CITY OF PARKER City Hall 1001 West Park Street Phone 850-871-4104 City of PARKER TLBLISIEDT Mayor Andrew Kelly City Council Tonya Barrow, Pro Tem Katy Bodiford Ron Chaple John Haney Attorney Tim Sloan City Clerk Ingrid Bundy PUBLIC NOTICE SPECIAL MEETING THE CITY OF PARKER CITY COUNCIL DECEMBER 20, 2024 4:00 PM LOCATED AT PARKER CITYI HALL NOTE: AT EACH OF ITS REGULAR OR SPECIAL MEETINGS, THE CITY OF PARKER COUNCIL ALSO SITS, AS EX OFFICIO, AS THE CITY OF PARKER COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA)AND MAY CONSIDER ITEMS. AND' TAKE ACTION INTHATCAPACITY. AGENDA CALLTO ORDER - Mayor Kelly ROLL CALL- City Clerk Public hearing in connection with and Council consideration of major development order application for Marriott Dya undig Ingrid Bundy, City Clerk Ifap person decides to appeal any decision made by the City Council with respect to any matter considered at the meeting, if an appeal is available, such person will: need a record of the proceeding and suchj person may need to ensure that a verbatim record oft the proceeding is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal ist tol be made. Any person requiring special accommodation at this meeting because of a disability or physical impairment should contact the City Clerk at 1001 West Park Street, Parker, Florida 32404: or by phone at (850) 871-4104. Ify you are hearing or speech impaired andy youl have TDD equipment, you may contact the City Clerk using the Florida Dual Party System, which can be ALLI INTERESTED PERSONS DESIRING TOI BE HEARD ON THE. AFORBSAID agenda are invited to be present at the reached at 1-800-955-8770 (Voice) or 1-800-955-8771 (TDD). meeting. Land Development Regulations Major DHppentApPatoN Submittal Revlew/Comments No.3 Review Date: Applicant Name: Contact Name: Permit No.: Project Name: NOVEMBER 27, 2024 NF VES-M PARKER, LLC JOHN BIANCO NOT PROVIDED PROPOSED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT MARRIOTT STUDIORES HOTEL PARCEL ID NO. 26065-020-000 SOUTHTYNDALL PARKWAY, PARKER, FLORIDA SUBMITTAL NO. 3 REVIEW APPROVAL STATUS: JAPPROVED APPROVED AS NOTED (CONDITIONAL APPROVAL) NOT APPROVED - DOES NOT MEET LAND USE CODE RESUBMITTAL REQUIRED - REQUEST ADDITIONAL VERIFICATION/MON/MODIFICATION PUBLIC WORKS REVIEW COMMENTS: 1. Please contact Tony Summerlin at City of Parker Public' Works to discuss alternate utility con- nections. Public Works Review Comment 10/22/2024 Connection has been corrected. Applicant will need to coordinate with the City of Callaway for impact fees for sewer. This comment has been addressed. POLICE DEPARTMENT REVIEW COMMENTS: FIRE DEPARTMENT REVIEW COMMENTS: 1. Not at this time. 1. Fire Protection. Applicant Response to Review Comment 10/15/2024 Fire protection drawings are typically a deferred submittal that the subcontractor produces for approval following the issuance of the building permit. Since we are still in the site plan approval stage, we do not have protection plans available for this project yet but can plan to have them done ahead of the building permit submittal for the fire marshal's review. We would prefer not to provide the example sprinkler head layouts that wel have from another prototypical StudioRes project because they for a different jurisdiction, however, sprinkler heads will be located within each guestroom, corridor and public space area in compliance with local code requirements. This building will have an NFPA-13 automatic fire sprinkler system, with flow and tamper switches on the backflow assembly in the fire riser room and floor zone controls on the standpipe assembly in the stairwell in compliance with local code requirements. 2024-11-27_Marriott StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal 3_FINAL Page 11 Land Devalopment Regulations Major DeMAtARAL-to Submfctal Reylew/Comments: No,3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS Public Works Review Comment1 10/22/2024 The City is okay with fire protection drawings being submitted at a later. The Cityi is okay with the sprinkler head layouts being submitted at a later time. This comment has been addressed. PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS: the next resubmittal package. Please refer to the checklist attached for a list of items that will need to be submitted with EPCI should be consulted to conduct a plan review of all architectural, structural, electri- cal, plumbing, HVAC, etc. of these buildings according to Florida Building Code require- Itshould be noted that all communication regarding this development should flow through the City for distribution to the review team. Communication with the review team directly is strictly prohibited as the City maintains the master files for this development. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the City of Parker. ments. 2024-11-27_Marriot. StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submital3_FINAL Page 12 Land Development Regulations Major PAEASPESN Submittal Review Comments No,3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Applicant is requesting approval to construct a midscale extended stay Marriott StudioRes Hotel located along the west side of South Tyndall Parkway between Boat Race Road and the "Y" intersection of East Business Highway 98 and South Tyndall Parkway. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION: 1. Parcel ID: 26065-020-000 - 5215 Highway 98 Business East APPROVED AS NOTED 11/21/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 Move-It Storage Please provide proof of ownership for Parcel ID No. 26065-020-000. Currently, referenced parcel shows to be owned by Move-It Storage. In addition, provide agreemenleasement between Applicant and owner of Parcel ID No. 26065-000- IfA Applicant is wanting to obtain approval of the parcel prior to closing, please 000 for use of a portion of the parcel for the stormwater pond. indicate such. This comment has not been addressed. Applicant Response to Review Comment 09/17/2024 Purchase and Sales Agreement provided with resubmittal package. Property has not closed yet, and applicant intending to obtain approval prior to closing. Parcel boundary was renegotiated with adjacent parcel owner to include stormwater within the site's parcel. Title commitment included with resubmittal package to The unexecuted Purchase Agreement and ALTA Survey notes that the purchase isf for a portion of Parcel IDI No. 26065-000-000. However, the parcel that is being purchased is Parcel ID No. 26065-020-000 according to the Bay County Property Appraisers. In addition, according to the Title Commitment and the executed Purchase Agreement, the total area is 2.67 acres (approximately 116,305.2 square feet) which does not match the total Site Area indicated on the Site Plan Itis understood that the Applicant is renegotiating with the OWNER to include the purchase the land where the proposed stormwater pond will encroach onto the The ALTA/NPS survey does not appear to show this renegotiated property boundary. In order to confirm the validity of the proposed property boundary in relation to the Purchase Agreement and Title Commitment, Applicant should provide an updated ALTA survey with new proposed boundaries. In addition, Applicant should confirm Parcel ID No. for the parcel being purchased. demonstrate this boundary change. Planning Review Comment 09/27/2024 2. Current Owner as +2.87 acres. adjacent parcel. 2024-11-27_Mariot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal 3_FINAL Page 13 Lend Development Regulations Major ACPPARLADAETON Submtctal Review Comments No,3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS Applicant Response to Review Comment 11/21/2024 New ALTA survey to be included with the submittal to reflect the proper acreage, ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey has been revised to incorporate area of stormwater management facility. Survey is signed and sealed. The question remains that the Purchase Agreement and' Title Commitment do not include the new area in those documents. This comment has been addressed with the understanding that Applicant will provide proof of ownership of the redrawn parcel. 2.89 acres. Planning Review Comment 11/21/2024 3. S/T/R: 4. Purpose of Application: 24-4S-14W this parcel. APPROVED 11/21/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 Applicant is requesting approval to construct a midscale extended stay hotel on Bay County GIS and Property Appraisers indicates the area of the parcel is approximately 2.67 acres (approximately 116,305.2 square feet). Applicant's application indicates the area oft the parcel is 2.64 acres (approximately 114,998.4 Applicant has provided an ALTA/NSPS Survey. The survey does not include the acreage of the parcel. The following corrections are needed in order to approve 1. As noted on the ALTA survey, the address for the parcel surveyed is 5215 East Business Highway 98. However, 5215 East Business Highway 98 is another parcel to ther northwest. Itappears that the original parcel was split into two. Bay County does not have an address associated with this in property appraisers and lists the parcel as VACANT COMMERCIAL along South Tyndall Parkway. However, in Property Appraisers when the ad- dress is turned on, this parcel is associated with three addresses: 934 and 938 South Tyndall Parkway and 5225 East Business Highway 98. An ad- dress application will need to be submitted to Bay County for this parcel and provided to the City. From the Site Plan, it appears the address will 2. Please have surveyor provide a total acreage and square footage of the subject parcel on the ALTA/NSPS Survey. This survey should be signed and sealed by a State of Florida Professional Land Surveyor. This is re- quired to ensure accuracy of acreage per the land surveyor. 