| Date |
Text |
| 2021-06-03 11:51:56 | CASE NO. PB 1857B |
| | FLAGLER TOWERS |
| | 1315 SOUTH FLAGLER DRIVE |
| | |
| | - CONTACT ERIC SCHNEIDER @ (561) 822-1446, |
| | [email protected] |
| | |
| | - PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN |
| | WRITTEN FORMAT. |
| | |
| | - WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF THREE |
| | (3) 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, |
| | JUNE 25, 2021, TO BE ELIGIBLE TO BE SCHEDULED FOR THE |
| | AUGUST 17, 2021 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 THE PPRC MEETING (BY AUGUST 10, 2021), |
| | THE PLANNING DIVISION MAY NOTIFY THE APPLICANT THAT THE |
| | CASE IS CONSIDERED WITHDRAWN.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 ($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) THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING THE TRAFFIC STUDY THAT |
| | STATES THAT THE PROJECT DOES NOT GENERATE A SIGNIFICANT |
| | IMPACT. HOWEVER, YOU ARE STILL REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A |
| | PALM BEACH COUNTY TPS APPROVAL LETTER. |
| | |
| | 2) THE SITE PLAN SHOWS A SIDEWALK AND WALKWAYS TO THE |
| | TOWNHOUSE UNITS BEING INSTALLED ON THE CITY OWNED |
| | PARCEL SOUTH OF THE PROJECT. THE PARCEL IS SUBJECT TO A |
| | DEED RESTRICTION THAT REQUIRES THE NORTON GALLERY AND |
| | SCHOOL OF ART, INC., TO BE NOTIFIED OF PROPOSED CHANGES |
| | TO THE PARCEL AND NOT OBJECT TO THE CHANGES. ONCE THE |
| | FULL SCOPE OF CHANGES TO THE PARCEL ARE FINALIZED |
| | BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND STAFF, IT IS YOUR |
| | RESPONSIBILITY TO PROVIDE WRITTEN CONSENT FROM THE |
| | NORTON GALLERY AND SCHOOL OF ART, INC., TO THE CITY. |
| | THE SIDEWALK MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 10 FEET IN WIDTH AND |
| | IT WILL BE THE FLAGLER TOWERS MAINTENANCE |
| | RESPONSIBILITY. THERE WILL BE EASEMENTS AND OTHER |
| | AGREEMENTS REQUIRED FOR THE INSTALLATION OF ANY |
| | IMPROVEMENTS ON CITY PROPERTY. |
| | |
| | 3) FPL EASEMENT WHICH BISECTS THE PROPOSED BUILDING |
| | LOCATION WILL NEED TO BE RELEASED BY FPL AND ALL |
| | OVERHEAD LINES MUST BE REMOVED. ANY NEW UTILITY LINES |
| | MUST BE RELOCATED UNDERGROUND. |
| | |
| | 4) YOU ARE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT THE FFA APPROVAL FOR THE |
| | PROPOSED TOWER PRIOR TO SCHEDULING THIS CASE FOR |
| | PLANNING BOARD. |
| | |
| | 5) PROVIDE THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION IN WORD FORMAT. |
| | |
| | 6) STAFF WILL NOT SUPPORT A BUILDING IN EXCESS OF 300 |
