGLY. NOTE: THE |
| | SITE PLAN INCLUDES A NOTE THAT THE 2010 SURVEY WAS USED |
| | AS A BASE, NOT THE CURRENT 2015 SURVEY. |
| | |
| | 2) REVISED COMMENT: THE UTILITY FEATURES ARE NOT |
| | IDENTIFIED ON THE LANDSCAPE PLANS. THIS IS REQUIRED SO |
| | THAT STAFF CAN VERIFY THERE ARE NOT CONFLICTS. PLEASE |
| | NOTE: RESOLUTION NO. 144-11 REQUIRES THAT IF THE |
| | EXISTING ANNE NORTON SCULPTURE GARDEN MATURE TREES |
| | ALONG THE BUFFER ARE REMOVED, THEN THE PALM BEACH DAY |
| | ACADEMY SHALL INSTALL THE REQUIRED BUFFER TREES. THERE |
| | SHALL BE A FIVE (5) FOOT AREA, CLEAR OF UTILITY, |
| | DRAINAGE OR THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT AVAILABLE |
| | ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE FOR LANDSCAPE THAT IS |
| | SEGREGATED FROM THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT. |
| | |
| | 3) REPEAT COMMENT: THE PEDESTRIAN PATH SHALL BE A |
| | SMOOTH CURVILINEAR PATH A MINIMUM OF FIVE (5) FEET IN |
| | WIDTH. IT SHALL NOT HAVE THE RIGHT ANGLES AS SHOWN ON |
| | THE PROPOSED PLAN. THE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT SHALL |
| | BE A MINIMUM OF FIVE (5) FEET WIDE FOR ITS ENTIRE |
| | LENGTH. THE SECTION NORTH OF THE PITT BUILDING SCALES |
| | AS NARROW AS 3.5 FEET IN WIDTH. ADDITIONALLY, THERE IS |
| | A LIGHT POLE SHOWN IN THIS AREA ON THE SITE PLAN THAT |
| | FURTHER REDUCES THE WIDTH OF THE PEDESTRIAN PATH TO |
| | LESS THAN THREE (3) FEET IN WIDTH. NOTE: THE PEDESTRIAN |
| | PATH NOTICE SIGNAGE SHALL NOT BE PLACED IN THE MIDDLE |
| | OF THE PATH, BUT OFF TO THE SIDE. |
| | |
| | 4) NEW COMMENT: THE SITE PLAN SUBMITTED SHOWS AN |
| | OVERLAP OF THE LANDSCAPE BUFFER WITH THE PEDESTRIAN |
| | ACCESS EASEMENT AND PATH. THIS IN NOT PERMITTED. |
| | RESOLUTION NO. 144-11 REQUIRES THAT THE PUBLIC |
| | PEDESTRIAN ACCESS EASEMENT AREA SHALL NOT BE USED FOR |
| | THE PARKING OF VEHICLES, FOR THE LOCATION OF ANY REFUSE |
| | CONTAINER, OR FOR TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT LOCATION OF |
| | OTHER ITEMS WHICH WILL OBSTRUCT THE EASEMENT AREA. |
| | |
| | 5) REPEAT COMMENT: PLEASE PROVIDE A PLAN WHICH SHOWS |
| | JUST THE FENCES AND GATES AND HOW THE VARIOUS PORTIONS |
| | OF THE CAMPUS WILL BE SECURED DURING SCHOOL AND NOT |
| | SCHOOL HOURS (THIS INCLUDES THE TUXEDO AND COCOANUT |
| | ROWS). THE PLAN SHALL DEMONSTRATE HOW THE OPEN GATES |
| | WILL NOT ENCROACH INTO THE ROW. IN ACCORDANCE WITH |
| | RESOLUTION NO. 376-10, PLEASE PROVIDE HOW PEDESTRIANS |
| | AND BICYCLISTS CAN ACCESS THE LIMITED STREET CLOSURE |
| | AREA ROADWAYS WHEN THEY ARE CLOSED TO VEHICULAR |
