| Date |
Text |
| 2023-01-25 18:44:55 | 1) SATISFIED. A METHODOLOGY MEETING SHOULD HAVE BEEN |
| | SCHEDULED. PLEASE DO SO. |
| | 2) SATISFIED. PROVIDE AN UPDATED TRAFFIC STUDY BASED ON |
| | MORE RECENT OR EXISTING COUNTS, AS THE 2018 COUNTS ARE |
| | OUTDATED, AS RECOMMENDED IN THE ANALYSIS AS WELL |
| | 3) SATISFIED. AN AERIAL SATELLITE MAP SHOWCASING |
| | PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT WITH RESPECT TO NEIGHBORING AREA |
| | SHOULD BE PROVIDED IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY |
| | 4) SATISFIED. SHOULD TABLE 1 THROUGH 3 MAIN CAPTIONS BE |
| | TOTAL MAXIMUM DRI OR MAXIMUM VESTED TRIP GENERATION? |
| | 5) SATISFIED. BELOW EACH TABLE PLEASE PROVIDE |
| | REFERENCES FOR EACH PARAMETER (I.E. RATE/EQUATION, |
| | INTERNALIZATION AND PASS-BY PERCENTAGES) |
| | 6) SATISFIED. PROVIDE TRIP GENERATION CALCULATION |
| | TABLE(S) SPECIFIC TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT (I.E. |
| | ONLY TRIPS GENERATED BY THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT). |
| | TABLE 7-9 SHOW AGGREGATE OF EXISTING/APPROVED AND |
| | CURRENTLY PROPOSED, MAIN CAPTION SHOULD BE CORRECTED |
| | ACCORDINGLY (E.G. APPROVED/BUILT PLUS PROPOSED |
| | DEVELOPMENTS) |
| | 7) SATISFIED. TABLE 10 NEEDS TO BE CORRECTED, AS VESTED |
| | DEVELOPMENT SHOULD REFER TO THE TOTAL MAXIMUM DRI, |
| | WHILE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SHOULD REFER TO |
| | EXISTING/APPROVED AND CURRENTLY PROPOSED. PLEASE |
| | CORRECT |
| | 8) SATISFIED. IN TABLE 10. DO DRIVEWAY TRIPS REFER TO |
| | TOTAL TRIPS MINUS INTERNALIZATION? (I.E. PASS-BY TRIPS |
| | ARE NOT DEDUCTED). IF SO, PLEASE INSERT A FOOTNOTE |
| | SPECIFYING THAT. |
| | 9) SATISFIED. SYNCHRO OUTPUTS AND LOS SUMMARY TABLES |
| | SHOULD INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING SCENARIOS: EXISTING, |
| | FUTURE NO-BUILD AND FUTURE BUILD XXX (INSERT BUILD-OUT |
| | YEAR AND APPLY GROWTH FACTORS ACCORDINGLY). RESULTS FOR |
| | EACH SCENARIO SHOULD BE SUMMARIZED AND COMPARED IN A |
| | TABLE. CURRENT SYNCHRO OUTPUTS INDICATE 2022 BUILD-OUT |
| | YEAR, IS THAT EXISTING OR AN OUTDATED BUILD-OUT |
| | ANALYSIS? |
| | 10) SATISFIED. PROVIDE MORE DETAILS PERTAINING THE |
| | CENTREPARK DRI EXTENT AND TRIP ALLOCATION. |
| | SPECIFICALLY: MAP SHOWCASING THE EXTENT OF THE DRI AND |
| | EACH OF THE SITES; A COMPREHENSIVE SPREADSHEET/TABLE |
| | SHOWCASING MAXIMUM ALLOWED SF/ROOMS/DU ALLOCATION FOR |
| | LAND-USE TYPE VERSUS EXISTING-BUILT, |
| | APPROVED-IN-CONSTRUCTION, PLANNED-PROPOSED DEVELOPMENTS |
| | AND LEFT OVER BALANCES, FOR EACH SITES AND OVERALL |
| | 11) CONDITIONALLY SATISFIED. THE TPS LETTER WAS ISSUED |
| | WITH AN ANTICIPATED BUILD-OUT YEAR IN 2024, WHILE THE |
| | TRAFFIC STUDY ASSUMES BUILD-OUT IN 2026. PLEASE EXPLAIN |
| | AND, IF NEEDED, REVISE THE TRAFFIC STUDY OR PROVIDE AN |
| | UPDATED TPS LETTER. PROVIDE THE UPDATED TPS LETTER, |
| | ONCE RECEIVED |
| | 12) SATISFIED. PROVIDE EXPLANATION OR HISTORICAL |
| | REFERENCE WITH RESPECT TO THE CHANGE IN MAXIMUM PARCEL |
| | AND DRI OVERALL ALLOCATIONS, AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT B. |
| | WHAT METHODOLOGY OR REASONING WAS APPLIED TO |
| | REDUCE/INCREASE ORIGINAL DRI ALLOCATIONS? |
| | 13) SATISFIED. THE ORIGINAL INTERNALIZATION CALCULATION |
| | TABLE IS DATED 2005. BECAUSE OF THE CHANGE IN OVERALL |
| | DRI ALLOCATION, LAND USE TYPE, AND THE USE OF THE |
| | LATEST ITE TRIP GENERATION RATES IN THE PROPOSED |
| | DEVELOPMENT TRAFFIC STUDY, IT WOULD BE LOGICAL AND |
| | NECESSARY TO RE-CALCULATE INTERNALIZATION PARAMETERS |
