| Date |
Text |
| 2017-10-17 15:03:10 | PLANNING BOARD CASE NO. 1000E - SEPTEMBER 22, 2017 |
| | RESUBMITTAL |
| | KRAVIS CENTER LEVEL III SITE PLAN - DREYFOOS HALL AND |
| | VALET GARAGE |
| | 701 OKEECHOBEE BOULEVARD |
| | |
| | - CONTACT ERIC SCHNEIDER @ (561) 822-1446 |
| | |
| | - PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN |
| | WRITTEN FORMAT. |
| | |
| | - WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF ELEVEN |
| | (11) PAPER COPIES AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY IN .PNG 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. |
| | |
| | - THE PPRC COMMENTS SHALL BE SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED AND |
| | SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING DIVISION BY 5 PM ON FRIDAY, |
| | NOVEMBER 3, 2017, TO BE ELIGIBLE TO BE SCHEDULED FOR |
| | THE DECEMBER 19, 2017 PLANNING BOARD MEETING. |
| | |
| | - 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 17, 2017), |
| | THE CASE SHALL BE CONSIDERED WITHDRAWN.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 ($600). |
| | |
| | - PUBLIC HEARING NOTIFICATION SIGNAGE SHALL BE POSTED |
| | IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION |
| | 94-39(I)(5) OF THE ZONING AND LAND DEVELOPMENT |
| | REGULATIONS. |
| | |
| | 1) PLANNING STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT THIS VALET GARAGE |
| | PORTION OF THIS APPLICATION IN ITS CURRENT DESIGN AS |
| | THE PRESENTED PLANS DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE ALL OF THE |
| | SITE DESIGN QUALITATIVE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. |
| | |
| | 2) SAPODILLA AVENUE HAS BEEN DESIGNED AS A RESIDENTIAL |
| | STREET FRONTED BY ACTIVE USES WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF |
| | THE CITYPLACE RESIDENTIAL UNITS, THE METROPOLITAN AND |
| | THE EVERNIA PLACE DEVELOPMENTS. THE CONSTRUCTION OF A |
| | VALET GARAGE WITH NO ACTIVE USE LINER, THE CONSTRUCTION |
| | OF A SURFACE VALET PARKING LOT AND THE WIDENING OF |
| | SAPODILLA AVENUE TO ACCOMMODATE THE VALET ENTRANCE AND |
| | ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC THAT CURRENTLY DOES NOT EXIST ON |
| | SAPODILLA IS EXPECTED TO HAVE AN ADVERSE EFFECT ON THE |
| | SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. |
| | |
| | 3) REPEAT COMMENT: PROVIDE THE FDOT PREDETERMINATION |
| | LETTER FOR THE MODIFICATIONS TO THE SAPODILLA AVENUE |
| | INTERSECTION MODIFICATION AND ADDITIONAL WESTBOUND |
| | RIGHT TURN LANE. CONDITIONS REQUIRED BY FDOT MAY RESULT |
| | IN MODIFIED OR NEW COMMENTS. PLEASE REVIEW THE COMMENTS |
| | PROVIDED BY THE CITY'S TRAFFIC ENGINEERING DIVISION |
| | REGARDING THE ON AND OFF SITE CIRCULATION BOTH FOR |
| | OKEECHOBEE BOULEVARD AND SAPODILLA AVENUE AS THESE MAY |
| | AFFECT THE FDOT APPLICATION. |
| | |
| | 4) REVISED COMMENT: WHAT IS THE PLANNED CONSTRUCTION |
| | PHASING OF THE ITEMS COVERED BY THE LEVEL II AND LEVEL |
