Loading...
AGENDA DOCUMENTS <....."' , ~ \\Jt-'j PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM NO 96-376 Agenda Memorandum for July 16, 1996 City Commission Meeting FROM Carrie Parker City Manager Tambri J Heyden, AICP~- Planning and Zoning Director TO DATE July II, 1996 SUBJECT Quantum Park - DRIA #96-002 and MPMD #96-004 DRI and Master Plan Amendment No 6 (add lots 80 - 82, add commercial to lots 65A, 65B, 67B, 76, 77, 78, 79 and 91 and delete commercial on lots 58 - 62) Please place the above-referenced item on the July 16, 1996 City Commission agenda under Legal, Ordinances - Second Reading DESCRIPTION The attached ordinance, which includes revisions discussed at the July 2, 1996 Commission meeting, was approved on first reading in connection with an amendment to the Quantum Park PID master plan and DRI to add lots 80, 81 and 82 of the PCD Center subdivision to the boundaries of Quantum Park, add the option of commercial use to the existing use designated for lots 65A, 65B, 67B, 76, 77, 78, 79 and 91 and change the use designation of lots 58, 59, 60, 61 and 62 from commercial to industrial/research and development/office The revisions agreed to at the meeting and that have been made ln the attached ordinance include the following 1 Clarification on page 2 to reflect the Commission's requirement to reduce the amount of "floating" commercial lots from 86 15 acres to 47 acres (the original 30 acres plus an additional 17 acres for CarMax) and identify the location of this 41 acres of commercial use (lots 65A, 65B, 67B, 76, 77, 78, 79 and 91 added as commercial use and lots 58 - 62 deleted as commercial use - see revised exhibit "B" for location of commercial lots) There is a question regarding the CarMax acreage which is under investigation due to a discrepancy in whether the lots desired by CarMax includes lot 76, a difference of 13 53 acres vs 17 acres 2 provision 3 on page 3 Include approval by Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council and DCA for development which would generate more than a 2,300 p m peak hour trips 3 Previous provision 4 regarding lots 53 and 54 has been deleted as it has been addressed on the revised master plan attached to the ordinance (The full-size master plan has not been received yet, but a copy of a portion has been received for review and was found acceptable The attached master plan was prepared by staff, until the full-size version is received for record purposes ) 4 Page 4, provision 4 (previously provision 5) to building permit has been changed to application - Reference site plan 5 Previous provision 6 regarding public access to the cul- de-sac serving lot 45A has been deleted as it has been addressed on the revised master plan attached to the ordinance TO Carrie Parker -2- July II, 1996 6 Page 4, provision 5c (previously provision 7c) Provisions a (signage), b (access) and c (landscaping) under 5 are the remaining assurances of those recommended by staff to prevent unsightly strip commercial development along Gateway Boulevard that the meeting minutes reflect Commission concensus (see revised exhibit "B" of ordinance for location of the 47 acres selected by the applicant for commercial - lots 80, 81 and 82 that are labeled as lito be added to Quantum II were also selected, but will be added to the master plan as commercial/industrial use by amending the development order after DCA review of a pending land use amendment for these lots) Prohibition of subdivision of lots into outparcels, buildings with multiple uses and more than one building per lot did not receive concensus and therefore are not included in the ordinance Provision c has been reworded to reflect the position of the majority of the Commission that excess landscaping would be required (in exchange for additional commercial), rather than encouraged, although it would not be determined until the first site plan application for a Gateway Boulevard commercial lot, but the first application would dictate the requirement for landscape consistency on subsequent Gateway commercial lots As a point of information, the existing landscaping within the median of Gateway Boulevard will be removed when Gateway Boulevard is widened Widening is a future requirement of the DRI Also, the row of trees that exists along the street frontage of the vacant lots on Gateway Boulevard will be removed when the lot is developed These trees are generally relocated on site where they can be accommodated as part of the site design 7 Previous provisions 8 (hotel rooms to be included within commercial square footage) and 9 (specification of approved total square footage and acreage for each use) have been deleted as they have been addressed on the revised master plan 8 Provision 6 on page 5 (previous provision 10) has been revised to require for traffic evaluation purposes, the use of gross floor area for all uses, except commercial, which shall use gross leasable area (All outside agencies responsible for