Plan Review Notes
Plan Review Notes For Project Z22090015
Project Number Z22090015
Review Stop Z
Sequence Number 4
Notes
Date Text
2023-05-31 17:04:0804/24/2023
  
 1. ZONING REVIEW 4.20.23 [NOT SATISFIED]
  
 TABLE ON SHEET A1.00 STILL APPEARS TO HAVE
 DISCREPANCIES:
 RESIDENTIAL PARKING MIN: 1SPACE/UNIT & 1SPACE/20UNIT
 FOR GUEST 87 REGULAR UNITS = 87 SPACES + 5 SPACES FOR
 GUEST = 92 REQUIRED SPACES RESPONSE: REGULAR UNITS = 65
 SPACES + 4 GUEST = 69 REQUIRED SPACES
 PLEASE REFER TO SHEET A.100 FOR REVISED PARKING DATA
 AND UNIT COUNT DATA.
  
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED ??? 69 SPACES; FOR 65
 UNITS AND 4 GUESTS
  
 72 MICRO UNITS PROPOSED
 DOES NOT REQUIRE PARKING MAX. PERMITTED: 0.5
 SPACES/UNIT + 1SPACE/20UNIT FOR GUEST
 RESPONSE: 94 MICROUNITS DOES NOT REQUIRE PARKING.
 PLEASE REFER TO SHEET A.100 FOR REVISED PARKING DATA
 AND UNIT COUNT DATA.
  
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED ??? NO SPACES
 PROVIDED FOR MICROUNITS
  
 LIVE/WORK PARKING MIN: 2 SPACES/1000SF
 4,464 SF OF LIVE/WORK ON GROUND FLOOR (6 UNITS AT 744
 EACH PER SHEET A3.01)
 = 10 SPACES
 92 RES/GUEST + 10 LIVE/WORK = 102 REQUIRED PARKING
 SPOTS NOT 130
  
 RESPONSE: 69 RES/GUEST +10 LIVE/WORK = 79 REQUIRED
 PARKING SPOTS PLEASE REFER TO REVISED SHEET A.100 FOR
 REVISED PARKING DATA.
  
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] NOT SATISFIED ??? 6,678 SF OF
 LIVEWORK ACCORDING TO A1.00 AND A0.04, REQUIRES A
 MINIMUM OF 13 SPACES; ONLY PROVIDING 10. PLEASE PROVIDE
 THE ADDITIONAL 3 SPACES.
  
  
 HOWEVER, NOW THAT THE HISTORIC BUILDING AND ITS USES
 ARE INCORPORATED INTO THE PROJECT SITE, PLEASE PROVIDE
 USE/SQUAREFOOTAGE BREAKDOWN OF INTERIOR TENANTS, SO
 THAT THESE USES CAN BE APPROPRIATELY PARKED.
  
 5,750+5,778 SF = 11,528 SF OF POTENTIAL RETAIL OR
 OFFICE USES THAT NEED PARKING.
 RESPONSE: RETAIL / OFFICES PARKING = 23 P.S FOR A TOTAL
 OF 102 P.S IN THE BUILDING.
 PLEASE REFER TO SHEET A.100 FOR REVISED PARKING
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] PARTIALLY SATISFIED ??? CLARIFY
 THE USE WITHIN THE HISTORIC BUILDING.
 IF SF IS ALL RETAIL/COMMERCIAL USE IT CAN BE PARKED AT
 A MINIMUM OF 2 SPACES/1000SF. THEN THE PROPOSED 23
 SPACES IS SUFFICIENT.
 IF SF IS ALL OFFICE USES IT CAN BE PARKED AT A MINIMUM
 OF 2.5 SPACES/1000SF. WOULD REQUIRE 29 SPACES.
  
 PLEASE CLARIFY THE 8 GUEST SPACES, 12 LIVE/WORK SPACES,
 AND 23 COMMERCIAL SPACES CALCULATIONS AS SHOWN IN
 TABLE.
 RESPONSE: PARKING HAVE BEEN REVISED PLEASE REFER TO
 SHEET A.100
 THE BUILDING HAS 4 GUEST SPACES, 10 LIVE/WORKSPACES, 23
 COMMERCIAL/OFFICES SPACES AND 65 RESIDENTIAL SPACES FOR
 A TOTAL OF 102 P.S.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] NOT SATISFIED ??? MINIMUM
 REQUIRED PARKING IS 105 SPACES IF HISTORIC BUILDING IS
 ALL RETAIL/COMMERCIAL.
  
 MINIMUM REQUIRED PARKING IS 111 SPACES IF HISTORIC
 BUILDING IS ALL OFFICE.
  
