| Date |
Text |
| 2012-01-31 15:00:25 | ZONING PLAN REVIEW |
| | ___________________________________________ |
| | |
| | DATE OF REVIEW: 01.31.2012 |
| | PERMIT NO.: 11120505 |
| | ADDRESS: NORTH AUSTRALIAN AVENUE |
| | CONTRACTOR/CONTACT: |
| | TELEPHONE NO.: |
| | SCOPE OF REVIEW: VEHICULAR ACCESS RESTRICTION DEVICES |
| | ___________________________________________ |
| | |
| | REVIEW STATUS: FAILED |
| | ___________________________________________ |
| | |
| | PLEASE PROVIDE A WRITTEN RESPONSE TO THE FOLLOWING PLAN |
| | REVIEW COMMENTS: |
| | |
| | 1. SHEET C1-1 |
| | A. IT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED TO HAVE THE GUARDRAIL RUN IN |
| | A STRAIGHT LINE, AND CLOSE THE GAP BETWEEN THE PROPOSED |
| | GUARDRAIL AND THE EXISTING GUARDRAIL AT THE BRIDGE |
| | UTILIZING LANDSCAPE MATERIAL (I.E. TREES AND PALMS). |
| | B. THIS SECTION SHOULD BE OVERLAID WITH THE PLANS FOR |
| | THE CONTROL STRUCTURE TO ENSURE COORDINATION OF THE |
| | PROJECTS. |
| | C. SOME LEVEL OF LANDSCAPING (I.E. SHRUBS, GRASSES, |
| | ETC.) SHOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO THE INSTALLATION OF |
| | THE GUARDRAIL TO HELP THE GUARDRAIL BLEND IN WITH THE |
| | NATURAL SURROUNDING. |
| | D. LANDSCAPING SHOULD BE COORDINATED WITH THE SCREENING |
| | FOR THE CONTROL STRUCTURE THAT IS PROPOSED AT THE |
| | BRIDGE. SIGNIFICANT LANDSCAPING SHOULD BE INSTALLED AT |
| | THE NORTH AND SOUTH ENDS OF THE BRIDGE TO HELP SCREEN |
| | THIS STRUCTURE FROM NORTH-SOUTH TRAFFIC. PLEASE REFER |
| | TO THE EXISTING LANDSCAPE MATERIAL THAT HAS BEEN |
| | UTILIZED ALONG CLEAR LAKE FOR RECOMMENDATIONS ON PLANT |
| | SPECIES. |
| | |
| | 2. SHEET C1-2 |
| | A. IT IS PREFERRED BY PLANNING STAFF THAT THIS SECTION |
| | OF GUARDRAIL NOT BE INSTALLED AND THAT NEW AND EXISTING |
| | LANDSCAPE MATERIAL BE UTILIZED TO CLOSE THE GAP AND |
| | AVOID THE NECESSITY OF THE GUARDRAIL. |
| | B. THE EXISTING GAPS IN VEGETATION IN THIS AREA (AND |
| | THE HOLES IN THE GROUND) ARE THE RESULT OF |
| | PREVIOUSLY-PLANTED PALMS DYING AND NOT BEING REPLACED. |
| | THE LANDSCAPING WAS ORIGINALLY INSTALLED AS PART OF A |
| | MITIGATION PROJECT BY THE SOLID WASTE AUTHORITY. IT IS |
| | PLANNING STAFF'S OPINION THAT THESE AREAS SHOULD BE |
| | REPLANTED. |
| | C. IF A PHYSICAL BARRIER DOES NEED TO BE CONSTRUCTED |
| | BEYOND ANY PROVISION OF LANDSCAPING, ARE THERE |
| | ALTERNATIVES (I.E. BOLLARDS) THAT COULD BE INCORPORATED |
| | INTO THE LANDSCAPING INSTEAD? |
| | D. IF A GUARDRAIL IS NECESSARY, MOCK-ROOS IS WORKING TO |
| | SEE IF THE COUNTY WILL ALLOW THE GUARDRAIL TO BE PLACED |
| | WITHIN THE EASEMENT. IT IS PLANNING STAFF'S |
| | RECOMMENDATION THAT SOME LEVEL OF LANDSCAPING (I.E. |
| | SHRUBS, GRASSES, ETC.) SHOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO THE |
| | INSTALLATION OF THE GUARDRAIL TO HELP THE GUARDRAIL |
