| Date |
Text |
| 2021-02-04 12:21:14 | |
| | SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS HAS NOT BEEN FINALIZED. THE |
| | BUILDING PERMIT WILL NOT BE PASSED BY ZONING UNTIL THE |
| | SITE PLAN APPROVAL LETTER IS OBTAINED. PLEASE SUBMIT |
| | ONE FINAL SET INCORPORATING ALL THE CONDITIONS OF |
| | APPROVAL FROM DAC AND HPB, AND ADDRESSING ANY |
| | OUTSTANDING COMMENTS FROM THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL |
| | PROCESS TO CLOSE THE APPROVAL. COMMENTS LISTED BELOW |
| | ARE THE COMMENTS STILL IN THE SYSTEM UNDER THE SITE |
| | PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS. SOME ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ARE |
| | LISTED AT THE END. |
| | TO FACILITATE THE TRACKING ALL COMMENTS ARE KEPT IN THE |
| | LIST AND JUST MARKED AS SATISFIED, PARTIALLY SATISFIED |
| | OR NOT SATISFIED. |
| | COMMENTS TO THE 11-23-20 PPRC RESUBMITTAL |
| | 1. NOT SATISFIED. TABLE NEEDS TO LIST THE RESULTING GSF |
| | FOR EACH OF THE CATEGORIES AND TOTAL THE GBA PERMITTED |
| | BY RIGHT AND WITH INCENTIVES. PREVIOUS COMMENT: ON |
| | SHEET A-01 PLEASE CREATE A SITE DATA TABLE THAT |
| | INCLUDES THE THREE DIFFERENT ZONING DESIGNATION ON |
| | SITE, THE AREA OF EACH, THE CORRESPONDING BASE FAR AND |
| | RESULTING GBA ALLOWED BY RIGHT, AND THE ADDITIONAL FAR |
| | AND GBA ALLOWED WITH INCENTIVES FOR EACH BASE ZONING. |
| | THIS TABLE WILL LIST THE MAXIMUM GBA ALLOWED ON SITE BY |
| | RIGHT AND INCENTIVES. TABLE ALSO NEEDS TO INCLUDE THE |
| | PROPOSED GSF AND THE NUMBER OF TDRS NEEDED FOR THE |
| | PROJECT. |
| | 2. SATISFIED. SURVEY AND CIVIL DRAWING SHALL INDICATE |
| | THE EXISTING CURB ACROSS STREET AND DIMENSION THE |
| | EXISTING TRAVEL LANES AFTER CHANGES. |
| | 3. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PLEASE INDICATE THE LOCATION OF |
| | THE EXISTING CURB AND THE PROPOSED LOCATION, IF |
| | CHANGED. |
| | 4. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. THE TRAVEL LANE ON 2ND STREET |
| | IS SHOWN AS 9 FEET IN WITH DUE TO THE PROPOSED |
| | ON-STREET PARKING. FURTHER DISCUSSION WITH TRAFFIC |
| | ENGINEER IS NEEDED TO DETERMINE IF THAT WIDTH IS |
| | ADEQUATE OR ADJUSTMENT ARE NEEDED. PREVIOUS COMMENT: |
| | WHAT IS THE WIDTH OF THE TRAVEL LANES ON 2ND STREET? IS |
| | IT CHANGE FROM CURRENT? |
| | 5. NOT SATISFIED. PLEASE MODIFY TO FOLLOW THE ANGLE OF |
| | THE CURB OR PEOPLE WILL DESTROY THE LANDSCAPE FOLLOWING |
| | THE EASIER PATH OF TRAVEL. PREVIOUS COMMENT: SIDEWALK |
| | ON EAST SIDE OF 3RD STREET SHALL FOLLOW THE CURB |
| | ALIGNMENT. |
| | 6. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PLEASE UPDATE SHEET A-03 TO |
| | REFLECT CHANGES ALONG ROSEMARY. PREVIOUS COMMENT: |
| | PROPOSED ON-STREET PARKING ALONG ROSEMARY WILL NOT BE |
| | POSSIBLE, PLEASE REMOVE PROPOSED STRIPING. |