 PLEASE CLARIFY IF YOU ARE PROVIDING PARKING FOR ANY OF
 THE MICRO-UNITS. BICYCLE PARKING IS REQUIRED.
 - 1 BICYCLE SPACE PER EVERY 15 PARKING SPACES (SHALL BE
 WITHIN SECURED/COVERED ROOM).
 RESPONSE: MICRO-UNITS DOES NOT REQUIRED PARKING 7 BIKE
 SPACES REQUIRED PROVIDED ON BASEMENT.
 PLEASE REFER TO REVISED SHEET A1.00 SHOWING REQUIRED
 BIKE SPACES.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED ??? 57 BIKE SPACES; 7
 BIKE SPACES FOR REQ. PARKING, 3 SPACES FOR FRONTAGE, 47
 SPACES FOR 94 MICRO UNITS.
  
 - 1 BIKE SPACE PER 100 LINEAR FEET OF FRONTAGE.
 RESPONSE: PLEASE REFER TO REVISED SHEET A1.00 SHOWING
 REQUIRED BIKE SPACES CALCULATION.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED
  
 - WITH INCLUSION OF MICRO-UNITS ALSO NEED 0.5 BIKE
 SPACES PER MICRO-UNIT. RESPONSE: PLEASE REFER TO
 REVISED SHEET A.100 SHOWING BIKE SPACES CALCULATION. 47
 BIKE SPACES NEEDED FOR MICRONUNITS.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED
  
 - A BIKESHARING STATION IS ALSO REQUIRED ONSITE, PLEASE
 CONTACT COLBY REESE 305-733-9650 [email protected] FOR
 DIMENSIONS OF THE CITY???S BRIGHTBIKE STATIONS.
 MICRO-MOBILITY STATION CANNOT BE LOCATED WITHIN
 REQUIRED LANDSCAPE STRIP ALONG DATURA FRONTAGE.
 RESPONSE: PLEASE REFER TO SHEET A3.00 BIKE RACK HAS
 BEEN LOCATED.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] NOT SATISFIED ??? PLEASE
 PROVIDE CORRESPONDENCE WITH CITY BIKESHARE OPERATOR OR
 BRIGHTBIKE REP. COLBY REESE 305-733-9650
 [email protected].
 A STATION MAY BE REQUIRED ALONG PROJECT FRONTAGE OR
 ALONG ROW. PROPOSED LOCATION ON A3.00 IS WITHIN
 BASEMENT. PROJECT IS LOCATED WITHIN 500 FT. OF TWO
 SEPARATE STATIONS WITHIN THE CITY, REQUIREMENT MAY BE
 WAIVED.
  
 UPDATE: 5.31.23 PER DISCUSSION BETWEEN APPLICANT AND
 COLBY, STATION IS NOT REQUIRED. [PARTIALLY SATISFIED]
 PLEASE REMOVE MICRO-MOBILITY STATION FROM PLANS.
  
  
 - A PROJECT WITH RESIDENTIAL MICRO-UNITS SHALL PROVIDE
 ON-SITE CAR- SHARE STATIONS ON A RATIO OF ONE PER EVERY
 13 UNITS. THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF CAR-SHARE STATIONS MAY BE
 REDUCED BY ONE CAR-SHARE STATION PER EVERY 13 ON-SITE
 PARKING SPACES PROVIDED. THE TOTAL NUMBER OF CAR- SHARE
 STATIONS MAY BE ADJUSTED BASED ON CURRENT SYSTEM
 DEMANDS, BUT A MINIMUM OF ONE CAR-SHARE STATION SHALL
 BE PROVIDED. THE REMAINDER OF THE SPACES SHALL BE
 RESERVED FOR FUTURE SERVICE EXPANSION.
  
 RESPONSE: 8 CAR STATION PROVIDED.PLEASE REFER TO
 REVISED SHEET A3.00 FOR CAR-SHARE STATION LOCATION.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] NOT SATISFIED ??? PLEASE LABEL
 OR INDICATE WHICH SPACES ARE FOR CAR-SHARE, A3.00 DOES
 NOT APPEAR TO HIGHLIGHT THESE SPACES.
  
 - A PROJECT WITH RESIDENTIAL MICRO-UNITS SHALL
 CONTRIBUTE A TROLLEY FEE PER UNIT PER MONTH TO SUPPORT
 THE OPERATION OF THE CITY'S TROLLEY SYSTEM, AS
 ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION FROM
 TIME TO TIME.
 RESPONSE: ACKNOWLEDGED. PLEASE ADVISE TO THE AMOUNTS,
 PROCESS AND TIMING AS REQUIRED PER THE CITY
 REGULATIONS.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED ??? PER RESOLUTION
 NO. 211-17 ??????A TROLLEY FEE OF $10.00 PER UNIT PER
 MONTH, FOR THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT, AT THE RATE
 ESTABLISHED BY RESOLUTION 211-17 OR AS AMENDED BY THE
 CITY COMMISSION. THE FIRST PAYMENT SHALL BE COMPLETED
 AT THE TIME OF PROJECT CO.???
  