reviewing traffic have acceptable the applicant's revised traffic study) 9 Provision 7 on page 5 (previous provision 11) has been revised to correlate upgrading of the lift station serving Park Ridge Boulevard to a determination of sewer flow in excess of the lift station's capacity RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the attached ordinance be approved on second and final reading It is understood that a new ordinance, which will amend the attached ordinance, will be processed to reflect commercial/industrial use on lots 80, 81 and 82, after DCA has completed their review of the pending land use amendment affecting these lots The future ordinance will be adopted prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy for CarMax tjh Attachments xc Central file A QPkDRIA6 ORDINANCE NO 96- AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR A DETERMINATION THAT CHANGES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT APPROVED IN ORDINANCE NO 84- 51, AND AMENDED IN ORDINANCES NOS 86-11, 86- 37, 88-3, 94-10 AND 94-51, DO NOT CONSTITUTE A SUBSTANTIAL DEVIATION UNDER CHAPTER 380 06, FLORIDA STATUTES, 1996, DETERMINING THAT NO FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT REVIEW IS NECESSARY REGARDING SUCH CHANGES, APPROVING SUCH CHANGES, AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER (ORDINANCE NOS 84-51, 86-11, 86-37, 88-3, 94-10 AND 94-51) FOR PURPOSES OF INCORPORATING THE APPROVED CHANGES, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, Riteco Development Corporation, a Florida corporation ("Riteco") filed with the City of Boynton Beach (the "City") an Application for Development Approval of Comprehensive Development of Regional Impact (the "ADA") on May 21, 1984, regarding that certain property (the "Property") described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and made a part hereof, and WHEREAS, the ADA was approved and the Development Order for the Property was granted December 18, 1984 and pursuant to Ordinance No 84-51 (the "Development Order"); and WHEREAS, Riteco subsequently conveyed its right, titles and interest in and to the Property to Boynton Park of Commerce, Inc a Florida corporation ("Boynton Park"), and, Boynton Park, in turn, subsequently conveyed its right, title and interest in and to the Property to Quantum Associates, a Florida general partnership (the "Developer") and WHEREAS, Developer filed with the City respective applications to amend the Development Order, which applications were approved by the City in Ordinance No 86-11, Ordinance No 86- 37, Ordinance No 88-3, Ordinance No 94-10, and Ordinance 94-51; and WHEREAS, the term "Development Order" includes all amendments thereto and WHEREAS, Quantum Associates, a Florida general partnership (IIDeveloperll) is the current owner and developer of the remaining vacant land within the project commonly known as Quantum Corporate Park at Boynton Beach Development of Regional Impact (sometimes hereinafter called the "Quantum Park DRI"); and WHEREAS, Developer has submitted to the City a Notification of Proposed Change to a Previously Approved Development of Regional Impact ("NOPC") requesting a further amendment to the Development Order for the purpose of revising the Master Site Development Plan to reflect the addition of Lots 80, 81 and 82 to the DRI and to include commercial use as a permitted land use for certain additional lots (lots 65A, 65B, 67B, 76, 77, 78, 79 and 91) within Quantum Park and delete commercial use as a permitted land use for lots 58, 59, 60, 61 and 62 within Quantum Park (see attached Exhibit "B" - Amended Master Site Development Plan), and WHEREAS, the City Commission of Boynton Beach, as the governing body having jurisdiction, is authorized and empowered to consider applications for amendments to development orders approving developments of regional impact pursuant to Chapter 380 06, Florida Statutes (1996), and WHEREAS, said City Commission has considered the testimony, reports and other documentary evidence submitted at said public hearing by Developer, the City staff and the public, and the City Planning and Development Board's recommendations of the 25th day of June, 1996; and WHEREAS, said City Commission has considered all of the foregoing NOW THEREFORE, be it ordained by the City Commiseion of Boynton Beach, that said City Commission makes the following findings of fact Section 1 A notice of public hearing in the proceedings was duly published on the 17th day of June, 1996, in The Post, a newspaper of general circulation in Boynton Beach, Florida, -2- pursuant to Chapter 380 06, Florida Statutes, and proof of said publication has been duly filed in these proceedings Section 2 Developer has requested that the Development Order be amended to include the following provisions 1 Lots 80, 81 and 82 as per the plat of P C D Center, Plat Book 60, Pages 106 and 107, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida, are hereby added and incorporated into