Plan Review Notes
Plan Review Notes For Project Z22080023
Project Number Z22080023
Review Stop Z
Sequence Number 2
Notes
Date Text
2022-12-27 14:20:45GENERAL COMMENTS:
  
 1.) AS MENTIONED BY STAFF DURING THE PREAPPLICATION
 MEETING WITH THE APPLICANT, PUBLIC OUTREACH ON THE
 PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS CRITICAL (AND PRIOR TO THE
 FORMAL SUBMITTAL OF THE PROJECT). DOCUMENTATION OF ANY
 PUBLIC OUTREACH (AND RESULTS/FEEDBACK FROM THESE
 MEETINGS) WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS IS REQUIRED
 AND SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO PLANNING STAFF. [NOT
 ADDRESSED. ALTHOUGH THE COMMENT HAS BEEN ACKNOWLEDGED
 IN THE 11/22/22 RESUBMITTAL PACKET AND THE APPLICANT
 HAS INDICATED ON-GOING OUTREACH, NO DOCUMENTATION ON
 COMMUNITY OUTREACH WAS FORMALLY SUBMITTED.]
  
 2.) THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FAR IS 1.5 (RESIDENTIAL +
 NON-RESIDENTIAL). PLEASE CHECK REVISED CALCULATIONS AND
 FAR DIAGRAM. THERE ARE SOME INCONSISTENCIES AND NOT ALL
 REQUIRED SPACES HAVE BEEN INCLUDED IN THE FAR
 CALCULATIONS.
  
 3.) THE PROJECT DOES NOT APPEAR TO FACTOR IN THE
 BUILDING HEIGHT SETBACK ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL ZONING
 DISTRICTS. PER THE ZLDRS, IF A STRUCTURE ABUTS A
 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT IN EXCESS OF 30 FT., THE
 FOLLOWING ADDITIONAL SETBACK SHALL BE PROVIDED: A) 1
 FT. OF HEIGHT ABOVE 30 FT. FOR EACH 2 FT. OF SETBACK
 WHEN ABUTTING A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING
 DISTRICT AND B) 1 FT. OF HEIGHT ABOVE 30 FT. FOR EACH 1
 FT OF SETBACK WHEN ABUTTING ANY MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL
 ZONING DISTRICT. THE BUILDING HEIGHT SETBACK IS IN
 ADDITION TO THE MINIMUM SETBACK REQUIREMENTS PROVIDED
 IN ZLDR S.94-145(2). [NOT COMPLETELY ADDRESSED. CHECK
 CALCULATIONS FOR CONSISTENCY.]
  
 4.) ZONING DIAGRAMS MUST INCLUDE REQUIRED AND PROVIDED
 CALCULATIONS TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE/CLEARLY SHOW HOW
 MUCH IS NEEDED FOR THE WAIVER REQUEST (I.E. OPEN SPACE,
 LANDSCAPE AREA ETC.). THE INFORMATION PROVIDED IS NOT
 CLEAR.
  
 5.) PREVIOUS COMMENTS FROM CYCLE 1 RELATED TO THE
 JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT HAVE NOT BEEN ADDRESSED (I.E.
 INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE WRITTEN INFORMATION TO THE
 INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE PLANS; JUSTIFICATION OF
 EACH WAIVER AND MITIGATION MEASURES, BENEFITS TO THE
 PUBLIC, ETC.), AS NO REVISED JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT
 WAS INCLUDED IN THE 11/22/22 RESUBMITTAL PACKET.
  
 6.) REQUIRED OWNER'S CONSENT FORMS HAVE NOT BEEN
 PROPERLY EXECUTED. PLEASE ADDRESS. [NOT ADDRESSED. THE
 REQUIRED EXECUTED OWNER???S CONSENT FORMS HAVE NOT BEEN
 INCLUDED IN THE 11/22/22 RESUBMITTAL PACKET.]
  