  
 2. ZONING REVIEW 4.20.23 [NOT SATISFIED]
  
 WITHIN CWD 10-12 DISTRICT, THE PODIUM GOES UP TO LEVEL
 5. SUBMITTED PLANS ARE ONLY SHOWING PLANAR BREAKS FOR
 GROUND FLOOR. SIMILAR TO SHEET A0.5.5 PLEASE SHOW
 PLANER BREAKS FOR FLOORS 2-5 ALONG THE DATURA FRONTAGE.
 PLEASE ADJUST THE CALCULATIONS AND AREA SHADED TO COUNT
 ONLY THE PORTIONS WHERE THE PRIMARY FACE OR PLANE OF
 THE BUILDING IS INTERRUPTED BY A 3 FT. + PROJECTION OR
 RECESSED AREA. PLEASE PROVIDE THE DIMENSION OF THE
 DEPTH OF THE RECESS OR PROJECTION AS WELL. SHEET A0.5.6
 AND A0.5.7 IS NOT NEEDED OR CALCULATIONS DO NOT NEED TO
 BE PROVIDED; AS PLANAR BREAKS ARE ONLY FOR BUILDING
 FRONTAGES LONGER THAN 150 FT. AND ON STREETS; IN THIS
 CASE ONLY THE DATURA FRONTAGE. BECAUSE THE HISTORIC
 BUILDING ALONG DIXIE ALREADY PROVIDES A BREAK IN THE
 MASS AND IS ONLY 141-3 IN WIDTH.
 RESPONSE: PLEASE REFER TO SHEET A0.5.6 SHOWING PLANAR
 BREAKS FOR FLOORS 2-5 ALONG THE DATURA FRONTAGE.
  
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] PARTIALLY SATISFIED. TYPICALLY
 ENTRYWAYS AND BALCONY PROJECTIONS OR RECESSED AREAS
 WOULD NOT COUNT TOWARD PLANAR BREAK REQUIREMENTS. STAFF
 ENCOURAGES ALTERNATIVE PLANAR BREAK PROPOSAL FOR FLOORS
 1-5 (PODIUM), PERHAPS WITHIN THE VERTICAL ELEMENTS
 BETWEEN BALCONIES. HOWEVER, STAFF IS AMENABLE TO
 INTERPRETING BALCONY AS PLANAR BREAK UNDER THE
 CONDITION THAT GLASS OR TRANSPARENT RAILING MATERIALS
 ARE UTILIZED, AS IS SHOWN IN THE RENDERS. CONDITION OF
 DAC OR SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
  
 3. ZONING REVIEW 4.20.23 [NOT SATISFIED]
 PLEASE REVISE SHEET A0.03 AND L-203 MINOR TEXT
 CORRECTION, OVERHEAD COVER IS NOT REQUIRED, IT IS JUST
 PERMITTED UP TO A MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE OF THE SPACE.
 WITHIN THE ROOFTOP GARDEN CALCULATIONS IT???S NOTED
 ???REQUIRED 30%???. PRIVATE OPEN SPACE ON GROUND FLOOR
 (GARDEN) IS NOT NEEDED AS THE REQUIREMENT IS MET WITH
 ROOFTOP GARDEN. ALSO IF PRIVATE OPEN SPACE IS LOCATED
 ON GROUND FLOOR, IT MUST BE DESIGNED TO MEET PUBLIC
 OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS AND BE ACCESSIBLE TO THE
 PUBLIC. RECOMMEND REMOVING REFERENCE TO GROUND FLOOR
 PRIVATE SPACE. SATISFIED REQUIREMENT WITH ROOFTOP
 SPACE.
 RESPONSE: PLEASE REFER TO SHEET A0.03 FOR REVISED NOTE
 AND GROUND FLOOR REFERENCE HAS BEEN REMOVED.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED
  
 4. ZONING REVIEW 4.20.23 [SATISFIED]
 RESPONSE: ACKNOWLEDGED.
  
 5. ZONING REVIEW 4.20.23 [SATISFIED]
 RESPONSE: ACKNOWLEDGED.
  
 6. ZONING REVIEW 4.20.23 [PARTIALLY SATISFIED] SITE
 VISIBILITY CAN BE ADJUSTED TO BE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE
 INTERSECTION WITH THE DRIVEWAY. SEE SEC. 94-305 FOR
 MORE INFORMATION OR REFER TO FIGURE X-1.
 RESPONSE: PLEASE REFER TO REVISED SHEET A3.00 FOR
 UPDATED SITE VISIBILITY.
  
