| Date |
Text |
| 2022-09-08 01:00:38 | TRAFFIC COMMENTS |
| | 1) GIVEN THE CHANGE IN LAND USE INTENSITY AND DRIVEWAY |
| | ACCESS POINTS, PROVIDE AN UPDATED COUNTY TPS LETTER |
| | 2) A METHODOLOGY MEETING SHOULD BE SCHEDULED TO DISCUSS |
| | A REVISED TRAFFIC STUDY, AS THE LATEST ONE IS BASED ON |
| | OLD DATA COLLECTION, AS WELL AS PEDESTRIAN CROSSING |
| | STUDIES FOR ENHANCED MARKED CROSSWALK ACROSS DIXIE HWY |
| | AT BARCELONA RD AND CORDOVA RD |
| | 3) DEPENDING ON THE OUTCOME OF THE TRAFFIC STUDIES AND |
| | PARKING REQUIREMENTS, TRANSPORTATION DEMAND MANAGEMENT |
| | (TDM) MEASURES, ROAD SAFETY IMPROVEMENTS AND |
| | CONTRIBUTION TO FUTURE TRANSIT OPERATIONS MAY BE |
| | NEGOTIATED |
| | |
| | SITE COMMENTS |
| | 4) PROVIDE A CLEAN TRANSPORTATION SPECIFIC SITE PLAN |
| | FOR THE GROUND FLOOR. SHOWCASING TRANSPORTATION RELATED |
| | FEATURES (E.G. ROADWAY WIDTHS, DRIVING AISLES, PARKING |
| | STALLS, SIDEWALK, CURB, GUTTER, DRIVEWAY, GATES, |
| | CROSSWALKS, VISIBILITY TRIANGLE, CORNER & DRIVEWAY |
| | SEPARATION DISTANCES, SLOPES, ETC.) PROPERLY LABELED |
| | AND DIMENSIONED. THE SITE PLAN SHOULD BE NAMED T-1.0 |
| | 5) IN THE T-1.0 SITE PLAN, PLEASE SHOWCASE BASIC CURB |
| | DETAILS (E.G. DRIVEWAY, CURB CUTS, PAVEMENT MARKINGS, |
| | PARKING STALLS, ETC.) ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE ROADS |
| | SURROUNDING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT |
| | 6) PROVIDE A SIGNAGE AND PAVEMENT MARKING PLAN. |
| | INCLUSIVE OF ALL FEATURES WITHIN THE PROPOSED |
| | DEVELOPMENT AND ALONG ALL ROADS FRONTING THE SITE. SUCH |
| | PLAN IS PART OF THE TRANSPORTATION REVIEW AND SHOULD BE |
| | NAMED ACCORDINGLY (E.G. T-1.1 OR T-2.0) |
| | 7) SHOWCASE ALL CORNER CLEARANCE AND DRIVEWAY |
| | SEPARATION DISTANCES. SPECIFY IF ANY MINIMUM DISTANCES |
| | ARE NOT MET. IN THAT CASE, VARIANCES MAY BE NEEDED FOR |
| | THE PROPOSED DRIVEWAYS AND ON-STREET PARKING STALLS |
| | 8) PROVIDE AUTOTURN ANALYSIS FOR GARBAGE TRUCK AND/OR |
| | SERVICE VEHICLES DRIVING IN AND OUT OF THE PROPOSED |
| | DEVELOPMENT WITH VEHICLE DYNAMIC ENVELOPES AND WHEEL |
| | PATHS CLEARLY DISTINCT AND DEFINED IN DIFFERENT COLORS. |
| | SITE PLAN(S) CONTAINING THE ANALYSIS ARE PART OF THE |
| | TRANSPORTATION REVIEW AND SHOULD BE NAMED ACCORDINGLY |
| | (E.G. T1.2, T-3.0) |
| | 9) PROVIDE ENGINEERING REFERENCE AND SPECS SHEETS FOR |
| | EACH OF THE PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION FEATURES (E.G. |
| | CURB, RAMP, GATE, SIGNAGE, PAVEMENT MARKING, SIGNAL, |
| | ETC.) |
| | 10) PROVIDE A PARKING TABLE SHOWCASING THE NUMBER OF |
| | REQUIRED AND PROVIDED PARKING SPACES, INCLUSIVE OF ADA |
| | AND BICYCLE ONES |
| | 11) IN THE PAVEMENT, MARKING & SIGN PLAN, PROVIDE A |
| | TABLE SHOWCASING THE NUMBER OF EXISTING AND PROPOSED |
| | ON-STREET PARKING STALLS. PROVIDE THE NUMBER OF METERED |
| | STALLS THAT ARE BEING REMOVED OR RELOCATED, IF ANY |
| | 12) ARE THERE ANY GATES PROPOSED? IF SO, CLEARLY |
| | SHOWCASE THE REQUIRED 20 FEET SETBACK DISTANCE FROM THE |
| | BACK OF THE SIDEWALK |
| | 13) ARE THERE ANY BUS STOPS BEING IMPACTED? IF SO, |
| | DEVELOPER SHALL COORDINATE WITH PALM TRAN REGARDING THE |
| | TRANSIT STOP RELOCATION AND PROVIDE A BUS SHELTER. |
| | MAINTENANCE OF THE BUS SHELTER SHALL BE DEVELOPERS? |
| | RESPONSIBILITY |
| | 14) PER CITY CODE 94-111(Q)(2): ?NON-PARKING RAMPS |
| | SHALL NOT EXCEED 16 PERCENT. IF THE RAMP IS GREATER |
| | THAN 14 PERCENT, A BREAK-OVER TRANSITION SHALL BE |
| | REQUIRED. THE PREFERRED STANDARD IS 10 PERCENT FOR |
| | NON-PARKING RAMP SLOPES?. PLEASE REVISE THE PLANS |
| | ACCORDINGLY |
| | 15) PLEASE CLEARLY MARKED THE TURN-AROUND SPACE AT EACH |
| | DEAD-END OF THE GARAGES |
| | 16) PLEASE CLEARLY MARK AND LABEL THE VALET PARKING |
| | SPACES |
| | |
| | VALERIO ORICCHIO |
| | CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER |
| | 561-494-1092 |
| | [email protected] |
| | |
| | |
| |
Print |
