| Date |
Text |
| 2022-07-08 17:28:29 | TRAFFIC COMMENTS |
| | 1) NOT SATISFIED. PROVIDE ORIGINAL TRAFFIC STUDY |
| | INCLUSIVE OF THE REFERENCED EXHIBIT D. PLEASE PROVIDE |
| | FILE NAME, AS IT WAS NOT FOUND IN THE LATEST SUBMISSION |
| | 2) NOT SATISFIED. CONDUCT A FULL DETAILED TRAFFIC |
| | STUDY. ROADWAYS GEOMETRY AND NEARBY TRAFFIC CONDITIONS |
| | HAVE CHANGED SIGNIFICANTLY SINCE THE INITIAL SITE PLANS |
| | APPROVAL. REASONING PROVIDED FOR NOT CONDUCTING A NEW |
| | STUDY DO NOT SUBSIST; AS THERE IS NO FAILURE FROM THE |
| | CITY, NOR THE DEVELOPER. MOREOVER, VESTED TRIPS DO NOT |
| | HAVE ANY MEANING ON THIS REQUEST. |
| | 3) NOT SATISFIED. DEPENDING ON THE OUTCOME OF THE |
| | TRAFFIC ANALYSIS, TDM MEASURES MAY NEED TO BE |
| | NEGOTIATED AND ESTABLISHED. THE FACT THAT THE PROJECT |
| | IS TRANSIT ORIENTED DOES NOT MEAN THAT IT IS PRECLUDED |
| | FROM IMPLEMENTING MITIGATION MEASUREMENTS. NEGATIVE |
| | IMPACTS FROM THE RESIDENTIAL AND/OR COMMERCIAL |
| | COMPONENTS OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT DO NOT GET A |
| | FREE PASS BY BEING PART OF A TRANSIT PROJECT. |
| | 4) SATISFIED. PROVIDE COUNTY TPS LETTER |
| | 5) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE DETAILS PERTAINING THE |
| | TRANSITION FROM EXISTING TO FUTURE TRANSIT SERVICES, IN |
| | TERMS OF LOGISTICS AND OPERATIONS. COMMENT WILL BE |
| | SATISFIED ONCE DETAILS FROM PBC ARE PROVIDED. |
| | |
| | SITE COMMENTS |
| | 6) NOT SATISFIED. PROVIDE A SEPARATE SITE PLAN |
| | SHOWCASING ONLY BASIC TRANSPORTATION FEATURES AND THEIR |
| | DIMENSIONS. SPECIFICALLY: SIDEWALK, CURB, PARKING |
| | STALLS, CROSSINGS, WALKWAY, ROADWAY, DRIVE ISLES, |
| | DRIVEWAYS, PAVEMENT MARKINGS, SIGNAGE. C-10 AND C-11 |
| | ARE NOT PROPER, AS THEY ARE MISSING MOST OF THE |
| | DIMENSIONS AND MEASUREMENTS. |
| | 7) NOT SATISFIED. ON THE SITE PLAN, PLEASE SHOWCASE |
| | BASIC CURB DETAILS (I.E. DRIVEWAY AND PARKING STALLS) |
| | ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE ROADS SURROUNDING THE |
| | PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. PLEASE PROVIDE DOCUMENT NAME AND |
| | SHEET NUMBER SHOWCASING SUCH FEATURES. THE APPLICANT |
| | MUST PROVIDE THE REQUESTED |
| | TRANSPORTATION-SPECIFIC-PLANS SO THAT THE REVIEWER CAN |
| | PROPERLY ANALYZE THE TRAFFIC AND TRANSPORTATION |
| | COMPONENT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU. |
| | 8) NOT SATISFIED. PROVIDE AUTOTURN ANALYSIS FOR GARBAGE |
| | TRUCK AND/OR SERVICE VEHICLES DRIVING IN AND OUT OF THE |
| | PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITH VEHICLE DYNAMIC ENVELOPES |
| | CLEARLY DEFINED. ANALYSIS SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN A |
| | SEPARATE FILE/DRAWING. PLEASE PROVIDE DOCUMENT NAME AND |
| | SHEET NUMBER SHOWCASING THE ANALYSIS. LATEST RESPONSE |
| | DID NOT PROVIDE FILE NAME AND SHEET NUMBER, PLEASE BE |
| | SPECIFIC. |
| | 9) SEVERAL ADA PARKING STALLS IN THE GARAGE MUST BE |
| | RELOCATED TO THE NEAREST ACCESS TO RESIDENTIAL UNIT AND |
| | ELEVATORS, SPECIFICALLY: 10, 11, 33, 34, 63, 64 |
| | 10) REDUCE GARAGE RAMPS TO ONE SINGLE LANE, INSTALL |
| | CHEVRON MARKINGS ON THE SIDE OF THE RAMP FOR SUCH |
| | REDUCTION. IF TWO LANES ARE KEPT, A CONTINUOUS DIVIDING |
| | ELEMENT MUST BE INSTALLED (I.E. RAISED CURB WITH |
| | FLEXIBLE POLES) |
| | 11) PLEASE PROVIDE A CONTACT PERSON THAT WOULD RECEIVE |
| | MARKED UP SITE PLANS. THERE ARE SEVERAL COMMENTS FOR |
| | THE PROPOSED DROP-OFF DESIGN THAT WOULD BE BETTER |
| | CONVENED WITH SITE PLAN MARK-UPS THAN COMMENTS HERE |
| | 12) THE BANYAN STREETSCAPE PROJECT DOES NOT ALLOW LEFT |
| | TURNS FROM CLEARWATER TO BANYAN. PLEASE UPDATE THE SITE |
| | PLANS ACCORDINGLY |
| | 13) PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS ON CLEARWATER MUST BE HIGH |
| | EMPHASIS ONES WITH INSTALLATION OF RECTANGULAR RAPID |
| | FLASHING BEACONS. STOP BARS AND SIGNAGE MUST BE |
| | RE-PLACED ACCORDINGLY |
| | |
| | VALERIO ORICCHIO |
| | CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER |
| | 561-494-1092 |
| | [email protected] |
| | |
| |
Print |