| | TRAFFIC. PLEASE REMEMBER THAT PBDA AGREED TO NOT GATE |
| | THE DRIVE BETWEEN THE PITT AND UNITY BUILDINGS SO AS TO |
| | CONTINUE TO PERMIT NEIGHBOR VEHICULAR ACCESS THROUGH |
| | THE SITE WHEN SCHOOL IS NOT IN SESSION. THIS HAS NOT |
| | BEEN CLEARLY DEMONSTRATED ON THE RESUBMITTED PLANS. |
| | ADDITIONALLY, THERE ARE FENCES AND GATES SHOWN WITHIN |
| | THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AT THE CURVE IN COCOANUT LANE THAT ARE |
| | NOT INCLUDED WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE LIMITED STREET |
| | CLOSURE GRANTED BY RESOLUTION NO. 376-10. |
| | |
| | 5) REPEAT COMMENT: THE ALUMINUM FENCES AND GATES NEED |
| | TO PROVIDE THE HEIGHT ON THE DETAIL PLANS. |
| | |
| | 6) NEW COMMENT: STAFF IS UNCLEAR AS TO WHAT THE FEATURE |
| | IS AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE ATHLETIC COMPLEX. IS |
| | THIS A WALL? A PATIO? A PATIO WITH A WALL? IT |
| | ENCROACHES INTO THE FRONT 25 FOOT SETBACK. PLEASE |
| | PROVIDE DETAILS FOR THIS FEATURE. DEPENDING ON WHAT |
| | THIS ACTUALLY IS WILL DETERMINE IF IT IS PERMITTED TO |
| | ENCROACH INTO THE SETBACK. |
| | |
| | 7) REPEAT COMMENT: THE SITE DATA CHART SHALL REFERENCE |
| | RESOLUTION NO. 144-11, NOT ORDINANCE NO. 4303-10, AS IT |
| | IS THE LATEST LEGISLATION FOR THE SITE. THE REQUIRED |
| | SETBACKS FOR THE RELOCATED (OUT) BUILDING SHALL REFLECT |
| | THE APPROVED SETBACKS OF FRONT - FIVE FEET AND CORNER |
| | SIDE - 17 FEET. |
| | |
| | 8) REVISED COMMENT: CORRECT THE DESIGNATION AND |
| | DIMENSION OF THE SETBACKS ON THE SITE DATA TABLE, |
| | INCLUDING THE PITT BUILDING AND THE OTHER FINAL SCHOOL |
| | BUILDINGS. |
| | |
| | 9) REPEAT COMMENT: PROVIDE WRITTEN VERIFICATION FROM |
| | THE CITY'S ENGINEERING SERVICES DIVISION THAT THE |
| | 4-SQUARE AND OTHER ITEMS APPLIED TO THE LIMITED CLOSURE |
| | SURFACE ARE PERMITTED BY ROADWAY STANDARDS. IF THIS |
| | APPROVAL IS NOT PROVIDED PRIOR TO SITE PLAN APPROVAL, |
| | THEN THE FEATURES SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE PLANS. |
| | |
| | 10) REPEAT COMMENT: THE APPROVED FORMAL SITE PLAN |
| | REQUIRES A SIX (6) FOOT PODOCARPUS HEDGE (AT |
| | INSTALLATION) ALONG COCOANUT LANE TO SCREEN THE BUS |
| | PARKING. THE HEDGE IS TO MEET THE BUS PARKING SCREENING |
| | REQUIREMENT OF RESOLUTION NO. 144-11. THE WILD TAMARIND |
| | TREE DOES NOT PROVIDE A VISUAL SCREEN AT BUS HEIGHT |
| | LEVEL. IT FURTHERMORE IS CLASSIFIED AS A MEDIUM TO |
| | LARGE TREE THAT WOULD NOT GROW ADEQUATELY WITHIN THE |
| | FIVE (5) FOOT LANDSCAPE AREA. ADDITIONALLY, THE USE OF |
