Plan Review Notes
Plan Review Notes For Project Z23020026
Project Number Z23020026
Review Stop Z
Sequence Number 2
Notes
Date Text
2023-06-09 09:44:56*** THIS REVIEW IS FOR THE 05.11.2023 RESUBMITTAL
 PACKET ***
  
 GENERAL COMMENTS:
  
 1. SATISFIED - THE PROPOSED PROJECT NAME IS LISTED IN
 THE APPLICATION AS "CURRIE PARK PLOT 4." IT IS ADVISED
 THAT THE NAME OF THE PROJECT BE CHANGED TO AVOID ANY
 CONFUSION WITH CURRIE PARK, WHICH IS:
  
 1.1. LOCATED OUTSIDE OF THE BOUNDARIES OF THE CURRIE
 MIXED USE DISTRICT (CMUD) AND
  
 1.2. THERE IS AN ACTIVE APPLICATION FOR THE CURRIE PARK
 REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT WITH A SIMILAR NAME.
  
 2. PARTIALLY SATSIFIED - A COMPLETE ADDRESS LIST OF ALL
 PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 500 FT. OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY,
 WITH CLEARLY WRITTEN INFORMATION (I.E. ZIP CODES,
 ETC.), AND A COPY OF THE MAILING LABELS (FROM THE
 ADDRESS LIST) SHALL BE PROVIDED. THIS IS A REQUIRED
 ELEMENT OF THE APPLICATION PACKET. THE ADDRESS LIST
 SUBMITTED WITH THE APPLICATION APPEAR TO HAVE CRYPTIC
 INFORMATION AND NO COPY OF THE MAILING LIST WAS
 PROVIDED.
  
 3. SATISFIED - A LETTER FROM THE PALM BEACH COUNTY -
 TRAFFIC DIVISION (561.684.4030), STATING THAT THE
 PROPOSED PROJECT MEETS THE TRAFFIC PERFORMANCE
 STANDARDS (TPS) OF THE COUNTY IS REQUIRED. THE TPS
 LETTER SHALL BE PROVIDED TO STAFF PRIOR TO SCHEDULING
 THE PROJECT FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING STAGE.
  
 4. SATISFIED - A SCHOOL CAPACITY AVAILABILITY
 DETERMINATION (SCAD) LETTER FROM THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF
 PALM BEACH COUNTY IS REQUIRED. THE SCAD LETTER SHALL BE
 PROVIDED TO STAFF PRIOR TO SCHEDULING THE PROJECT FOR
 THE PUBLIC HEARING STAGE.
  
 5. SATSIFIED - 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
 (561-494-1040) ON HOW TO OBTAIN THE REQUIRED LETTER.
  
 6. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - PROVIDE WRITTEN 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: AT&T, FPU, FPL AND COMCAST.
  
 7. SATISFIED - PLEASE CONTACT CAROLINE PUELL,
 ADDRESSING COORDINATOR (561.805.6659 OR
 [email protected]), ON THE FLAGLER DRIVE ADDRESSES
 PROVIDED IN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN (2175 N FLAGLER DRIVE
 SOUTH TOWER AND 2251 N FLAGLER DRIVE - NORTH TOWER). IT
 APPEARS THAT THE ADDRESSES UTILIZED HAVE NOT BEEN
 FINALIZED.
  
  
 JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT COMMENTS:
  
 1. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - PLEASE EXPLAIN/CLARIFY "THE
 PROPERTY OWNER OF THE REMAINDER OF THE SITE WILL BE
 RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OBLIGATION OF THE CITY
 OWNED PARCEL." ADDITIONALLY, FURTHER COORDINATION AND
 DISCUSSION SHALL BE REQUIRED ON THE MAINTENANCE
 RESPONSIBILITY OF THE CITY-OWNED PARK PARCEL LOCATED AT
 THE SOUTHEAST CORNER.
  
 1.1. THE APPLICANT WILL BE REQUIRED TO ENTER INTO A
 MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY FOR THE
 TRIANGULAR-SHAPED CITY PARK AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF
 THE PROJECT. A CONDITION WILL BE PROVIDED.
  
 2. SATISFIED - APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE THE REQUIRED
 RESPONSES TO THE STANDARDS IN SEC. 94-55(B)(2) OF THE
 ZLDRS. THE RESPONSES TO THE STANDARDS FOR SPECIAL
 REVIEW HAVE NOT BEEN INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION
 SUBMITTAL.
  
 3. SATISFIED - THE LIST/REQUEST FOR VARIANCES WILL NEED
 TO BE AMENDED TO CAPTURE ALL THE VARIANCES/WAIVERS
 NECESSARY FOR THE PROJECT. ADDITIONALLY, ANY RELATED
 DIALOGUE IN THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT SHALL BE
 REVISED TO MATCH (FOR CONSISTENCY).
  
 4. SATISFIED - THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH IS IDENTIFIED
 AS "PARKS/OPEN SPACE," AS IT IS A DESIGNATED FUTURE
 LINEAR PARK IN THE REGULATING PLANS FOR CMUD. THE
 JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT IDENTIFIES THE PROPERTY TO THE
 NORTH AS CMUD-CORE IA. PLEASE ADDRESS FOR CONSISTENCY.
  
 5. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - NOT ALL THE STATEMENTS
 PROVIDED TO THE RESPONSES IN SEC. 94-35(C) - SITE
 DESIGN AND QUALITATIVE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE
 ACCURATE. AS NOTED ABOVE, ADDITIONAL VARIANCE/WAIVERS
 ARE REQUIRED; INCORRECT CALCULATIONS (I.E. PARKING) ARE
 NOTED, ETC., SO NOT ALL THE STANDARDS HAVE BEEN MET OR
 ARE ACCURATE. PLEASE REVISE FOR CONSISTENCY WITH THE
 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION.
  
 5.1. ALL PORTIONS OF THE BUILDING FRONTAGE MUST BE
 WITHIN THE SETBACK RANGE. IF NOT, THE PROJECT DOS NOT
 COMPLY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE CMUD REGULATIONS (AS
 NOTED IN STANDARD A).
  
 5.2. THE PROVIDED PRIVATE OPEN SPACE CALCULATIONS ARE
 INCONSISTENT WITH THE CALCULATIONS PROVIDED IN THE
 PLANS.
  
 5.3. ROVIDED REQUIRED MININMUM PARKING CALCULATIONS NOT
 ACCURATE IN STANDARD A. PLEASE ADDRESS FOR CONSISTENCY.
  
 5.4. INFORMATION ON THE SCREENING/MASKING OF THE TRASH
 COLLECTION AREA MUST BE PROVIDED IN STANDARD C.
  
 6. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - A MORE IN-DEPTH EXPLANATION
 FOR EACH VARIANCE IS REQUIRED. THE STANDARDS ARE VERY
 SPECIFIC AND THE RESPONSES DO NOT EXPLAIN THE HARDSHIP
 AND IF THE REQUIREMENT CAN BE MET IN THE DESIGN AND/OR
 IF OTHER DESIGN ALTERNATIVES TO MEET CODE HAVE BEEN
 EXPLORED.
  
 6.1. SINCE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS A VACANT SITE, THERE
 SHOULD BE FEW (IF ANY) HARDSHIPS WITH MEETING THE CODE.
 IF THERE IS A DESIGN HARDSHIP (TO PROVIDE A CERTAIN
 APPEARANCE) THE APPLICANT MUST BE ABLE TO STATE HOW THE
 DESIGN ALTERNATIVE MEETS THE INTENT OF THE CODE
 REQUIREMENT.
  