1. Address provided by City now shown on Civil Plan set and survey. 2. Refer to note 4 under "Table "A" A.L.T.A. Survey Requirements" on updated survey provided with resubmittal package square feet). This is a difference of 1,306.80 square feet. the area for this development: 5. Area: be off South Tyndall Parkway. Applicant Response to Review Comment 09/17/2024 2024-11-27 Marriott StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal3 3_FINAL Page 14 Land Devolopment Regulations Major Development Application Submittal Review Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS Planning Review Comment 09/27/2024 1. Applicant provided Proof of Address from Bay County to indicate the official address to be 938 South Tyndall Parkway, Panama City, Florida 32404. 2. Per Note 4 under "Table "A" A.L.T.A. Survey Requirements, the parcel is approximately 2.66 acres (115,820.40 square feet). However, per Item 2 of this review, Applicant indicated that the Purchase Agreement and Title Committee were being renegotiated to include a small area of the adjacent parcel where the stormwater is encroaching. This updated property boundary is also shown on the proposed Site Plan. However, the ALTA/NPS Survey does not appear to be updated to show this proposed property boundary and thus, does not appear to reflect the updated acreage/square footage of the parcel. The proposed Site Plan indicates +2.87 acres with the renegotiated property boundary. Please update the ALTA/NPS Survey to include the renegotiated property boundary. Updated survey acreage to match proposed acreage in the site summary tables, ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey has been revised to incorporate area ofs stormwater management facility. Survey is signed and sealed. Site Plan Data Table indicates the parcel is 2.89 acres or approximately 126,039 square feet (per the mperviouspervious total on the Site Summary Table). This comment has been Accurate dimensions and/or areas of the impervious structures (buildings, driveway, etc.) are requested to ensure that the City has the most up-to-date records fora all structures located on these parcels and to assist ini the review of lot coverage and additional development orders submitted for the same development Applicant Response to Review Comment 11/21/2024 2.89 acres. Planning Review Comment 71/21/2024 addressed. int the future. Vacant Commercial Lot APPROVED 08/15/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 6. Current Use: 7. Proposed Use Hotel 8. FLU: 9. Maximum Density (s60 feet) The parcel is designated as General Commercial (GC). Per Article 4-5.12.1.c, "hotels/motels shall be allowed throughout the Mixed Use One, Mixed Use Two, and Commercial land use districts." This comment has been addressed. NIA: As referenced in Article 4-5.4 - General Commercial (GC) - Development Standards, Maximum Density does not apply to commercial developments. As referenced in Article 4-5.4.3.a - General Commercial (GC) - Development Standards - Maximum Building Height is defined as 601 feet (6 stories). Site Plan indicates that the hotel will be 4 stories and the application indicates a height of APPROVED 08/15/2024: 10. Building Height Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 2024-11-27_Mariot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal 3_FINAL Page 15 Land Development Regulations Major wAbPtAPStoN Submibtal Reviewo Comments No,3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS 471 feet and 4 inches from foundation to top of parapet. This comment has been addressed. APPROVED 08/15/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 11. Setback. - Front As referenced in Article 4-5.4.3.b.i - General Commercial - (GC) Development - Yard 15 feet Standards - Front Yard Minimum Lot Setbacki is defined as 151 feet. Applicant has indicated a 15-foot front building setback line (BSL), also known as a front yard setback line of 151 feet on the Site Plan. This comment has been addressed. APPROVED 08/15/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 12. Setback- - Rear As referenced in Article 4-5.4.3.b.ii - General Commercial (GC) - Development Yard - 151 feet Standards - Rear Yard Minimum Lot Setback is defined as 151 feet. Applicant has indicated a 15-foot rear building setback line (BSL), also known as ar rear yard setback line of 15 feet on the Site Plan. This comment has been addressed. APPROVED 08/15/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 13. Setback - Side As referenced in Article 4-5.4.3.b..11 - General Commercial (GC) - Development Yard- 71 feet 14. Setback- CornerL Lot-10 NIA feet Standards - Side Yard Minimum Lot Setback is defined as 71 feet. Applicant has indicated a 7-foot side building setback line (BSL), also known as a side yard setback line of7 feet on the Site Plan. This comment has been ad- dressed. APPROVED AS NOTED 11/21/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 As referenced in Article 4-5.4.3.c = General Commercial (GC) Development Standards - Maximum Lot Coverage is defined as! 90%. Lot coveragei is calculated according to the lot size and structures on the parcel. Per the LDR, lot coverage ist the land area of any lot or parcel which can be covered by impervious surfaces such as buildings, vehicle use areas or similar development. Fromi the Impervious Area Summary provided int the Drainage Report and from the Site Summary Table of the Site Plan, the following is assumed: 15. Lot Coverage (s90%) Lot Coverage Calculations Proposed 4-Story Hotel Proposed Pavement Sidewalks Stormwater Pond Total Impervious Area 14,658.00 SF 47,135.00 SF 3.917.00 SF 35,242.00SF 100,952 SF The total impervious noted for the hotel, pavement, sidewalk and ponds in the drainage report does not match that of the Site Summary Table on the Site Plan. The Site Plan does not break down the individual impervious coverages in order for the City to verify those calculations. 2024-11-27_Mariot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal3 3_FINAL Page 16 Land Development Regulations Major DHpmHAtARetoN Submittal Review Commnents No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS The applicant's Site Plan indicated the area is +2.64 acres (approximately Because Bay County Property Appraiser had +2.67 acres and the survey was slightly lower at +2.64 acres, for this analysis, until the survey is resubmitted with actual acreage per Item No. 1, the applicant's acreage will be used for this calcu- With the impervious calculation taken from the Drainage Report and the Appli- cant's Site Plan parcel acreage, the following lot coverage is assumed. Lot Coverage (%) = Total Impervious Surfaces (including SW Pond)/ Total Lot 114,998.4 square feet). lation. Area (use surveyed area). Lot Coverage =. 100,952.0 square feet =87.8% 114,998.4 square feet However, this may change when the applicant resubmits documents that are re- quested for review and approval. Applicant's Site Summary Table indicates 70% lot coverage. Please breakdown how the applicant calculated that number and make corrections as needed to the Site Summary Table or the Drainage Report. Ina addition, it appears that a portion of the stormwater pond will be encroaching on the adjacent parcel (Parcel ID No. 26065-000-000). Please confirm this was the intent, and if so, please include an agreement with the current Owner for use oft their parcel. Please advise if this will change the area of the parcel? Comment has not been addressed and more information is required. Applicant Response to Review Comment 09/17/2024 Updated impervious calculations have been included on site plan sheet C3.0 in the site summary table. Property line has been revised toi include proposed storm water pond. Ownership documents and title commitment included in the Per the revised Site Plan, the following impervious surface data is known: resubmittal package. Planning Review Comment 09/19/2024 Lot Coverage Calculations Proposed 4-Story Hotel Proposed Pavement Sidewalks Stormwater Pond Total Impervious Area 14,477.00SF 44,915.00SF 4,930.00SF 23,427.00SF 87,749SF Under Site Ratios and Impervious Data on the Site Data Table, the Total Impervious Area should be 87,749 SF according to the above. Site Data Table indicates 88,325 SF. Please correct Total Impervious Area calculation on Site Data Table. 