| | III APPLICATIONS? GIVEN THAT THE PARKING DEMAND |
| | ANALYSIS CONCLUSION AND THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT |
| | INDICATE THAT NEW VALET PARKING GARAGE AND ASSOCIATED |
| | SITE IMPROVEMENTS ARE NECESSARY TO IMPROVE THE VEHICLE |
| | FLOW IN AND AROUND THE SITE, IT DOES NOT SEEM WISE TO |
| | CONSTRUCT ALL OF THE PROPOSED ELEMENTS (IF APPROVED BY |
| | THE CITY COMMISSION) AS ONE PHASE AS THIS WOULD CREATE |
| | INCREASED DISRUPTION TO THE USERS OF THE SURROUNDING |
| | ROADWAY NETWORK. IF APPROVED, STAFF WILL RECOMMEND A |
| | CONDITION THAT TWO VALET AREAS ARE NOT UNDER |
| | CONSTRUCTION AT THE SAME TIME. |
| | |
| | 5) PLAZA AREA |
| | |
| | A. REPEAT COMMENT: PLEASE EXPLAIN WHAT THE NEW BASEMENT |
| | AREA IS THAT IS SHOWN ON THE CROSS SECTIONS - SHEET |
| | AE121. THE RESPONSE COMMENTS STATE THAT THERE IS NO |
| | BASEMENT, YET SHEET AE121 AND SHEET AE220 CLEARLY STATE |
| | "NEW BASEMENT AREA". THE PLANS AND THE RESPONSE |
| | COMMENTS NEED TO AGREE. |
| | |
| | 6) DRYFOOS HALL ENTRY DRIVE |
| | |
| | A. REVISED COMMENT: THE NEWLY DESIGNED "BOX OFFICE" |
| | PARKING SPACES SHOW THE ADA SPACE AT 11 FEET IN WIDTH |
| | (SHEET SMP-1). ADA SPACES REQUIRE A MINIMUM WIDTH OF 12 |
| | FEET. ADDITIONALLY, PLEASE PROVIDE THE DIMENSION OF THE |
| | DRIVE AISLE BEHIND THESE PARKING SPACES ON THE PLAN. |
| | B. PROVIDE THE WIDTH DIMENSION OF THE NEW 4TH FLOOR |
| | RAMP ON THE PLANS. |
| | |
| | 7) SAPODILLA AVENUE VALET DROP-OFF |
| | |
| | A. REPEAT COMMENT: THE DOWNTOWN REGULATIONS LIMIT THE |
| | WIDTH OF DRIVE AISLES FOR PORTE COCHERES TO 25 FEET IN |
| | WIDTH AT THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK (FIGURE IV-22) NOT 30 |
| | FEET AS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN. SECTION 94-111(O)(3) |
| | ALSO LIMITS CURB CUTS, PARKING ENTRANCES, EXITS AND |
| | DRIVEWAYS TO NO WIDER THAN 25 FEET. REDUCE THE OPENING |
| | WIDTH TO COMPLY WITH THE CITY REQUIREMENT. |
| | |
| | 8) THE SAPODILLA VALET GARAGE |
| | |
| | A. REVISED COMMENT: THE PRICE TO REMOVE A METERED |
| | PARKING SPACE IS CURRENTLY $16,800. THE CITY TRAFFIC |
| | ENGINEER HAS AUTHORITY OVER THE REMOVAL OF PARKING |
| | SPACES ALONG CITY RIGHTS-OF-WAY. THE SITE PLAN PROPOSES |
| | TO RECONFIGURE IRIS STREET DIRECTLY NORTH OF THE |
| | PROPOSED VALET GARAGE BY ADDING BULBOUTS, THE RELOCATED |
| | TROLLEY DROP-OFF AND SOME PARALLEL PARKING SPACES. THE |
| | START OF THE TROLLEY STOP IS REQUIRED TO BE 30 FEET |
| | FROM THE STOP BAR, WHICH IS NOT REFLECTED ON THE PLANS. |
| | BASED ON THIS STARTING POINT, THE TROLLEY PARKING SPACE |
| | DEPTH (40 FEET ALONG THE CURB) AND AN AREA TO SEPARATE |
| | THE PARKED CARS FROM THE TROLLEY PARKING, IT APPEARS |
| | THAT ONLY TWO PARKING SPACES WILL BE ABLE TO BE |
| | INSTALLED. THE IRIS STREET CONFIGURATION, TO INCLUDE |
| | THE NUMBER OF SPACES THAT REQUIRE PAYMENT, REQUIRES |
| | ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION WITH PLANNING AND ENGINEERING |