 7.) A TRAFFIC PERFORMANCE STANDARDS (TPS) REVIEW LETTER
 FROM THE PALM BEACH COUNTY TRAFFIC DIVISION IS REQUIRED
 (561-684-4030). ALL INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE TPS
 LETTER MUST MATCH THE PROJECT INFORMATION FOR
 CONSISTENCY. [NOT ADDRESSED. NO TPS LETTER PROVIDED IN
 THE 11/22/22 RESUBMITTAL PACKET.]
 INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND SHARED
 PARKING STATEMENT IS STILL INCONSISTENT WITH THE
 INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE PLANS. INFORMATION MUST
 MATCH FOR CONSISTENCY.
  
 8.) A NEW SCAD LETTER FROM THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PALM
 BEACH COUNTY IS REQUIRED. THE SCAD LETTER INCLUDED IN
 THE APPLICATION SUBMITTAL CONTAINS OUTDATED INFORMATION
 AND IS EXPIRED. INFORMATION IN THE SCAD LETTER MUST
 MATCH THE PROJECT INFORMATION FOR CONSISTENCY. [NOT
 ADDRESSED. NO UPDATED SCAD LETTER WAS PROVIDED IN THE
 11/22/22 RESUBMITTAL PACKET.]
  
 9.) AN ADDRESS LIST, RADIUS MAP AND EXECUTED ADDRESS
 LIST AFFIDAVIT IS REQUIRED PER THE INSTRUCTION ON PAGE
 4 OF THE 2022 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION. THIS INFORMATION
 WAS NOT INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION SUBMITTAL. [NOT
 ADDRESSED. NOT PROVIDED.]
  
 10.) PROVIDE WRITTEN CONFIRMATION THAT THE PUBLIC
 UTILITIES DEPARTMENT HAS REVIEWED THE PROPOSAL FOR
 WATER, SEWAGE TREATMENT, STORM DRAINAGE AND GARBAGE
 COLLECTION SERVICES. PLEASE CONTACT THE CITY OF WEST
 PALM BEACH ENGINEERING SERVICES DEPARTMENT
 (561-494-1117). [NOT ADDRESSED. NO CONFIRMATION LETTER
 WAS PROVIDED WITH THE 11/22/22 RESUBMITTAL PACKET.]
  
 11.) PROVIDE LETTERS FROM ALL PUBLIC UTILITIES
 CONFIRMING THAT THE PROPOSED PROJECT DOES NOT ENCROACH
 INTO THEIR EASEMENTS OR OTHERWISE INTERFERE WITH THE
 PROVISIONS OF THEIR SERVICES. [NOT ADDRESSED. NO
 CONFIRMATION LETTERS FROM ANY PUBLIC UTILITIES WERE
 PROVIDED IN THE 11/22/22 RESUBMITTAL PACKET.]
  
 12.) ALL PLAN SHEETS SHALL MATCH FOR CONSISTENCY. NOT
 ALL PLAN SHEETS MATCH. PLEASE ENSURE ALL PLAN SHEETS
 MATCH PRIOR TO THE RESUBMITTAL. [NOT ADDRESSED. PLANS
 WITHIN THE RESUBMITTAL PACKET SHOW INCONSISTENCIES.]
  
 13.) ADDRESS FOLLOWING COMMENTS FOR THE CIVIL PLAN SET:
 A) TABLE OF CONTENTS DO NOT MATCH AND INCONSISTENT IN
 PAGE NUMBERING (SHEET A0.00 AND C-001). B) TABLE OF
 CONTENTS (SHEET C-001): CONCEPTUAL UTILITY PLAN INSET A
 IS SHEET C-503 (NOT C-501). C) CHECK SPELLING FOR SOUTH
 SOIL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLAN (SHEET C-001).
 D) CONCEPTUAL PAVEMENT MARKING AND SIGNAGE PLAN (BOTH
 NORTH AND SOUTH) AND TRUCK CIRCULATION PLAN (BOTH NORTH
 AND SOUTH) HAVE DUPLICATE PAGE NUMBERING IN THE ACTUAL
 SHEETS.
  
 14.) THE TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR THE CIVIL SET DO NOT
 MATCH AND ARE INCONSISTENT (SHEETA0.00 AND C-001).
  