| | FEET IN HEIGHT. THE PROPOSED 356-FOOT TALL TOWERS DO |
| | NOT CONTINUE THE PATTERN OF BUILDINGS TRANSITIONING |
| | DOWN IN HEIGHT AS THEY MOVE SOUTH ALONG SOUTH FLAGLER |
| | DRIVE AND SOUTH OLIVE AVENUE TOWARD THE EXISTING LOWER |
| | SCALE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. |
| | |
| | 7) SHEET C-300 SHOWS THE SAME AT&T LINE AS REMAINING |
| | AND BEING REMOVED. ALL PLANS MUST SHOW THE SAME |
| | ACCURATE CONDITIONS. |
| | |
| | BUILDING PLACEMENT |
| | |
| | 8) BASED ON THE BUILDING DESIGN, YOU ARE SHOWING A |
| | ZERO-FOOT NORTH SETBACK FOR THE GROUND LEVEL. PLACING |
| | DIRT AND A RETAINING WALL BETWEEN THE ABOVE GRADE LEVEL |
| | OF PARKING AND THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE NORTH DOES NOT |
| | MAKE THAT LEVEL OF BUILDING DISAPPEAR FOR THE PURPOSES |
| | OF SETBACKS. STAFF DOES NOT CURRENTLY SUPPORT THIS |
| | DESIGN BASED ON THE WAIVERS THAT IT REQUIRES. |
| | |
| | 9) THE BUILDING SETBACK ALONG SOUTH FLAGLER DRIVE DOES |
| | NOT COMPLY WITH THE THEME THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED BY |
| | PRIOR PROJECTS TO SET THE BUILDINGS BACK AND CREATE AN |
| | ENHANCED VISUAL OPEN SPACE ALONG SOUTH FLAGLER DRIVE. |
| | NOT ONLY IS THE BUILDING NOT SET BACK APPROPRIATELY, |
| | BUT THE OUTSIDE STAIRWAYS FROM THE TERRACES ENCROACH |
| | INTO THE MINIMUM 25-FOOT FRONT SETBACK REQUIRED IF THIS |
| | WAS AN MF32 ZONING BASED PROJECT NOT LOCATED ALONG |
| | SOUTH FLAGLER DRIVE. |
| | |
| | 10) THE TERRACE, WHILE NOT SHOWING AN EXACT SETBACK |
| | DIMENSION ON THE PLANS, APPEARS TO BE APPROXIMATELY 25 |
| | FEET FROM SOUTH FLAGLER DRIVE. THE TERRACE WALL EXTENDS |
| | OVER EIGHT (8) FEET ABOVE THE SIDEWALK GRADE AND THUS |
| | DOES NOT CREATE AN ENHANCEMENT FOR SOUTH FLAGLER DRIVE. |
| | THE FIRST LEVEL OF THE TOWNHOUSE UNITS WILL NOT BE |
| | VISIBLE TO A PEDESTRIAN. |
| | |
| | 11) THE SOUTH PORTION OF THE BUILDING (BEHIND THE |
| | FOUNTAIN) IS A STAIRCASE TO UP TO THE AMENITY DECK, |
| | WHICH, UNLESS OPEN TO THE PUBLIC, IS ANOTHER SECTION OF |
| | THE BUILDING BROUGHT CLOSE TO SOUTH FLAGLER DRIVE WHICH |
| | PROVIDES NO ACTIVE USE INTERACTION. |
| | |
| | 12) STAFF DOES NOT OPPOSE THE PODIUM SETBACK OF 15 FEET |
| | ALONG THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE; HOWEVER, MORE DETAIL ON |
| | THE INTERACTION BETWEEN THE TOWNHOUSES AND THE PROPOSED |
| | SIDEWALK IS REQUIRED. THE RENDERINGS SEEM TO INDICATE |
| | THAT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE SITE WILL HAVE A HIGH |
| | RETAINING WALL AT THE CORNER, WHICH DOES NOT FOSTER ANY |