| | THE NATAL PLUM SHRUB AT AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND |
| | ADJACENT TO A PEDESTRIAN PATH IS NOT APPROPRIATE SINCE |
| | THE PLANT HAS SPINES (FROM UF IFAS EXTENSION "...IT |
| | SHOULD NOT BE PLANTED TOO CLOSELY TO WALKWAYS WHERE ITS |
| | LARGE, FORKED THORNS CAN INJURE PASSERSBY...") |
| | |
| | 11) REVISED COMMENT: THE BUS PARKING SHOWN IN THE |
| | WESTERN PARKING AREA DURING THE INTERIM PLAN DOES NOT |
| | COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF RESOLUTION NO. 144-11. |
| | PLEASE PROVIDE HOW BUS PARKING WILL BE PROVIDED AND |
| | SCREENED IN ACCORDANCE WITH RESOLUTION NO. 144-11 |
| | DURING THE INTERIM PHASE, ESPECIALLY IF THE UNITY |
| | BUILDING IS REMOVED. |
| | |
| | 12) NEW COMMENT: THE LANDSCAPE FOR THE ENTIRE CAMPUS |
| | LANDSCAPE SHALL BE SHOWN ON THE LANDSCAPE PLANS. THIS |
| | SET OF PLANS WILL BE THE RECORD DRAWINGS. |
| | |
| | 13) REVISED COMMENT: ALL PERIMETER BUFFERS, PARKING LOT |
| | LANDSCAPE AND FOUNDATION PLANTINGS NEED TO BE INSTALLED |
| | AS PART OF THE INTERIM PLAN. |
| | |
| | 15) REPEAT COMMENT: PROVIDE THE HEIGHT OF THE BOAT MAST |
| | AND THE BOAT'S SETBACK FROM THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE. |
| | THE HEIGHT HAS NOT BEEN SHOWN ON THE BOAT DETAIL AND |
| | THE SETBACK IS NOT SHOWN ON THE PLANS. |
| | |
| | 16) REVISED COMMENT: THE BICYCLE RACKS SHALL HAVE A |
| | MINIMUM SEPARATION OF 30 INCHES. THE BICYCLE RACK |
| | DETAIL SHALL BE REVISED TO REFLECT THIS STANDARD AND |
| | THE PAD SHALL BE INCREASED ACCORDINGLY. THE CORRECTED |
| | BICYCLE RACK PAD SHALL BE SHOWN ON ALL OF THE RELEVANT |
| | DRAWINGS. |
| | |
| | 17) REPEAT COMMENT: AN UPDATED LIGHTING PLAN IS |
| | REQUIRED WHICH CONFORMS TO THE NEW PEDESTRIAN PATH |
| | CONFIGURATION. PLEASE REMEMBER THE LIGHTING LEVELS MAY |
| | NOT EXCEED 0.5 FOOTCANDLES AT THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING |
| | BOUNDARIES (INCLUDING THE PEDESTRIAN LIGHTING). NO |
| | LIGHTING PLAN WAS SUBMITTED. THERE ARE STILL POLES |
| | SHOWN WITHIN THE PEDESTRIAN EASEMENT. |
| | |
| | 18) REPEAT COMMENT: THE PLANS AND ELEVATIONS SHOW |
| | SIGNAGE. PROVIDE SIGNAGE DETAILS SO STAFF MAY REVIEW |
| | FOR CODE COMPLIANCE. THIS WILL ENSURE THAT THE SIGN |
| | PERMITTING PROCESS GOES SMOOTHLY. INSUFFICIENT DETAILS |
| | TO VERIFY THE SIGNAGE WERE PROVIDED, SPECIFICALLY THE |
| | LENGTH OF THE SIGNS. |
| | |
| | 19) REVISED COMMENT: THE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION TAG |
| | FOR THE ACADEMIC BUILDING'S SOUTH ELEVATION IS SHOWN |
| | ALMOST THREE (3) FEET ABOVE THE GRADE. |