the Quantum Park DRI 2 Master Plan Amendment No 6 to the Master Site Development Plan for Quantum Park dated July 11, 1996, is hereby approved 3 In accordance with the analysis of the intersection of Park Ridge Road and Gateway Boulevard prepared by Kimley- Horn and Associates, Inc dated April 9, 1996, as modified by Supplemental Analysis dated June 10, 1996 and incorporated herein by reference, the following intersection improvements shall be constructed at such time as that portion of the project served by Park Ridge Road exceeds the following trip generation levels a 1,200 p m peak hour trips restripe the southbound approach for dual lefts and a combination through/right turn lane b 1,300 P m peak hour trips construct an additional right-turn lane on the northbound approach to provide dual right-turns c 1, 935 P m peak hour trips add a southbound through lane and separate out the through/right into a through and right-turn only lane The Developer shall not proceed with development of that portion of the project served by Park Ridge Boulevard which would generate in excess of 2,300 p m peak hour trips without further review of the operating characteristics of said intersection and approval by the City, the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council and the Department of Community Affairs -3- 4 Concurrently with the submittal of a site plan application for any lot designated commercial pursuant to the Master Site Development Plan (regardless of whether the proposed use is commercial or another permitted land use), the applicant shall indicate in writing to the City the number of PM peak hour vehicle trips estimated to be generated by the proposed building improvement and also the aggregate peak hour trip generation for all lots served by Park Ridge Boulevard 5 With respect to any commercial development along Gateway Boulevard, the following conditions shall apply a There shall be no increase in the number of free- standing signs than is currently permitted (i e one per lot, additional lots created beyond the number of lots that currently exists as of the adoption date of this ordinance shall not be entitled to their own freestanding sign and must share freestanding signage with an adjacent lot) b There shall be no increase in the number of access points on to Gateway Boulevard than currently anticipated (i e additional lots created beyond the number of lots that currently exists as of the adoption date of this ordinance shall not be entitled to their own access point and must share access through cross access with an adjacent lot) c Landscaping shall be installed in excess of that required by the landscaping code in effect as of the adoption date of this ordinance The extent of the supplemental landscaping required shall be determined at the time of site plan review for the first commercial lot along Gateway Boulevard submitted for review after the adoption date of this ordinance The supplemental landscaping determined to be required for this first commercial lot shall establish the landscaping standard -4 - required for subsequent commercial lots along Gateway Boulevard 6 Where square footage is used to evaluate traffic generated by a given land use, gross floor area shall be used, with the exception of commercial use which shall be evaluated using gross leasable area 7 The sewage lift station serving Park Ridge Boulevard shall be upgraded at Quantum's expense at such time as development generates sewer flow in excess of the lift station capacity as determined by the city's Utilities Department Section 3 Upon consideration of all matters described in Section 380 06, Florida Statutes (1996), it is hereby determined that A The amendments proposed by Developer do not unreasonably interfere with the achievement of the objectives of the adopted state land development plan applicable to this area B The amendments proposed by Developer are consistent with the local comprehensive plan and local land development regulations C The amendments proposed by Developer are consistent with the recommendations of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council on file in these proceedings D The amendments proposed by Developer do not constitute a substantial deviation under Chapter 380 06, Florida Statutes (1996) Section 4 The City Commission has concluded as a matter of law that these proceedings have been duly conducted pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 380 06, Florida Statutes (1996), that Developer is entitled to the relief prayed and applied for, and that the Development Order is hereby amended incorporating the amendments proposed by Developer ae eet forth in Section 2 above Section 5 Except as otherwise amended herein, the Development Order shall remain in full force and effect FIRST READING this 2nd day of July, 1996 -5- SECOND READING and FINAL PASSAGE this , 1996 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAYOR VICE-MAYOR COMMISSION MEMBER COMMISSION MEMBER COMMISSION MEMBER ATTEST CITY CLERK EXHIBITS IIAII - Legal Description liB II - Amended Master Site Development Plan ORl95 20376.1 SMW -6- day of EXHIBIT "A" - - OVERALL BOUNDARY LEGAL DBSCRIPTION A Tract of land lying partially 1n ..et1on. 1', 11, ao and 21, Town.hip 41 .ouCh, Ran,. 