  
 DESIGN COMMENTS ON REQUESTED VARIANCES:
  
 ** FIVE (5) VARIANCES ARE REQUESTED FOR THE PROPOSED
 PROJECT AT THIS TIME. APPLICANT MUST CLEARLY DEFINE THE
 HARDSHIP AND WHY THE CODE REQUIREMENT CANNOT BE MET.
 ADDITIONALLY, HOW DOES THE PROPOSED DESIGN MEET THE
 INTENT OF THE ZLDRS IN PLACE OF THE REQUESTED VARIANCE
 MUST BE EXPLAINED **
  
 1. NOT SATISFIED - THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A VARIANCE
 FROM SEC. 94-215(G)(1)(VI), WHICH REQUIRES GROUND FLOOR
 COMMERCIAL ACTIVE USES ALONG THE FIRST 100 FT. ON
 FLAGLER DRIVE AT 23RD STREET. AT THIS TIME, STAFF
 CANNOT SUPPORT THIS VARIANCE REQUEST:
  
 1.1. IT WAS DISCUSSED AT THE PRE-APPLICATION MEETING
 THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO JUSTIFY AND
 DEMONSTRATE HOW THE ACTIVE USE GARDEN COULD MEET THE
 INTENT OF THE ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENT ALONG 23RD STREET
 AND FLAGLER DRIVE. AN EXPLANATION OF THE HARDSHIP MUST
 ALSO BE INCLUDED IN THE STATEMENT. SUFFICIENT
 INFORMATION ON HOW THIS REQUEST JUSTIFIES AS ACTIVE USE
 TO MEET THE INTENT OF THE ZLDRS AND MEETS THE VARIANCE
 STANDARDS HAVE NOT BEEN PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT.
  
 1.2. THE FENCE APPEARS TO CONTRADICT THE PROPOSED
 PUBLIC NATURE OF THE ACTIVE USE GARDEN. IT WAS ALSO
 DISCUSSED THAT THE OPEN SPACE FENCES WITHIN THE PROJECT
 BE REMOVED FROM THE PLANS, YET THE FENCES REMAIN IN THE
 CURRENT PLANS. PLEASE ALSO NOTE THAT PER SEC.
 94-215(M), ???PUBLIC OPEN SPACE??? IS DEFINED AS GROUND
 FLOOR OPEN SPACE FOR PUBLIC USE AND ACCESS ABUTTING A
 PUBLIC STREET ON AT LEAST ONE SIDE AND WITH
 UNENCUMBERED PEDESTRIAN ACCESS FROM THE PUBLIC SIDEWALK
 OR A RIGHT OF WAY FOR GENERAL PUBLIC USE. [ZLDR
 S.94-215(G)(1)(VI)]
  
 1.3. THE INTENT OF THE ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENT ALONG
 23RD STREET IS TO DRAW PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY. THE OPEN
 SPACE APPEARS MORE TO BE A PASSIVE PARK, WHICH
 CONFLICTS WITH THE INTENT OF THE CMUD REGULATIONS.
  
 1.4. EXTENDING THE ACTIVE USE BUILDING FRONTAGE ALONG
 23RD STREET TO MINIMIZE THE OPEN SPACE AND TO ACTIVATE
 THE STREET FRONTAGE SHOULD BE HIGHLY CONSIDERED.
  
 2. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A
 VARIANCE FROM SEC. 94-209(2)(J)(1)(A) OF THE ZLDRS,
 WHICH REQUIRES THE MAXIMUM HORIZONTAL BUILDING LENGTH
 NOT TO EXCEED 250 FT. THE REQUEST HAS BEEN MADE FOR THE
 BUILDING FRONTAGE ALONG PONCE DE LEON AVENUE; HOWEVER,
 IT ALSO APPEARS THAT A VARIANCE IS NEEDED FOR THE
 FLAGLER DRIVE FRONTAGE:
  
 2.1. SATSIFIED - WHAT IS THE HARDSHIP? WHY CAN'T THE
 CODE REQUIREMENT BE MET?
  
 2.2. SATISFIED - INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION PROVIDED IN
 THE STATEMENT LETTER ON THE JUSTIFICATION AND HOW THE
 PROPOSED BUILDING LENGTH ALONG EACH FRONTAGE WOULD MEET
 THE INTENT OF 250 FT. BUILDING LENGTH REQUIREMENT.
  
 2.3. NOT SATISFIED - BUILDING LENGTH DIAGRAM(S) SHALL
 BE PROVIDED AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SET TO
 CLEARLY SHOW THE LENGTH OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT ALONG
 EACH FRONTAGE AND THE VARIANCE(S) REQUESTED.
  
  
 COMMENT(S) ON BUILDING HEIGHT:
  
 1. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - CLEARLY SHOW AND LABEL THE
 FEMA APPROVED BASE ELEVATION + 2 FT. REQUIRED ELEVATION
 PER THE CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH BUILDING CODE. THE
 HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING SHALL BE MEASURED FROM THIS
 POINT TO THE TOP OF THE BUILDING. THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE
 HEIGHT PER THE CMUD REGULATIONS SHALL NOT BE EXCEEDED
 (BASE HEIGHT = 111 AND MAXIMUM HEIGHT WITH INCENTIVE =
 350 FT.). THERE APPEARS TO BE INCONSISTENCIES AND/OR
 LACK OF CLARITY WITH THE MEASUREMENTS PROVIDED IN THE
 ELEVATION DRAWINGS.
  
 1.1. THE 8 FT. NAVD FLOOD ELEVATION (6 FT. FEMA + 2 FT.
 BUILDING ELEVATION) IS ACCURATELY NOTED; HOWEVER, THE
 ELEVATION DRAWINGS MUST ALSO SHOW THE MAXIMUM BUILDING
 HEIGHT MEASUREMENT/NOTATIONS TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE
 WITH THE HEIGHT LIMITATIONS OF THE ZLDRS (ONLY
 SECTIONAL DRAWINGS PROVIDE BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENTS
 BUT IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO CAPTURE ALL STRUCTURAL
 ELEMENTS OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING(S)).
  
  
 FLAGLER DRIVE PARKWAY SYSTEM COMMENTS AND NOTES:
  
 1. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - THE DESIGN OF THE PROPOSED
 FLAGLER DRIVE PARKWAY SYSTEM DOES NOT FULLY MEET THE
 DESIGN CRITERIA OF THE FLAGLER DRIVE PARKWAY SYSTEM.
 PLEASE ENSURE ALL THE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS FOR THE
 PARKWAY HAVE BEEN MET PER S.94-215(M)(4) OF THE ZLDRS
 (I.E. PARKWAY WIDTH, STREET FURNISHINGS, ETC.).
  
 1.1. CONSIDER ADDING TRASH RECEPTACLES TO ENHANCE THE
 DESIGN OF THE PARKWAY EASEMENT.
  
 1.2. ALTHOUGH DETECTED IN THE PHOTOMETRIC PLAN, THE
 LIGHT FIXTURES WITHIN THE PARKWAY EASEMENT (AS WELL AS
 THE ENTIRE PROJECT SITE) SHALL BE SHOWN IN THE SITE
 PLAN TO DEMONSTRATE CONSISTENCY WITH THE PLANS AND TO
 ENSURE NO CONFLICT WITH THE PLACEMENT OF THE FIXTURES.
  
 2. SATISFIED - THE EXISTING SIDEWALK THAT WILL BE
 REPLACED BY THE MULTIPURPOSE PATH WITHIN THE PARKWAY
 SHALL BE REMOVED AS PART OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
 THE MULTIPURPOSE PATH IS DESIGNED TO REPLACE THE
 EXISTING SIDEWALK AND THERE SHOULD NOT BE AN ADDITIONAL
 SIDEWALK. ALSO, THE STREET TREES AND THE PLANTING
 STRIPS SHALL CONNECT SEAMLESSLY ADJACENT TO THE
 PARKWAY.
  