| | PERCEIVED INTERACTION WITH THE SITE. THE ADDITIONAL |
| | DETAILING NEEDS TO SHOW THE ELEVATIONS BETWEEN THE |
| | PROPOSED SIDEWALK AND THE ENTRY GARDENS. |
| | |
| | 13) STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT THE WESTERN TOWER BUILT TO |
| | THE 15-FOOT PODIUM LINE. THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT |
| | GOES TO GREAT LENGTHS TO STATE HOW THE DESIGN OF THE |
| | PODIUM AND THE TOWER POSITIONING LESSONS THE IMPACT OF |
| | THE MASS OF THE BUILDING. STAFF HAS ACCEPTED THIS IN |
| | THE PAST ONLY WHEN THE TOWER IS SETBACK FROM THE EDGE |
| | OF THE PODIUM. BUILDING A 20 PLUS STORY TOWER 15 FEET |
| | FROM A PROPERTY LINE ACCENTUATES THE SIZE OF THE |
| | BUILDING. |
| | |
| | 14) THE NORTH/SOUTH PORTION OF CURRIE CRESCENT IS A |
| | FRONT PROPERTY LINE, WHICH REQUIRES A 25-FOOT, NOT |
| | 10-FOOT SETBACK. NOTE: THIS IS NOT A FENCE HEIGHT |
| | WAIVER FOR THE WALL, SINCE THE WALL IS THE BUILDING |
| | WALL THAT ENCROACHES INTO THE SETBACK. |
| | |
| | 15) THE EAST/WEST PORTION OF CURRIE CRESCENT IS A SIDE |
| | PROPERTY LINE SO IT MUST MEET THE ONE-FOOT SETBACK FOR |
| | EACH TWO FEET IN HEIGHT REQUIREMENT. THIS SECTION IS |
| | NOT COVERED IN YOUR WAIVER REQUEST. |
| | |
| | 16) SHEET G-201 SHOWS THE BAY WINDOWS BEING 18 INCHES |
| | DEEP. PLEASE EXPLAIN WHY THE WAIVER REQUEST IS FOR 36 |
| | INCHES. |
| | |
| | 17) SHEET G-201 SHOWS THE BALCONY BEING 3 FEET 8 INCHES |
| | DEEP. PLEASE EXPLAIN WHY THE WAIVER REQUEST IS FOR 5 |
| | FEET. |
| | |
| | 18) STAFF DOES NOT OBJECT TO THE CAFE AWNINGS |
| | ENCROACHING 7 FEET INTO THE WESTERN SETBACK OVER THE |
| | ENTRANCES TO THE CAFE FROM THE OUTDOOR SEATING. |
| | |
| | 19) STAFF IS NOT PREPARED TO SUPPORT A 12-FOOT CANOPY |
| | ENCROACHMENT INTO THE WEST SETBACK. THERE HAS BEEN |
| | INADEQUATE JUSTIFICATION PROVIDED AS TO WHY SUCH A DEEP |
| | CANOPY IS REQUIRED AT THIS ENTRANCE. |
| | |
| | 20) STAFF DOES NOT SUPPORT THE 12-FOOT CANOPY |
| | ENCROACHMENT INTO THE SOUTH SETBACK. THE BUILDING |
| | SETBACK IS ALREADY BEING REQUESTED TO BE REDUCED HAS |
| | ALREADY BEEN REDUCED BY OVER 150 FEET. ENCROACHING |
| | FURTHER INTO THE SETBACK IS NOT JUSTIFIED FOR THE |
| | CANOPY. ADDITIONALLY, A 12-FOOT AWNING ENCROACHES INTO |
| | THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE BUFFER WHERE THE PROPOSED OAK |
| | TREE IS LOCATED. |
| | |
| | 21) PROVIDE THE SETBACK DIMENSIONS OF THE PODIUM |
| | (INCLUDING THE AMENITIES LEVEL) AND THE TWO TOWERS. |
| | THIS IS THE METHODOLOGY USED ON THE NEARBY TOWERS TO |