| | 7. NOT SATISFIED. PLEASE PREPARE SOME CROSS SECTIONS |
| | FOR 2ND STREET AND 3RD STREET. |
| | 8. NOT SATISFIED. PLEASE JUSTIFY WHY THE FDC ON 2ND |
| | STREET CANNOT BE WALL MOUNTED. IF IT CANNOT BE WALL |
| | MOUNTED IT SHALL BE INSTALLED WITHIN THE LANDSCAPE AREA |
| | AND NOT ON THE SIDEWALK. PREVIOUS COMMENT: IF POSSIBLE |
| | FDC SHALL BE WALL MOUNTED. |
| | 9. NOT SATISFIED. PLEASE COORDINATE WITH ENGINEERING |
| | FOR THE LOCATION OF THE DCDA. VALVE SHALL BE LOCATED |
| | BEHIND THE MINIMUM SETBACK AND SCREENED WITH LANDSCAPE. |
| | PREVIOUS COMMENT: DCDA INDICATED ON 2ND STREET EAST OF |
| | THE PARKING GARAGE IS LISTED TO BE LOCATED UNDERGROUND. |
| | VAULT WILL NOT BE PERMITTED BY THE PUBLIC UTILITIES |
| | DEPARTMENT. NEW DCDA LOCATION SHALL BE BEHIND THE |
| | MINIMUM SETBACK AND SCREENED WITH LANDSCAPE. |
| | 10. SATISFIED. PROPOSED EXFILTRATION TRENCH WILL |
| | CONFLICT WITH THE REQUIRED STRUCTURAL SOIL FOR THE |
| | STREET TREE. PLEASE DISCUSS WITH LANDSCAPE PLANNER IF |
| | THE CONTINUOUS PLANTING AREA WILL BE SUFFICIENT FOR |
| | TREES AND THERE IS NO NEED FOR STRUCTURAL SOIL. |
| | 11. SATISFIED. PLEASE CORRECT THE MAXIMUM BUILDING |
| | FOOTPRINT TABLE TO ACCURATELY REFLECT THE REQUIREMENT |
| | FOR PROPERTIES LARGER THAN 80,000SF. |
| | 12. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. BIKE STORAGE ALONG 2ND STREET |
| | CANNOT BE COUNTED AS ACTIVE USE. PLEASE REMOVE FROM |
| | CALCULATION. THE STREET FRONTAGE IS CALCULATED |
| | DISCOUNTING THE MINIMUM SETBACKS. PREVIOUS COMMENT: |
| | PLEASE PROVIDE A GRAPHIC TO CONFIRM COMPLIANCE WITH |
| | ACTIVE USE REQUIREMENT AS LISTED IN TABLE WITHIN SHEET |
| | A-01. |
| | 13. NOT SATISFIED. APPLICANT SUBMITTED FOR A VARIANCE |
| | REQUEST. PREVIOUS COMMENT: CODE REQUIRES AN AVERAGE |
| | UNIT SIZE OF 800SF. PROJECT PROPOSED AVERAGE UNIT SIZE |
| | OF 765SF. A VARIANCE WILL BE NECESSARY IF NOT ADJUSTED |
| | TO MEET REQUIREMENT. |
| | 14. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. ON THE 2ND FLOOR, THE AREA |
| | LISTED AS OPEN TO BELOW CAN BE DISCOUNTED FORM THE GBA |
| | CALCULATIONS. PREVIOUS COMMENT: THE SQUARE FOOTAGE |
| | TABLE LISTS TRASH WITHIN THE NON-LEASABLE AREA. THE |
| | TRASH CHUTE CAN BE EXCLUDED FROM GBA BUT THE ROOM WHERE |
| | THE TRASH CHUTE IS LOCATED WITHIN EACH FLOOR SHALL BE |
| | COUNTED AS GBA. |
| | 15. SATISFIED. PLEASE ADJUST THE TRANSPARENCY |
| | CALCULATION GRAPHIC IN SHEET A-03 TO INDICATE THE 10 |
| | FEET MARK AND CONFIRM THE CALCULATION IS BASED ON THAT |
| | DIMENSION. TRANSPARENCY IS ONLY REQUIRED FOR |
| | NON-RESIDENTIAL ACTIVE USES (LOBBY AND COMMERCIAL |
| | SPACE). |
| | 16. NOT SATISFIED. PLEASE PROVIDE GRAPHIC INFORMATION |
| | TO CONFIRM COMPLIANCE WITH PLANAR BREAK, HORIZONTAL |
| | PROJECTIONS AND ARCHITECTURAL TREATMENT FOR FACADES |