4' .a.t, 'al. B.ach County, Florida Baid Tract being more particularlr de.orib.d .. 'ollow.: Co...naln, at ~h. eouthwe.e carner of .aid '.ction 11; thence North 1044' 39" la.t, along the w.et 11ne of S.ction 11, a di.tanc. o! 1318.10 fe.t to a point in the inter..ction with the centerline 01 N.W. 12nd Avenue, a. recorded in O.R. Book 1138, 'av. 1'86, of th. Public Records of 'alm a.ach County, rlorida~ thence with a b.aring of North 89004'32" la.t, along the centerline of N.W. 22nd Avenue, a dietance of 118.31 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence North 1044'39" laet, a dietance of 1241.06 feet to the South right of way line of L.W.D.D Lateral 21~ thence North 89008'49" Bast along the south right of way line L W.D.D. Lateral 21, a. recorded in O.R. Book 1732, Page 612, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida, a distance of 635.93 feet to the centerline of the L "1.0 0 Equalizing canal B-4, as recorded in O.R Book 1732, Page 612, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Floridai thence along the centerline of the above described 8-4 Canal with a curve to the right having a chord b.aring of North 10032'52" Bast, a radius of 150.00 feet, a central angle of 4004'17", and an arc length of 53.29 f.et, thence continue along the centerline of the 8-4 canal, with a bearing of North 12035'00" East, a dista~ce of 320.69 feet to a point of curve; thence ~lth a curve to the left having a 'radius of 6500.00, a central angle of 3028' 30", and an arc length of 394.23 feet; thence North 9006' 30" Bast, a distance of 1979.16 feet to a point on the Uorth Line of Section 1,; thence with a bearing of North 89016'39" Bast, along the North line of section 17, a distance of 1964.50 feet; thence South 0002'11" Bast, a distance of 2625.18 feetJ thence North 89008'49" Bast, a distance of 368 96 I.feet to a point on the .Jorth right of way 1 ine of N W. 22nd Avenue as recorded in O.R. Book 1738, 'ave 1686 of the Public ,Record. of .al. Beach County, florida, thence South 19027'31" ,East, a distance of 50 00 feet to the centerline of N.N 22nd Avenue: tbence wlith a curve to the right having a chord bearing of North 15029"9" East, a radius of 163/.02 feet, a central anqle of 905~'58", and an arc length of 282.85 feet to a point; thence north 12002'41" Bast, ~ distance of 915.12 feet; thence North 0031'11" East, a distance of 399.10 feet; thence North 89012'37" Bast, a distance of 413.21 feetithen South 88022'56" East, a distance of 1349.70 feet to a point on the West right of way line of the Seaboard Coastline Railroad; thence South 0028'21" East, along the West right of way line of the Railroad, a distance of 1309.09 feet to a point on the centerline of N.W 22nd Avenue, thence North 88021'31" We.t, along the centerline of N. W 22nd Avenue a distance of 612.91 feet, thence South 0033'53" Bast, a distance of 1306.69 feet; thence South 88045'31" Baat, a diatance of 333.51 feet to a point on the West right of way of the seaboard coastline Railroad; thence with a bearin9 of South 14008'23" West, along the West right of way of the railroad, a distance of 1312.4' f.et; thence South 0033'53" East, a distance of 26.69 feet, thence South 13015'22" Nest, a distance of 920.51 feet, thence north 88050'04" West, a distance of 187.60 feet; thence with a bearing North 0049'21" West, a dist~nce of 200.00 feet, thence North 88050'04" West, a distance of 218 00 feet; thence South 0049'21" Sast, a diatance of 200 00 feet; thence North 88050'04" West, a distance of 40.00 feet; thence South 0049'21" ...t, . d1.~.nc. of 158.84 fe.t~ thence North 88050'04" W.st, a distance of 3617.26 feet to a point on the centerline of the above described centerline of the E-4 canal; thence with a bearinQ of North 5018'14" Nest a distance - , ot 153 13 feet, thence with a curve to the right having a radius of 450 00 feet, a central angle of 15036'44", and an arc length " I' II IlLEGAL DESCRIPTION (Continuedl I' of 122.62 .feet; thence North 10018' 30" Bast, a distance of 11988.60 f..~ to a point of ourve; thence with a curve to the 1. having a radiua of.~50.00 feet, a central angle of 18020'OG land an are length of 1t3.99 feet; thence with. b..ring of North I' 8001' 30" West, . distance of 1255 1. feet to a point on the ,Icenterline of N.W. 22nd Avenue, thence with a beRring of South ;.89004' 32" W.st, along the centerline of N.W. 22nd Avenue a Hdi8tance of 817.85 feet aore or le.. to th. Point of aeg1nn1ng. leontainin; 591.55 acres aore or le.. and subject to ea.e.ent. and rights of way of record. I \, ci r " EXHIBIT "B" \\ ~'-.~ ~ .....,~- I i .1 I I l - - 1:.1 if I s.. - P- I ~ 1- "" fi1~ ( O~ ~~ ....., -- W~ , ~ , "'0 Ee .