| Date |
Text |
| 2018-09-25 13:33:03 | CASE NO. PB1223H |
| | JFK NORTH HOSPITAL ER EXPANSION ? 1ST RESUBMITTAL |
| | 2201 45TH STREET |
| | |
| | - 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 THE PPRC MEETING (BY OCTOBER 8, 2018), |
| | THE CASE SHALL BE CONSIDERED WITHDRAWN.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 ASSESSED A RESUBMITTAL FEE. SUCH FEE |
| | WILL BE 20% OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FEE ($300). |
| | |
| | 1) REPEAT COMMENT: THANK YOU FOR SUBMITTING A TRAFFIC |
| | IMPACT STATEMENT WHICH SHOWS THAT THERE WILL BE NO |
| | ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC IMPACT FROM BASED ON THE EXPANSION. |
| | THE STATEMENT PERMITTED THE APPLICATION TO PROCEED TO |
| | THE PPRC FOR REVIEW OF THE PROPOSED EXPANSION. HOWEVER, |
| | YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO PROVIDE THE TRAFFIC |
| | PERFORMANCE STANDARDS LETTER FROM PALM BEACH COUNTY |
| | VERIFYING THE CONCLUSIONS FROM THE TRAFFIC STATEMENT. |
| | |
| | 2) REPEAT COMMENT: IF THE COUNTY TPS LETTER VERIFIES |
| | THAT THERE IS NO ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC IMPACT, THEN THE |
| | CASE WILL NOT TRIGGER A CITY COMMISSION REVIEW AS A |
| | MAJOR PD AMENDMENT. HOWEVER, SINCE THE EXPANSION |
| | EXCEEDS 1,000 SQUARE FEET, IT REQUIRES A FORMAL SITE |
| | PLAN REVIEW AS WELL AS THE MINOR PD AMENDMENT. BOTH |
| | APPLICATIONS REQUIRE THE SAME APPLICATION MATERIAL; |
| | HOWEVER, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT THE $1,500 REVIEW |
| | FEE. NO ADDITIONAL ENGINEERING FEES ARE REQUIRED. ---- |
| | THE RESPONSE STATED THAT THE FEE WILL BE SUPPLIED UNDER |
| | A SEPARATE COVER. STAFF HAS NO RECORD OF THE FEE BEING |
| | SUBMITTED. PLEASE PROVIDE A COPY OF THE RECEIPT IF THE |
| | FEE WAS SUBMITTED. |
| | |
| | 3) REVISED COMMENT: THE SITE DATA TABLE REMOVED THE |
| | INFORMATION THAT SHOWED THE REQUIRED AND PROVIDED |
| | PARKING SPACES FOR THE CAMPUS, TO INCLUDE THE ADA |
| | REQUIREMENTS. THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN SHOWS A REMOVAL OF |
| | BOTH REGULAR AND ADA PARKING, IT MUST VERIFY THAT THE |
| | MINIMUM OF REGULAR AND ADA SPACES FOR THE CAMPUS ARE |
| | STILL PROVIDED. |
| | |
| | 4) NEW COMMENT: THE ORIGINAL PLAN CALLED FOR THE |
| | PARKING SPACES IN THE AMBULANCE LOOP TO BE FOR |
| | AMBULANCES ONLY. THE COMMENT RESPONSE IS THAT THIS IS |
| | FOR AMV PARKING. STAFF IS UNFAMILIAR WITH THIS ACRONYM, |
| | SO PLEASE CLARIFY. IF THIS IS PUBLIC PARKING IN ANY |
| | WAY, THEN THESE SPACES ARE CLOSER TO THE ENTRANCE THAN |
| | THE PROVIDED ADA SPACES, WHICH IS NOT PERMITTED PER THE |
| | CITY?S CONSTRUCTION SERVICES DIVISION. |
| | |
| | 5) REVISED COMMENT: NO PARKING DETAIL WAS SUBMITTED FOR |
| | THE ANGLED PARKING SPACES. REMOVE THE INCORRECT PARKING |
| | DETAIL FROM SHEET C500 AS IT DOES NOT CONFORM TO CITY |
| | STANDARDS. |
| | |
| | 6) REPEAT COMMENT: PLEASE EXPLAIN WHY THE ROADWAY |
| | ADJACENT TO THE BUILDING IS 18 FEET WIDE, YET IT |
| | EXPANDS TO 19 (NOW 24) FEET WIDE SOUTH OF THE DROP OFF |
| | AREA ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE BUILDING. ----- THE |
| | RESPONSE STATES THAT THIS IS A TWO-WAY DRIVE UP TO THE |
| | DROP OFF ENTRANCE AND THE 18 FOOT WIDE ROADWAY IS |
| | ONE-WAY SOUTHBOUND PAST THE DROP OFF. THE SITE PLAN |
| | SHOWS TWO LANES IN TO THE SOUTHERN ENTRANCE DROP OFF |
| | WITH A STOP/DO NOT ENTER BAR AT THE 18 FOOT WIDE |
| | ROADWAY, IN ADDITION TO THE DO NOT ENTER SIGN SHOWN ON |
| | SHEET C301. THE CURB IS BEING REBUILT HERE AND THE LANE |
| | SHOULD BE NARROWED TO THE 18 FOOT WIDTH. NO YELLOW |
| | STRIPING SHOULD BE USED. |
| | |
| | 7) REVISED COMMENT: THE PLANS SHOW NO NEW FREE STANDING |
| | DIRECTIONAL SIGNS AS PART OF THIS AMENDMENT. PLEASE |
| | VERIFY THAT THIS IS THE CASE. |
| | |
| | 8) NEW COMMENT: THE WALL AROUND THE OXYGEN TANKS IS |
| | REQUIRED TO HAVE A HEDGE ALONG ITS BASE ON THE NORTH |
| | SIDE. ADDITIONALLY, THE GREEN SPACE TO THE NORTH OF THE |
| | TANKS IS THE TERMINAL ISLAND FOR THE ROW OF PARKING AND |
| | MUST HAVE THE REQUIRED TERMINAL TREE OR PALM EQUIVALENT |
| | INSTALLED. THIS LANDSCAPE MUST BE SHOWN ON THE |
| | LANDSCAPE PLAN. |
| | |
| | 9) REVISED COMMENT: THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING THE |
| | REPLACEMENT BICYCLE RACK AND PAD THAT MEET THE PHYSICAL |
| | CITY STANDARDS; HOWEVER, THEY NEED TO BE MOVED CLOSER |
| | TO THE MAIN HOSPITAL ENTRANCE TO MEET THE CITY |
| | LOCATIONAL STANDARDS. PLEASE SHIFT THE BICYCLE PARKING |
| | TO THE WEST APPROXIMATELY 40 FEET AND ADJUST THE |
| | LANDSCAPE ACCORDINGLY. |
| | |
| |
Print |