2024-11-27_Mariot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal 3_FINAL Page 17 Land Davelopment Reguiations Major OMASERIAPRSSN Submittal Review Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS Ina addition, under Site Area of the Site Summary Table, please indicate if the Impervious Area (On Site) and Pervious Area (On Site) are for existing surfaces or proposed surfaces as iti is not clear, and update if necessary. Under Site Ratios and Impervious Data on the Site Data Table, the Total Parcel Area indicates 125,717, which equates to 2.88 acres. Per the Site Plan acreage listed under Site Area, the acreage is 2.87 which equates to 125,017. Please A preliminary lot coverage calculation using the corrected Impervious Surfaces Lot Coverage (%6) = Total Impervious Surfaces (including SW Pond)/ Total Lot confirm acreage and square footage and correct data. and corrected Lot Area is shown below: Area (use surveyed area). Lot Coverage = 87,749 square feet =70.2% 125,017 square feet Applicant Response to Review Comment 11/21/2024 Site Ratios revised to correctly reflect on site impervious areas. Planning Review Comment 11/21/2024 Below is the current lot coverage calculation with the revision to the site area. Lot Coverage Calculations Proposed 4-Story Hotel Proposed Pavement Sidewalks Stormwater Pond Total Impervious Area 13,949.00SF 48,835.00SF 4,753.00SF 21,213.00: SF 88,750 SF Lot Coverage (%) = Total Impervious Surfaces (including SW Pond)/ Total Lot Area (use surveyed area). Lot Coverage = 88,750 square feet =70.4% 126,039 square feet This comment has been addressed with the understanding that the Appli- cant will submit a revised signed and sealed Site Plan with a correction to the Site Summary Table Total Impervious Area as indicated above. Appli- cant's calculation for all impervious surfaces was 87,749 square feet, which is 1,000 square feet offa actual calculation. Please submit final to City fori files. As the development moves along in the review process, these numbers may change. On the final approved DO review, final calculations will be known and noted. 2024-11-27_Marriot. StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal 3_FINAL Page 18 Land Development Regulations Major Developmant Application Submittal Review Comments No,3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS As stated above, accurate dimensions and/or areas of the impervious structures (buildings, driveway, etc.) are requested to ensure that the City has the most up- to-date records for all structures located on these parcels and to assist in the re- view of lot coverage and additional development orders submitted for the same development in the future. APPROVED AS NOTED 11/21//2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 The Impervious Surface Ratio is the ratio between the parcel area and impervious surfaces, excluding the stormwater pond. From the Impervious Area Summary provided ini the Drainagel Report andi from the Site Summary Table oft the Site Plan, the following is assumed: Lot Coverage Calculations Proposed 4-Story Hotel Proposed Pavement Sidewalks Total Impervious Area 14,658.00SF 47,135.00SF 3.917.00 SF 61,793.00 SF ISR (decimal) = Total Impervious Area (excluding the SWF Pond) ISR (decimal) = 61,793.00 square feet =0.54 Total Parcel Area 114,998.4 square feet ISR is 0.54, which is under the 0.70 ISR threshold required by the City. However, this may change when the applicant resubmits documents that are re- 16. Impervious (ISR) (0.7) Surface Ratio quested for review and approval, specifically the survey, in Comment No. 4 above. Applicant Response to Review Comment 09/17/2024 Updated ISR included in site summary table located on sheet C3.0. Planning Review Comment 09/19/2024 Per the updated ISR on SHEET 3.0, the following impervious surface data is known: Lot Coverage Calculations Proposed 4-Story Hotel Proposed Pavement Sidewalks Total Impervious Area 14,658.00SF 47,135.00SF 3.917.00SF 64,322.00 SF ISR (decimal) = Total Impervious Area (excluding the SWI Pond) ISR (decimal) = 64,322.00 square feet = 0.51 Total Parcel Area 125,017 square feet ISR is 0.51, which is under the 0.70 ISR threshold required by the City. 2024-11-27_Mariot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal 3_FINAL Page 19 Land Dovolopment Regulations Major Development Application Submittal Review/Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS Planning Review Comment 11/21/2024 Belowi is the current ISR calculation with revisions toi impervious surfaces and site area: Lot Coverage Calculations Proposed 4-Story Hotel Proposed Pavement Sidewalks Total Impervious Area 13,949.00 SF 48,835.00 SF 4,753.00SF 67,537 SF ISR (decimal) =. Total Impervious Area (excluding the SW Pond) Total Parcel Area ISR (decimal) = 67,537 square feet =0.536 126,039 square feet As the development moves along in the review process, these numbers may change. On the final approved DO review. final calculations wil be known and noted. APPROVED 08/15/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 Comment has been addressed. APPROVED AS NOTED 09/19/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 building by the total area of the lot. 17. Minimum Lot As referenced in Article 4-5,4.3.d-General Commercial (GC)- - Minimum Lot Size Size (25,000) is indicated as 5,000 square feet. The lot size is over 5,000 square feet which meets the requirement of greater than 5,000 square feet detailed in the LDR. As defined in the Parker LDR, Floor Area Ratio (FAR) is the relationship between the amount of useable floor area permitted in a building and the area of the lot on which the building stands. It is obtained by dividing the gross floor area of the FAR (decimal) = Total Floor Area (includes all floors) Total Parcel Area 18. FAR (1.0) As taken from the Application, the total floor area appears to be 56,421 square feet. Please confirm that this is correct. FAR (decimal) = 56,421.00 square feet = 0.49 114,998.4 square feet However, this may change when the applicant resubmits documents that are requested for review and approval, specifically the confirmation on total floor area. Please add the FAR calculation including total floor area on the Site Summary Table oft the Site Plan. This comment has not been addressed. 2024-11-27_Marriott StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal 3_FINAL Page 110 Land Development Regulations Submittal Review Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS Applicant Response to Review Comment 09/17/2024 FAR has been provided on Site Summary Table located on sheet C3.0. Planning Review Comment 09/19/2024 Per the updated ISR on SHEET 3.0, the following impervious surface data is known: FAR (decimal) = 55,074.0 square feet = 0.44 125,017 square feet As the development moves along in the review process. these numbers may change. On the final approved DO review, final calculations will be known and 1. The minimum distance between adjacent stand-alone buildings shall be at to- 2. Distance shall be measured at the narrowest space between structures, whether a main living unit, principal structure, allowable attachment, or an accessory use, and shall not include roof overhang (eave). Only one building on site. Comment has been addressed. noted. APPROVED AS NOTED 08/15/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 19. Distance Between Buildings tal of 101 feet. 20. FIRM Panel No, BFE (if applicable) 21. Wetlands: 22. Storm Surge Risk: 23. Coastal High Hazard Area: Flood Zone and APPROVED 08/15/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 APPROVED 08/15/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 Parcel is NOT located adjacent to a wetland. APPROVED 08/15/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 APPROVED 08/15/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 NOTIFICATION ONLY 08/15/2024: Parcel is relatively flat between 11 to 151 feet. This Sand, with Hurricane Sand towards the northeast corner of the Sand towards the southwest corner of the site. Parcel is located within Flood Zone. X in FIRM Panel No. 12005C0364H. Due to its inland location, no storm surge is anticipated on these parcels. Due to its inland location, no coastal high hazard area is associated with these parcels. contain Plummer parcel mostly site and Mandarin 24. Soils/ Contours: The USDA Custom Soill Resource Survey indicates that the site has approximately 86.6% Plummer sand, 9.7% Mandarin Sand, and 3.6% Hurricane Sand. This is 2024-11-27_Marriot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal3 3_FINAL Page/11 Land Development Regulacions Major OTIAOAN Submittal Review Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS consistent with the Geotechnical Report provided in the Drainage Report. Details MLRA(s): 133A-Southern Coastal Plain, 133B-Western Coastal Plain, 153A-At- for those soilt types are below: PLUMMER SERIES Depth Class: Very deep lantic Coast Flatwoods, and 153B-Tidewater Area Drainage Class (Agricultural): Poorly or very poorly drained Internal Free Water Occurrence: Very shallow, persistent Flooding Frequency and Duration: None Index Surface Runoff: Negligible to low Saturated Hydraulic Conductivity: Moderately high Shrink-swell Potential: Low Landscape: Upper, middle, and lower coastal plains Landform: Flats, depressions Geomorphic Component: Talfs, dips Hillslope Profile Position: Not assigned Parent Material: Marine or fluviomarine deposits Slope: Ot to 5 percent, dominantly less than 1 percent Elevation (type location): Unknown Frost Free Period (type location): 240 days MANDARIN SAND SERIES MLRA(s): 153A Carolina Depth Class: Very deep Permeability: Moderate Landscape: Lower coastal plain Landform: Marine terrace Geomorphic Component: Talf Parent Material: Marine sediments Slope: 01 to 3 percent Elevation (type location): HURRICANE SAND SERIES Ponding Frequency and Duration: None to frequent; long or very long periods Mean Annual Air Temperature (type location): 19.2 degrees C (66.5 degrees F.) Mean Annual Precipitation (type location): 1240 millimeters (49 inches) MLRA SOIL SURVEY REGIONAL OFFICE (MO) RESPONSIBLE: Raleigh, North Drainage Class (Agricultural): Somewhat poorly drained Internal Free Water Occurrence: Moderate deep, common Mean Annual Air Temperature (type location): 67 degrees F. Mean Annual Precipitation (type location): 55 inches The Hurricane series consists of very deep, somewhat poorly drained, moderately rapid permeable soils on broad areas that are slightly higher than the adjacent flats int the Southern Coastal Plain (MLRA 133A), the Gulf Coast Flatwoods (MLRA 152A) and the Atlantic Coast Flatwoods (MLRA 153A). They formed in sandy ma- rine sediments. Near the type location, the mean annual temperature is about 67 degrees F., and the mean annual precipitation is about 55 inches. Slopes range from 01 to 5 percent. 