| Date |
Text |
| 2019-05-29 15:24:34 | CASE NO. PB 950LLLLL - 1ST RESUBMITTAL |
| | CITYPLACE OKEECHOBEE VALET DROP-OFF |
| | 701 SOUTH ROSEMARY |
| | |
| | - 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 JULY 29, 2019), |
| | THE CASE SHALL BE CONSIDERED WITHDRAWN. ANY FURTHER |
| | ACTION SHALL REQUIRE A NEW DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION. |
| | |
| | - PLEASE NOTE THAT SINCE PREVIOUSLY-ISSUED COMMENTS |
| | WERE NOT SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSED, YOU ARE ASSESSED A |
| | RESUBMITTAL FEE. SUCH FEE WILL IS 20% OF THE ORIGINAL |
| | APPLICATION FEE ($60). |
| | |
| | 1) REPEAT COMMENT: PROVIDE DIMENSIONS ON THE PLANS. |
| | THIS MUST INCLUDE THE SIZE OF THE VARIOUS FEATURES AND |
| | THE DIMENSIONS BETWEEN THE VARIOUS FEATURES. NO |
| | DIMENSIONS WERE PROVIDED FOR THE OPENING FOR THE VALET |
| | DRIVE, THE WIDTH OF THE NEW WALKWAY (INCLUDING THE |
| | NARROWEST POINT BETWEEN A PROPOSED LIGHT POLE AND THE |
| | BUILDING), DEPTH DIMENSIONS OF THE DROP-OFF AND |
| | STACKING AREAS. |
| | |
| | 2) REVISED COMMENT: THERE IS INSUFFICIENT JUSTIFICATION |
| | PROVIDED FOR THE VALET DROP OFF. THE JUSTIFICATION |
| | STATEMENT INDICATES THAT THE NEW VALET AREA IS FOR A |
| | "CONSOLIDATED VALET AREA IN ORDER TO RELOCATE MULTIPLE |
| | AREAS CURRENTLY UTILIZED ON THE SOUTH END OF THE |
| | PROJECT". PLEASE EXPLAIN WHO THIS VALET DROP-OFF SERVES |
| | AND WHICH CURRENT VALETS WILL BE CONSOLIDATED? --- THIS |
| | INFORMATION WAS NOT PROVIDED. |
| | |
| | A. THE RESPONSE TO THE TRAFFIC ENGINEERING COMMENT |
| | STATES THAT THE ?EXISTING VALET INCLUDES OVER 30,000 |
| | TRANSACTIONS A YEAR?. PLEASE VERIFY THAT THE 30,000 |
| | TRANSACTIONS ARE FOR THE VALET STAND THAT IS ADJACENT |
| | TO AMERITRADE. ADDITIONALLY, IS A TRANSACTION COUNTED |
| | AS INBOUND/OUTBOUND = ONE TRANSACTION, OR IS THE |
| | INBOUND AND OUTBOUND COUNTED AS TWO TRANSACTIONS? QUICK |
| | MATH FOR THE DAYS/HOURS THAT ANUSHKA IS OPEN RESULTS IN |
| | LESS THAN 11 TRANSACTIONS PER HOUR. THIS IS ONE CAR |
| | EVERY FIVE MINUTES, WHICH DOES NOT PROVIDE |
| | JUSTIFICATION TO TRANSFORM A LANDSCAPE AREA (WITH A NET |
| | LOSS OF LANDSCAPE) INTO ONE GIVEN UP FOR VEHICULAR USE. |
| | |
| | B. THIS COMMENT DOES NOT ADDRESS THE CONSOLIDATION OF |
| | VALET OPERATIONS. IF THIS AREA TRULY CONSOLIDATES THE |
| | VALET OPERATIONS ? RUTH CHRIS, REGIONAL, FUTURE MELLOW |
| | MUSHROOM SPACE, ETC., THEN THIS CAN JUSTIFY A NESTED |
| | VALET AREA, BUT THIS REQUIRES THAT ALL THE OTHER VALET |
| | STANDS BE REMOVED AND NOT RE-OCCUPIED. |
| | |
| | |
| | 3) REVISED COMMENT: THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING THE VALET |
| | CIRCULATION PLAN. |
| | |
| | A. THE LANE ADJACENT TO THE WALKWAY HAS A RIGHT TURN |
| | ONLY ARROW. HOW IS IT GUARANTEED THAT ON A SLOW |