| | STAFF AND THE APPLICANT AND A SET OF PLANS. |
| | B. CONDITION: THE CULTURAL ARTS DISTRICT REQUIRES |
| | BUILDINGS ON SECONDARY STREETS TO HAVE A MINIMUM OF 30 |
| | PERCENT OF THE BUILDING BE ACTIVE USE (REQ. 132.3 |
| | FEET). THE ACTIVE USE ALONG SAPODILLA AVENUE (PROVIDED |
| | 134 FEET) IS PREDICATED ON THE KRAVIS CENTER ABUTTING |
| | PUBLIC OPEN SPACE AS DEFINED IN SECTION 94-109 OF THE |
| | ZLDR. THE PROPOSED OPEN SPACE (PROPOSED DREYFOOS HALL |
| | PLAZA) IS REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH FEDERAL ADA |
| | REQUIREMENTS AT TIME OF BUILDING PERMIT IN ORDER TO |
| | MEET THE ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENTS. IF THE DREYFOOS HALL |
| | PLAZA DOES NOT COMPLY WITH ADA REQUIREMENTS AT THAT |
| | TIME, THEN THE GARAGE WILL BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE |
| | ACTIVE USES. |
| | C. REPEAT COMMENT: STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT THE |
| | ADDITIONAL CURB CUT FOR THE VALET INGRESS/EGRESS ON |
| | IRIS STREET (STAFF NOTES THAT YOU ARE REQUESTING A |
| | WAIVER). THIS ADDITIONAL ACCESS POINT FAILS TO ADHERE |
| | TO THE SITE DESIGN STANDARDS OF IMPROVING PEDESTRIAN |
| | SAFETY SINCE MORE CURB CUTS CREATE MORE POSSIBLE |
| | VEHICLE PEDESTRIAN CONFLICTS. THE RESPONSE STATES THAT |
| | THIS ACCESS POINT IS FOR VALETS TO EXIT THE SITE AND |
| | BRING VEHICLES BACK FOR PICK-UP VIA THE SAPODILLA |
| | AVENUE ENTRANCE. THIS PRESENTS TWO ISSUES: |
| | 1. DOES NOT COMPLY WITH SECTION 94-485(M) - ALL |
| | VEHICULAR MOVEMENT AND MANEUVERING THAT MAY BE REQUIRED |
| | TO UTILIZE OFF-STREET PARKING FACILITIES SHALL BE |
| | RETAINED ON-SITE. PUBLIC RIGHTS-OF-WAY SHALL NOT BE |
| | UTILIZED TO ALLOW OR ENHANCE MOVEMENT OR MANEUVERING. |
| | 2. THIS THEN WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE PATRON PICKING UP |
| | THE VEHICLE TO DRIVE THROUGH THE GARAGE AND EXIT ONTO |
| | IRIS STREET. THIS IS LEFT OUT OF ALL THE PROJECT |
| | DESCRIPTIONS. MIXING VALET AND PATRON, ESPECIALLY |
| | ELDERLY (62 YEAR OLD AVERAGE AGE), VEHICLE OPERATION IN |
| | A PARKING GARAGE IS NOT A SAFE SITUATION. A CIRCULATION |
| | PLAN IS REQUIRED. |
| | ADDITIONALLY, THE PLANS CALL OUT VALET INGRESS/EGRESS. |
| | IF A VALET IS DRIVING IN OFF OF IRIS STREET, THEN THE |
| | GARAGE IS USING CITY STREETS FOR MANEUVERING (WHERE IS |
| | THE VALET COMING FROM?). GIVEN THE TRAFFIC THAT WILL BE |
| | ARRIVING/DEPARTING SHOWS, ADDING VALETS TO THE CITY |
| | STREET NETWORK IS NOT A SAFE, DESIRABLE SITUATION. THE |
| | JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT STATES THE NEED FOR THE |
| | ADDITIONAL ACCESS POINT TO "MAINTAIN EFFICIENT VALET |
| | FUNCTIONS". CITY STREETS ARE NOT INTENDED TO MAKE VALET |
| | FUNCTIONS EFFICIENT, THIS OPERATION IS TO BE KEPT |
| | ON-SITE. |
| | D. THE TERMINAL ISLAND STRIPING NEEDS TO EXTEND THE |
| | LENGTH OF THE ADJACENT PARKING SPACE. |