| | ESTABLISH THE BUILDING SETBACKS. |
| | |
| | 22) THE SITE OPEN SPACE IS INCORRECTLY CALCULATED. THE |
| | AREAS SUCH AS THE MOTOR COURT AND THE DRIVE WHERE IT IS |
| | ABOVE THE FIRST LEVEL OF THE BUILDING IS NOT OPEN SPACE |
| | IT IS A BUILDING ROOF. |
| | |
| | ELEVATIONS |
| | |
| | 23) PROVIDE THE ELEVATION HEIGHTS OF ALL THE FEATURES |
| | ON THE AMENITY DECK AND THE LEVEL 5 PLANS FOR THE ROOF. |
| | |
| | 24) PROVIDE THE ELEVATION HEIGHT OF THE ROOF TOP |
| | MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT AND COOLING TOWER. |
| | |
| | 25) PROVIDE ELEVATION HEIGHTS FOR THE VARIOUS FEATURES |
| | ALONG THE SOUTH FLAGLER DRIVE FRONTAGE. |
| | |
| | PARKING |
| | |
| | 26) PLEASE PROVIDE HOW THE PARKING SPACES WILL BE |
| | ASSIGNED IN THE BUILDING. THERE ARE SEVERAL PRIVATE |
| | GARAGES WHICH INCLUDE THREE CAR SPACES. GIVEN THAT THE |
| | PARKING TABLE (PRIOR TO ANY OF THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS |
| | BEING ADDRESSED) SHOWS THAT THERE IS ONLY ONE EXTRA |
| | PARKING SPACE, ASSIGNING MULTIPLE UNITS MORE THAN TWO |
| | PARKING SPACES DOES NOT PERMIT THE OTHER UNITS TO HAVE |
| | THE REQUIRED TWO PARKING SPACES. |
| | |
| | 27) IS THERE A VALET? PROVIDE THE VALET PLAN. PLEASE |
| | NOTE THAT VALETS ARE NOT PERMITTED TO USE THE PUBLIC |
| | RIGHTS-OF-WAY FOR MANEUVERING. |
| | |
| | 28) HOW DOES A RESTAURANT/CAFE PARKING CUSTOMER OR A |
| | GUEST KNOW WHICH PARKING ENTRANCE TO USE? |
| | |
| | 29) WHERE ARE THE RESTAURANT/CAFE PARKING AND GUEST |
| | PARKING SPACES. THESE NEED TO BE DESIGNATED ON THE |
| | PLAN. |
| | |
| | 30) PROVIDE A DRAWING SHOWING HOW A RESTAURANT OR CAFE |
| | CUSTOMER GETS FROM THE PUBLIC PARKING TO THE RESTAURANT |
| | OR CAFE. |
| | |
| | 31) WHO HAS ACCESS TO THE PARKING FIELD ON SHEET A-102? |
| | DEPENDING ON WHO HAS ACCESS, STAFF MAY HAVE COMMENTS |
| | REGARDING PARKING SPACE ACCESS AND TURN AROUND |
| | DEFICIENCIES. |
| | |
| | 32) WHO HAS ACCESS TO THE PARKING FIELD ON SHEET A-103? |
| | DEPENDING ON WHO HAS ACCESS, STAFF MAY HAVE COMMENTS |
| | REGARDING PARKING SPACE ACCESS AND TURN AROUND |
| | DEFICIENCIES. |
| | |
| | 33) ARE THE PARKING AREAS GATED? IF NOT HOW IS ACCESS |
| | CONTROLLED? IF SO, PROVIDE INFORMATION ON STACKING AND |
| | CALL BOXES. |
| | |
| | 34) THE ADA PARKING SPACE DETAILS ON SHEET A-054 DO NOT |
| | CONFORM TO CITY STRIPING STANDARDS. |
| | |
| | 35) THE ADA PARKING SPACES DO NOT APPEAR TO THE BE |
| | CLOSEST PARKING SPACES TO THE ELEVATORS LEADING TO THE |
| | UPPER FLOOR RESTAURANT OR TO THE CORRIDOR LEADING TO |