  
 CITY-OWNED PARK (TRIANGULAR PIECE TO THE SOUTHEAST
 CORNER OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL) COMMENTS:
  
 1. SATISFIED - IT WAS DISCUSSED AT THE PRE-APPLICATION
 MEETING THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO IMPROVE THE
 CITY-OWNED PARK SPACE LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF FLAGLER
 DRIVE AND PICADILLY STREET. BASED ON STAFF???S REVIEW,
 THE AREA HAS ONLY BEEN IMPROVED BY A WIDE SIDEWALK THAT
 CONSUMES MOST OF THE PARK AREA WHICH IS UNACCEPTABLE.
 THOUGHT SHOULD BE MADE TO ACTIVATE AND MAKE THIS PARK
 PARCEL COHESIVE AND ATTRACTIVE WITH THE PROPOSED
 DEVELOPMENT AND CONNECTIVITY TO THE FLAGLER DRIVE
 PARKWAY SYSTEM.
  
  
 DEVELOPMENT PLAN COMMENTS:
 1. SATISFIED - BUILDINGS WITH FRONTAGE ALONG 23RD
 STREET SHALL MAINTAIN A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 6 STORIES/80
 FT. AT THE PODIUM. ALTHOUGH THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
 PLAN APPEARS TO MEET THE HEIGHT AND PODIUM/TOWER
 SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, CONSIDERATION SHOULD ALSO BE MADE
 TO HOW THE BUILDING HEIGHT AT THE PODIUM BALANCES OUT
 WITH THE LINEAR PARK (NORTH OF 23RD STREET) AND THE
 PROPOSED OPEN SPACE WITHIN THE PROJECT ALONG 23RD
 STREET AND FLAGLER DRIVE. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT THE
 ACTIVE USE FRONTAGE ALONG 23RD STREET IS INCREASED IN
 HEIGHT AND EXTENDED ALONG THE STREET FRONTAGE. [ZLDR
 S.94-215(G)(1)(III)]
  
 2. NOT SATISFIED - A MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT OF 6
 STORIES/80 FT. SHALL BE PROVIDED AT THE PODIUM LEVEL
 AND ANY ADDITIONAL HEIGHT ABOVE THE PODIUM OF THE
 BUILDING SHALL BE SETBACK A MINIMUM OF 20 FT. FROM THE
 EDGE OF THE PODIUM FRONTING ALONG PONCE DE LEON. IT
 DOES NOT APPEAR THAT THIS REQUIREMENT HAS BEEN MET
 (SITE PLAN SHOWS AT 12 FT. TOWER SETBACK FROM THE
 PODIUM). PLEASE ADDRESS AND/OR PROVIDE ADDITIONAL
 REFERENCES TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE WITH THIS SECTION
 OF THE ZLDRS. [ZLDR S.94-215(G)(1)(IV)]
  
 2.1. DIMENSION MUST BE PROVIDED IN THE PLAN TO
 DEMOSNTRATE COMPLIANCE. THIS IS STILL MISSING.
  
 2.2. MEASUREMENT MUST BE TAKEN FROM THE EDGE OF THE
 PODIUM TO THE TOWER. IT APPEARS THAT THE MINIMUM
 SETBACK OF 20 FT. HAS NOT BEEN MET.
  
 3. SATISFIED - GROUND LEVEL COMMERCIAL USE IS REQUIRED
 AS A WRAPAROUND USE FOR THE FIRST 100 FT. OF PONCE DE
 LEON AVENUE FROM 23RD STREET. ON SHEET Z-9.0, THE WRAP
 AROUND SPACE IS NOTED AS 3,000 SQ. FT. OF SEMI-PUBLIC
 WRAP AROUND SPACE. STAFF NEEDS MORE INFORMATION ON THE
 PROPOSED "SEMI-PUBLIC" USE TO DETERMINE IF IT MEETS THE
 USE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE REQUIRED WRAP-AROUND ACTIVE
 USE. [ZLDR S.94-215(G)(1)(VI)]
  
 4. SATISFIED - VARIANCE REQUESTED. THE PROPOSED
 BUILDING SETBACK ALONG FLAGLER DRIVE IS NOT LOCATED
 WITHIN THE REQUIRED BUILDING SETBACK RANGE (35 FT.
 MINIMUM AND 45 FT. MAXIMUM; PROVIDED IS A MAXIMUM 80
 FT. FOR THE SOUTH TOWER AND A 98 FT. MAXIMUM SETBACK
 FOR THE NORTH TOWER). PLEASE ADDRESS; IF THIS
 REQUIREMENT CANNOT BE MET, THE APPLICANT WILL NEED TO
 SEEK A VARIANCE FROM THIS REQUIREMENT AND EXPLAIN THE
 HARDSHIP. [ZLDR S.94-215, TABLE VII-11]
  
 5. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - PROVIDE AN OPEN SPACE DIAGRAM
 THAT CLEARLY SHOWS THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED OPEN
 SPACE WITHIN THE PROJECT AND PROVIDE THE CALCULATIONS
 (REQUIRED AND PROPOSED). A MINIMUM OF 3% OF PRIVATE
 OPEN SPACE (DEFINED AS ANY OPEN SPACE WITHIN THE
 BUILDING ENVELOPE OR ON ROOFTOPS) IS REQUIRED FOR THE
 PROJECT. [ZLDR S.94-215(G)(2), TABLE VII-11]
  
 5.1. STAFF DOES NOT AGREE WITH THE PROPORION OF PUBLIC
 OPEN SPACE. AS A RESULT, THE CALCULATIONS PROVIDED MAY
 CHANGE.
  
 6. NOT SATISFIED - CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE MADE TO
 REDUCING THE AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE AT THE GROUND LEVEL.
 THE PURPOSE OF REQUIRING ONLY 3% OF PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
 IS BASED ON THE PROXIMITY OF THE PROJECT SITE TO CURRIE
 PARK, THE LINEAR PARK (NORTH OF 23RD STREET) AND THE
 REQUIREMENT FOR THE 30 FT. WIDE PARKWAY EASEMENT. THERE
 ARE CONCERNS THAT DESIGNING ADDITIONAL AND EXCESSIVE
 OPEN SPACE WITHIN THE PROJECT SITE WILL DIMINISH
 PEDESTRIAN ACTIVITY ALONG THE BUILDING/STREET
 FRONTAGES, WHICH IS NOT THE INTENT OF THE CMUD
 REGULATIONS.
  