-- I -aJo. - .., , I .n I I I - .1J ~-.. ,.. .. J " J i I ;I.. , I~. * 1:-l~ .ro--- ./ 'I' ""'" a...D.o. 10UAuIINI CAIML C-tt ~ ~ WASTER PLAN AWENOWENT NO. . JULY 11. 1986 I. .... POI"I'ION Off ,AIle ... .... 10 II WClQID At nc ,. fJI THl ... taIXII. DI\CIMNIIIf .. ~ ..... M -.tJOlEM' HI). . oun '/1'/14. I DlWIJl'IIhl FCIU.DlIIMI LNIt ~~ ..,.D _ CICIrD rMl ~ .. :::r'1 ~ ~ ........, , _ .ti' . ,;~ - "n.nr.r=- ..... ... .. _ ...-z - 1.I11.m to " ClOSS.... GNN01II.1IODtI_ _sa "CllCllllAIIA~ I. 10DL GItD "'" nil 1M!: NO.aCT ItMLL .... IJ.JSa 1111. ~ =..o"",;.::::"..='7 l.'l ~ -"...:="Aw............ .. _ .. _. II AIDPROJED COMMERCIA( UllII DELETION OF COMMERCIAL MASTER SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN LEGEND ~ - -LJ..J' -- ... i B,- Offico Olroco/Commlrcfal Orliel/HollI/Commorclal Offlcl/Hol.. O,nol/ll..o OfficI/Old Indu.trtol/CommltCial Ind~.lriol/R&O/Offtoo Inclu.lrIoI R&:ll R&:D/C"'I Governmentaljlnltltutlonol W.lland. Sand Pine R...rYII Roode 98.112 Acre. 11.57 Iocr.. 13.115 Acr.. 11.17 Iocr.. '.03 Aor.. 2.38 Aor.. 211.55 Iocr.. 23.19 Iocr.. 115.35 Acr.. 32.11 Acro. 2.40 Acr.. 38.80 Acr.. II.DO Ac.... 40.00 "0'" 41.1 3 Acrl. I.'" ) KEY PLAN {:} OPEN SPACE ~ 10.117 Aor.. Pc.-k. loke. O.tentlon QUANTUM ASSOCIATES National City Center 115 West Washington 51. Indianapolis. IN 46204 (317) 636-1600 QUANTUM PARK TOTAL ~5J.13 Acr.. PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM NO 96-350 Agenda Memorandum for July 2, 1996 City Commission Meeting FROM Carrie Parker City Manager Tambri J HeYde~ Planning and Zoning Director TO DATE June 27, 1996 SUBJECT Quantum Park - DRIA #96-002 and MPMD #96-004 Master Plan Amendment No 6 (add lots 80 82, add commercial to lots 65A, 65B, 66, 67A, 67B, 67C, 68B, 69, 70, 72, 73A, 73B, 74 - 85 and delete commercial on lots 58 - 61) Please place the above-referenced item on the July 2, 1996 City Commission agenda under Public Hearing DESCRIPTION James G Willard of Shutts & Bowen, agent for Quantum Associates, property owner of Quantum Park, is requesting to amend the previously approved PID master plan in connection with an amendment to the DRI to add 13 17 acres (the PCD Center subdivision) to the PID boundaries and change the use designation from office to commercial/industrial use, add the option of commercial use to the existing use designated for lots 65A, 658, 66, 67A, 67B, 67C, 68A, 68B, 69, 70, 72, 73A, 73B, 74 - 79, 83 - 85 and 91 (86 51 acres) and change the use designation of 58, 59, 60 and 61 (20 14. acres) from commercial to industrial/research and development/office (see attached Planning and Zoning Department Memorandum No 96-340 for further details) RECOMMENDATION The Planning and Development Board, with a 6 - 1 vote, recommended approval of this request for a master plan amendment, subject to the following conditions 1 All staff comments on page 6 and 7 of Planning and Zoning Department Memorandum No 96-340, except comments 2, 8, 10, 11, 12a, 12b and 12d 2 Concurrent ly wi th the submittal of a building permi t application for any lot for which commercial development is a permitted use pursuant to the master site development plan (regardless of whether the proposed use is commercial or another permitted land use), the applicant shall indicate in writing to the city the number of PM peak hour vehicle trips estimated to be generated by the proposed building improvement and also the aggregate peak hour trip generation for all lots served by Park Ridge Boulevard 3 With respect to any commercial development along Gateway Boulevard, the following conditions shall apply a There shall be no increase in the number of freestanding signs than is currently permitted (i e one per lot, additional lots created beyond the number of lots that currently exists shall not be entitled to their own freestanding sign and must share freestanding signage with an adjacent lot) b There shall be no increase in the number of access points on to Gateway Boulevard than currently anticipated (i e additional lots created beyond the number of lots that currently exists shall not be entitled to their own access point and must share access through cross access with an adjacent lot) TO Carrie Parker -3- June 27, 1996 accomplished in less time than the site plan process Therefore, it is recommended that the reference to building permit in #2 be changed to site plan and added to the ordinance accordingly 2 Recommendation #3c above was wording proposed by the applicant at the Board meeting to replace staff comment #12f However, the Board also recommends approval of staff comment #12f The difference is that #12f refers to the city's landscape code, but #3c refers to the PID landscape code There is no PID landscape code, except for peripheral greenbelts and only two of the subject commercial lots along Gateway Boulevard are peripheral lots Recommendation #3c also says that the excess landscaping is encouraged (not required) and will be reviewed as part of the site plan This is contrary to staff