| | AND RATES BASED ON LATEST DRI ALLOCATION AND ITE/COUNTY |
| | RATES AND METHODOLOGY. PLEASE DO SO AND PROVIDE THE |
| | WORKING SPREADSHEET AS PART OF NEXT RESUBMISSION |
| | SITE COMMENTS |
| | 14) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE A HORIZONTAL CONTROL |
| | 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. PROVIDE DETAILS OF |
| | THE SIDEWALK AREA ALONG S AUSTRALIAN AVE AND OLD |
| | OKEECHOBEE RD FRONTING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT |
| | 15) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. IN THE HORIZONTAL CONTROL 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. THERE ARE MISSING FEATURES ALONG |
| | OLD OKEECHOBEE ROAD, PLEASE PROVIDE SIDEWALK AND TRAVEL |
| | LANE DETAILS ALONG CENTREPARK DR N TILL THE |
| | INTERSECTION WITH CENTREPARK DR E. |
| | 16) PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PROVIDE A SIGNAGE AND PAVEMENT |
| | MARKING PLAN. INCLUSIVE OF ALL FEATURES WITHIN THE |
| | PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND ALONG ALL ROADS FRONTING THE |
| | SITE. SUCH SITE PLAN CAN BE SEPARATE OR INTEGRATED IN |
| | THE HORIZONTAL CONTROL ONE. SEVERAL MISSING ITEMS, |
| | PLEASE REVISE AND COMPLETE |
| | 17) SATISFIED. ALL TRANSPORTATION RELATED ITEMS (I.E. |
| | PARKING STALL, DRIVE AISLES, RAMP) WITHIN THE GARAGE |
| | PLANS NEED TO BE PROPERLY LABELED AND DIMENSIONED (I.E. |
| | LENGTH, WIDTH, SLOPE PERCENTAGES) |
| | 18) SATISFIED. PER CITY CODE SEC94-111(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.??? PLEASE APPLY AND SHOWCASE SUCH |
| | REQUIREMENT IN THE GARAGE PLANS |
| | 19) SATISFIED. TURN-AROUND SPACES SHOULD BE PROVIDED, |
| | AND CLEARLY MARKED AS SUCH AT EACH DEAD-END(S) OF THE |
| | GARAGE. PLEASE REVISE THE SITE PLANS ACCORDINGLY. |
| | 20) SATISFIED. PROPOSED LOADING ZONE(S) ARE NOT CLEARLY |
| | DEPICTED NOR DIMENSIONED IN THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS. |
| | PLEASE REVISE AND PROVIDE CODE REFERENCE TO MINIMUM |
| | REQUIRED AND PROVIDED DIMENSIONS. |
| | 21) 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 |
| | 22) SATISFIED. PROVIDE ENGINEERING REFERENCE AND SPECS |
| | SHEETS FOR EACH OF THE PROPOSED TRANSPORTATION FEATURES |
| | (E.G. CURB, RAMP, GATE, SIGNAGE, PAVEMENT MARKING, |
| | SIGNAL, ETC.) |
| | 23) SATISFIED. IDENTIFY AND DESIGNATE AN EASILY |
| | ACCESSIBLE MICRO-MOBILITY STATION AREA (MINIMUM 8 X 20 |
| | FEET) AND PROVIDE BASIC ELECTRIFICATION READINESS WITH |
| | THE FOLLOWING SPECS: A CONDUIT (2-INCH SCHEDULE 40 PVC) |
| | TO THE POWER SOURCE WITH AN ELECTRICAL PULL BOX (240V / |
| | 10,000W CIRCUIT) |
| | 24) SATISFIED. PROVIDE A PARKING TABLE SHOWCASING THE |
| | NUMBER OF REQUIRED AND PROVIDED PARKING SPACES, |
| | INCLUSIVE OF ADA AND BICYCLE ONES |
| | 25) SATISFIED. ARE THERE ANY GATES PROPOSED? IF SO, |
| | CLEARLY SHOWCASE THE REQUIRED 20 FEET SETBACK DISTANCE |
| | FROM THE BACK OF THE SIDEWALK OR CURB |
| | 26) SATISFIED. IS VALET SERVICE PROPOSED? IF SO, |
| | PROVIDE A THOROUGH OPERATIONAL ANALYSIS AND/OR PARKING |
| | MANAGEMENT PLAN |
| | 27) SATISFIED. ARE THERE ANY BUS STOPS BEING IMPACTED? |
| | 28) SATISFIED. IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IMPACTING |
| | ANY EXISTING OR PLANNED BICYCLE FACILITY? |
| | 29) TO BE SATISFIED AT BUILDING PERMIT. PROVIDE A |
| | CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT PLAN. PLEASE REFER TO CITY CODE |
| | 86-246 FOR DETAILS |
| | |
| | VALERIO ORICCHIO |
| | CITY TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER |
| | 561-494-1092 |
| | [email protected] |
| | |
| |
Print |