| | AFTERNOON, THE VALET DOES NOT RETURN THE CAR TO THIS |
| | LANE, WHICH WOULD RESULT IN CONFUSION FOR DRIVERS |
| | LEAVING THE VALET AREA, ESPECIALLY ELDERLY DRIVERS? |
| | B. THE CIRCULATION PLAN SHOWS DROP OFF ONLY IN THE |
| | RIGHT LANE. HOW WILL USERS KNOW TO ONLY DROP OFF IN THE |
| | RIGHT LANE? |
| | C. THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT INCLUDED THAT THIS AREA |
| | WOULD BE USED FOR RIDE SHARE DROP OFF AND PICK UP. HOW |
| | WILL THIS AREA BE CONTROLLED SO THAT RIDE SHARE DRIVERS |
| | DO NOT USE THE RIGHT LANE FOR PICK UP AND DROP OFF AND |
| | THEN IGNORE THE RIGHT TURN ARROW AND CAUSE AN UNSAFE |
| | SITUATION WITH DRIVERS LEAVING THE VALET PICK UP LANE. |
| | D. HOW IS IT GUARANTEED THAT THE VALETS WILL NOT RETURN |
| | THE CARS BY TAKING A LEFT OFF THE ALLEY INSTEAD OF |
| | LOOPING AROUND THE PARKING SPACES AS SHOWN IN THE |
| | DIAGRAM. |
| | |
| | 4) REPEAT COMMENT: PROVIDE DETAILS OF THE PROPOSED |
| | LIGHT POLES. |
| | |
| | 5) REVISED COMMENT: THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING ADDITIONAL |
| | BICYCLE PARKING IN FRONT OF CAPITAL ONE CAFE. |
| | |
| | A. THE ADDITIONAL BICYCLE PARKING SPACES REFERENCED IN |
| | THE INITIAL COMMENT WERE TO SERVE EMPLOYEES OF THE |
| | REGIONAL, WHO HAD NO PLACE TO SECURE THEIR BICYCLES. |
| | MOVING THE BICYCLE PARKING TO THE EAST END OF THE BLOCK |
| | DOES NOT SERVE THERE USERS. ONE ALTERNATIVE LOCATION |
| | DISCUSSED BETWEEN STAFF AND CITYPLACE WAS IN THE |
| | SERVICE AREA ALONG THE ALLEY. PROVIDE THE PARKING FOR |
| | THIS USER GROUP AS IT WAS AN ISSUE BROUGHT TO THE |
| | CITY'S ATTENTION BY CITYPLACE. |
| | |
| | B. THE BICYCLE PAD IS REQUIRED TO BE SIX (6) FEET DEEP, |
| | WITH THE RACK CENTERED ON THE PAD. |
| | |
| | 6) WHERE IS THE VALET STAND GOING TO BE LOCATED. |
| | PROVIDE DIMENSIONS OF THE STAND AND FROM THE STAND TO |
| | THE TRAVEL LANE AND THE BUILDING. PROVIDE DETAILS OF |
| | THE STAND. WILL IT BE PERMANENT OR MOBILE? IF MOBILE, |
| | WHERE WILL IT BE STORED WHEN NOT IN USE? |
| | |
| | OCCURS POST MINOR AMENDMENT APPROVAL: |
| | |
| | 6) THE RELOCATION OF THE SIDEWALK WILL REQUIRE AN |
| | ACCESS AND MAINTENANCE EASEMENT FOR THE PORTION ON |
| | PRIVATE PROPERTY. THIS WILL BE REQUIRED TO THE |
| | COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT. |
| | |
| | 7) THE NEW LANDSCAPE AND HARDSCAPE LOCATED WITHIN THE |
| | FDOT RIGHT-OF-WAY WILL REQUIRE A MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT. |
| | SINCE THE DESIGN OF THE PROJECT WITH THE LANDSCAPE AND |
| | SIDEWALK RELOCATION IS INTERTWINED BETWEEN THE ROW AND |
| | THE SITE, THE FDOT PERMIT OR A PREDETERMINATION LETTER |
| | NEEDS TO BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL OF ANY |
| | PERMITS FOR ABOVE GROUND WORK. |
| | |
| |
Print |