| | ENCLOSING NON-ACTIVE USES (GARAGE). PREVIOUS COMMENT: |
| | PLEASE PROVIDE INFORMATION TO CONFIRM COMPLIANCE WITH |
| | ALL THE ELEMENTS REQUIRED BY TABLE IV-4 FACADE |
| | ARTICULATION REQUIREMENTS. |
| | 17. NOT SATISFIED. PLEASE INCORPORATE THE CONDITIONS OF |
| | APPROVAL FROM THE HPB REVIEW AND REDESIGN THE WEST AND |
| | SOUTH PARKING GARAGE FACADES. PREVIOUS COMMENTS: |
| | FURTHER STUDY IS NECESSARY FOR THE WEST ELEVATION AS IT |
| | WILL BE HIGHLY VISIBLE FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE |
| | PARKING GARAGE FACADES NEED ADDITIONAL WORK TO COMPLY |
| | WITH THE REQUIREMENT FOR ARCHITECTURAL TREATMENT OF |
| | NON-ACTIVE USES. THE WEST STAIR CAN INCORPORATE SOME |
| | WINDOWS OR TREATMENT TO IMPROVE THE FACADE. THE PARKING |
| | GARAGE NORTH ELEVATION WILL BE ALSO VISIBLE AND NEED |
| | SOME IMPROVEMENTS. |
| | 18. SATISFIED. PLEASE INDICATE THE MINIMUM REQUIRED |
| | GROUND SETBACK ON ALL FLOOR PLANS AND THE CONDITIONAL |
| | SETBACK LINE ON EACH OF THE REQUIRED LEVELS. ALSO |
| | CLEARLY INCLUDE THE PROPERTY LINE IN ALL DRAWINGS, |
| | INCLUDING CIVILS AND LANDSCAPE. |
| | 19. SATISFIED. IN SHEET A-02 PLEASE REFER TO MAXIMUM |
| | PROPOSED GBA, NOT FAR. |
| | 20. NOT SATISFIED. EASTERN MOST TOWN HOUSE UNIT SHALL |
| | BE SETBACK FOR THE SIDE INTERIOR PROPERTY LINE A |
| | MINIMUM OF 10 FEET. PREVIOUS COMMENT: PLEASE PROVIDE A |
| | SIDE INTERIOR SETBACK FOR THE EAST PROPERTY LINE. |
| | 21. SATISFIED. PLEASE LIST THE TOTAL NUMBER OF PARKING |
| | SPACES REQUIRED BY CODE, AND THE TOTAL NUMBER OF BIKE |
| | SPACES REQUIRED BY CODE (WITHIN THE BUILDING FOR |
| | BUILDING TENANTS AT 1/15 PARKING SPACES, AND ALONG THE |
| | STREET FRONTAGE 1/100 LINEAR FEET OF FRONTAGE). THE |
| | TABLE LISTING THE REQUIRED PARKING BY CODE IS NOT |
| | ACCURATE. PLEASE USE PROVISIONS IN SEC 94-111 OF THE |
| | ZLDRS. |
| | 22. NOT SATISFIED. PLEASE CLEARLY INDICATE IN THE |
| | PARKING GARAGE THE LOCATION OF THE GUEST PARKING AND |
| | THE PARKING FOR THE COMMERCIAL USE. THESE SPACES SHALL |
| | NOT BE LOCATED BEHIND ANY CONTROL GATE. |
| | 23. SATISFIED. WHAT IS THE BACK OUT SPACE AT THE GROUND |
| | LEVEL PARKING GARAGE? |
| | 24. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PLEASE CHECK THE LABELING OF |
| | THE FACADES AS THEY ARE NOT ACCURATE. PREVIOUS COMMENT: |
| | PLEASE LOCATE THE EXISTING STRUCTURES WITHIN THE BLOCK |
| | THAT ARE NOT PART OF THE PROJECT FOR REFERENCE. |
| | 25. SATISFIED. STAFF WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THE ARCADE |
| | REMOVAL IN RELATION TO POSSIBLE FUTURE TENANTS. |
| | PREVIOUS COMMENT: STAFF WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THE |
| | POSSIBLE RE-DESIGN OF THE RETAIL SPACE ALONG ROSEMARY |
| | AVENUE. ARCADES DO NOT HAVE A RECORD OF SUCCESS FOR |
| | COMMERCIAL SPACES. |