comment #12f in that it requires landscape design standards to be developed, prior to the first site plan approval of any Gateway commercial lot, to achieve landscape continuity among the lots Therefore, it is recommended that #3c be reworded and added to the ordinance as follows Landscape design standards, requiring landscaping in excess of the current landscape code, shall be developed in conjunction with staff and the Regional Planning Council, and shall apply to all commercial lots along Gateway Boulevard Such standards shall be approved by the Commission prior to the first site plan submittal for a commercial lot along Gateway Boulevard Regarding staff comment #7 recommended by the Board, the Utilities Department indicates that this comment can now be revised as follows (this has already been added to the ordinance) The sewage lift station serving Park Ridge Boulevard shall be upgraded at Quantum's expense when deemed necessary by the Utilities Department Rega.rding staff comment #10 deleted by the Board, I have spoken to the RPC and there is no problem with deleting this comment In conclusion, it is recommended that the ordinance not be approved until the traffic study is revised and found acceptable to the outside reviewing agencies, that the ordinance not be approved until the master plan is revised to address staff comments, Planning and Development Board recommendations and any changes to commercial lot designations that the Commission determines appropriate, that the ordinance be revised to reflect the proposed wording in conflict #1 above (building permit vs site plan for timing of traffic information) and #2 above (required landscape design standards) tjh Attachments A QPkDRIA xc Central file IJLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM NO. 96-340 TO: Chairman and Members Planning and Development Board FROM: Tambri .I Heyden Planning and Zoning Director DATE: June 27, 1996 SUBJECT: Quantum Park of Commerce - DRIA #96-002 and MPMD #96-004 Master PIon Amendment No.6 (odd Iptll 80 - 81, ndd commercial to lots 6!5A, 6SB, 66, 67 A, 678, 67C, 688, 69, 70, 72, 73A, 738, 74 - 85 and delete commercial on lots 58 - 61) NATURE OF REQUEST Quantum Parh: of Commerce, a partially developed Development of Regional Impact (I>RI) comprised of 539 9 acres, zoned PID (Planned Industrial llevelopment), is located on the west side of 1-95, between .Miner Road extended and the Boynton (C- 16) Canal (see attached location map - Exhibit "A") James G \-Villard, Esquire and agent for Quantum Associates, property owner of the Quantum Park of Commerce, has re(IUested amendments to their lllU development order, Ordinance No 84-51 as amended by Ordinance No 86-1 I, 86-37, 88-3, 94-10 and 94-51 The proposed amendments are as follows 1 Incorporation of the undeveloped P C II Center subdivision property (lots 80, 81 and 82), containing 13 17 acres at the southeast corner of Park Ridge Boulevard and Gateway Boulevard and a change to the master plan designation from office use to industrial/commercial use; 2 Change in the master plan designation of lots 58, 59, 60 and 61 from commercial use to industrial/research and development/office use; 3 Change in the master plan designation of lots 65A, 658, 66, 67 A, 67C and 91 frolJl office/hotel use to office/hotel/commercial use; 4 Change in the master plan designation of lots 83, 84 and 85 from ollice use to office/colJlmercial use; 5 Change in the master phm designation of lots 68A and 68IJ from research and development to research and development/commercial use; and 6 Change in the master plan designation of lots 69, 70, 72, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73A and 73B from industrial to industrial/commercial use. The amendment request is governed by Section 7 of Appendix A, Zoning, City of Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances, which establishes Planned Industrial Development Districts and by Chapter 380 06(19), Florida Statutes, for a determination of substantial deviation The amendments are submitted in connection with a request that the City Commission mal<e a determination that the amendments are not substantial in nature and that the proposed changes do not require further Development of Regional Impact review BACKGROUND A public hearing must be conducted by the City Commission prior to maldng a determination as to whether the proposed change is substantial in nature and whether further. development of regional impact review is required If no further review is rC(luired, the City Commission shall issue an amended development order which, in this instance, requires the IJassage of an ordinance which amends the original development Pl:lIllling and Zoni >epartmcnt J\ kmm"andllln No W.