2024-11-27_Mariot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal 3_FINAL Pagel 112 Land Development Regulations Major yepeARSoN Submittal Review Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS APPROVED AS NOTED 11/21//2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 This parcel borders a 50-footr right-of-way easement along South Tyndall Parkway, a5 50-foot abandonment easement running along U.S. Business 98 to the southwest and a sewer easement that runs along the southern boundary of the property. Please indicate all easements on Site Plan. This item has not been addressed. 25. Easements: Applicant Response to Review Comment 09/17/2024 50-foot abandonment easement and 50-foot right-of-way easement shown on site plan, refert to updated survey included in submittal for other easement information. Not all easements indicated on the ALTA/NPS Survey are shown on the Site Plan. All easements should bei indicated on the Site Plan. Specifically, the southern Bay County easement that borders the parcel is not shown on the Site Plan. In addi- tion, there appears to be three new easements to the western portion of the parcel including a 10-foot drainage easement, a 20-foot drainage easement, and an ac- Applicant Response to Review Comment 11/21/2024 Updated Survey has been revised to include all easements per comment. Planning Review Comment 11/21/2024 Survey and Site Plan have been updated to reflect easements accordingly. Itdoes not appear that the stormwater pond will encroach into the 10-foot County Ease- Planning Review Comment 09/19/2024 cess and sign easement. ment. 2024-11-27_Marriot! StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submital3_FINAL Page/13 Land Development Regulations Major DabomatAnleation Submibtal Review Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS PENDING APPROVAL 08/15/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 Water Utilities: Applicant will need to connect tot the City's 8-inch PVC Potable Waterline that runs int the rear of the parcel along U.S. Business Highway 98. c BomRaceRd From the Utility Plan, it appears that the Applicant will tiei into the 8-inch waterline with a 6-inch waterline that will branch out for a 6-inch fire line and backflow, a 1- inch irrigation line, backflow and meter, and a 3-inch domestic waterline that will route into the building with backflow and water meter. Please contact the City 26. Utilities: for fees related to water meter and tap for this project. THRUST FIRELNE FIREB Wastewater Utilities: Applicant will need to connect to the City's 8-inch PVC gravity sewer main either along South Tyndall Parkway or U.S. Business 98 or the portion that cuts just south oft the parcel that connects the two gravity sewer lines together. 2024-11-27_ Marriott StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal3_FINAL Page 114 Land Development Regulations Major Development Application Submictal Review Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS From the Utility Plan, it appears that the Applicant will tie into the City's 8-inch gravity sewer along U.S. Business 98 with thei installation of a doghouse manhole. The applicant proposes 7 manholes throughout the site. Iti is proposed that 358 linear feet of 8-inch PVC sewer piping will route through the manholes and into a cleanout at the hotel. Please contact the City for fees related to sewer lateral installation for this project. Applicant Response to Review Comment 11/21/2024 City has been contacted for water meter and sewer tap fees. Planning Review Comment 11/21/2024 Noted. BEND BLOCK H 2024-11-27_Mariot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal3_FINAL Page115 Land PCCRSNSS Major DweomuntApplaiion Submittal Review Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS Fire Hydrant: indicated below. Applicant proposes one fire hydrant to the south of the proposed building as PROPOSED 4-STORYE BUILDING 124-KEYM MARRIOTTS FFE:16.5 STUDIORES ROOSEPEECIREUNE APPROVED AS NOTED 11/25/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 As referenced in Article 4-7.4- Subarea 3- Commercial Intensive (South Tyndall Parkway / Highway 98), Applicant shall show compliance with the overlay design 1. Building Architectural Style - The use of a common set of colors and building materials should be maintained for building facades to create a consistent and traditional architectural identity. Variations in roofline, façade, and depth 2. Building Use Mix - Non-residential mixed-use buildings are desired fronting 3. Pedestrian Mobility - All properties within the subarea are encouraged to pro- vide sidewalks parallel to public rights-of-way across the entirety of the prop- erty frontage and connecting with and to existing sidewalks located on abutting properties. Internal sidewalks are also encouraged to provide linkages to build- 4. Parking - Parking standards will meet the requirements of Section 5-9 Traffic Circulation and Parking. The parking in front of the buildings should be limited to create an urban form where buildings are closer to the street and parking is 5. Streetscape and Landscape = The parking lots shall meet the landscape re- quirements as set forth in these Land Development Regulations. The streetscape will be encouraged to include wider sidewalks, street trees, me- standards and the City's vision for this area of Highway 98: should be provided. Tyndall Parkway. 27. SubArea 3- Commercial Intensive Parkway Overlay ing entrances. int the rear. dian plantings, and landscaped buffers of parking lots. 2024-11-27_Mariot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal 3_FINAL Page 116 Land Development Regulations Major Development, Application Submittal RvlwComments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS 6. Stormwater - All stormwater management basins shall be designed to meet the City's and Water Management District's design requirements. Co-location shall be encouraged for larger regional systems and use as a site amenity. Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 1. Building Architectural Style in compliance. 2. Commercial building in compliance. 3. Existing sidewalk along South Tyndall Parkway. Striping for a crosswalk into the entrance road is proposed. In addition, new sidewalk coming off existing sidewalk into hotel development proposed with crosswalk striping for crossing traffic coming into the hotel. 4. Parking in compliance. 5. Streetscape and Landscape in compliance. 6. Stormwater will require additional information. Please referi to Comment Landscape plan was provided detailing a full-scale landscaped site including streetscaping, entrance landscaping, parking island landscaping, and al landscape buffer for the northern, western and southern property line. The landscape key for No. 42 below. planting details was included in the Landscape Plan. APPROVED 08/15/2024: 28. AICUZ Overlay Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 According to the Generalized Existing Land use and AICUZ Planning Contours, this parcel lies outside of the AICUZ overlay area of Parker. 29. Accessory Structures: NIA APPROVED 08/15/2024: As referenced in Article 5-7.11-Trees: 1. Generally Unless exempt under paragraph 18 of this subsection 5-7.11 or if the property owner obtains documentation from an arborist certified by the International Society of Arboriculture or a Florida licensed landscape architect that a tree presents a danger to persons or property, no person shall cut down, destroy, remove or move, or effectively damage any protected tree located on any public or pri- vate real property within the City, unless otherwise exempted, without first 30. Trees obtaining authorization from the City. 2. Protected Trees Unless otherwise authorized by this subsection or exempt from a City permit, no person shall cause, suffer, permit The removal of a protected tree without first obtaining approval or authorization from the City to conduct the removal. 