 6.1. A MEETING BETWEEN STAFF AND THE
 APPLICANT/ARCHITECT IS REQUESTED TO DISCUSS FURTHER.
  
 7. SATISFIED - THE MINIMUM ACTIVE USE FRONTAGE ALONG
 23RD STREET AND PONCE DE LEON SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH
 THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CMUD CODE. PROVIDE DIAGRAMS AND
 CALCULATIONS WHERE NECESSARY. [ZLDR S.94-215(G)(2),
 TABLE VII-11]
  
 8. SATISFIED - SHOW DIAGRAM THAT DEMONSTRATES
 COMPLIANCE WITH THE MINIMUM TRANSPARENCY REQUIREMENT
 FOR GROUND LEVEL ACTIVE USES (70% MINIMUM REQUIRED).
 ALTHOUGH THE CALCULATIONS FOR TRANSPARENCY HAVE BEEN
 PROVIDED IN THE LINER AND TRANSPARENCY DIAGRAM (SHEET
 Z9.0) THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED TRANSPARENCY AND
 SUPPORTING DIMENSIONS ARE NOT SHOWN IN THE DIAGRAM.
 PLEASE ILLUSTRATE FOR CLARITY WITH COMPLIANCE. [ZLDR
 S.94-215(G)(2), TABLE VII-11]
  
 9. NOT SATISFIED - PRIVATE OPEN SPACE LOCATED ON THE
 GROUND FLOOR AND LOCATED ALONG THE LOT FRONTAGE SHALL
 BE DESIGNED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE
 REQUIREMENTS OF THE CMUD REGULATIONS. THE PUBLIC OPEN
 SPACE REUQIREMENTS HAVE NOT BEEN MET. PLEASE ADDRESS.
 [ZLDR S.94-215(M)(2) AND (3)]
  
 9.1. THE PROPOSED PRIVATE OPEN SPACE AT THE GROUND
 LEVEL DOES NOT COMPLY WITH CODE. IF PRIVATE OPEN SPACE
 IS PROVIDED ON THE GROUND FLOOR AND LOCATED ALONG THE
 LOT FRONTAGE, IT SHALL BE DESIGNED IN COMPLIANCE WITH
 THE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS AND IT SHALL BE
 ACCESIBLE BY THE PUBLIC [REFERENCE: S.94-215(M)(2)].
  
 10. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - CALCULATIONS AND
 ILLUSTRATIONS FOR THE ROOFTOP TERRACES SHALL BE
 PROVIDED. ROOFTOP TERRACES SHALL BE DESIGNED IN
 ACCORDANCE WITH THE STANDARDS PROVIDED IN SEC.
 94-215(S)(1) AND SHALL BE:
  
 10.1. HARDSCAPED WITH MATERIALS, SUCH AS, BUT NOT
 LIMITED TO PATTERNED CONCRETE, PAVERS OR WOOD DECKING.
 MATERIALS MUST BE IDENTIFIED. [NOT SATISFIED]
  
 10.2. PROVIDE SHADED SEATING AREAS. [SATISFIED]
  
 10.3. A MINIMUM 15% OF THE OVERALL GROSS FLOOR AREA OF
 THE ROOFTOP TERRACE SHALL BE LANDSCAPED. LANDSCAPING
 SHALL CONSIST OF TREES, SHURBS, GROUND COVER AND VINES.
 [PARTIALLY ADDRESSED ??? ROOFTOP AREAS MUST CONTAIN
 TREES IN LANDSCAPE PLANTING AREAS.]
  
 10.4. A MINIMUM OF A 5 FT. WIDE WALKWAY SHALL BE
 PROVIDED AROUND THE SWIMMING POOL AND/OR WHIRLPOOL
 (PROVIDE DIMENSIONS). [SATISFIED]
  
 10.5. ROOFTOP COVERED STRUCTURES SHALL NOT OCCUPY MORE
 THAN 30% OF THE GROSS ROOFTOP AREA. [NOT SATISFIED ???
 CALCULATIONS APPEAR TO BE INACCURATE AND NOT CLEAR.]
  
 10.6. ROOFTOP COVERED STRUCTURES SHALL NOT BE DESIGNED
 IN ANY MANNER THAT WOULD PERMIT THE CONVERSION OF SUCH
 STRUCTURES FROM NON-HABITABLE TO HABITABLE SPACE.
 [SATSIFIED]
  
 11. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - WHERE A SIDEWALK OR OTHER
 WALKWAY CROSSES A PARKING LOT, STREET, OR DRIVEWAY, THE
 FOLLOWING STANDARDS SHALL APPLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH SEC.
 94-209(2)(D)(2). THESE REQUIREMENTS SHALL BE FULLY
 ILLUSTRATED AND/OR NOTED IN THE PLANS TO DEMONSTRATE
 CONSISTENCY:
  
 11.1. THE INTERSECTION SHALL BE CLEARLY MARKED AND
 LIGHTED FOR SAFETY; [SATISFIED]
  
 11.2. THE SIDEWALK/WALKWAY SHALL BE CONTINUOUS AND
 REMAIN AT A CONSTANT LEVEL AT ALL INSTANCES (I.E. THERE
 SHOULD BE NO CURBING TO ILLUSTRATE THE FLUSH SIDEWALK
 LEVEL); [NOT SATISFIED]
  
 11.3. A CHANGE IN TACTILE SURFACE TEXTURE SHALL BE
 INSTALLED AT ALL STREET CROSSINGS. THESE REQUIREMENTS
 MUST BE FULLY ILLUSTRATED AND/OR NOTED IN THE PLANS TO
 DEMONSTRATE CONSISTENCY. [ZLDR S.94-209(2)(D)(2)] [NOT
 SATISFIED]
  
 12. NOT ADDRESSED - OPENINGS OFF ANY STREET SHALL NOT
 EXCEED TWO LANES IN WIDTH AND AT A MAXIMUM WIDTH OF 24
 FT. AT THE PROPERTY LINE [S.94-209(2)(E)(2)(B)(II)]
  
 12.1. THE ACCESS POINTS ON FLAGLER DRIVE AND PICADILLY
 STREET APPEAR TO EXCEED 24 FT. IN WIDTH AT THE PROPERTY
 LINE. PLEASE SHOW DIMENSION TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE.
  
 13. NOT SATISFIED - THE PARKING GARAGE SHALL HAVE
 DIRECT PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO A PUBLIC WALKWAY. CLEARLY
 SHOW IN THE PLANS THE PEDESTRIAN PATH TO DEMONSTRATE
 COMPLIANCE. [ZLDR S.94-209(2)(E)(2)B)(V)]
  
 13.1. DIRECT PEDESTRIAN ACCESS MUST BE CLEARLY DEFINED
 BY WALKWAYS LEADING FROM THE GARAGE STRUCTURE AND
 CONNECTING TO A PUBLIC WALKWAY.
  
 13.2. IS PEDESTRIAN ACCESS ONLY PROVIDED ON FLAGLER
 DRIVE? IT IS LOGICAL TO HAVE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS FROM THE
 GARAGE TO PICADILLY STREET AND PONCE DE LEON, GIVEN THE
 SIZE OF THE PROJECT.
  
 14. SATISFIED - THE PRIMARY ENTRANCE OF THE PROJECT
 SHALL PROVIDE PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO A PUBLIC
 RIGHT-OF-WAY, OR PUBLIC, SEMI-PUBLIC OR PRIVATE OPEN
 SPACE. CLEARLY DEMONSTRATE IN THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
 [ZLDR S.94-209(2)(J)(1)(E)]
  
 15. SATSIFIED - GROUND FLOOR WINDOW SILLS SHALL BE
 PLACED AT A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 24 INCHES ABOVE GRADE.
 PLEASE SHOW/PROVIDE NOTE WHERE MOST APPROPRIATE IN THE
 DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DEMONSTRATE CONSISTENCY. [ZLDR
 S.94-209(2)(J)(1)(H)]
  
 16. SATISFIED - IT APPEARS THAT A SOLAR ENERGY SYSTEM
 WILL BE PROVIDED ON THE ROOFTOPS OF THE PROPOSED
 PROJECT. PLEASE ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH SEC. 94-309(I)
 WITH ALL OTHER APPLICABLE SECTIONS OF THE ZLDRS.
  