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] NOT SATISFIED ??? SHOULD BE TWO
 SEPARATE SITE VISIBILITY TRIANGLES. THE TIP OF TRIANGLE
 SHOULD BEGIN AT THE BACK OF CURB. TRIANGLE THEN EXTENDS
 20 FEET SOUTHWARD (FOLLOWING THE DRIVEWAY) AND 20 FEET
 EAST OR WEST ENCOMPASSING THE LANDSCAPE ADJACENT TO THE
 DRIVEWAY APRON AND ROW . STAFF CAN PROVIDE DIAGRAM FOR
 REFERENCE.
 7. ZONING REVIEW 4.24.23 [NOT SATISFIED]
  
 [REPEAT COMMENT]: PLEASE NOTE FAR CALCULATIONS ARE THE
 SAME AS GBA. PER SECTION 94-109. GROSS BUILDING AREA
 MEANS THE TOTAL FLOOR AREA OF A BUILDING, INCLUDING
 AIR- CONDITIONED OR FULLY ENCLOSED STORAGE SPACES,
 ENCLOSED AREAS ON THE ROOFTOP, SUCH AS BATHROOMS AND
 LOBBIES, STAIRS AND ELEVATOR AREAS, AND EXTERNAL
 UNENCLOSED CIRCULATION AREAS. THE GROSS BUILDING AREA
 DOES NOT INCLUDE PARKING AREAS; UNENCLOSED COLONNADES,
 PORCHES AND BALCONIES; MECHANICAL AND ELECTRICAL
 SPACES; AND TRASH ROOMS. STORAGE SPACES WITHOUT WINDOWS
 AND ENCLOSED BY SURFACES THAT ALLOW FOR NATURAL
 VENTILATION OR OUTSIDE AIR CIRCULATION SHALL NOT BE
 INCLUDED. GROSS BUILDING AREA REQUIREMENTS:
 RESPONSE: PLEASE REFER TO SHEET A0.04 FOR REVISED FAR
 CALCULATIONS.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] NOT SATISFIED.
  
 ON SHEET A0.04 ??? DIAGRAM 1 BASEMENT: ALL ELEVATORS
 AND STAIRWELLS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITHIN FAR CALC.
 PLEASE CLARIFY ARE THE BIKE STORAGE SPACES ENCLOSED
 WITHIN FENCING OR SOLID WALLS/ROOMS? IF ENCLOSED WITH
 WALLS, NEEDS TO COUNT TOWARD FAR.
  
 ON SHEET A0.04 ??? DIAGRAM 2 GROUND LEVEL: BOH ROOM
 ADJACENT TO OR LEFT OF THE MAILROOM CAN BE EXCLUDED
 FROM FAR CALC. THE BIKE STORAGE ROOM SHOULD BE INCLUDED
 WITHIN FAR CALC. STAIRWELL AT THE NORTHEASTERN CORNER
 OF PROPERTY SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITHIN FAR CALC.
  
 ON SHEET A0.04 ??? DIAGRAM 4 2ND RESIDENTIAL LEVEL:
 STAIRWELL AT THE NORTHEASTERN CORNER OF PROPERTY SHOULD
 BE INCLUDED WITHIN FAR CALC.
  
 ON SHEET A0.04 ??? DIAGRAM 5 3RD ??? 12TH RESIDENTIAL
 LEVEL: FAR CROSSHATCH LAYER APPEARS TO BE MISSING OR
 UNDER THE OTHERS, ONLY SHOWN ON CORRIDORS AND
 ELEVATORS, PLEASE REVISE. ALSO NOTE TO INCLUDE
 STAIRWELL AT THE NORTHEASTERN CORNER OF PROPERTY WITHIN
 FAR CALC.
  
 ON SHEET A0.04 ??? DIAGRAM 6 ROOF LEVEL: ALL ELEVATORS
 AND STAIRWELLS SHOULD BE INCLUDED WITHIN FAR CALC.
  
 1. ANY PORTION OF THE PARKING AREA WHICH EXCEEDS THE
 MAXIMUM PARKING RATIO SHALL BE INCLUDED IN THE
 CALCULATIONS OF GROSS BUILDING AREA. THIS SHALL INCLUDE
 STALLS AND ALL ASSOCIATED CIRCULATION AREAS. RESPONSE:
 NOTED. PLEASE REVIEW GROSS BUIDING AREA CALCULATION.
 PLEASE REFER TO REVISED SHEET A.0.04.
  
 2. PARKING LOCATED BELOW GRADE SHALL NOT BE COUNTED AS
 PART OF THE GROSS BUILDING AREA.
 RESPONSE: PLEASE REVIEW GROSS BUIDLING AREA
 CALCULATION, PARKING LOCATED BELOW GRADE IS NOT BEIGN
 INCLUDE
 PLEASE REFER TO REVISED SHEET A.0.04.
  