| | |
| | 9) REVISED COMMENT: SHOW ALL OF THE LIGHT POLES ON THE |
| | LANDSCAPE PLAN TO VERIFY THAT THEY DO NOT INTERFERE |
| | WITH THE PROPOSED OR EXISTING TREES. |
| | |
| | 10) BICYCLE PARKING |
| | |
| | A. REVISED COMMENT: THANK YOU FOR DISTRIBUTING THE |
| | BICYCLE PARKING FACILITIES; HOWEVER, SOME OF THE |
| | LOCATIONS DO NOT WORK DUE TO SITE CONSTRAINTS (DOORS |
| | AND PEDESTRIAN AREAS) AND NON-CODE COMPLIANT SITING. |
| | STAFF WILL E-MAIL REVISED LOCATIONS TO WGI. |
| | B. REVISED COMMENT: THE BICYCLE RACKS ARE REQUIRED TO |
| | BE CENTERED IN THE SIX FOOT DEEP BICYCLE PAD, NOT |
| | PUSHED TO THE FRONT OF THE PAD. THE BICYCLE PAD NEEDS |
| | TO SHOW THE CORRECT NUMBER OF RACK ELEMENTS AND THEIR |
| | DIMENSIONS ON THE PAD. PLEASE NOTE THAT THERE IS A |
| | MINIMUM REQUIRED 24 INCHES BETWEEN THE OUTSIDE RACK |
| | ELEMENT AND THE EDGE OF THE PAD. |
| | C. SHOW THE EXISTING BICYCLE PARKING IN THE GARAGE AND |
| | INCLUDE THOSE ON THE DATA TABLE. |
| | |
| | 11) REVISED COMMENT: THE SITE DATA TABLE IS INADEQUATE. |
| | PROVIDE A FLOOR PLAN FOR EACH LEVEL OF THE COHEN |
| | PAVILION SO THAT STAFF CAN VERIFY THE SEPARATION OF |
| | USES IN THE DRI AND THE DMP PORTIONS OF THE BUILDING. |
| | THE TABLE WILL NEED TO BE UPDATED AFTER STAFF REVIEW OF |
| | THE FLOOR PLAN. THE DIMENSIONS AND FENESTRATION |
| | CALCULATIONS FOR THE EAST SIDE OF THE DRYFOOS HALL WERE |
| | NOT PROVIDED IN TABULAR FORM OR ON THE SITE OR |
| | ELEVATION PLANS, SO THAT STAFF CAN VERIFY THE |
| | INFORMATION PRESENTED SUCH AS THE FACADES MEETING THE |
| | FENESTRATION PERCENTAGES (ONLY ROUGH CALCULATION DONE |
| | IN COMMENT #8B). |
| | |
| | 12) REVISED COMMENT: CITY STAFF HAS GARNERED INPUT FROM |
| | THE TROLLEY OPERATOR AND HAS SOME MODIFICATIONS TO THE |
| | TROLLEY AREA THAT NEED TO BE DISCUSSED. SEE PREVIOUS |
| | COMMENT #8A REGARDING MEETING WITH STAFF REGARDING THE |
| | TROLLEY PARKING ALONG IRIS STREET. |
| | |
| | 13) REVISED COMMENT: ACCESS EASEMENTS ARE REQUIRED FOR |
| | SIDEWALKS AND RIGHT-OF-WAY PROVIDED ON THE KRAVIS |
| | CENTER PROPERTY UNLESS THE ROADWAY AUTHORITY REQUIRES |
| | THAT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY BE DEDICATED TO THE AUTHORITY. |
| | THE RESPONSE WAS THAT FDOT REQUIRES DEDICATIONS. AREAS |
| | TO BE DEDICATED MUST BE SHOWN ON THE SITE AND LANDSCAPE |
| | PLANS. |
| | |
| | 14) REPEAT COMMENT: THE SITE PLAN CALLS OUT THE SIGNAL |
| | POLE AT THE CORNER OF SAPODILLA AVENUE AND OKEECHOBEE |
| | BOULEVARD AS BEING RELOCATED. WHERE WILL THIS BE |
| | RELOCATED TOO? PROVIDE APPROVAL FROM FDOT OR PALM BEACH |
| | COUNTY THAT THIS SIGNAL POLE MAY BE RELOCATED. |
| | |
| | 15) REVISED COMMENT: NO OVERALL DETAILED OVERALL |
| | SIGNAGE PLAN WAS SUBMITTED FOR THE AREA WITHIN THE DRI. |
| | PLEASE INCLUDE THE LOCATION OF ALL THE FACADE SIGNAGE, |
| | WITH SIZES, ON THE SITE PLAN DRAWING. |
| | |