 17. SATISFIED - WHAT IS THE DISTANCE SEPARATION BETWEEN
 ACCESS POINTS ON PICADILLY STREET? THE MINIMUM DISTANCE
 SEPARATION SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 125 FT. PLEASE PROVIDE
 THE DIMENSIONS TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE. [ZLDR
 S.94-312(2)]
  
 18. NOT SATISFIED - WHAT IS THE MINIMUM CORNER
 CLEARANCE DISTANCE FROM THE ACCESS POINTS/DRIVEWAYS TO
 THE STREET INTERSECTIONS? THE MINIMUM CORNER CLEARANCE
 SHALL BE MET IN ACCORDANCE WITH ZLDR S. 94-305(E).
 PLEASE PROVIDE CORNER CLEARANCE DIMENSIONS TO
 DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE.
  
 18.1. SIGHT TRIANGLES IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE STANDARDS
 IN ZLDR S. 94-305(E) SHALL BE PROVIDED AT ALL PROPOSED
 DRIVEWAYS.
  
 19. SATISFIED - THE SCALE APPEARS TO BE MISSING FROM
 THE SITE PLAN. AS PROVIDED IN THE SITE PLAN CHECKLIST
 (PAGE 16/31 OF THE 2023 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION), THIS
 INFORMATION IS REQUIRED.
  
 20. PARTIALLY SATSIFIED - CAN THE TRASH
 COLLECTION/MECHANICAL ROOMS ON LEVEL 1 (WHICH FRONTS ON
 PICADILLY STREET AND HAS ITS OWN SEPARATE ACCESS POINT)
 BE RELOCATED? THE PROJECT CAN BE GREATLY ENHANCED BY
 ELIMINATING THE LOADING ZONE/MECHANICAL ROOM CURB CUT
 AND ACTIVATING THE BUILDING FRONTAGE IN THIS AREA.
  
 20.1. IT IS STAFF'S UNDERSTANDING THAT THE SANITATION
 DEPARTMENT HAS REQUESTED ACCESS ON PICADILLY STREET
 (LEAST ACTIVE ROADWAY) FOR TRASH PICKUP. IF THE
 LOCATION OF THE TRASH COLLECTION/MECHANICAL ROOMS
 CANNOT BE RELOCATED, THE ENTRANCE AREA TO THE TRASH
 COLLECTION POINT SHALL BE DESIGNED TO MINIMIZE VISUAL
 IMPACT (I.E. UTILIZATION OF DECORATIVE
 SCREENING/ARCHITECTURAL TREAMENT TO MASK IMPACT OF THE
 TRASH COLLECTION POINT).
  
 20.2. THE SITE PLAN DOES NOT MATCH THE ELEVATION FOR
 THE TRASH COLLECTION POINT. IT IS DIFFICULT FOR STAFF
 TO ANALYZE THE VISUAL IMPACT OF THIS POINT ALONG THE
 SOUTH ELEVATION (PICADILLY STREET).
  
 21. NOT SATISFIED - AS DISCUSSED IN THE PRE-APPLICATION
 MEETING, IT IS HIGHLY RECOMMENDED THAT THE PROJECT
 ACCOMMODATE AN ACTIVE USE LINER ALONG THE PROPOSED
 PARKING GARAGE, NOT ONLY TO BREAK UP THE EXTENSIVE
 BUILDING FACADE OF NON-ACTIVE USES (I.E. THE PARKING
 GARAGE), BUT TO COMPLIMENT THE EXISTING AND FUTURE
 BUILDINGS ON THE WEST SIDE OF PONCE DE LEON AVENUE.
  
 21.1. A VARIANCE FROM THIS REQUIREMENT HAS BEEN
 REQUESTED; HOWEVER, THE JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT
 SUPPORTING THE VARIANCE IS WEAK. IF THE ACTIVE USE
 LINER REQUIREMENT CANNOT BE MET (BY THE DESIGN OF THE
 ARCHITECT), THEN AT MINIMUM, IT MUST BE EXPLAINED
 AND/OR ILLUSTRATED TO HOW THE INTENT OF THE CODE
 REQUIREMENT (WHICH IS TO ACTIVATE THE SPACE IS
 ADDRESSED/MET THROUGH THIS ALTERNATIVE DESIGN.
  
 22. SATISFIED - THE ZONING DESIGNATIONS OF THE ADJACENT
 PROPERTIES ARE INCORRECTLY LABELED. PLEASE ADDRESS FOR
 CONSISTENCY.
  
 23. NEW COMMENT ??? THERE IS OPPORTUNITY TO IMPROVE THE
 AREA ALONG PICADILLY STREET WHERE THE BICYCLE RACKS ARE
 LOCATED. SINCE THERE IS NO ENTRANCE TO THE BUILDING
 FROM THIS POINT (IT IS BACK OF HOUSE), AND NO ACTIVE
 USES ALONG THE BUILDING FRONTAGE, A SMALL COHESIVE
 PEDESTRIAN AREA COULD BE ACCOMODATED TO PROVIDE SOME
 ACTIVATION TO THE STREET/BUILDING FRONTAGE.
  
 24. NEW COMMENT ??? ALL PROPOSED STRUCUTRES, INCLUDING
 HEIGHT AND SETBACK DISTANCE (WHERE APPLICABLE), SHALL
 BE INCLUDED IN THE PLANS.
  
 25. NEW COMMENT - TOWER SETBACK FROM THE PODIUM LEVEL
 ALONG PONCE DE LEON MUST BE CLEARLY NOTATED IN THE
 PLANS.
  
  
 OPEN SPACE COMMENTS:
  
 1. NOT SATISFIED - OPEN SPACE CALCULATIONS AND DIAGRAMS
 SHOW AREAS AS PUBLIC OPEN SPACE THAT DO NOT QUALIFY AS
 PUBLIC OPEN SPACE. IF THE APPLICANT WANTS TO INCLUDE
 AREAS OF PUBLIC OPEN SPACE, IT MUST SHOW HOW IT
 QUALIFIES AS PUBLIC OPEN SPACE AND MEETS THE
 REQUIREMENTS OF THE DESIGNATED PUBLIC OPEN SPACE. [ZLDR
 S.94-215(M)]
  
 1.1. THE PROPOSED FENCE AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE
 GARDEN AREA CANNOT BE UTILIZED TO QUALIFY AS PUBLIC
 OPEN SPACE. IT WAS ADVISED BY STAFF TO REMOVE THE FENCE
 FROM THE PLANS OR PROVIDE A NATURAL BARRIER (I.E.
 LANDSCAPE HEDGE IN LIEU OF A FENCE, ETC.)
  
 1.2. PUBLIC OPEN SPACE MUST HAVE UNCUMBERED ACCESS FROM
 THE PUBLIC SIDEWLAK OR RIGHT-OF-WAY FOR GENERAL PUBLIC
 USE.
  
 2. NOT SATISFIED - PRIVATE OPEN SPACE ON THE GROUND
 LEVEL AND LOCATED ALONG THE LOT FRONTAGE SHALL BE
 DESIGNED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE
 REQUIREMENTS, AND IT SHALL BE ACCESSIBLE BY THE PUBLIC
 FOR PUBLIC USE [ZLDR S.94-215(M)]:
  
 2.1. IT APPEARS THE PROPOSED GROUND LEVEL PRIVATE OPEN
 SPACE IS STILL RESTRICTED AND DOES NOT PROVIDE
 UNENCOMBERED PEDESTRIAN ACCESS FROM THE SIDEWALK.
  
  
 STREETSCAPE COMMENTS:
  
 1. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF PAVED
 AREA AT THE CORNERS AND DRIVEWAY ENTRANCES. ADDITIONAL
 LANDSCAPING CAN BE ACCOMMODATED.
  
 1.1. THE AMOUNT OF PAVED AREA AT THE CORNERS LEADING TO
 THE CROSSWALKS CAN BE MINIMIZED TO ACCOMMODATE MORE
 LANDSCAPED AREA. ADDITIONALLY, WIDER CROSSWALKS CAN BE
 DEPICTED.
  