| | THE CAFE. PLEASE EXPLAIN. |
| | |
| | 36) SHOW THE DEPTH DIMENSIONS FOR THE PARKING ROWS. |
| | |
| | 37) THE DEAD-END PARKING ROW CONTAINING SPACES 112 AND |
| | 162 MUST EITHER HAVE A MARKED TURN AROUND SPACE OR BE |
| | ALL ASSIGNED PARKING SPACES IN AN AREA WHERE A |
| | RESTAURANT/CAFE OR GUEST PARKER CANNOT ACCESS. |
| | |
| | 38) DESCRIBE HOW THE MOTOR COURT WILL FUNCTION. WILL |
| | CARS BE PARKED HERE FOR ANY REASON? |
| | |
| | 39) THE BUILDING IS DEFICIENT IN PARKING: |
| | |
| | A. YOU ARE PROPOSING A LUXURY HIGH RISE BUILDING THAT |
| | WILL REQUIRE ON-SITE STAFF. PLANNING STAFF REQUIRES |
| | THAT YOU PROVIDE PARKING SPACES WITHIN THE PARKING LOT |
| | FOR THE ON-SITE STAFF SO THAT THESE EMPLOYEES ARE NOT |
| | REQUIRED TO PARK IN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS. |
| | PLEASE PROVIDE HOW MANY RESIDENTIAL STAFF WILL ON-SITE |
| | AT PEAK TIME SO THE PROPER NUMBER OF SPACES CAN BE |
| | DETERMINED. |
| | B. ONLY THE OUTSIDE TANDEM PARKING SPACE MAY COUNT |
| | TOWARD MEETING THE PARKING REQUIREMENT. |
| | C. SPACES 1 AND 2 ON THE BASEMENT LEVEL DO NOT HAVE |
| | ADEQUATE BACK OUT MANEUVERING ROOM AND THUS DO NOT |
| | FUNCTION. |
| | D. PARKING SPACE 82 DOES NOT PROVIDE SAFE |
| | INGRESS/EGRESS TO THE SPACE GIVEN THE PROXIMITY TO THE |
| | GARAGE ENTRANCE AND THE WALLS. |
| | |
| | 40) HOW DOES THE PERSON PARKING IN SPACE 110 LEAVE THE |
| | GARAGE? |
| | |
| | 41) PROVIDE THE ANGLE OF PARKING SPACES 131 AND 132 AND |
| | PROVIDE DIMENSION LINES TO VERIFY THAT THEY MEET THE |
| | CODE REQUIRED BACK UP DISTANCE. |
| | |
| | 42) NO BICYCLE PARKING WAS PROVIDED. |
| | |
| | A. YOU MUST HAVE BICYCLE PARKING FOR THE |
| | CAFE/RESTAURANT USERS LOCATED ON THE SOUTH OLIVE AVENUE |
| | SIDE OF THE SITE. |
| | B. YOU MUST HAVE A BICYCLE STORAGE ROOM FOR RESIDENTS. |
| | C. YOU MUST HAVE BICYCLE PARKING FOR GUESTS NEAR ONE OF |
| | THE GUEST ACCESSIBLE ENTRANCES TO THE BUILDING. |
| | |
| | 43) PROVIDE MORE DETAIL ON THE PROPOSED PRE-WIRING OF |
| | THE BUILDING FOR EV CHARGER INSTALLATION. THERE ARE A |
| | NUMBER OF SPACES THAT ARE HEAD TO HEAD AS WELL AS THE |
| | TANDEM SPACES THAT DO NOT SEEM TO HAVE SPACE FOR |
| | CHANGING UNITS. PLEASE REMEMBER THAT THE ELECTRICAL |
| | ROOM NEEDS TO INCLUDE EXTRA SPACE FOR THE ADDITIONAL |
| | PANELS. |
| | |
| | LOADING/ACCESS |
| | |
| | 44) THE NORTH SIDE OF CURRIE CRESCENT HAS ON-STREET |
| | PARALLEL PARKING SPACES. THE TRUCK TURNING DIAGRAM |
| | SHOWS THE TRUCK USING THE FULL WIDTH OF CURRIE |
| | CRESCENT, WHICH IS IMPOSSIBLE IF A CAR IS PARKED IN THE |
