| Date |
Text |
| 2022-12-21 17:36:36 | |
| | 1) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE A FULL DETAILED TRAFFIC |
| | STUDY. SEE VALET OPERATIONS COMMENTS. |
| | 2) VALET QUEUE ANALYSIS NEEDS TO PROVIDE A DETAILED |
| | NARRATIVE AND MORE ELABORATION ON THE ASSUMED |
| | PARAMETERS AND HOW THEY HAVE BEEN CALCULATED. PROVIDE A |
| | BREAKDOWN OF THE ACTUAL TIMING FOR EACH |
| | PICK-UP/DROP-OFF OPERATION, FOR EXAMPLE: XX SECONDS TO |
| | RECEIVE/HAND-OVER KEYS, XX TO DRIVE VEHICLE TO/FROM THE |
| | GARAGE, XX FOR THE VALET TO WALK TO/FROM THE PODIUM. |
| | ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING THE VALET PARKING STALLS BEING |
| | LOCATED ON THE TOP FLOORS OF THE GARAGE |
| | 3) WHAT IS THE WIDTH OF THE PROPOSED DROP-OFF LOCATION |
| | ON FERN ST? NOTE: BECAUSE OF THE ADJACENCY TO THE BIKE |
| | LANE IT IS NOT RECOMMENDED, AND EVEN IF APPROVED, A |
| | GENEROUS SAFETY BUFFER WOULD NEED TO BE PROVIDED |
| | 4) WHERE ARE THE VALET PICK-UP LOCATIONS? |
| | 5) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE COUNTY TPS LETTER, ONCE |
| | RECEIVED |
| | 6) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE TRANSPORTATION DEMAND |
| | MANAGEMENT (TDM) MEASURES. AN INITIAL SET OF MEASURES |
| | AND METHODOLOGIES SHOULD BE DISCUSSED BY ENGINEERING |
| | PERMITTING, AND FINALIZED PRIOR TO TCO |
| | 7) SATISFIED. 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. PROVIDE THE ANALYSIS IN A SEPARATE SHEET. SUCH |
| | PLAN(S) CONTAINING THE ANALYSIS ARE PART OF THE |
| | TRANSPORTATION REVIEW AND SHOULD BE NAMED ACCORDINGLY |
| | (E.G. T1.2, T-3.0). CURRENT ANALYSIS IS INSUFFICIENT. |
| | 8) SHEET T-110 ??? TRUCK WHEELS AND DYNAMIC ENVELOPE |
| | PATHS SHOW ENCROACHMENTS BY THE FERN ST DRIVEWAY. |
| | PLEASE REVISE |
| | 9) SATISFIED. PROVIDE A PARKING TABLE SHOWCASING THE |
| | NUMBER OF REQUIRED AND PROVIDED PARKING SPACES, |
| | INCLUSIVE OF ADA AND BICYCLE ONES |
| | 10) THE NUMBER OF PROVIDED PARKING SPACES ARE LESS THAN |
| | REQUIRED. IS A VARIANCE OR WAIVER BEING REQUESTED? |
| | 11) SATISFIED. ARE THERE ANY GATES PROPOSED? IF SO, |
| | CLEARLY SHOWCASE THE REQUIRED 20 FEET SETBACK DISTANCE |
| | FROM THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK |
| | 12) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. IS VALET SERVICE PROPOSED? IF |
| | SO, PROVIDE A DETAILED OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS. ALSO, ANY |
| | VALET OPERATIONS SHOULD BE KEPT INTERNAL TO THE |
| | PROPERTY, NO PICK-UP/DROP-OFF ON PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. |
| | VALET OPERATIONS MUST BE VALIDATED AT PPRC STAGE, AS |
| | THE PROPOSED SITE DESIGN MAY BE SIGNIFICANTLY IMPACTED |
| | IN THE CASE CURRENT VALET PLANS ARE NOT APPROVED |
| | 13) SATISFIED. DOES THE QUADRILLE PLAZA DR EXTENSION |
| | COMPLY WITH FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION |
| | REQUIREMENTS IN TERM OF DISTANCE FROM RAILROAD TRACKS |
| | AND GATE ARMS? |
| | 14) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE THE NUMBER OF METERED |
| | STALLS THAT ARE BEING REMOVED OR RELOCATED. HAS PARKING |
| | DEPARTMENT BEEN NOTIFIED OR APPROVED THE REMOVAL? |
| | 15) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. THERE IS A LACK OF ON-STREET |
| | PARKING AND PICK-UP/DROP OFF ZONES IN THE AREA; |
| | MOREOVER, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS REMOVING SEVERAL |
| | STALLS ON FERN AND EVERNIA. THUS, PARKING SHOULD BE |
| | INSTALLED ALONG THE PROPOSED NEW ROADWAY. PLEASE |
| | PROVIDE CODE REFERENCE AND A DRAFT DRAWING SHOWCASING |
| | LIMITING SETBACKS, IF ANY |
| | 16) BECAUSE OF THE POTENTIAL CONGESTION IN THE AREA DUE |
| | TO SEVERAL FUTURE DEVELOPMENTS UNDER REVIEW OR ALREADY |
| | APPROVED IN THE VICINITY OF THE PROPOSED ONE, THE CITY |
| | IS RECOMMENDING ONE-WAY CIRCULATION FOR THE QUADRILLE |