| | A. REVISED COMMENT: THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING ADDITIONAL |
| | INFORMATION ON THE DREYFOOS HALL PLAZA SIGN; HOWEVER, |
| | THERE WAS NO FRONT ELEVATION DRAWING THAT SHOWS HOW THE |
| | SIGN WILL LOOK ON THE RETAINING WALL. NOTE: THERE IS A |
| | DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT TEXT |
| | AND THE PLANS AS TO THE DIMENSION OF THE SIGN. THE |
| | DIMENSION PROVIDED ON THE PLAN COMPLIES WITH THE DMP |
| | ALLOWANCE, SUBJECT TO THE CITY COMMISSION APPROVING THE |
| | WAIVER TO RELOCATE THE SIGN OFF THE BUILDING. THE |
| | JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT INCORRECTLY CITES THE SIGN TYPE |
| | AND CODE SECTION. STAFF IS REVIEWING THIS AS A FACADE |
| | SIGN BAND (PERMITTED 36 INCHES IN HEIGHT X 60% OF THE |
| | BUILDING FACADE). THE PLANS LIST A 36 INCH HIGH SIGN X |
| | 50 FEET LONG, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 30% OF THE |
| | BUILDING FRONTAGE. THE WAIVER SHOULD BE TO RELOCATE THE |
| | SIGN TO THE PLAZA SINCE THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE |
| | BUILDING DOES NOT LEND ITSELF TO MOUNTING A FACADE |
| | SIGN. PLEASE REVISE THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT |
| | ACCORDINGLY. STAFF DOES NOT OBJECT TO THIS WAIVER |
| | REQUEST (SUBJECT TO A REVIEW OF THE ELEVATION DRAWING). |
| | B. REVISED COMMENT: THE ARTIST ENTRANCE SIGN COMPLIES |
| | WITH THE DMP HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS. THE SIGN BAND MAY |
| | OCCUPY A MAXIMUM OF 60 PERCENT OF THE NORTH DRYFOOS |
| | HALL BUILDING FACADE (DIMENSION STILL NOT PROVIDED). |
| | THE PROPOSED SIGN LENGTH IS SHOWN AS 40 FEET. |
| | C. PROVIDE LOCATIONS AND DETAILS OF THE VALET |
| | DIRECTIONAL SIGNS. NO DIMENSIONS WERE PROVIDED FOR |
| | THESE SIGNS. THE SIGNS ARE SHOWN BLOCKING THE SIDEWALK, |
| | WHICH IS NOT PERMITTED. |
| | D. NO NEW SIGNS ARE PERMITTED TO BE INSTALLED WITHIN |
| | THE RIGHTS-OF-WAY (EX. OKEECHOBEE BOULEVARD). |
| | |
| | 16) CONDITION: IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DRI ADOPTING |
| | ORDINANCE, THE KRAVIS CENTER PROPERTY SHALL BE PLATTED. |
| | THE PREVIOUS OVERSIGHT OF THIS REQUIREMENT DOES NOT |
| | RESOLVE THE PLATTING REQUIREMENT. |
| | |
| | 17) REPEAT COMMENT: THE PLAN MUST BE PRESENTED TO THE |
| | CITYPLACE COURTYARDS AND CONDO ASSOCIATIONS PRIOR TO |
| | STAFF SCHEDULING THE CASE FOR A PUBLIC HEARING. STAFF |
| | MUST BE MADE AWARE OF THE MEETING SO THAT A |
| | REPRESENTATIVE CAN ATTEND. |
| | |
| | 18) CONDITION: PROVIDE CHARGING STATIONS FOR ELECTRIC |
| | CARS ON SITE. |
| | |
| | 19) THE SCALE ON THE LANDSCAPE PLAN IS SHOWN AT 1":50', |
| | WHEN IT SHOULD ACTUALLY BE 1":20'. |
| | |
| | 20) THE "REQUIRED" LINE OF THE PARKING TABLE MUST USE |
| | THE CITY'S PARKING STANDARDS AS LISTED IN THE ZONING |
| | AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. YOU MAY NOT USE OTHER |
| | NUMBERS UNLESS THE PARKING TABLE IS AMENDED. |
| | |
| | |
| |
Print |