 3. THE GROSS BUILDING AREA SHALL BE MEASURED FROM THE
 OUTSIDE FACE OF EXTERIOR WALLS.
 RESPONSE: PLEASE REVIEW GROSS BUILDING AREA
 CALCULATION, AREA IS MEASURED FROM OUTSIDE FACE OF
 EXTERIOR WALLS
 PLEASE REFER TO REVISED SHEET A.0.04.
  
 YOUR FAR CALCULATION NEEDS TO INCLUDE BOTH ELEVATORS
 AND STAIRWELLS. DATA TABLE AND FIGURES ON A0.04 APPEAR
 TO HAVE DISCREPANCIES IN CALCULATIONS. IT IS STILL
 UNCLEAR TO STAFF WHAT SPACES ARE COUNTING TOWARD TOTAL
 FAR AND WHAT IS BEING OMITTED; DUE TO BEING A
 MECHANICAL/ELECTRIC ROOM, OR PARKING. STAFF
 RECOMMENDATION IS TO SIMPLIFY THE CALCULATIONS TABLE
 INTO A SINGLE ONE RATHER THAN SPLITTING INTO TWO
 COMPONENTS.
 STAFF ALSO RECOMMENDS A SIMPLE TWO-TONED GRAPHIC FOR
 FAR ON SHEET A0.04. BLANK OR WHITE SPACE = AREAS NOT
 COUNTED TOWARD FAR TOTAL RED OR SOME OTHER COLOR =
 SPACE THAT IS COUNTED TOWARD FAR TOTAL
 RESPONSE: ELEVATORS AND STAIRWELLS ARE INCLUDED; CHART
 HAS BEEN UPDATED AND FAR IS SHOWING JUST ONE COLOR
 HATCH AS REQUESTED.
 PLEASE REFER TO REVISED SHEET A.004 FOR REVISED
 CALCULATIONS.
  
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] NOT SATISFIED, SEE COMMENTS
 UNDER #7.
  
  
 8. ZONING REVIEW 4.20.23 [SATISFIED]
 RESPONSE: ACKNOWLEDGED.
  
 9. ZONING REVIEW 4.24.23 [PARTIALLY SATISFIED]
  
 PREVIOUS 12.09.22 SUBMITTAL HAD SETBACKS ALONG DATURA
 MEASURED FROM THE CENTER OF THE ON-STREET PARKING.
 WITHIN THIS 3.24.23 SUBMITTAL THE SETBACK IS BEING
 MEASURED FROM THE BACK OF CURB, HOWEVER, THE
 PREDOMINANT BACK OF CURB LINE IS THE INTERIOR CURB LINE
 OF THE ON- STREET PARKING. PLEASE ADJUST. SHEET A3.01
 IS SHOWING TWO DIFFERENT SETBACKS ON THE DATURA
 FRONTAGE. SEE SEC. 94-109 SETBACK DEFINITION FOR MORE
 INFORMATION.
 RESPONSE: PLEASE REFER TO REVISED SHEET A2.00 AND A3.01
 FOR REVISED SETBACK DIMENSION.
  
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] NOT SATISFIED. SETBACKS ARE
 SHOW FROM PROPERTY LINE, THIS IS INCORRECT. SETBACKS
 ARE MEASURED IN DOWNTOWN FROM BACK OF CURB. PLEASE NOTE
 THIS IS FROM YOUR PREDOMINANT BACK OF CURB LINE, IN
 THIS INSTANCE THE CURB LINE FROM THE ON-STREET PARKING.
 A 16FT. SETBACK WOULD INCLUDE, THE MINIMUM 4 FT.
 LANDSCAPE BUFFER, MINIMUM 8FT. SIDEWALK AND THEN 4 FEET
 OF EXTRA SPACE.
  
 10. ZONING REVIEW 4.24.23 [SATISFIED] HISTORIC BUILDING
  LEGAL NONCONFORMING, DOES NOT NEED TO MEET
 TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENTS. RESPONSE: NOTED. PLEASE
 REFER TO REVISED SHEET.
  
 11. ZONING REVIEW 4.24.23 [SATISFIED] RESTRICTIVE
 COVENANT AND RECORDED DOCUMENTATION WILL BE A CONDITION
 OF APPROVAL
 RESPONSE: ACKNOWLEDGED. PLEASE CONFIRM THE
 APPLICABILITY OF THE RESTRICTIVE COVENANT, THE VALET
 OPERATIONS HAVE BEEN REMOVED AND THE PROJECT IS NOW
 100% SELF-PARK.
  