2024-11-27_Marriott StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal 3_FINAL Page/17 Land Devslopment Regulations Major DevelopmentApplcation Submittal Review Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS 3. Conditions for Protected Tree Removal Authorization Itis the intent of this subsection to minimize the number of protected trees subject to damage or removal. No authorization shall be granted to remove a protected tree if the person has failed to take reasonable measures to design and locate proposed development sO that the number ofp protected trees tob be removed is minimized. 4. Tree Permit Application Requirements Required tree survey. Each permit application shall be accompanied by a tree survey, prepared by a professional surveyor, registered with and licensed by the State. The survey shall consist of field flagging, location and identification of all From aerial photos taken from Google Earthe it appears that this parcel is mostly cleared. If removing trees, an application should be submitted to the City for prior approval to ensure no protected tree is removed without the City's prior consent. As referenced in Article 5-6.3.1 - Performance Standards - Visual Buffers, Appli- There shall be ai five (5) foot buffer strip between residential use and non-residen- tial use which may be comprised of native vegetation or landscaped vegetation. Ally visual buffers shall be properly maintained and kept in good repair and appear- protected trees, and property boundaries and corners. Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 Comment has been addressed. APPROVED 08/15/2024: cant is required to provide: 31. Visual Buffers ance by the property owner. Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 Comment has been addressed. APPROVED 08/15/2024: required to provide: Because this is a commercial intensive area of Parker with commercial develop- ments to the north, south, east, and west, visual buffers are not required. As referenced in Article 5-6.3.2 - Performance Standards - Noise, Applicant is Nor non-residential development shall be allowed adjacent to residential properties which causes extended sound levels on such residential properties to exceed 60 dBA from 7:00 A.M. to 10:00 P.M., and 55 dBA from 10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M. Ex- tended sound levels are those of a continuous or consistently repetitive nature. Because this is a commercial intensive area of Parker with commercial develop- ments to the north, south, east, and west, the noise requirement is not applicable. 32. Noise Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 Comment has been addressed. 2024-11-27 Marriott StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal3_FINAL Page 118 Land Development Regulations Major Development Application Submittal Review Comments No. 3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS APPROVED 08/15/2024: Applicant is required to provide: As referenced in Article 5-6.3.3 = Performance Standards - Lighting and Glare, No multi-family residential or non-residential development shall be allowed adja- cent to any residential properties which causes excessive illumination or glare upon the residential properties. All lighting or lumination proposed as part of any multi-family or non-residential development shall be located and installed sO that no direct or indirect light falls upon adjacent residential properties. All driveways, parking lots or other vehicular access associated with multi-family or non-residen- tial development shall be designed and constructed SO that no direct vehicle headlights is shown upon or into any adjacent residential dwelling. Please provide lighting details for the outside of the building and parking area which is adjacent to the low density residential development along the western boundary. Show how the development will ensure no lighting from headlights will glare into Because this is a commercial intensive area of Parker with commercial develop- ments to the north, south, east, and west, the lighting and glare requirement isr not As referenced in Article 5-7.7.2- Soil-F Protection Standards, Applicant is required As part oft the development review process required pursuant to subsection 6-1.4 oft these Land Development Regulations the developer shall include an "Erosion a. Calculations of maximum runoff based on the 100-year 1-percent critical du- b. A description of, and specifications for, sediment retention devices. C. Ad description of, and specifications for, surface runoff and erosion control de- e. Amap showing the location of all items listed in (a) through (d) in this para- Ad developer may propose the use of any erosion and sediment control techniques provided such techniques represent best management practices and are certified by a Florida registered professional engineer. Once development activity begins the developer shall maintain in good repair all erosion and sediment control measures specified in the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan regardless of 33. Lighting and Glare from light the back of the residential housing. Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 applicable. Comment has been addressed. RESUBMIT 11/25/2024: to provide: and Sediment Control Plan". Such plan shall include: ration storm event. vices. graph. 34. Erosion Control d. A description of vegetative measures. whether the development project is completed or not. 2024-11-27_Mariot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal3 I3_FINAL Pagel 119 Land Devolopment Regulations Major tAPASeT Submittal Review Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 Applicant provided and Drainage Report with calculations and Geotechnical Re- port. Applicant also provided an Erosion Control and Grading Plan. Please see Ita appears that the Applicant is encroaching onto the adjacent parcel to the west, which appears to be owned by the same owner on GIS. Is there an agreement for below for comments on those submitted documents. extending the pond onto that parcel? The following comments need to be addressed: 1. Connection to FDOT's Stormwater system will require a FDOT drainage per- 3. Provide reasonable assurance that the runoff from all developed areas is ac- counted for in the Stormwater system design. Although it is understood that some areas of the site may not be captured within the proposed system due tot topographic or other constraints, treatment is required for all areas. As an alternative to including the bypassed areas in the wet pond treatment volume, assurance that the required treatment is met by the bypass system prior to discharge may be provided through a treatment analysis for the bypassed 4. Please update rainfall depth for each storm event of the 24-hour duration to match the FDOT Zonel I IDF curves. The City requires flood attenuation for the 100-year, 24-hour storm event (rainfall depth of 13.44 inch) per Sec. 9-3.2(4) 5. Provide Runoff Curve Number Calculations, including the curve number used for each Pre-Development and Post-Development land cover. 6. Provide details on how the proposed pond side slope of 1H:1V below the con- trol elevation will be effectively stabilized. Typically, a side slope of no steeper than 2H:1Vis expected in order to prevent excess erosion and sedimentation. 7. Please show boring locations on the plan sheet. It does not appear that a soil boring was performed within the proximity of the proposed stormwater pond to be able to establish accurate groundwater conditions for the purpose of design. 8. Please explain why the Unit Hydrograph with peaking factor 256 (UH256) was chosen to best represent the runoff pattern of both the Pre-development and 9. Ino order to prevent oillgrease from leaving the drainage basini in concentration that may adverselyi impact water quality, please include as skimming device that extends a minimum of 4 inches below the weir invert. Additionally, include an 10. It appears that the width of Weir 3 and' Weir 4 in the ICPR model do not match mit. (Applicant will also need a NWFWMD permit) 2. Include a retaining wall detail in the site details. ditch(es). of the Land Development Regulations. Post-development watershed conditions. elbow on the orifice pipe. the outlet structure detail on the Plans. Please explain. 2024-11-27_Marriot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submital3_FINAL Page |20 Land Developmant Regulations Majori Development Application Submittal Review Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS 11. Provide a Mitered End Section detail. Additionally, please provide reasonable assurance that the point-discharge fromi the outlet structure will not cause ero- sion of the ditch bank Applicant Response to Review Comment 09/17/2024 Property line has been revised toi include proposed storm water pond. 1. Proof of all other submittals (including FDOT Drainage and NWFWMD) in- 2. Retaining Wall detail has been added to plan set on sheet C6.6. 3. Updated permanent pool and treatment volumes for the wet pond are based on the entire proposed site area and entire proposed impervious area. See 4. Section 5.0 of the FDOT Drainage Handbook specifies that rainfall depths for 24-hour duration storm events are to come from isopluvial maps. These storm events in the StormWise model have a "(FDOT)" suffix. Additional storm events using the FDOT IDF curves for 24-hour duration storm events are added to the StormWise model with a (CoP)" suffix. See Appendix A for de- termination of rainfall depths and Appendix B for pre-post discharge compari- 6. Proposed wet pond side slopes below the permanent pool elevation havel been reduced to 2H:1V. Proposed wet pond side slopes above the permanent pool 7. Updated Geotechnical Report with additional soil testing is being coordinated now, with field work to be completed the week of 9/16. Updated report will be cluded int the resubmittal package. Appendix B of stormwater report for calculations. son. 5. Curve Number calculations are including in Appendix B. elevation are proposed to be 3H:1V. provided once received. 