  
 SITE PLAN COMMENTS:
  
 1.) ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING IN THE OVERALL SITE
 INFORMATION (SHEET A0.01): A) EXISTING FUTURE LAND USE:
 COMMERCIAL EAST (CE) B) PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE:
 COMMERCIAL EAST (CE)
  
 2.) DUE TO THE COMPLEX NATURE OF THE PROJECT, IT WOULD
 BE HELPFUL TO PROVIDE SEPARATE BUILDING SETBACK
 DIAGRAMS. THIS WOULD HELP TO MINIMIZE/CLARIFY THE
 INFORMATION PROVIDED IN THE DIAGRAMS AND MAKE IT
 EASIER/MORE CLEAR ON THE REVIEWER. THE DIAGRAMS ARE
 CLUTTERED WITH INFORMATION WHICH MAKES IT VERY
 DIFFICULT TO READ.
  
 3.) THE FAR DIAGRAMS DO NOT APPEAR TO CAPTURE ALL AREAS
 THAT SHOULD BE COUNTED TOWARDS THE FAR CALCULATIONS
 (SOME SPACES ARE QUESTIONABLE IN THE FAR CALCULATION).
 PLEASE NOTE THAT THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FAR IS 1.5
 (RESIDENTIAL AND NON-RESIDENTIAL).
  
 4.) BUILDING SETBACKS HAVE BEEN INCORRECTLY MEASURED.
 THE BUILDING SETBACKS SHALL BE MEASURED FROM THE
 PROPERTY LINE TO THE CLOSEST POINT OF THE BUILDING
 WALL. THERE ARE ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTIONS THAT ENCROACH
 WITHIN THE NOTED BUILDING SETBACKS. THESE ARCHITECTURAL
 PROJECTIONS ARE NOT EXEMPT AND SHALL BE COUNTED AS PART
 OF THE PRINCIPAL BUILDING SETBACK.
  
 5.) STRUCTURAL OVERHANGS, INCLUDING BALCONIES, ETC. MAY
 NOT PROJECT MORE THAN 3 FT INTO A SETBACK. SUCH
 ENCROACHMENTS HAVE BEEN INCORRECTLY MEASURED AND
 NOTATED IN THE PLANS. PLEASE ADDRESS FOR CONSISTENCY.
 [ZLDR S.94-305(B)(2)]
  
 6.) THE PLANS NOTE ???EDGE OF TRELLIS??? (SHEET A1.01
 ??? GROUND LEVEL) FOR BOTH BUILDINGS; HOWEVER, NO
 INFORMATION AND DETAILS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED IN THE
 PLANS. IS THIS A NOTE THAT SHOULD BE ELIMINATED FROM
 THE REVISED PLAN SET?
  
 7.) WALL HEIGHT INFORMATION FOR THE FLAMINGO AND
 CORDOVA BUILDINGS SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE PLANS. THE
 HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED PRIVACY WALL SHALL BE CONSISTENT
 WITH THE HEIGHT STANDARDS IN ZLDR S.94-302. THIS
 INFORMATION WAS REQUESTED IN STAFF???S PREVIOUS
 COMMENTS; HOWEVER, IT HAS NOT BEEN ADDRESSED.
  
 8.) MIXED USE PROJECT WITH OVER 300 PARKING SPACES
 PROVIDED SHALL HAVE A MAXIMUM OF TWO (2) ACCESS POINTS
 ONTO EACH RIGHT-OF-WAY. PLEASE PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION
 ON THE FPL VAULTS WITHIN THE FLAMINGO BUILDING AND
 WHETHER OR NOT THE VAULTS WILL HAVE VEHICULAR ACCESS
 (LOCATED ALONG FLAMINGO DRIVE). PLEASE NOTE THAT THE
 FLAMINGO BUILDING CURRENTLY HAS 2 ACCESS POINTS ON
 FLAMINGO DRIVE. [S.94-312]
  
 9.) GROUND FLOOR PLAN FOR THE CORDOVA BUILDING SHOWS
 7,624 SQ. FT. FOR THE RETAIL USE, WHICH IS INCONSISTENT
 WITH THE 7,626 SQ. FT. PROVIDED IN THE ZONING DATA AND
 TRAFFIC STUDY. PLEASE ADDRESS FOR CONSISTENCY.
  
 10.) CHECK PARKING CALCULATIONS FOR THE FLAMINGO
 BUILDING (SHEET A0.01). THERE MAY BE AN ERROR IN THE
 CALCULATIONS, AS THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES ON EACH
 PARKING LEVEL DOES NOT ADD UP.
  