 12. ZONING REVIEW 4.24.23 [SATISFIED]
 RESPONSE: ACKNOWLEDGED.
  
 13. ZONING REVIEW 4.24.23 [SATISFIED]
 RESPONSE: ACKNOWLEDGED.
  
 14. ZONING REVIEW 4.24.23 [SATISFIED]
 RESPONSE: ACKNOWLEDGED.
  
 15. ZONING REVIEW 4.24.23 [SATISFIED]
 RESPONSE: ACKNOWLEDGED.
  
 FROM 1.19.23 COMMENTS
 1. ZONING REVIEW 4.24.23 [SATISFIED]
 RESPONSE: ACKNOWLEDGED.
  
 2. ZONING REVIEW 4.24.23 [NOT SATISFIED]
 ON SHEET A3.01 AND OTHERS THE BIKE RACKS ARE SHOWN
 PARALLEL TO SIDEWALK, IS THE 8FT. CLEAR PATH MAINTAINED
 WITH THE BIKES IN THIS POSITION? SHEET A0.6.2 SHOWS
 UTILIZATION OF???INVERTED U??? RACKS, WITH THESE RACKS
 THE BIKES ARE TYPICALLY PERPENDICULAR TO SIDEWALK AS IT
 IS EASIER TO ACCESS FOR USERS. SPACES CAN BE PARALLEL
 BUT RECOMMEND PLACING THEM ON A SEPARATE PAD WITHIN
 LANDSCAPE BUFFER OR ANOTHER DEDICATED SPACE, AS THIS
 MAINTAINS THE 8FT. CLEARANCE ON SIDEWALK. MICROMOBILITY
 STATION AND STREETLIGHTS STILL APPEAR TO OVERLAP STREET
 TREE LOCATIONS.
 RESPONSE: 8FT CLEARANCE ON SIDEWALK IS MAINTAINED.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] NOT SATISFIED. L-100 PLANS SHOW
 BIKE RACKS IN MIDDLE OF SIDEWALK. PLEASE ILLUSTRATE ALL
 STREETLIGHTS, STREETSCAPE FURNISHINGS, BIKE RACKS,
 TREES, ETC. WITHIN LANDSCAPE PLAN, AND SITE PLAN OR
 GROUND FLOOR PLAN.
  
 3. ZONING REVIEW 4.24.23 [NOT SATISFIED]
 STREET TREE ON EITHER SIDE OF THE DRIVEWAY ALONG DATURA
 STREET ARE NOT SPACED 30FT. APART. THERE IS THE WIDTH
 OF THE DRIVEWAY AND THE MICROMOBILITY STATION
 INTERRUPTING THE TREE CONTINUITY. PLEASE
  
 RECONFIGURE TREES ON EITHER SIDE OF THE DRIVEWAY OR A
 VARIANCE MUST BE REQUESTED AS IT DOES NOT MEET CODE
 PROVISION OF SEC. 94-113(D.)(2.) RESPONSE: PLEASE REFER
 TO REVISED SHEET A3.01 AND INFORMATION PROVIDED BY
 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, STREET TREES CANNOT BE PLACED
 WITHIN THE DRIVEWAY SIGTH DISTANCE TRIANGLES, THIS IS
 WHY THE STREET TREES ARE NOT 30??? APART.
 MICROMOBILITY STATION HAS BEEN RELOCATED.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] NOT SATISFIED. SITE VISIBILITY
 TRIANGLES ARE DRAWN FROM THE PROPERTY LINE OUTWARD, SEE
 COMMENT #6. PLEASE NOTE LANDSCAPING CAN BE WITHIN THE
 SITE VISIBILITY TRIANGLE SO LONG AS AN AREA BETWEEN
 18IN. AND 8FT. IS KEPT CLEAR. PLEASE REFERENCE SECTION
 94-305(E.)
  
  
 4. ZONING REVIEW 4.24.23 [NOT SATISFIED]
 ON THE NORTH EASTERN CORNER OF PROJECT, THE STAIRWELL
 ENCROACHES INTO THE SETBACK. PLEASE ADJUST TO BE
 OUTSIDE OF REQUIRED 5FT. SETBACK. ALSO PLEASE REMOVE
 PLANTERS WITHIN 5 FT. SETBACK, SHOULD BE HEDGES PLANTED
 AT 2-3 FOOT INTERVALS AND SHADE TREES EVERY 30 FT.
 RESPONSE: PLEASE REFER TO REVISED SHEET A3.01, STAIR
 HAS BEEN MOVED TO COMPLY WITH SETBACK.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED. PLEASE NOTE A3.02
 STILL SHOWS GRAPHIC ERROR WITH STAIR IN SETBACK.
  