-340 'I'() Planning ami Development Board .June 21, 1996 Page 2 order If a determination is made that the proposed change requires further development of regional impact review, the review shall be conducted only on those aspects of the development order required to be chanaed. The required public hearing shall receive a fifteen (15) day public notice, following the passage of thirty (30) days, but not more than forty.five (45) days pfter receipt of the amendment materials. The City Commission will conduct its hearing on July 2, 1996, as advertised, and if the City Commission determines the proposed changes to be non- substantial, with no further review required, first reading of the amended Quantum Park development order (an ordinance) will occur on July 2, 1996, as well. This amendment will require a one-time change to our development process. For non- development of regional impact planned industrial developments, the City Commission must make a finding related to the degree of change, that is, whether or not it is substantial, and then, the Planning and Development Board approves, approves with modification, or denies the re(IUest. In this instance, the City Commission must approve any change. Therefore, the Planning and Development Board must act in an advisory capacity to the City Commission, as the State Statutes prevail over City ordinances. ANALYSIS The changes itemized ahove can be summarized as the addition of 13 17 acres of land into the DRI, deletion of 20 14 ac."es (lots 58 - 61) of commercial use ~lIong Quantum L~lI{es Drive, and the addition of commercial use along the eastern segment of Gateway Boulevard and ~t1ollg the portion of l~arl{ Ridge Uoulevard, south of Gateway Boulevard (see attached proposed master plan amendment - Exhihit "U") The addition of land area satisfies a condition of Ordinance 94-10; the development order which approved the high school in Quantum Pari" to meet state law which re(luires that land under common ownership, mljacent to a DIU, must be included within the boundaries of the DRI This 1317 acres of property was originally owned hy the city and was exchanged with the original ))IU developer for the city Ilark property located within Quantum Park. This additional land area has heen under common ownership since approximately 1986 when it was rezoned from Recreation to Planned Commercial District (PCD) for 287,250 square feet of office This pcn, known as the PCD Center, was platted into three lots (lots 80, 81 and 82) in 1989 and is vested for office use, hut has never heen developed A land use amendment ami rezoning application was approved hy the Board at the .Jnne ] 1, 1996 meeting (pending hefm'e the Commission) to unify the land use and zoning of the property with the land use and zoning of Quantum Pari, The master plan amendment with the subject request also changes the pl"Oposed use from office to commerciallindustrial for these three lots. \-Vitll respect to the deletion of 20 14 acres (lots 58 - 61) of commercial use along Quantum Lakes Drive, this commercial acreage is proposed to be relocated elsewhere in Quantum Pari" specifically along the east end of Gateway Boulevard and along Park Ridge Boulevard, south of Gateway Boulevard, between the 14 3 acre sand pine preserve and the railroad tracks/Interstate 95 The total commercial acreage allowed in Quantum Park is 29 7 acres, therefore 20 14 acres represents relocation of 2/3 of the commercial space. The applicant has stated that the reason for relocation of these 20 14 acres and redesignation as either industrial, research and development or office (at the developer's option) is because the developer has received little interest in Quantum Lakes Drive from commercial ventures (the last developer that approached city staff for development of this commercial area wanted to construct a Scandinavian village retail/hotel complex) In 1986, Quantum Pari, submitted a DRI amendment to, among other things, locate a total of 24 4 acres of commercial space along the south side of Gateway Boulevard This portion of the amendment was denied hecause it was in opposition to the zoning code stated purpose of the I'll> (planned Industrial Development) district regulations and pr~jected an image of a commercial strip, rather than an industrial office park A condition of the 1986 I'lallning and Zuni. I)eparhncnt J\ I elllonlll d 11111 No 9()-34I '10 Planning and Development Hoard .June 21, 1996 Page 3 amendment was that the majority of the commercial space be relocated to a less prominent site within the PID, specifically along Quantum Lakes Drive. With respect to the addition of commercial use to seven (7) lots along Gateway Boulevard, west of 1-95 and to 19 lots along the portion of Park Ridge Boulevard which is south of the intersection of Gateway Boulevard and High Ridge Road, the applicant states that this is requested for flexibility of marketing The applicant is proposing commercial use as an OI)Uon to the current use of these referenced lots and thnt not all the lots would be developed for commerclal (Just those the developer could market for commercial) In addition, the applicant is proposing a total limit of commercial use of 426,888 square feet (not the 29 7 