| | BLEND IN WITH THE NATURAL SURROUNDING. |
| | |
| | 3. SHEET C1-3 |
| | A. THE PROPOSED GUARDRAIL SHOULD BE RELOCATED BEHIND |
| | THE EXISTING ROYAL PALMS. |
| | B. SOME LEVEL OF LANDSCAPING (I.E. SHRUBS, GRASSES, |
| | ETC.) SHOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO THE INSTALLATION OF |
| | THE GUARDRAIL TO HELP THE GUARDRAIL BLEND IN WITH THE |
| | NATURAL SURROUNDING. |
| | |
| | 4. SHEET C1-5 |
| | A. IT IS PREFERRED THAT AN ALTERNATIVE BE USED TO THE |
| | PROPOSED TYPICAL GUARDRAIL AND THAT SOME LEVEL OF |
| | LANDSCAPING (I.E. SHRUBS, GRASSES, ETC.) SHOULD BE |
| | INCORPORATED INTO THE INSTALLATION OF THE GUARDRAIL TO |
| | HELP THE GUARDRAIL BLEND IN WITH THE NATURAL |
| | SURROUNDING. IN STAFF'S OPINION THIS AREA IS NOT AS |
| | HIGH OF A PRIORITY. |
| | B. IS IT NECESSARY TO LOCATE THE GUARDRAIL IMMEDIATELY |
| | ADJACENT TO THE SIDEWALK? THIS CREATES A LESS-DESIRABLE |
| | PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT ALONG THE SIDEWALK. IS THERE ANY |
| | WAY TO MOVE THE GUARDRAIL BACK AWAY FROM THE SIDEWALK |
| | AND MAINTAIN SPACING BETWEEN THE SIDEWALK AND THE |
| | GUARDRAIL? |
| | C. WHILE A GATED OPENING IS PROPOSED FOR MAINTENANCE |
| | ACCESS, IT IS STAFF'S OPINION THAT SOME CONSIDERATION |
| | BE MADE THAT IN THE FUTURE A RECREATION PATH MAY BE |
| | CONSTRUCTED AROUND THE LAKE AND THAT THE DESIGN OF THE |
| | GUARDRAIL SHOULD MAKE AN ATTEMPT TO ACCOMMODATE THOSE |
| | FACILITIES OR AT LEAST MAKE IT EASY TO MODIFY THE |
| | GUARDRAIL. |
| | |
| | 5. SHEET C1-6 |
| | A. THE INSTALLATION OF LANDSCAPING SHOULD SERIOUSLY BE |
| | CONSIDERED ON ALL FOUR (4) CORNERS OF THE BRIDGE TO |
| | CREATE A "GATEWAY" AND DISGUISE THE APPEARANCE OF THE |
| | EXISTING/PROPOSED GUARDRAILS. |
| | B. LANDSCAPE MATERIAL COULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE |
| | MATERIALS THAT HAVE BEEN INSTALLED ALONG THE PALM BEACH |
| | LAKES BOULEVARD MEDIAN (I.E. PALMS, SHRUBS, GRASSES, |
| | ETC.). |
| | |
| | 6. GENERAL COMMENTS |
| | A. ANY AND ALL PROPOSED LANDSCAPING WILL NEED TO BE |
| | REVIEWED BY THE CITY'S PARKS & RECREATION DEPARTMENT. |
| | B. IS IT NECESSARY TO HAVE A THREE (3) FOOT SECTION OF |
| | ASPHALT UNDERNEATH THE GUARDRAIL? PLANNING STAFF |
| | UNDERSTANDS THAT THIS IS TO EASE THE MOWING OF THE |
| | AREA, BUT WOULD LIKE TO ASK PARKS & RECREATION IF IT |
| | WOULD BE FEASIBLE TO MAINTAIN THE AREA AROUND THE |
| | GUARDRAIL IF IT WERE LEFT AS SOD/LANDSCAPING. |
| | C. HAS THIS PROJECT BEEN PRESENTED TO THE MAYOR/CITY |
| | COMMISSION FOR REVIEW/APPROVAL? HAS A FACE OF THE CITY |
| | PRESENTATION BEEN MADE AND APPROVED? |
| | |
| | THE FOLLOWING COMMENTS WERE GENERATED BY THE CITY'S |
| | SENIOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNER, ALEX HANSEN, WHO MAY BE |