8. Unit Hydrograph has been revised to UH484. 9. Elbow for orifice and weir skimming device shown on Sheet C4.1. 10. OCS Detail on Sheet C4.1 revised to match StormWise model. See Input Re- 11. Mitered end section detail included on sheet C6.1. Discharge into the wet pond is below the permanent pool elevation as the entire storm pipe system is sub- porti in Appendix B. merged. Planning Reviewr Comment 09/27/2024 1. Applicant has addressed this comment. 2. Applicant has addressed this comment. 3. Applicant has addressed this comment. 4. Applicant has addressed this comment. 5. Applicant has addressed this comment. 6. Applicant has addressed this comment. 2024-11-27_Mariot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal 3_FINAL Page/21 Land Development Regulations MaorDsyelopmentAppilcation Submittal Review Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS 8. Applicant has addressed this comment. 10. Applicant has addressed this comment. 7. Applicant did not include Geotechnical Report. Please submit. 9. SHEET C4.1 does noti include a skimmer or elbow on the orifice. Please sub- 11. Applicant provided MES Detail on SHEET C6.1. It appears there is a new storm manhole proposed downstream of their outlet control structure. How with this proposed manhole affect existing flow and provide where the water mit. will be conveyed out oft that manhole. Applicant Response to Review Comment 11/21/2024 1. Previously Addressed. 2. Previously Addressed. 3. Previously Addressed. 4. Previously Addressed. 5. Previously Addressed. 6. Previously Addressed. 7. Original geotechnical report and additional geotechnical included with the submittal. Explanation of groundwater conditions and basis for stormwater pond design are included in Geotechnical Water Table In- vestigation" on page 4 of Stormwater Management Design Report. 9. Det. Pond OCS 3 Detail in upper right-hand corner of Sheet C4.1 revised 11. Proposed storm manhole is to be inserted into existing FDOT drainage system. Existing FDOT drainage system drains to the south. Review and approval from FDOT is ongoing. This was communicated to and acknowledged via email coordination with Donna Perdue on 10/29. 8. Previously Addressed. to include skimmer. and elbow. 10. Previously Addressed. Planning Review Comment 11/25/2024 1. Previously Addressed. 2. Previously Addressed. 3. Previously Addressed. 4. Previously Addressed. 5. Previously Addressed. 6. Previously Addressed. 7. Comment. has been addressed. 2024-11-27_Mariot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal 3_FINAL Page 122 Land Development Regulations Major Development Applisation Submittal Review Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS 8. Previously Addressed. 9. Comment has been addressed. 10. Previously Addressed. 11.1 It is still unclear where the drainage from the outfall manhole is being conveyed to downstream. Is the Applicant planning on tying into the DMH structure shown directly south (with rim elevation 11.42 feet). The Outfall manhole shows one pipe on the drawing and one invert in the storm structure table. This comment has not been addressed. APPROVED AS NOTED 08/15/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 The parcel does not border a wetland and is in a commercially developed area of Parker. The USFWS has indicated no critical habitats directly exist at this site location; however, the following species are known to occur or may be affected by activities within this area and precaution should always be taken to ensure no adverse effects to any discovered protected species that may be present on or Endangered species protected under the Endangered Species Act of 1973, near this site: including: Tricolored Bat (mammal) Eastern Black Rail and Bald Eagle (bird) Monarch Butterfly (insect) Alligator Snapping Turtles and Eastern Indigo Snake (reptiles) Godfrey's Butterwort and' White Birds-in-a-Nest (flowering plants) Migratory birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act andi the Bald and 35. Wetlands and Critical Habitats: Golden Eagle Protection Act, including: American Kestrel Bald Eagle Black Skimmer Brown-headed Nuthatch Chimney Swift Chuck-will's Widow Kentucky Warbler Least Term Lesser Yellowlegs Ruddy Turnstone Swallow-Tailed Kite Willet Wood Thrush Alle efforts should ber made to protect the environment. Please ensure protecteds species orf fauna are noto disturbed during construction activities. The area should also be kept clean from all trash and debris fromt the construction zone thato could otherwise pollute thee ecosystem and bird, orf fauna are encountered prior or during construction. environment. Red-headed Woodpecker USFWS should bec consultedi if any protecteds species ofa animal, 2024-11-27_ Marriott StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submital3_FINAL Page/23 Land Devslopment Regulations MalorDayslopmentApplioation Submittal Review Comments No, PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS APPROVED 08/15/2024: Per Article 5-9.6 - Access Control, Emergency Access, "all residential subdivi- sions or multi-family developments including moble/manufactured home parks 36. Access Control shall have at least two roadway outlets which allow for emergency ingress and egress. Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 APPROVED 08/15/2024: Applicant will have one main entrance off South Tyndall Parkway. ping Centers require 1 sace per unit + 1 per 5 employees. Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 Under Article 5-9.8- Off-Street Parking and Loading Requirements Table, Shop- Peri the Site Plan, the hotel willl be a 124-key hotel. Applicant has that 126 spaces are required and 126 spaces are provided. This would meant thatt there are: at least 10 employees, which would calculate out to 2 extra spaces for at total of 126 park- APPROVED 08/15/2024: As referenced in Article 5-9.8.4- Off-Street Parking Lot All parking areas shall be surfaced with a hard, dustless material approved by the City; properly drained; designed for pedestrian safety and shall provide direct access to a public roadway or alley. Each off-street parking space shall havea minimum width of 9 feet and a minimum length of 20 feet. Vehicular off-street turning and maneuvering space shall be provided for each lot containing five or 37. Parking and Loading ing spaces. Comment has been addressed. Requirements, Applicant is required to provide: 38. Parking Lot Requirements more spaces sO that no vehicle will be required to back into or from any public roadway or alley. Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 Applicant has indicated that parking lot willl be paved with 12-inch stabilization sub- base, 4-inch aggregate base course, and 6.5-inch PCCI heavy-duty concrete over. Applicant has indicated that parking stalls will be mainly 9 feet wide and 20 feet long with the exception of the ADA Compliant Parking which will be 12 feet wide As referenced in Article 5-9.8.5- Off-Street Parking Lot Requirements, Applicant There shall be provided on the same lot as that of the principal structures (other than ac one- ortwo-family dwelling) adequate space for vehicular off-street load- ing, unloading, and the maneuvering of commercial vehicles. Vehicular off- street maneuvering spaces shall be provided sO that no vehicular backing onto or All vehicular loading and maneuvering areas shall be surfaced with a hard, dustless material, and shall have direct access to a public roadway or alley. Ar minimum of one such loading space shall be provided for all nonresidential build- ings where six or more parking spaces are required, plus one additional space for and 201 feet long. Comment has been addressed. APPROVED 09/19/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 isr required to provide: 39. Off-Street Loading and Unloading from a public roadway is required. 2024-11-27_Marriot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal 3_FINAL Page 124 Land Deyelopmant Regulations Major ASRASSESN Submittai Review Comments No,3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS each ten thousand (10,000) square feet (or fraction thereof). Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 Site Plan does not indicate as semi-trailer loading space. Ifunloading at one oft the doors into the building along the access drive, striping should be drawn in to show location and to also assist delivery drivers. Provide designated loading/striping for A12-foot X 45-foot loading zone shown on the site plan, no semi deliveries on site. Applicant provided loading zone on the updated Site Plan. This comment has As referenced in Article 6-1.3 - Development Review Process, Applicant is re- 1. APPROVED AS NOTED- Adequacy ofp public facilities and services available toserve the proposed development and bonding of alli infrastructure by phase. 