 1.2. A CONTINUOUS LANDSCAPE STRIP SHALL BE PROVIDED
 ALONG 23RD STREET, BETWEEN THE WALKING PATH AND THE
 ROADWAY.
  
 1.3. HOW WIDE ARE THE CROSSWALKS? PLEASE PROVIDE
 DIMENSIONS.
  
 2. NOT SATISFIED - A MINIMUM LANDSCAPE STRIP OF 5 FT.
 SHALL BE PROVIDED ALONG THE STREET EDGE. PLEASE
 DIMENSION OUT TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE. [ZLDR
 S.94-215(N)(4)(II)]
  
 2.1. THE LANDSCAPE STRIP ALONG THE STREETS SHALL BE
 CONTIGUOUS UNLESS EXCEPTIONS PROVIDED OTHERWISE IN THE
 ZLDRS (I.E. DRIVEWAYS, ETC.).
  
 3. NOT SATISIFIED - TREE GRATES SHALL BE A MINIMUM OF 5
 FT. BY 5 FT. AND MAY BE UTILIZED IN PLACE OF THE
 REQUIRED LANDSCAPE STRIP. THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPE
 PLANTING AREAS ADJACENT TO THE PARALLEL ON-STREET
 PARKING SPACES ALONG PONCE DE LEON AVENUE DO NOT MEET
 THE MINIMUM STREETSCAPE REQUIREMENTS. [ZLDR
 S.94-215(N)(4)(IV)]
  
 3.1. THE LANDSCAPE STRIP ALONG PONCE DE LEON AND
 ADJACENT TO THE PARALLEL PARKING SPACES SHALL BE
 CONTIGUOUS. ALTERNATIVELY, TREE GRATES CAN BE UTILIZED
 IN PLACE OF THE REQUIRED STRIP. THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPED
 AREAS ALONG PONCE DE LEON DO NOT COMPLY WITH THE
 MINIMUM STREETSCAPE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CMUD.
  
 4. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - A MINIMUM 5 FT. WIDE
 UNOBSTRUCTED SIDEWALK SHALL BE PROVIDED ADJACENT TO THE
 LANDSCAPED AREA. PLEASE DIMENSION THE SIDEWALK AROUND
 THE PERIMETER OF THE PROJECT TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE.
 [ZLDR S.94-215(N)(4)(V) AND (VI)]
  
 4.1. SHOW WIDTH OF THE NARROWEST POINT OF THE SIDEWALK
 ALONG ALL STREET FRONTAGES TO DEMONSTRATE COMPLIACE.
 NOT ALL NARROW POINTS ALONG THE STREET FRONTAGES HAVE
 BEEN DIMENSIONED. INVERSELY, A NOTE STATING THAT THE
 CONTINUOUS SIDEWALK VARIES IN WIDTH BUT SHALL BE A
 MINIMUM OF 5 FT. CVAN BE PROVIDED IN THE PLAN.
  
 5. SATISFIED - IDENTIFY THE FIVE (5) SQUARES ADJACENT
 TO THE BUILDING FRONTAGE OF THE NORTH TOWER WITHIN THE
 PROPERTY LINE. THESE SQUARES ARE NOT LABELED IN THE
 PLAN.
  
 6. SATISFIED - NO UTILITY POLES, FIRE HYDRANTS OR ANY
 OTHER TEMPORARY OR PERMANENT STRUCTURES SHALL BE
 PERMITTED WITHIN THE UNOBSTRUCTED AREA. [ZLDR
 S.94-215(N)(4)(VIII)]
  
 7. SATISFIED - OVERHEAD UTILITIES ARE NOT PERMITTED.
 EXISTING OVERHEAD UTILITIES SHALL BE RELOCATED
 UNDERGROUND. [ZLDR S.94-(N)(4)(XI)]
  
 8. SATISFIED - CONSIDER INCORPORATING BICYCLE RACKS
 INTO THE STREETSCAPE AND/OR OPEN SPACE DESIGN OF THE
 PROJECT.
  
 9. SATSIFIED - PUBLIC SIDEWALKS THAT CROSS INTO PRIVATE
 PROPERTY SHALL REQUIRE A PUBLIC ACCESS EASEMENT.
  
  
  
 PARKING COMMENTS:
  
 1. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - INCONSISTENCIES DETECTED IN
 THE PARKING CALCULATIONS PROVIDED IN THE SITE DATA
 TABULAR. PLEASE ADDRESS FOR CONSISTENCY (I.E. VEHICULAR
 PARKING CALCULATIONS INCORRECT; BICYCLE PARKING
 CALCULATIONS MISSING; LOADING REQUIREMENTS).
  
 1.1. REQUIRED PARKING CALCULATIONS FOR COMMERCIAL USE
 IS INCORRECT AND THE PROVIDED PARKING DISTRIBUTION FOR
 THE COMMERCIAL USE DOES NOT MEET THE MINIMUM PARKING
 REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZLDRS.
  
 1.2. REQUIRED ACCESSIBLE PARKING CALCULATIONS
 INCORRECT.
  
 2. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - FLOOR PLANS SHOWING THE
 PARKING LAYOUT, GENERAL DIMENSIONS AND TABULATIONS FOR
 EACH LEVEL OF PARKING (BOTH VEHICULAR AND BICYCLE)
 SHALL BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE
 PLANS AND CALCULATIONS SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITHIN THE
 PLAN.
  
 2.1. GENERAL DRIVE AISLE, PARKING STALL DIMENSIONS
 SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE PARKING LAYOUT FLOOR PLAN TO
 DEMONSTRATE COMPLIANCE.
  
 2.2. IS THERE SUFFICIENT ROOM BETWEEN THE END PARKING
 STALLS AND THE WALL/COLUMNS (WHERE APPLICABLE) TO
 ADEQUATELY OPEN DOORS AND EXIT THE VEHICLE?
  
 3. SATISFIED - ALTHOUGH THE PARKING STALL STRIPING
 DETAIL IS PROVIDED IN THE CIVIL PLAN SET, THE DETAIL
 SHALL ALSO BE INCLUDED IN THE SITE PLAN SET FOR
 CONSISTENCY.
  
 4. PARTIALLY SATSIFIED - THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT SHALL
 PROVIDE SECURE BICYCLE PARKING SPACES FOR BOTH THE
 COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL COMPONENTS OF THE
 DEVELOPMENT AS CALCULATED SEPARATELY IN ACCORDANCE WITH
 THE REQUIREMENTS OF SEC. 94-215(P). THE LOCATION AND
 BICYCLE PARKING CALCULATIONS SHALL BE CLEAR IN THE
 DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
  
 4.1. LOCATION OF SURFACE BICYCLE PARKING NEEDS TO BE
 INCLUDED NEAR THE GROUND LEVEL COMMERCIAL USE.
  
 4.2. IDENTIFY THE LOCATION OF THE REQUIRED BICYCLE
 RACKS AND STORAGE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT. A
 MINIMUM OF ONE SHOWER AND CHANGING FACILITY SHALL BE
 PROVIDED TO BE AVAILABLE FOR ALL TENANTS AND SHALL BE
 LOCATED WITHIN THE BUILDING OR WITHIN 200 FT. OF THE
 BUILDING ENTRANCE.
  
 4.3. ENSURE THAT THE NUMBER OF BICYCLE RACKS DEPICTED
 IN THE PLAN MATCHES THE BICYCLE PARKING CALCULATIONS
 FOR REQUIRED AND PROPOSED. THERE APPEARS TO BE SOME
 INCONSISTENCIES.
  