 5. ZONING REVIEW 4.24.23 [NOT SATISFIED]
 PER SEC. 94-113(F.)(1.) A 5 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER IS
 NEEDED WITH SHRUBS PLANTED AT 2 OR 3 FT. INTERVALS AS
 WELL AS SHADE TREES PLANTED AT 30 FT. INTERVALS.
 SUBMITTED PLANS DO NOT SHOW SHADE TREES. PLEASE REMOVE
 PLANTERS AND ENCROACHING STAIRWELL.
 RESPONSE: PLANTER HAVE BEEN REMOVED, SHRUBS ADDED AND
 STAIR HAVE BEEN MOVED. PLEASE REFER TO REVISED SHEET
 A3.00 AND INFORMATION PROVIDED BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED. SHEET A3.01.
  
 ZONING COMMENTS 4.24.23:
  
 1. PLEASE PROVIDE SIDEWALK AND CLEARPATH WIDTH FOR BOTH
 DATURA AND
 S. DIXIE FRONTAGES. 8FT. CLEAR PATH REQUIRED ON DATURA
 STREET FRONTAGE, SOUTH DIXIE HWY FRONTAGE TO MAINTAIN
 EXISTING SIDEWALK WIDTH OR INCREASE COMPLIANCE WITH
 REQUIRED 8FT. ALSO PROVIDE WIDTH OF LANDSCAPE STRIP
 ALONG DATURA AND S DIXIE FRONTAGE. MICRO-MOBILITY
 STATION CANNOT BE LOCATED WITHIN REQUIRED LANDSCAPE
 STRIP ALONG DATURA FRONTAGE.
 RESPONSE: PLEASE REFER TO REVISED SHEET A2.00 AND A3.01
 SHOWING DIMENTIONS OF SIDEWALKS, LANDSCAPE STRIP OR
 DATURA AND S. DIXIE FRONTAGES, MICROBOLITY STATION HAS
 BEEN MOVED.
 ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED.
  
 2. PLEASE PROVIDE WIDTH OF DRIVEWAY OR CURBCUT WHERE IT
 INTERSECTS WITH THE PROPERTY LINE, DIMENSION CANNOT
 EXCEED 25FT.
 RESPONSE: PLEASE REFER TO SHEET A3.01 SHOWING DIMENTION
 OF DRIVEWAY.
 ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED.
  
 3. ON THE ELEVATION DRAWINGS, PLEASE PROVIDE HEIGHT OF
 ROOFTOP ELEMENTS (TRELLIS, DECORATIVE ELEMENTS, ETC.),
 EACH ELEMENT MUST MEET THE PROJECTION STANDARDS OF SEC.
 94-109 TABLE IV-5.
 RESPONSE: PLEASE REFER TO REVISED SHEETS A4.00, A4.02,
 A4.03, A4.04 SHOWING HEIGHTS OF ROOFTOP ELEMENTS.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED.
  
 4. PER SEC. 94-112 ALLEYS AND PUBLIC RIGHTS OF WAY:
 INSTALLATION OF PUBLIC UTILITIES. ALL PROPOSED
 DEVELOPMENTS EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN 50,000 GROSS
 SQUARE FEET SHALL HAVE ALL PUBLIC UTILITIES SERVICE
 CONNECTIONS,
  
 INCLUDING TELEPHONE, CABLE AND ELECTRIC DISTRIBUTION
 SERVICE INSTALLED UNDERGROUND.
 RESPONSE: NOTED.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED.
  
 5. PLEASE WALLMOUNT FDC IF LOCATED ALONG DATURA
 FRONTAGE, AND PROVIDE SOME LANDSCAPING OR SCREENING SO
 LONG AS ACCESS IS NOT HINDERED.
 RESPONSE: PLEASE REFER TO REVISED SHEET A3.01, SHOWING
 FDC AND A PROTECTION LANDSCAPE SCREEN.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED.
  
 6. ON THE NORTH EASTERN CORNER OF PROJECT, THE
 STAIRWELL ENCROACHES INTO THE SETBACK. PLEASE ADJUST TO
 BE OUTSIDE OF REQUIRED 5FT. SETBACK. RESPONSE: PLEASE
 REFER TO REVISED SHEET A3.01, STAIR HAS BEEN MOVED TO
 COMPLY WITH SETBACK.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED. PLEASE NOTE A3.02
 STILL SHOWS GRAPHIC ERROR WITH STAIR IN SETBACK.
  
 7. LANDSCAPE TERMINAL ISLANDS AND BUILDING BASE
 PLANTING ON THE REAR SURFACE PARKING DOES NOT SEEM
 VIABLE AS IT IS UNDER THE AMENITY DECK/ROOF, THESE
 AREAS WILL NOT HAVE DIRECT SUNLIGHT OR OPEN-AIR ACCESS.
 RESPONSE: PLEASE REFER TO REVISED SHEET A3.01 PLANTERS
 HAVE BEEN REMOVED.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED.
  