| | 26. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. PLEASE REVISE ELEVATIONS TO |
| | REFLECT THE CHANGE TO SWING DOOR FOR RESIDENTIAL WALK |
| | UP UNITS. PREVIOUS COMMENT: WALK UP UNIT DOORS SHALL BE |
| | DESIGNED LIKE FRONT DOORS AND NOT SLIDERS. |
| | 27. NOT SATISFIED. THE GARAGE ELEVATION NEEDS |
| | ENHANCEMENT TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISION OF |
| | ARCHITECTURAL TREATMENT FOR NON-ACTIVE USES. ENHANCED |
| | DESIGN MAY INCORPORATE SOME OF THE CONDITIONS OF |
| | APPROVAL FROM THE HPB BOARD. PREVIOUS COMMENT: GARAGE |
| | HAS BIG BLANK WALL ALONG 2ND STREET. OPTION COULD BE TO |
| | MOVE THE BIKE STORAGE THERE. |
| | 28. NOT SATISFIED. THE GARAGE ELEVATION NEEDS |
| | ENHANCEMENT TO COMPLY WITH THE PROVISION OF |
| | ARCHITECTURAL TREATMENT FOR NON-ACTIVE USES. ENHANCED |
| | DESIGN MAY INCORPORATE SOME OF THE CONDITIONS OF |
| | APPROVAL FROM THE HPB BOARD. PREVIOUS COMMENT: GARAGE |
| | ELEVATION ALONG 2ND STREET SHALL INCLUDE ARCHITECTURAL |
| | TREATMENT. |
| | 28A SATISFIED. STAFF RECOMMENDS THE SECONDARY ENTRANCE |
| | ON 2ND STREET TO BE HIGHLIGHTED TO BREAK THE CONTINUITY |
| | OF THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS. |
| | 29. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. ADDITIONAL WORK IS STILL |
| | NECESSARY IN COORDINATION TO THE ARCHITECTURAL |
| | TREATMENT OF THE PARKING GARAGE. PREVIOUS COMMENT: THE |
| | WEST ELEVATION OF THE RESIDENTIAL BUILDING SHALL BE |
| | ENHANCED TO PROJECT A GOOD FACADE TOWARDS THE |
| | RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THE WEST HALLWAY FACADE SHALL |
| | INCORPORATE WINDOWS. |
| | 30. SATISFIED. STREETSCAPE DESIGN ALONG ROSEMARY AVENUE |
| | SHALL FOLLOW THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE DANCE INTO THE |
| | SUNSET STREETSCAPE DESIGN. |
| | 31. NOT SATISFIED. EXISTING DECORATIVE LIGHTS ALONG 3RD |
| | STREET SHALL BE REPLACED FOR CURRENT DOWNTOWN STANDARD, |
| | AND NEW DECORATIVE FIXTURES SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG |
| | 2ND STREET TO MEET THE MINIMUM 0.6 FOOTCANDLE REQUIRED. |
| | ALONG THE ROSEMARY FRONTAGE DECORATIVE LIGHTS MATCHING |
| | THE NEW LIGHT FIXTURES AND POLES BEING INSTALLED BY THE |
| | CITY SHALL BE INSTALLED ALONG THE PROJECT FRONTAGE. |
| | PREVIOUS COMMENT: PROJECT IS REQUIRED TO PROVIDE |
| | DECORATIVE STREET LIGHT ALONG THE STREET FRONTAGE TO |
| | MEET THE MINIMUM 0.6 FOOT-CANDLES REQUIRED. LIGHT |
| | FIXTURE SHALL MATCH CITY STANDARD. |
| | 32. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. SEE HPB CONDITIONS OF |
| | APPROVAL. PREVIOUS COMMENT: A PORTION OF THE SITE IS |
| | LOCATED WITHIN THE HISTORIC DISTRICT, THEREFORE HPB |
| | APPROVAL FOR A COA WILL BE REQUIRED. PLEASE CONTACT |
| | FRIEDERIKE MITTNER AT 561-822-1457 TO DISCUSS |
| | REQUIREMENTS FOR SUCH APPLICATION. THE COA SHALL BE |