 5. SATISFIED - A DETAIL OF THE BICYCLE PARKING IS
 REQUIRED AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN.
  
 6. NOT ADDRESSED. ACCORDING TO THE CURRENT PARKING
 CALCULATIONS, A TOTAL OF 325 PARKING SPACES WILL BE
 PROVIDED. THIS REQUIRES A MINIMUM OF 9 ACCESSIBLE
 PARKING SPACES. ONLY 8 ACCESSIBLE PARKING SPACES HAVE
 BEEN PROVIDED. PLEASE ADDRESS AND/OR CLARIFY. [ZLDR
 S.94-485(O)]
  
 7. SATISFIED - A MINIMUM OF TWO 10 FT. BY 25 FT.
 LOADING SPACES SHALL BE PROVIDED. CLEARLY SHOW THE
 LCOATION OF THE LOADING ARE AND DIMENSION OUT THE
 LOADING SPACES TO DEMONSTRATE CONSISTENCY WITH THIS
 REQUIREMENT. [ZLDR S.94-485(P)]
  
  
 SIGNAGE COMMENTS:
  
 1. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - INSUFFICIENT INFORMATION
 PROVIDED ON SIGNAGE. ANY SIGNAGE PROPOSED ON THE
 PROPERTY SHALL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF
 SEC. 94-215(R). ALL RELEVANT SIGN INFORMATION SHALL
 ALSO BE PROVIDED IN THE PLAN SHEET(S) TO DEMONSTRATE
 CONSISTENCY (I.E. CONTENT, LOCATION, SIGN AREA,
 DIMENSIONS, RELEVANT NOTES ON RESTRICTIONS, ETC.).
  
 1.1. THE NOTE FOR THE FREESTANDING SIGNAGE SHALL
 CLEARLY STATE THAT THE SIGN AREA IS NOT TO EXCEED 5 FT.
 IN HEIGHT WITH A MAXIMUM SIGN AREA OF 4 SQ. FT. THE
 SIGNAGE INFORMATION IS NOT CLEAR.
  
 1.2. A NOTE STATING THAT THE PROPOSED FREESTANDING
 SIGNAGE WILL NOT BE LIT IN ANY WAY SHALL BE REQUIRED
 WITH THE FREESTANDING SIGN DETAIL.
  
 2. SATISFIED - ACCORDING TO SHEET A-5.3, A FREESTANDING
 SIGN IS PROPOSED; HOWEVER, THE LOCATION OF THE
 FREESTANDING SIGN IS NOT SHOWN IN THE SITE PLAN.
 LOCATION OF ANY PROPOSED FREESTANDING SIGN SHALL BE
 PROVIDED IN THE SITE PLAN (AND ALL OTHER RELEVANT
 SHEETS I.E. LANDSCAPE PLAN, ETC.) FOR CONSISTENCY. THE
 DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL ALSO INCLUDE SETBACK DISTANCE
 FROM THE PROPERTY LINE(S), ETC.
  
 3. SATISFIED - SOME PLAN SHEETS SHOW A FREESTANDING
 SIGN WITHIN THE FLAGLER DRIVE PARKWAY EASEMENT. THIS IS
 NOT PERMITTED AND SHALL BE REMOVED FROM THE EASEMENT
 AREA.
  
  
 REQUIRED DIAGRAMS:
  
 1. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN MUST
 CLEARLY PROVIDE SEPARATE DIAGRAMS AND CORRECT
 CALCULATIONS FOR THE FOLLOWING:
  
 1.1. FAR (BY EACH FLOOR) [PARTIALLY SATISFIED]
  
 1.2. OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS (PUBLIC AND PRIVATE)
 [SATISFIED]
  
 1.3. PARKING (SHOWING THE LAYOUT AND CALCULATIONS ON
 EACH LEVEL AND CIRCULATION) [SATISFIED]
  
 1.4. BUILDING LENGTH MEASUREMENTS [S.94-209(2)(J)(1)]
 [NOT SATISFIED ??? SEPARATE DIAGRAM REQUIRED AND ALL
 BUILDING FRONTAGES MUST BE ACCOUNTED FOR.]
  
 1.5. PLANAR BREAK (SHOWING DIMENSIONS IN THE PLANS)
 [S.94-209(2)(J)(1)(A)] [NOT SATISFIED ??? SEPARATE
 DIAGRAM REQUIRED AND ALL BUILDING FRONTAGES MUST BE
 ACCOUNTED FOR.]
  
 1.6. TOWER PLATE SETBACKS [S.94-209(2)(J)(1)] [NOT
 SATISFIED]
  
  
 ARCHITECTURAL COMMENTS:
  
 1. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - IN THE SECTIONAL DRAWINGS, IT
 WOULD BE HELPFUL TO PROVIDE THE DIMENSIONAL SETBACK(S)
 FOR THE BUILDING. THIS WILL HELP CLARIFY THE PLANS AND
 DEMONSTRATE CONSISTENCY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE
 ZLDRS.
  
 1.1. SHOW DIMENSIONS FOR THE ARCHITECTURAL
 ENCROACHMENTS. ALL ENCROACHMENTS MUST BE CONSISTENT
 WITH ZLDR S.94-209(2)(L), TABLE VII-1.
  
 2. NOT SATISFIED - THERE APPEARS TO BE AN ENCROACHMENT
 INTO THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG 23RD STREET, WHICH
 IS NOT ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE VARIANCE REQUEST FOR
 BUILDING ENCROACHMENTS (REQUEST IS ONLY FOR A 5 FT.
 ENCROACHMENT VARIANCE, BUT IT APPEARS TO BE GREATER).
 PLEASE ADDRESS FOR CONSISTENCY. ALSO NOTE THAT
 ENCROACHMENTS INTO ANY RIGHT-OF-WAY WILL REQUIRE THE
 APPROVAL OF THE APPLICABLE GOVERNING AGENCY. [ZLDR
 S.94-209(2)(L), TABLE VII-1]
  
 3. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - WITHOUT CLEAR AND ACCURATE
 NOTATIONS ON THE ELEVATIONS AND SECTIONS, THE BUILDING
 ELEVATIONS/SECTIONS APPEAR TO BE INACCURATE. IT IS ALSO
 IMPORTANT TO ACCURATELY SHOW THE EXISTING SIDEWALK
 LEVEL IN THE DRAWINGS (ESPECIALLY ALONG THE ACTIVE USE
 FRONTAGES) TO DEPICT THE RELATIONSHIP OF THE BUILDING
 TO THE SIDEWALK/STREETSCAPE LEVEL.
  
 3.1. THE CORRECT FLOOD ELEVATION (6 FT. FEMA + 2 FT.
 BUILDING ELEVATION = 8 FT. NAVD) HAS BEEN NOTED IN THE
 PLANS; HOWEVER, THE MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT
 IS NOT CONSISTENT IN ALL SHEETS (I.E. 3 FT. 11 INCHES
 IN SHEET A-4.2).
  
 3.2. THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE BUILDING HEIGHT MEASUREMENT
 SHALL BE SHOWN IN ALL ELEVATION DRAWINGS (NOT JUST THE
 SECTIONALS) TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE MAXIMUM BUILDING
 HEIGHT OF 350 FT. INCLUDES ALL STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS OF
 THE BUILDING (EXCLUDING THE HEIGHT EXCEPTIONS PER ZLDR
 S.94-209(2)(L), TABLR VII-1).
  
 3.3. CLARIFY THE 0 FT./LEVEL 1/9.5 FT. ELEVATION. IT IS
 NOT UNDERSTOOD BY STAFF TO WHY THIS ELEVATION IS
 DEPICTED AT 0 FT.
  