| | |
| | 20) REPEAT COMMENT: PROVIDE A ROOF PLAN TO SHOW THE |
| | LOCATION OF THE NEW ROOFTOP MECHANICAL AREAS. NO SHEET |
| | A2.0 WAS PROVIDED AS STATED IN THE RESPONSE COMMENTS. |
| | |
| | 21) REPEAT COMMENT: THE MECHANICAL SCREEN WALL |
| | ELEVATION IS SHOWN AT 130 FEET, YET THE TOP OF THE WALL |
| | IS ALSO 130 FEET. PLEASE CORRECT THE ELEVATIONS. |
| | |
| | 22) REPEAT COMMENT: PROVIDE FLOOR PLANS OF THE TWO NEW |
| | BUILDINGS THAT MATCH THE ELEVATIONS. THE FLOOR PLANS |
| | ARE DATED 2010, YET THE REVISED BUILDING ELEVATIONS ARE |
| | FROM 2015. THERE ARE DIFFERENCES IN WINDOWS AND DOORS. |
| | |
| | 23) REPEAT COMMENT: WHY WERE THE HORIZONTAL SUN CONTROL |
| | AND LOUVER ELEMENTS REMOVED FROM THE BUILDING |
| | ELEVATIONS? NOT ONLY ARE THESE ELEMENTS FOUND ON THE |
| | EXISTING CLASSROOM BUILDING, BUT THEY WOULD GO A LONG |
| | WAY TO HELPING MAKE THE LARGE MECHANICAL SCREEN |
| | ENCLOSURES BLEND MORE WITH THE BUILDING ARCHITECTURE. |
| | PLEASE REMEMBER THAT THESE ELEMENTS WERE PRESENTED TO |
| | THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS PART OF THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL |
| | PROCESS TO GET THEIR SUPPORT IN ACCORDANCE WITH |
| | RESOLUTION NO. 144-11. THE STONE AND TILE VENEER THAT |
| | HAVE BEEN REMOVED WERE ALSO PART OF THE PACKAGE |
| | PRESENTED TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND CITY COMMISSION. |
| | NOTE: THE REMOVAL OF THESE ELEMENTS WILL REQUIRE THE |
| | NEW ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN TO BE PRESENTED TO THE |
| | NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THEIR SUPPORT PRIOR TO STAFF APPROVAL. |
| | |
| | 24) CONDITION REMINDER: PLEASE REMEMBER THAT PER ORD. |
| | NO. 144-11, THE FOLLOWING ARE REQUIRED PRIOR TO THE |
| | FIRST BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE NEXT PHASE: |
| | |
| | A. PREPARE A CONSTRUCTION SITE SECURITY AND MANAGEMENT |
| | PLAN FOR APPROVAL BY THE CITY'S POLICE DEPARTMENT CRIME |
| | PREVENTION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN (CPTED) |
| | OFFICIAL. |
| | |
| | B. RECORD A PLAT FOR THE ENTIRE PBDA CAMPUS. PRIOR TO |
| | RECORDATION, THE PLAT SHALL BE SUBMITTED FOR REVIEW |
| | THROUGH THE MINOR SUBDIVISION PROCESS TO INCLUDE ALL |
| | REQUIRED EASEMENTS. THE RELOCATION AND/OR ABANDONMENT |
| | OF EASEMENTS WILL REQUIRE APPLICATIONS TO BE FILED WITH |
| | THE ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT. |
| | |
| | C. SUBMIT COMPREHENSIVE EMERGENCY PLANS TO THE FIRE |
| | DEPARTMENT FOR THEIR APPROVAL. |
| | |
| |
Print |