2. APPROVED AS NOTED Suitability of site conditions including topography and soils, and the extent to which site modifications will be necessary to ac- commodate the proposed development. See Comment 34 above. 3. APPROVED 08/15/2024 - Ingress and egress to roadways. See Comment 4. RESUBMIT 11/25/2024 - Drainage or stormwater management. See Com- commercial vehicles. Applicant Response to Review Comment 09/17/2024 Planning Review Comment 09/19/2024 been addressed. RESUBMIT 11/25/2024: quired to provide: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 See Comment 43 below. 40. Major Development Requirements: 36 above. ments 34 above and 42 below. 5. Water infiltration. 6. APPROVED AS NOTED 08/15/2024- - Vehicular traffic, including on-site park- 7. APPROVED AS NOTED 09/19/2024: Required permits from other govern- mental agencies. Provide proof of submittal of all applicable permit applica- tions (or exemptions) (FDEP/NWFWMD ERP, FDEP Water and Wastewater ing. See Comment 37 to 39 above. Permitting, if necessary). 8. APPROVED 08/15/2024: Lighting. See Comment 33 above. 9. APPROVED AS NOTED 09/19/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 2024-11-27_Marriot. StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submital3_FINAL Page125 Land Development Regulations Mayor PPREAPPIENSN Submittal Revlew/Oomments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS Public safety and/or potential to create a public nuisance. Applicant shall pro- vide statement to the City that the proposed development will maintain public safety and not create a public nuisance in the City. Applicant Response to Review Comment 09/17/2024 Nuisance Statement provided with submittal. Planning Review Comment 09/19/2024 Applicant provided Nuisance Statement dated September 9, 2024. 10. APPROVED 08/15/2024: Impacts on natural resources. See Comment 21 APPROVED AS NOTED BELOW 11/21/24: As referenced in Article 6-1.4.b- Development Review Process, Applicant is required to provide detailed 1. APPROVED 08/15/2024: A vicinity sketch showing the relationship of the site in relation to surrounding roadways, land use districts, and flood zones, with base. ASite Map was provided which shows roadways and Site Location, and Applicant provided the Land Use designations of adjacent parcels on the Site 2. APPROVED 08/15/2024: A description of the land; the name, address, and telephone number oft the owner, developer, and designer or architect, and the 3. APPROVED 08/15/2024: The boundary lines and dimensions of the area or lots included in the site plan, including angles, dimensions and references; a North directional arrow and map scale; and the proposed use of the land and 36 above. drawings which show the following: Plan. date of site plan preparation. 41. Major Development Site Plan by areas. Requirements 4. APPROVED 08/15/2024: The existing and proposed grades, the drainage plan, erosion control plan, and the proposed structures with appropriate topo- 5. APPROVED 08/15/2024: The shape, size, and location of all structures, in- cluding the floor area and elevations thereof; the floor area and ground cover- age ratios and the relative finished ground and basement floor grades. Refer to No. 14, 15, and 17 above. FFE is indicated as 16.5 on Site Plan. 6. APPROVED AS NOTED 08/15/2024: Natural features such as wetlands, shoreline, lakes or ponds, and protected trees, and man-made features such as existing roads, sidewalks, bicycle paths, walls, fences or other structures, indicating which are to be retained, removed or altered and the adjacent prop- 7. APPROVED AS NOTED 08/15/2024: Proposed street, driveways, sidewalks, bicycle paths, and parking facilities; vehicular turnarounds, curb cutouts, and 2024-11-27_Mariott StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal 3_FINAL graphic contour intervals or spot elevations. erties, their existing uses and land use designations. Page 126 Land Developmant Regulations Major AAASSESSN Submittal Review Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS loading areas; the location of solid waste receptacles; the inside radii of all curves; the width of streets, driveways and sidewalks and the total number of available parking spaces specifying thei type of construction and critical dimen- sions, and the ownership of the various facilities. Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 8. APPROVED 11/21/24: The size and location of all existing and proposed public and private utilities or easements; water and sewer tap locations; sewer cleanouts and turns; and water meter types, sizes, and locations. See Comment 24 above. Please show all existing easements bordering parcel. Refer to Item 24 above for existing easements. Show that the stormwater pond to along southern border of parcel isnot impeding on sewer easement that also borders the parcel. In addition, please verify the boundary of the stormwater pond on the western parcel (Par- cel ID No. 26065-000-000). Applicant Response to Review Comment 09/17/2024 Easement called out on Utility Plan sheet C5.0. Planning Review Comment 09/27/2024 Not all easements indicated on the ALTA/NPS Survey are shown on the Site Plan. All easements should be indicated on the Site Plan. Specifically, the southern Bay County easement that borders the parcel is not shown on the In addition, there appears to be three new easements to the western portion oft the parcel including a 10-foot drainage easement, a 20-foot drainage ease- Applicant Response to Review Comment 11/21/2024 Updated Survey has been revised to include all easements per comment. Planning Review Comment 11/21/2024 Survey and Site Plan have been updated to reflect easements accord- ingly. Itdoes not appear that the stormwater pond will encroach into the 10-foot County Easement. 9. APPROVED 08/15/2024: All proposed landscaping and the dimensions and location of all proposed signs. RESUBMIT 11/25/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 As referenced in Article 9-3.4-L Levels of Service, Site Plan. ment, and an access and sign easement. 42. Stormwater Drainage Drainage Systems or Facilities, Applicant is required to provide: The City shall use the regulatory requirements of Chapter 62-25, Florida Administrative Code as the level ofs service toreduce storm- water pollution and the 100 year 1%, 24-hour storm event as the design standard tor reduce the potential for flooding. 2024-11-27_Mariot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal3_FINAL Page127 Land CepmentPpeSNe MajorDeyslopment Application Submibtal Review Comments No3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS Ita appears that the Applicant is encroaching onto the adjacent parcel to the west, which appears to be owned by the same owner on GIS. Is there an agreement for extending the pond onto that parcel? The following comments need to be addressed: mit. (Applicant will also need a NWFWMD permit) 2. Include a retaining wall detail in the site details. 1. Connection to FDOT's Stormwater system will require a FDOT drainage per- 3. Provide reasonable assurance that the runoff from all developed areas is ac- counted for in the Stormwater system design. Although it is understood that some areas of the site may not be captured within the proposed system due to topographic or other constraints, treatment is required for all areas. As an alternative to including the bypassed areas in the wet pond treatment volume, assurance that the required treatment is met by the bypass system prior to discharge may be provided through a treatment analysis for the bypassed 4. Please update rainfall depth for each storm event of the 24-hour duration to match the FDOT Zone IDF curves. The City requires flood attenuation for the 100-year, 24-hour storm event (rainfall depth of 13.44 inch) per Sec. 9-3.2(4) 5. Provide Runoff Curve Number Calculations, including the curve number used for each Pre-Development and Post-Development land cover. 6. Provide details on how the proposed pond side slope of 1H:1V below the con- trol elevation will be effectively stabilized. Typically, a side slope of no steeper than 2H:1Vi is expected in order to prevent excess erosion and sedimentation. 7. Please show boring locations on the plan sheet. It does not appear that a soil boring was performed within the proximity oft the proposed stormwater pond to be ablet to establish accurate groundwater conditions for the purpose of design. 8. Please explain why the Unit Hydrograph with peaking factor 256 (UH256) was chosen to best represent the runoff pattern of both the Pre-development and 9. Inc order to prevent oillgrease from leaving the drainage basin in concentration that may adverselyi impact water quality, please include a skimming device that extends a minimum of 4 inches below the weir invert. Additionally, include an 10. It appears that the width of Weir 3 and Weir 4 in the ICPR model do not match 11. Provide a Mitered End Section detail. Additionally, please provide reasonable assurance that the point-discharge from the outlet structure will not cause ero- ditch(es). of the Land Development Regulations. Post-development watershed conditions. elbow on the orifice pipe. the outlet structure detail on the Plans. Please explain. sion of the ditch bank Applicant Response to Review Comment 09/17/2024 Property line has been revised to include proposed storm water pond. 2024-11-27_Mariot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_Submittal: 3_FINAL Page 128 Land Development Requiations Major Development Application Submittal Review Commients No,3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS cluded in the resubmittal package. 