| | REACHED AT 561.822.1463 OR VIA EMAIL AT |
| | [email protected]: |
| | |
| | 1. WHILE I UNDERSTAND THE OVERALL GOAL OF THE PROJECT |
| | IS TO PREVENT MOTOR VEHICLES FROM ENTERING INTO LAKE |
| | MANGONIA AND CLEAR LAKE, I BELIEVE THIS GOAL COULD BE |
| | ACHIEVED IN WAYS THAT ARE MORE AESTHETICALLY PLEASING |
| | AND LESS VISUALLY OBTRUSIVE THAN THE GUARD RAILS THAT |
| | ARE PROPOSED IN THESE PLANS. I SUGGEST THAT THE |
| | PLANTING OF ADDITIONAL TREES OR THE INSTALLATION OF |
| | BOLLARD-LIKE STRUCTURES SPACED EVERY 6-7 FEET COULD BE |
| | USED INSTEAD OF THE GUARD RAILS. FURTHER, A COMBINATION |
| | OF TREES AND BOLLARDS SPACED FROM EACH OTHER COULD ALSO |
| | BE USED TO PROVIDE A MORE VISUALLY PLEASING BARRIER |
| | THAT WOULD STILL PREVENT VEHICULAR INTRUSION. IF THE |
| | INSTALLATION OF TREES/BOLLARDS IS NOT AN OPTION, THEN A |
| | SMALL HEDGE SHOULD BE INSTALLED IN FRONT OF THE |
| | RAILINGS. |
| | |
| | 2. THESE SUGGESTED APPROACHES OF TREES, BOLLARDS, |
| | AND/OR HEDGES SHOULD IN PARTICULAR BE USED AT THE MOST |
| | VISIBLE AND HEAVILY TRAVELLED AREAS AFFECTED BY THIS |
| | PLAN SUCH AS AUSTRALIAN AVENUE (SHEETS C1-1 AND C1-2) |
| | AND OKEECHOBEE BOULEVARD (SHEETS C1-3 AND C1-4). I |
| | NOTICED ON C1-3 THAT THE INSTALLATION OF SABAL PALMS IS |
| | BEING PROPOSED TO CLOSE AN EXISTING GAP BETWEEN |
| | PLANTINGS IN THE AREA WHERE AUSTRALIAN CONNECTS WITH |
| | OKEECHOBEE. I BELIEVE THIS APPROACH IS CONSISTENT WITH |
| | MY SUGGESTIONS. |
| | |
| | 3. SOME OF THE SECTIONS OF OKEECHOBEE BOULEVARD AND |
| | AUSTRALIAN AVENUE AFFECTED BY THIS PROPOSAL WERE |
| | RECENTLY THE SUBJECT OF BEAUTIFICATION PROJECTS THAT |
| | COULD BE HINDERED BY THESE PROPOSED RAILINGS. FOR |
| | EXAMPLE, ON SHEET C1-3, GUARD RAILS ARE PROPOSED TO BE |
| | INSTALLED IN FRONT OF ROYAL PALM TREES WHICH WERE |
| | RECENTLY INSTALLED. THE GUARD RAILS WOULD NOT ONLY |
| | IMPACT THE AESTHETICS OF THE ROYAL PALMS BUT WOULD ALSO |
| | NEGATIVELY AFFECT THE MAINTENANCE AND VIABILITY OF |
| | THESE TREES. IF A RAILING HAS TO BE INSTALLED AT THIS |
| | LOCATION THE RAILING SHOULD BE LOCATED BEHIND THESE |
| | TREES. |
| | ___________________________________________ |
| | |
| | PLEASE NOTE THAT SUBMITTAL OF ADDITIONAL AND/OR REVISED |
| | MATERIALS MAY RESULT IN NEW PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS. |
| | ___________________________________________ |
| | |
| | QUESTIONS/COMMENTS, PLEASE CONTACT THE FOLLOWING: |
| | |
| | JOHN ROACH, SENIOR PLANNER |
| | CITY OF WEST PALM BEACH |
| | DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT ? PLANNING DIVISION |
| | 401 CLEMATIS STREET - P.O. BOX 3366 |
| | WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33402 |
| | |
| | PHONE: 561.822.1435 |
| | FAX: 561.822.1460 |
| | |
| | EMAIL: [email protected] |
| | |
| | WWW.CITYOFWPB.COM |
| | |