| | OBTAINED BEFORE PROCEEDING TO DAC FOR SPECIAL REVIEW. |
| | 33. ACKNOWLEDGED. DEMOLITION OF EXISTING BUILDINGS ON |
| | SITE CANNOT OCCUR UNTIL BUILDING PERMIT FOR NEW |
| | CONSTRUCTION HAS BEEN APPROVED. |
| | 34. NOT SATISFIED. TO BE INCLUDED AS A CONDITION IN |
| | SITE PLAN APPROVAL LETTER. PREVIOUS COMMENT: A PROPERTY |
| | RE-PLAT WILL BE REQUIRED. |
| | 35. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. AN APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED |
| | ON NOVEMBER 12, 2020. STAFF STARTED THE PROCESS FOR THE |
| | ALLEY ABANDONMENT AND WILL NOTIFY THE APPLICANT IF |
| | ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS NEEDED. REQUEST WILL GO THE |
| | DAC AT THE SAME TIME THAN THE SPECIAL REVIEW, AND TO |
| | CITY COMMISSION AFTER THAT. STAFF HAS DETERMINED THE |
| | OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT HAS BEEN MET BY THE PROJECT |
| | THROUGH THE ADDITIONAL PRIVATE OPEN SPACE PROVIDED. A |
| | WAIVER WILL NOT BE NECESSARY. PREVIOUS COMMENT: AN |
| | APPLICATION SHALL BE SUBMITTED FOR THE ALLEY |
| | ABANDONMENT. THE ALLEY ABANDONMENT REQUIRES THAT A |
| | PUBLIC OPEN SPACE EQUIVALENT TO THE AREA OF THE |
| | ABANDONED ALLEY BE ALLOCATED ON SITE. ALLEY AREA = 15 |
| | X500=7,500SF. PLEASE INDICATE IF A PUBLIC OPEN SPACE |
| | EQUAL TO 7,500 SF CAN BE LOCATED ON SITE. IF NOT, A |
| | WAIVER OF SUCH PROVISION SHALL BE REQUESTED TO THE CITY |
| | COMMISSION AS PART OF THE ALLEY ABANDONMENT PROCESS. IS |
| | THERE ANY POSSIBILITY TO PROVIDE ANY PUBLIC OPEN SPACE |
| | ON SITE TO COMPLY WITH THE ALLEY ABANDONMENT PROVISION? |
| | SMALLER THAN THE REQUIRED? |
| | 36. SATISFIED. HAS THE PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF |
| | THE ALLEY (NOT PART OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT) CONFIRMED |
| | SUPPORT FOR ALLEY ABANDONMENT? |
| | 37. PARTIALLY SATISFIED. THE PROJECT REQUIRES DAC |
| | APPROVAL FOR SPECIAL REVIEW. IN PREPARATION FOR THE |
| | DAC, PLEASE PROVIDE COLORED ELEVATIONS IN CONTEXT FOR |
| | DAC SPECIAL REVIEW, MORE DETAILED COLORED ELEVATIONS |
| | WITH CALL OUT MATERIALS AND PICTURES OF PROPOSED |
| | MATERIALS, AND STREET LEVEL RENDERS. |
| | 38. ACKNOWLEDGED. EASEMENTS WILL BE INCLUDED IN |
| | RE-PLAT. PREVIOUS COMMENT: PROJECT WILL BE REQUIRED TO |
| | PROVIDE A SIDEWALK ACCESS EASEMENT FOR THE SIDEWALK |
| | LOCATED ON PRIVATE PROPERTY. |
| | 39. ACKNOWLEDGED. PROJECT WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE |
| | MAINTENANCE OF ALL HARDSCAPE AND LANDSCAPE INSTALLED |
| | WITHIN THE ROW AS PART OF THIS PROJECT. A MAINTENANCE |
| | AGREEMENT SHALL BE SIGNED BETWEEN THE CITY AND THE |
| | DEVELOPER BEFORE FINAL CO. |
| | ADDITIONAL COMMENTS: |
| | 40. PLEASE CORRECT THE PARKING TABLE TO REFLECT THE |
| | ACCURATE PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR RETAIL WITHIN THIS |