 8. ART IN PUBLIC PLACES CONTRIBUTION OR ART LOCATION ON
 SITE MUST BE IDENTIFIED PRIOR TO TAKING THE SITE PLAN
 TO DAC.
 RESPONSE: CONTRIBUTION WILL BE DISCUSSED WITH
 OWNERSHIP/LAND USE LAWYER.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] SATISFIED. DISCUSSION HAD WITH
 SYBILLE AND APPLICANT, NEW LOCATION PROPOSED WHERE
 MICROMOBILITY STATION IS SHOWN ON CURRENT PLAN SET.
  
 9. LANDSCAPE PLANS CONFLICT WITH ARCHITECTURAL PLANS,
 TREE LOCATIONS APPEAR TO DIFFER OR INTERFERE WITH SITE
 ELEMENTS. BE SURE TO SHOW ON BOTH THE LANDSCAPE AND
 ARCHITECTURE PLANS THE LOCATION OF ANY STREETSCAPE
 ELEMENT (BIKERACK, LIGHTS, STREET TREES, FURNITURE,
 METERS/VAULTS, PLANTERS, ETC.)
 RESPONSE: PLEASE REFER TO REVISED SHEET A3.01 LANDSCAPE
 AND ARCHITECTURE PLANS ARE COORDINATED.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] NOT SATISFIED. DOES NOT APPEAR
 TO BE ADDRESSED. LIGHT POLES OVERLAP STREET TREE
 CANOPY. BIKE RACKS ONLY SHOWN ON L-100 AND APPEAR TO BE
 IN MIDDLE OF SIDEWALK. SEE COMMENT #2 FROM 04.24.23.
  
 10. PLEASE LIST AND IDENTIFY ANY ZONING VARIANCES THAT
 ARE REQUESTED.
 RESPONSE: THERE ARE NO VARIANCES BEING REQUESTED AS
 PART OF THIS PROJECT.
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] NOT SATISFIED. IT IS UNDERSTOOD
 THAT THE APPLICANT IS LOOKING TO PROCEED WITHOUT ANY
 VARIANCES, HOWEVER THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT REVISIONS
 NECESSARY, AS SOME UNSATISFIED COMMENTS WOULD WARRANT A
 VARIANCE.
  
 THERE ARE MANY OUTSTANDING ZONING COMMENTS POSSIBLY DUE
 TO MISINTERPRETATION OR CONFUSION WITH CODE ELEMENTS
 AND/OR SITE CHANGES FROM THE PREVIOUS SUBMITTAL HAS
 OUTLINED OR CAUSED NEW COMMENTS. STAFF WOULD LIKE TO
 SUGGEST AN IN-PERSON MEETING WITH THE APPLICANT/DESIGN
 TEAM TO CLARIFY THE REMAINING ZONING COMMENTS SO THAT
 THE NEXT SUBMITTAL MORE SUFFICIENTLY ADDRESSES COMMENTS
 AND IS OKAYED FOR THE NEXT STEP IN THE DESIGN PROCESS
 (DAC APPROVAL).
 RESPONSE: NOTED.
  
 [ZONING REVIEW 5.23.23] REPEAT COMMENT. STAFF SUGGESTS
 MEETING TO CLARIFY NEXT SUBMITTAL.
  
  
  
  
  
 NEW COMMENTS 5.23.23:
  
 1. CLOUDED VERSION OF PLANS DOES NOT MATCH UNCLOUDED
 VERSION, EXAMPLE BEING A3.00 BASEMENT PARKING, CLOUDED
 VERSION SHOWS LIFTS WHEREAS UNCLOUDED SHOWS CARSHARE.
 BE SURE THAT ALL PLANS ARCHITECTURE, LANDSCAPE, AND
 CIVIL ARE CONSISTENT.
  
 2. SETBACKS MEASURED FROM BACK OF CURB, NOT PROPERTY
 LINE, PLEASE SEE COMMENT #9 FROM 4.24.23.
  
 3. PLEASE PROVIDE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN FOR SITE. PLEASE
 REFERENCE SEC. 94-113(B.)
 EXTERIOR LIGHTING. ALL BUILDINGS SHALL PROVIDE EXTERIOR
 LIGHTING EVERY NIGHT FROM DUSK TO DAWN TO ILLUMINATE
 BUILDING ENTRANCES, ADJACENT SIDEWALKS, AND PATHS, AT A
 MINIMUM OF 0.6 FOOTCANDLES AS MEASURED AT THE BACK EDGE
 OF THE CURB AND ONE FOOT ABOVE THE SIDEWALK. THIS
 MEASUREMENT SHALL INCLUDE LIGHT EMANATING FROM PUBLIC
 AND PRIVATE SOURCES. UNSHIELDED LIGHT FIXTURES SHALL BE
 PROHIBITED.
  
  Print


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