 11.) THE "ON-STREET" PARKING IN THE SITE PLAN IS
 INCORRECTLY LABELED AS "OFF STREET" PARKING. THESE
 SPACES ARE CLEARLY LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE PROPERTY
 LINE, AND THEREFORE SHALL BE CORRECTED FOR CONSISTENCY.
  
 12.) LOCATION OF LIGHT POLES (AS PROVIDED IN THE
 PHOTOMETRIC PLAN) ARE NOT SHOWN IN THE SITE PLAN.
 PLEASE SHOW LOCATION OF THE LIGHT FIXTURES AND SETBACKS
 TO DEMONSTRATE CONSISTENCY WITH THE PLANS AND
 COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZLDRS.
  
 13.) PLEASE EXPLAIN THE ENCLOSED LOADING AREA IN THE
 FLAMINGO BUILDING (LEVEL 1). IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE TO
 PROVIDE A LOADING DRIVE NEXT TO AN ENCLOSED LOADING
 AREA.
  
 14.) THE ENCLOSED NON-AIRCONDITIONED "VESTIBULE" SHALL
 BE COUNTED TOWARDS FAR. [ZLDR 94-145(11)]
  
  
 LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS:
  
 1.) A PROTECTIVE SCREEN WALL AND LANDSCAPE BUFFER SHALL
 BE PROVIDED ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE ABUTTING A
 RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT IN ACCORDANCE WITH
 S.94-443(A). COMPLIANCE WITH THIS REQUIREMENT HAS NOT
 BEEN FULLY MET.
  
  
 PARKING COMMENTS:
  
 1.) CHECK PARKING CALCULATIONS PROVIDED IN THE REVISED
 PLANS. THERE APPEARS TO BE INCONSISTENCIES WITH THE
 PARKING CALCULATIONS.
  
 2.) ALTHOUGH IT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE TO PROVIDE AN
 ENCLOSED LOADING AREA NEXT TO THE UNENCLOSED LOADING
 AREA (MORE INFORMATION IS NEEDED). AN AUTO-TURN DIAGRAM
 WILL BE REQUIRED FOR THE ENCLOSED LOADING AREA (IF
 KEPT), AS THE AREA/SPACE APPEARS TO BE VERY TIGHT.
  
 3.) PLEASE IDENTIFY THE LOCATION OF TURNAROUND SPACES
 IN THE PARKING GARAGES WHERE NECESSARY TO ADDRESS
 ADEQUATE VEHICULAR CIRCULATION. [NOT ADDRESSED. NO
 MARKINGS/NOTATIONS HAVE BEEN PROVIDED IN THE PLANS.]
  
 4.) IS THERE ANY ON-STREET PARKING PROPOSED FOR THE
 PROJECT? IF SO, PLEASE PROVIDE MORE INFORMATION (I.E.
 LOCATION, DIMENSIONS, CALCULATIONS, ETC.). [PARTIALLY
 ADDRESSED. ON-STREET PARKING STALLS SHALL BE
 DIMENSIONED TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE WITH THE
 DIMENSIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR ON-STREET PARKING.
 DIMENSIONS HAVE NOT BEEN PROVIDED IN THE PLANS.]
  
 5.) A NOTE CLEARLY STATING THAT THE TANDEM PARKING
 SPACES WILL BE CLEARLY MARKED AND RESERVED FOR
 VALET/RESIDENTIAL SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE PLANS. [NOT
 ADDRESSED. NOTE STILL MISSING IN THE REVISED PLAN SET.]
  
  
 ARCHITECTURAL COMMENTS:
  
 1.) BUILDING HEIGHT INFORMATION INCOMPLETE IN THE
 ELEVATIONS. PLEASE PROVIDE MEASUREMENTS IN ACCORDANCE
 AND CONSISTENT WITH SEC. 94-145 (GENERAL COMMERCIAL
 DISTRICT), SEC. 94-306 (HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS AND SEC.
 94-611 (HEIGHT OF STRUCTURE). [NOT ADDRESSED TO STAFF'S
 STATISFACTION. PLEASE SEE PREVIOUS COMMENTS ABOVE.]
  