 4. NOT SATSIFIED - ARCHITECTURAL TREATMENT SHALL BE
 PROVIDED FOR ALL NON-ACTIVE USE FACADE ELEVATIONS (I.E.
 PARKING FACADE ELEVATIONS) AND SHALL BE INTEGRATED WITH
 THE DESIGN OF THE ADJACENT ACTIVE USE FACADES.
 ARCHITECTURAL TREATMENT SHALL BE PROVIDED THROUGH A
 COMBINATION OF TWO (2) OR MORE TREATMENTS. PLEASE
 CLEARLY ILLUSTRATE IN THE DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND
 IDENTIFY TREATMENT TECHNIQUE AND MATERIALS. [ZLDR
 S.94-209(2)(J)(1)(J)]
  
 4.1. A COMBINATION OF TWO MATERIAL TREATMENTS MUST BE
 PROVIDED AND INTEGRATED (I.E. PARKING FA??ADE ??? METAL
 AND CONCRETE INTEGRATED TOGETHER AND NOT SEPARATED).
  
 5. NOT SATISFIED - EXCEPT STOREFRONTS, A MINIMUM OF 30%
 OF ALL GROUND FLOOR BUILDING FRONTAGES SHALL BE
 FENESTRATED WITH WINDOWS. PLEASE SHOW TO DEMONSTRATE
 COMPLIANCE. DIAGRAMS AND CALCULATIONS MUST BE PROVIDED.
 [ZLDR S.94-209(2)(J)(1)(K)
  
 6. SATISFIED - FLOOR PLANS FOR LEVELS 3-7 ARE MISSING.
 A TYPICAL CAN BE PROVIDED FOR THESE LEVELS, BUT ALL
 FLOOR PLAN LEVELS MUST BE ACCOUNTED FOR IN THE
 ARCHITECTURAL PACKET.
  
  
 PHOTOMETRIC/LIGHTING COMMENTS:
  
 1. PARTIALLY SATISFIED - THE FOLLOWING NOTES SHALL BE
 PROVIDED IN THE PHOTOMETRIC/LIGHTING PLAN TO MAINTAIN
 CONSISTENCY (SHOULD THERE BE ANY CHANGES) WITH THE
 REQUIREMENTS OF SEC. 94-309(2)(I) OF THE ZLDRS:
  
 1.1. LIGHT POLES SHALL NOT EXCEED AN OVERALL HEIGHT OF
 17.5 FT. ABOVE GRADE. (SATISFIED)
  
 1.2. NO COBRA HEADLIGHTS ARE PERMITTED. (SATISFIED)
  
 1.3. ALL LIGHTING SHALL BE LED OR LIGHT-EMITTING DIODE.
 (SATISFIED)
  
 1.4. ALL LIGHTING SHALL BE WEATHER AND VANDAL RESISTANT
 ??? A NOTE SHALL BE PROVIDED (I.E. RESISTANT TO
 GRAFFITI, SHATTERING, ETC.). (NOT SATISFIED)
  
 1.5. ADDITIONALLY, ADD THIS STANDARD NOTE THE
 PHOTOMETRIC/LIGHTING PLAN [PER S.94-309(A)]: ALL
 OUTDOOR LIGHTING SHALL BE SHIELDED TO REDUCE GLARE AND
 SHALL BE ARRANGED TO REFLECT LIGHT OR GLARE AWAY FROM
 ALL ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, ADJACENT
 RESIDENCES, OR PUBLIC THOROUGHFARES. (NOT SATISFIED)
  
 1.6. A DIGITAL COPY OF THE LATEST PHOTOMETRIC PLAN FOR
 THE PROJECT SHALL BE PROVIDED. (NOT SATISFIED)
  
 2. NEW COMMENT - THE LIGHTING/PHOTOMETRIC PLAN SHOWS
 CONFLICT WITH THE PLACEMENT OF POLE FIXTURES WITHIN
 WALKWAYS AND DRIVE AISLES. PLEASE ADDRESS FOR
 CONSISTENCY.
  
  
  
 ART IN PUBLIC PLACES COMMENT:
  
 1. NEW COMMENT - THE REVISED DEVELOPMENT PLAN NOW SHOWS
 A PLACE HOLDER FOR PUBLIC ART. COORDINATION WITH THE
 ADMINISTRATOR OF PUBLIC ART AND CULTURE IS REQUIRED
 REGARDING THE PROPOSED LOCATION FOR THE ART AND THE
 MINIMUM DIMENSIONS FOR THE PLACE HOLDER. THESE ISSUES
 MUST BE RESOLVED IN THE PLANS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC
 HEARING STAGE.
  
 1.1. THE LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED PUBLIC ART DOES NOT
 APPEAR TO COMPLY WITH THE STANDARDS FOR THE LOCATION OF
 PUBLIC ART.
  
  
 INSTRUCTIONS FOR RESUBMITTAL:
  
 * PLEASE PROVIDE RESPONSES TO REVIEW COMMENTS IN
 WRITTEN FORMAT.
  
 * WHEN RESUBMITTING, PLEASE PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF FOUR
 (4) PAPER COPIES, ONE (1) REDUCED COPY IN 11 INCHES X
 17 INCHES, AND AN ELECTRONIC COPY OF ALL PLANS AND
 DOCUMENTS.
  
 * CHANGES TO THE PLAN SHEETS SHALL BE CARRIED
 THROUGHOUT THE PLAN SET FOR CONSISTENCY.
  
 * PLEASE NOTE THAT CHANGES ON THE RESUBMITTED PLANS MAY
 RESULT IN ADDITIONAL COMMENTS.
  
 * 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 PERCENT
 OF THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FEE.
  
 * CONTACT LINDA LOUIE @ (561) 822-1458 IF THERE ARE ANY
 QUESTIONS.
  
  
 NORTHWOOD ROAD EXTENSION (HEIGHT BONUS) NOTES:
  
 1.) PER SEC. 94-215(K)(2) OF THE ZLDRS, THE DEVELOPER
 UTILIZING THIS INCENTIVE SHALL ADDRESS THE FOLLOWING:
  
 1.1) THE REQUIRED RIGHT-OF-WAY (ROW) FOR THE NORTHWOOD
 ROAD EXTENSION MUST BE IN PLACE AND DEDICATED BY THE
 PROPERTY OWNERS IMPACTED BY THIS EXTENSION BY NOVEMBER
 15, 2024.
  
 1.2) COMPLETE THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROADWAY EXTENSION
 BY NOVEMBER 15, 2026 (5 YEARS FROM THE ADOPTION DATE OF
 THE CMUD REGULATIONS; REFERENCE: ORDINANCE NO.
 4963-21).
  
  
 CONDITIONS:
  
 * THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THEIR SUCCESSORS OR ASSIGNS
 SHALL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND ONGOING
 MAINTENANCE OF THE REQUIRED PARKWAY EASEMENT. [ZLDR
 S.94-215(M)]
  
 * THE PARKWAY EASEMENT SHALL BE RECORDED WITH THE CLERK
 OF PALM BEACH COUNTY PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST
 BUILDING PERMIT FOR DEVELOPMENT. [ZLDR S.94-215(M)(4)]
  
 * STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY
 ALONG THE ENTIRE PROPERTY (AS SHOWN IN THE DEVELOPOMENT
 PLAN) SHALL BE INSTALLATED BY AND MAINTENANCE
 RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEVELOPER/PROPERTY OWNER.
  
 * A SEPARATE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
 APPLICANT AND THE CITY SHALL BE EXECUTED TO MAINTAIN
 THE CITY-OWNED PARK/OPEN SPACE PARCEL LOCATED AT THE
 SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE PROJECT.
  Print


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