1. Proof of all other submittals (including FDOT Drainage and NWFWMD) in- 2. Retaining Wall detail has been added to plan set on sheet C6.6. 3. Updated permanent pool and treatment volumes for the wet pond are based on the entire proposed site area and entire proposed impervious area. See 4. Section 5.0 of the FDOT Drainage Handbook specifies that rainfall depths for 24-hour duration storm events are to come from isopluvial maps. These storm events in the StormWise model have a "(FDOT)" suffix. Additional storm events using the FDOT IDF curves for 24-hour duration storm events are added to the StormWise model with a (CoP)" suffix. See Appendix A for de- termination of rainfall depths and Appendix Bi for pre-post discharge compari- 6. Proposed wet pond side slopes below the permanent pool elevation have been reduced to 2H:1V. Proposed wet pond side slopes above the permanent pool 7. Updated Geotechnical Report with additional soil testing is being coordinated now, with field work to be completed the week of 9/16. Updated report will be Appendix B of stormwater report for calculations. son. 5. Curve Number calculations are including in Appendix B. elevation are proposed to be 3H:1V. provided once received. 8. Unit Hydrograph has been revised to UH484. 9. Elbow for orifice and weir skimming device shown on Sheet C4.1. 10. OCS Detail on Sheet C4.1 revised to match StormWise model. See Input Re- 11. Mitered end section detail included on sheet C6.1. Discharge into the wet pond is below the permanent pool elevation as the entire storm pipe system is sub- port in Appendix B. merged. Planning Review Comment 09/27/2024 1. Applicant has addressed this comment. 2. Applicant has addressed this comment. 3. Applicant has addressed this comment. 4. Applicant has addressed this comment. 5. Applicant has addressed this comment. 6. Applicant has addressed this comment. 8. Applicant has addressed this comment. 10. Applicant has addressed this comment. 7. Applicant did noti include Geotechnical Report. Please submit. 9. SHEET C4.1 does not include a skimmer or elbow on the orifice. Please sub- mit. 2024-11-27_ Marriott StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal3.FINAL Page 129 Land Developmient Regulations Major Development Application Suoruittal Review Commentts No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS 11. Applicant provided MES Detail on SHEET C6.1. It appears there is a new storm manhole proposed downstream of their outlet control structure. How with this proposed manhole affect existing flow and provide where the water will be conveyed out of that manhole. Applicant Response to Review Comment 11/21/2024 12. Previously Addressed. 13. Previously Addressed. 14. Previously Addressed. 15. Previously Addressed. 16. Previously Addressed. 17. Previously Addressed. 18. Original geotechnical report and additional geotechnical included with the submittal. Explanation of groundwater conditions and basis for stormwater pond design are included in "Geotechnical Water Table In- vestigation" 'on page 4 of Stormwater Management Design Report. 20. Det. Pond OCS. 3 Detail in upperngnt-nand corner of Sheet C4.1 revised 22. Proposed storm manhole is to be inserted into existing FDOT drainage system. Existing FDOT drainage system drains to the: south. Reviewand approval from FDOT is ongoing. This was communicated to and acknowledged via email coordination with Donna Perdue on 10/29. 19. Previously Addressed. toi include. skimmer and elbow. 21. Previously Addressed. Planning Review Comment1 11/25/2024 12. Previously Addressed. 13. Previously Addressed. 14. Previously Addressed. 15. Previously Addressed. 16. Previously Addressed. 17. Previously Addressed. 18. Comment. has been addressed. 19. Previously Addressed. 20. Comment has been addressed. 21. Previously Addressed. 22. It's still not clear where the drainage from the outfall manhole is being conveyed to downstream. Is the Applicant planning on tying into the DMH structure shown directly south (with rim elevation 11.42 feet). The 2024-11-27_Mariot: StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal 3_FINAL Page 130 Landi Devolopment Regulations Major Developmant Application Submittal Reviewc Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS Outfall manhole shows one pipe on the drawing and one invert in the storm structure table. This comment. has not been addressed. APPROVED AS NOTED 11/25/2024: Planning Review Comment 08/15/2024 As referenced in Article 9-3.2 - Concurrency Management Review = Levels of Service as well as detailed in the Parker 2025 Comprehensive Plan, Applicant is required to meet the capacity thresholds of all utilities within Parker. Applicant is required to provide a water and wastewater capacity analysis, and Traffic Analysis (specifically, Trip Generation, latest edition). More information on Capacity Threshold Standards can bei found in Article 9-4.3 of the Parker LDR. In addition, information on the Determination of Available Capacity can be found in Water and wastewater capacity analysis provided on utility plan sheet C5.0, and TIA provided with submittal. Written confirmation of wastewater capacity has been Applicant provided capacity information on SHEET C5.0. Also, as indicated in the previous comment, Applicant's water and wastewater capacity report isn't signed and sealed by a Professional Engineer in the State of Florida. This report is re- quired to ensure that the Applicant has met the City's water and sewer Applicant has provided a Traffic Impact Analysis indicating that the proposed de- velopment will operate at LOS D or better with 528 daily trips, 42 AM peak hour Capacity letter from City of Calloway provided with submittal, Water Report has Provide a short narrative detailing how you arrived at 1,500 gpm, including the square footage of the building, etc. Confirm ift the building is sprinkled. Confirm if you are using B105.1(2) and how it was calculated. Applicant Response to Review Comment 11/22/24 The Footprint Area that is showing on the plans is 13,955: square feet, duei tot there being 4 floors, we calculated the total floor areai to be 55,820 sq ft. Because the building is a commercial development we used thel building type clas- sification of the table: Type IV. The associated Fire Flow that our total floor area Article 9-5.1 oft the Parker LDR. Applicant Response to Review Comment 09/17/2024 received from the City of Callaway. Planning Review Comment 09/27/2024 43. Concurrency Review thresholds within this area. system trips and 43 PM peak hour trips. Applicant Response to Review Comment 11/21/24 been included signed by project engineer of record. Planning Review Comment 11/22/2024 falls into on thei table is 4,250 gpm. 2024-11-27_Mariot. StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal 3_FINAL Page 131 Land Development Regulations Major Development Application Submittal Revlew/Comments No.3 PLANNING REVIEW COMMENTS The table details that Required Fire flow is 25% of the 4,250 gpm which totals 1,062 gpm. Due this value being less than 1,500 gpm per the table below, 1,500 gpm was required to be used, because our building is fully sprinkled. TABLEB105.2 0860 REQUIREDI FIRE FLOWI FORE BUILDINGS OTHER THAN ONE- AND1 TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS. GROUPF R-3ANDI R-48 BUILDINGS AND1 TOWNHOUSES AUTCMATIC SPRINKLER SYSTEM (Dasign Standard) No3 Semon 033 FST MINIMUME FIREF FLOW (gailons parminute) 105 12: FLOWDURATON fhours) Duranonnt Taple 81051 12: 25ctmhe Tacies 5105 12 Duramonn Tabe 51051 12athereduceas fowr rate 5105 12 Durations Table: 51053 12:8: mereducedn Tonr rate Planning Review Comment 11/25/2024 Anchor has reviewed the inputs to the water model and while Anchor did not con- firm the model results by running a seperate model, the inputs appear correct and the report has been signed and sealed by a professional engineer. Anchor'sreview and approval of the water report does not relieve the applicant of providing ade- quate fire flow to the building by whatever means necessary. Comment has been NOTIFICATION ONLY: All efforts should be made to protect the environment. The area should also be kept clean from all trash and debris fromi the construction zone that could otherwise pollute the ecosystem and environment. Per Parker Or- dinance No. 2016-376, $3, 8-16-16, any construction or building site shall be kept clean at all times. All debris or solid waste must be confined in a specific area of the construction or building site. It shall be the responsibility of the individual ob- taining the building permit and the general contractor to properly dispose of con- struction debris and solid waste on at least a weekly basis. No construction debris addressed as noted. 44. Trash Ordinance: shall be burned or buried. 2024-11-27_Mariot! StudioRes Commercial Dev Order Review_ Submittal3 3_FINAL Page |32