| | PARALLEL SPACES, AND THUS IS NOT PERMITTED. |
| | |
| | 45) WHERE WILL A FULL-SIZED MOVING TRUCK PARK FOR THE |
| | RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF THE PROJECT? |
| | |
| | 46) WHAT IS THE PLAN FOR GARBAGE PICK-UP? |
| | |
| | 47) THE CITY'S ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT NEEDS TO |
| | APPROVE THE USE OF CURRIE CRESCENT FOR MANEUVERING |
| | PRIOR TO THE CASE PROCEEDING THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING |
| | PROCESS. |
| | |
| | 48) THE CITY'S ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT NEEDS TO |
| | APPROVE THE NUMBER OF ACCESS POINTS TO CURRIE CRESCENT |
| | AND THE SEPARATION OF ACCESS POINTS TO THE CASE |
| | PROCEEDING THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS. |
| | |
| | TOWNHOUSE UNITS |
| | |
| | 49) PLEASE PROVIDE A SAMPLE FLOOR PLAN ON HOW THE |
| | TOWNHOUSE UNITS WILL WORK. THE LINEWORK ON LEVEL ONE |
| | SEEMS TO SHOW WHAT APPEAR TO BE 16 TOWNHOUSES. |
| | |
| | WALLS |
| | |
| | 50) THE PROPOSED USE INCLUDES NON-RESIDENTIAL USES SO A |
| | SCREEN WALL IS REQUIRED ALONG THE NORTH AND SOUTH |
| | PROPERTY LINES. THE CITY COMMISSION, ON BEHALF OF THE |
| | CITY, WHO OWNS THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH MAY WAIVER THE |
| | REQUIREMENT AS PART OF THE RPD, BUT YOU HAVE NOT |
| | REQUESTED THIS WAIVER. PROVIDE VERIFICATION THAT THE |
| | WALL ALONG THE ENTIRE NORTH PROPERTY LINE COMPLIES WITH |
| | THE SECTION 94-443A.1 REQUIREMENTS OR THAT THE PROPERTY |
| | OWNER TO THE NORTH HAS GRANTED A WAIVER FOR THE |
| | REQUIRED WALL. NOTE: AN EARLIER COMMENT RELATES TO THE |
| | NORTH PROPERTY LINE AND ITS DESIGN. |
| | |
| | 51) WALL HEIGHTS ARE MEASURED FROM THE ACTUAL GRADE ON |
| | THE EXTERIOR OF THE WALL, NOT THE MEAN GRADE OF THE |
| | PROPERTY USED FOR BUILDING HEIGHT. UPDATE YOUR WALL |
| | HEIGHT PLANS, CROSS SECTIONS AND REQUIRED WAIVERS TO |
| | COMPLY. |
| | |
| | 52) NO INFORMATION IS PROVIDED ABOUT WHAT APPEARS TO BE |
| | A WALL WITH STEPS AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE SITE. |
| | |
| | CAFE/RESTAURANT |
| | |
| | 53) PROVIDE A DIAGRAM SHOWING HOW A PUBLIC CUSTOMER |
| | ACCESSES THE RESTAURANT. |
| | |
| | 54) SHEET LG-3.1 CALLS OUT THE SURFACE AS SOD AT THE |
| | AREA SHOWN AS OUTDOOR SEATING FOR THE CAFE ALONG SOUTH |
| | OLIVE AVENUE. THERE ARE DISCREPANCIES ON THE VARIOUS |
| | PLANS AS TO WHAT THE AREA IN FRONT OF THE CAFE LOOKS |
| | LIKE ON THE VARIOUS PLANS. ALL PLANS MUST SHOW THE |
| | SAME, ACCURATE CONDITIONS. |
| | |
| | |
| |
Print |