| | DISTRICT AS FOLLOWS: MIN-1/1,000SF; MAX 2/1,000SF. |
| | 41. PLEASE RELOCATE AT LEAST TWO OF THE BIKE PARKING AT |
| | THE PEDESTRIAN EXIT ON 3RD STREET TO THE ROSEMARY |
| | AVENUE FRONTAGE, IN FRONT OF RETAIL AREA. |
| | 42. PLEASE DISCUSS WITH ENGINEERING DEPT THE |
| | POSSIBILITY TO REDUCE THE PARKING SPACES TO 8 FEET |
| | INCLUDING THE GUTTER. THAT WILL ALLOW ONE ADDITIONAL |
| | FOOT TO THE AREA IN FRONT OF THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON |
| | 3RD STREET AND PROVIDE ADDITIONAL PRIVACY FOR THE FIRST |
| | FLOOR UNITS. IN ADDITION, THE PLANTING AREA NEXT TO THE |
| | CURB CAN BE REDUCED TO 4 FEET IN WIDTH, ALSO PROVIDING |
| | ONE ADDITIONAL FOOT THAT CAN BE INCORPORATED WITHIN THE |
| | FRONT YARD OF THE FIRST FLOOR RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON 3RD |
| | STREET. |
| | 43. PLEASE REDUCE THE PARKING GARAGE ENTRANCE FROM |
| | SAPODILLA AVE AND 2ND STREET TO 20 FEET IN TOTAL WIDTH. |
| | 44. THE PLANTING AREA NEXT TO THE CURB ALONG 3RD STREET |
| | MAY BE REDUCE TO 4 FEET IN WIDTH. THE SIDEWALK CAN BE |
| | MOVED 1 FOOT NORTH AND THE ADDITIONAL FOOT SHALL BE |
| | ALLOCATED TO THE FRONT PLATING AREA OF THE RESIDENTIAL |
| | UNITS. |
| | ADDITIONAL COMMENTS FROM BUILDING PERMIT SET: |
| | THE DRAWINGS SUBMITTED FOR BUILDING PERMIT ARE NOT |
| | CONSISTENT WITH THE DRAWINGS SUBMITTED FOR DAC |
| | APPROVAL. STAFF CONDUCTED A PRELIMINARY REVIEW OF THE |
| | BUILDING PERMIT SET CONSIDERING A MORE ADVANCED SET WAS |
| | ALREADY REVIEWED FOR THE DAC SUBMITTAL AND COMMENTS TO |
| | THAT SET ARE ALREADY INCLUDED IN THE PPRC LIST |
| | (COMMENTS LISTED ABOVE). FOR NEXT SUBMITTAL, PLEASE |
| | INCORPORATE THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FROM THE HPB |
| | APPROVAL AND THE JANUARY 13 DAC MEETING . |
| | 45. DRAINAGE PLAN SHOWS THE GAS LINE ALONG 3RD STREET |
| | RUNNING IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF THE NEW CURB. PROPOSED |
| | LOCATION MAY CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSED TREES NEXT TO |
| | THE CURB. PLEASE DISCUSS WITH FPU THE DEPTH OF THE |
| | PROPOSED LINE AND CONFIRM NO CONFLICT EXISTS. |
| | 46. THE GAS LINE PROPOSED ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF 2ND |
| | STREET MAY BE IN CONFLICT WITH THE PROPOSED TREES ON |
| | THE BULB OUTS. TO AVOID FUTURE PROBLEMS THE TREES CAN |
| | BE MOVED FROM THE BULB OUT TO THE PLANTING STRIP NORTH |
| | OF THE CURB. THE PLANTING AREA IN FRONT OF THE LOBBY |
| | CAN BE EXPANDED TO ALLOW FOR THE SAME RELOCATION OF THE |
| | TREE. |
| | 47. DRAWINGS NEED TO REFLECT THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL |
| | FROM THE JANUARY 13, 2021 DAC. |
| | 48. IN THE PARKING GARAGE PLEASE INDICATE THE PARKING |
| | SPACES FOR GUEST AND COMMERCIAL USES. |
| | |
| | |