| | PLAZA DR EXTENSION, WITH A PROPENSITY FOR THE |
| | SOUTHBOUND DIRECTION. SUCH MODIFICATION WILL ALSO ALLOW |
| | ESTABLISHING PERMANENT OR TEMPORARY PARKING STALLS, |
| | WHICH WOULD ALLEVIATE THE ALREADY CRITICAL ON-STREET |
| | PARKING CONDITIONS. PLEASE REVISE THE SITE PLANS |
| | ACCORDINGLY |
| | 17) TO FORBID LEFT-TURN MOVEMENTS AND PROPERLY |
| | CHANNELIZE THE SOUTHBOUND TRAFFIC ALONG THE QUADRILLE |
| | PLAZA DR EXTENSION, PLEASE IMPLEMENT A TRAFFIC ISLAND |
| | AT THE FERN ST INTERSECTION AND REVISE THE SITE PLANS |
| | ACCORDINGLY |
| | 18) SATISFIED. EXPLAIN THE USE OF THE PARKING AREA |
| | ALONG FERN |
| | 19) SATISFIED. EXPLAIN THE USE OF THE STRETCH OF ROAD |
| | NORTH OF THE SOUTH-WESTERN SERVICE DRIVEWAY |
| | 20) SATISFIED. PROVIDE A CIRCULATION DIAGRAM FOR LEVEL |
| | 2 |
| | 21) SATISFIED. THE SINGLE ELECTRIC CAR PARKING ON LEVEL |
| | 2 NEARBY THE ACCESS GATES IS NOT FEASIBLE, EITHER |
| | REMOVE IT OR PROVIDE A TURN-AROUND SPACE |
| | 22) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. SHOWCASE AND INSERT THE VALUE |
| | FOR EACH SLOPE ON LEVEL 1. SHEET A1.01. THE MAIN |
| | PARKING RAMP MAY NEED A TRANSITION DUE TO THE SLOPE |
| | BEING GREATER THAN 14% |
| | 23) SATISFIED. IS THERE A SLOPE BY THE GARAGE ENTRY |
| | GATES ON LEVEL 2? SHEET A1.02 |
| | 24) SATISFIED. INSTALL AND SHOW DIRECTIONAL ARROW |
| | PAVEMENT MARKINGS THROUGHOUT THE GARAGE FLOORS |
| | 25) SATISFIED. PER CITY CODE SEC 94-111(C)(1): IN THOSE |
| | CASES WHERE THE SIDE OF ANY STALL IS ADJACENT TO A |
| | WALL, FENCE, BUILDING, OR OTHER PHYSICAL OBSTRUCTION, |
| | THE STALL WIDTHS SHALL BE INCREASED BY A MINIMUM OF ONE |
| | FOOT. WHERE THERE IS AN OBSTRUCTION ON BOTH SIDES OF |
| | THE STALL, THE STALL WIDTHS SHALL BE INCREASED BY A |
| | MINIMUM OF TWO FEET. PROVIDE DIMENSIONS FOR EVERY STALL |
| | NEARBY A WALL OR OBSTRUCTION IN SHEET A1.02 TO A1.06. |
| | 26) SATISFIED. PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 8-FEET WIDE |
| | PEDESTRIAN WALKABLE AREA THROUGHOUT THE PROPOSED |
| | DEVELOPMENT. PROVIDE 15-FEET WIDE SIDEWALK ALONG |
| | EVERNIA, SO TO STAY CONSISTENT WITH THE WESTERN PORTION |
| | FRONTING THE 360 BUILDING. THIS IS CLEARLY SHOWN IN |
| | SHEET R0.02. |
| | 27) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. THE EXISTING BICYCLE LANE |
| | CONFIGURATION SHOULD BE UNCHANGED. THE 2-FEET BUFFER |
| | BETWEEN THE EDGE OF THE BIKE LANE AND THE EXISTING |
| | STALLS/PROPOSED NEW CURB MUST BE KEPT. SHOWCASE SUCH |
| | DIMENSION IN THE TRANSPORTATION SITE PLAN. PER COMMENT |
| | #3, FURTHER DISCUSSION AND POTENTIAL REVISION NEEDED |
| | 28) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. INSTALL SHARROW MARKINGS ALONG |
| | THE NEW ROADWAY. PLEASE INSTALL THEM AT THE MID-BLOCK |
| | POINT AS WELL |
| | 29) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. IF FEASIBLE, PROVIDE A |
| | PEDESTRIAN CROSSING ON FERN, JUST EAST OF THE QUADRILLE |
| | PLAZA DR EXTENSION. PLEASE SHOWCASE THE LANDING RAMPS |
| | ON BOTH SIDE OF THE ROAD (NOTE: THERE ARE A FIRE |
| | HYDRANT AND A PALM TREE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF FERN ST, |
| | PLEASE MARK THEM ON THE PLAN) |
| | 30) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE A MID-BLOCK CROSSING |
| | ON FERN, JUST EAST OF THE SERVICE DRIVEWAY. PLEASE |
| | ELABORATE ON THE WARRANT JUSTIFICATION |
| | 31) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE A MID-BLOCK CROSSING |
| | ON THE QUADRILLE PLAZA DR EXTENSION. PLEASE ELABORATE |
| | ON THE WARRANT JUSTIFICATION |
| | 32) SATISFIED. PLEASE PROVIDE THE DIRECTIONALITY FOR |
| | EACH OF THE SERVICE DRIVEWAYS. ARE THEY ONE-WAY OR |
| | TWO-WAY? |
| | |
| | VALERIO ORICCHIO |
| | CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER |
| | 561-494-1092 |
| | [email protected] |
| | |
| | |
| |
Print |