 2.) ALL SPACES WITHIN THE REVISED FLOOR PLAN SET SHALL
 BE LABELED TO DETERMINE IF THE SPACES SHALL BE COUNTED
 TOWARDS THE FAR. SOME (ENCLOSED) SPACES DO NOT HAVE
 LABELS/ARE NOT CLEARLY IDENTIFIED.
  
  
 LIGHTING/PHOTOMETRIC COMMENTS:
  
 1.) A PHOTOMETRIC PLAN HAS BEEN SUBMITTED WITH THE
 11/22/22 RESUBMITTAL PACKET; HOWEVER, THE FOLLOWING
 SHALL BE ADDRESSED TO DEMONSTRATE CONSISTENCY WITH THE
 PLANS AND THE ZLDRS: A) ALTHOUGH THERE'S A NOTE ON
 SHEETS PH1 AND PH2 OF THE PHOTOMETRIC SET STATING THAT
 THE LIGHT POLE FIXTURES WILL BE SETBACK A MINIMUM OF 5
 FT. FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, THE PLAN ALSO SHOWS THE
 LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED LIGHT POLES, WHICH ARE CLEARLY
 WITHIN 5 FT. OF THE PROPERTY LINE. PLEASE ADDRESS THIS
 CONFLICT. IF THE LIGHT POLES CANNOT BE LOCATED OUTSIDE
 OF THE MINIMUM REQUIRED SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE,
 THE APPLICANT SHALL EITHER REMOVE THE POLE FIXTURE OR
 REQUEST A WAIVER TO THE SETBACK REQUIREMENT. B) THE
 SETBACK DIMENSION OF THE LIGHT POLE TO THE PROPERTY
 LINE SHALL BE CLEARLY DEPICTED IN THE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN.
 C) THE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN DOES NOT SHOW THE PHOTOMETRIC
 SPILLOVER BEYOND THE PROPERTY LINES OF THE PROJECT SITE
 AS REQUESTED. GIVEN THE LIGHTING INFORMATION PROVIDED,
 THE PLAN SHOULD NOT HAVE AN ISSUE PROVIDING THE
 LIGHTING SPILLOVER TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE.
  
  
 SIGNAGE COMMENTS:
  
 1.) THE PREVIOUS COMMENT ON SIGNAGE HAS NOT BEEN
 ADDRESSED (CYCLE 1 ??? 9/6/22). THE 11/22/22 RESPONSE
 TO STAFF???S COMMENTS AND WAIVER TABLE (SHEET A0.01)
 STATES THAT A WAIVER TO SIGNAGE IS BEING REQUESTED;
 HOWEVER, NO REVISED JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT HAS BEEN
 PROVIDED WITH THE 11/22/22 RESUBMITTAL PACKET, AND THE
 DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOES NOT PROVIDE ANY SPECIFIC DETAILS
 ON THE SIGN WAIVER REQUEST. AT THIS TIME, THE APPLICANT
 MUST HAVE INFORMATION ON THE SPECIFIC WAIVER(S) TO
 SIGNAGE FOR THE PROJECT. THE WAIVER CANNOT BE
 GENERALIZED. IT MAY BE HELPFUL TO GENERATE A SIGN
 PROGRAM FOR THE PROJECT.
  
  
 INSTRUCTIONS FOR RESUBMITTAL:
  
 * PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN
 WRITTEN FORMAT.
  
 * MAKE SURE ALL PLANS MATCH FOR CONSISTENCY!
  
 * WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF FOUR
 (4) FULL SIZE PAPER COPIES AND ONE SET IN 11 INCHES X
 17 INCHES, AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY OF ALL PLANS AND
 DOCUMENTS. THREE (3) HARD COPY SETS SHALL BE PROVIDED
 IN FULL COLOR.
  
 * ANY CHANGES TO THE RESUBMITTED PLANS MAY RESULT IN
 ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
  
 * PLEASE NOTE 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).
  
 * CONTACT LINDA LOUIE @ (561) 822-1458 IF THERE ARE
 QUESTIONS.
  
  Print


Account Summary | Usage Policy | Privacy Policy
Copyright © 2005 – 2014, SunGard Pentamation, Inc & City of West Palm Beach, FL – All Rights Reserved