acres currently allowed) Also part of this amendment, pursuant to a condition of the revised development order which approved the high school, is a traffic analysis of the intersection of High Ridge Road and Gateway Boulevard This analysis was required to study the operating characteristics of this intersection, since the high school approval included closure of a portion of Park Ridge Uoulevard when the high school is constructed Although, as discussed further on in this .'eport, the traffic analysis re(luit"eS revision, the following intersection imllrovements arc indicated in the analysis ami shall be constructed at such time as that portion of the project sened by P3I'k Ridge Boulevard exceeds the following trip generation levels. I 1,200 Il III peak hour trips - restrille the southbound approach for dual lefts and a combination through/right turn lane. 2 1,300 P m peak hour trips - construct an additional right turn lane on the northbound approach to provide dual right turns. 3 1,935 P III peak hour trips - add a southhound through lane and separate out the through/right into a through and right turn only lane. III addition, the analysis indicates that when 2,300 p m peak hour trillS is reached, further re\/iew of' the intersection is necessary, as this is the physical limit of this intersection (the pe~tI{ hour design capacity of this intersection) The Tcchnicall{eview Committee met on May 21, 1996 to review the plans and documents submitted The Planning and Zoning Department also met on June 12, 1996 with the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council staff and the agency's traffic consultant The Planning and Zoning Department has also been in contact with certain other agencies that review nlu amendments; the Florida Department of Transportation (li'llOT), the Department of Community Affairs (UCA) and Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering As of today, no written comments have been received from the outside reviewing agencies regarding their review of the second revision of the traffic analysis. However, all agencies expressed major concerns with the traffic analysis and stated that further revisions were necessary due to inaccurate information and comments from first review that had not been satisfactorily addressed The concerns from city staff and the outside agencies are sunlluarized as follows: 1 The "option" of commercial on such a large number of lots (26 new commercial options proposed) defeats the purpose of master planning and will lead to spotty locating of commercial uses with no consideration for adjacent uses. 2 Commercial uses, which draw customers, pedestrians and vehicles, haphazardly mixed with industrial uses, which require greater tractor trailer trallic, as proposed along Park mdge Uoulevard, is potentially unsafe and is not recommended by tranSllOl"tation phumers. P'anning and Zon Ikpar(llIcn( I\ll'lIlUrandmu No ,6-341 TO Planning and Development Board .June 21, 1996 I'age 4 3 The relocation of 2/3 of the commercial uses from Quantum Lakes Drive to the Intersection of Gateway Boulevard and Ulah Rldae Road nnd Alonll the railroad tracks and 1-95 wIU Impact the type of commercial ventures interested in locating in Quantum Park. This shift will attract commercial uses such as service stations, fast food restaurants, oil change garages, and strip commercial that will be interested in the 1-95 visibility and capturing external project traffic, with little relation to the planned industrial park. 4. In the vicinity of Boynton Beach Boulevard and Old Boynton Road, west of Congress Avenue alone, there is already 500,000 square feet of commercial square footage approved, unbullt and vested since 1990 These approvals, as well as the commercial revitalization efforts planned for Federal Highway, will be competing with the relocated commercial space in Quantum Parl{, due to the tYlle of commerchtl uses that will now be interested in locating in Quantum Park. Since the demand for commercial land use is finite, some existing commercial uses within the city may migrate to Quantulll Park 5 Str"ip commercial and the types of commercial uses that will be interested in locating close to the 1-95 interchange will lead to re-subdivision of the seven new commercial parcels along Gateway Uoulevard into smaller parcels and the creation of outbuildings, which will increase the appearance of more commercial use in the PII> This is hecause, although the land area would not increase, more commercial buildings would result since the types of commercial referenced requires smaller parcels than is currently platted along Gateway Uoulevard Also, there would be the potential for stacking of buildings and signage, all competing for visibility and access to remain viable; factors less important for office and manufacturing uses. 6 Although the applicant is proposing a limit of 426,888 square feet of commercial square footage, he does not want to limit commercial space to the 29 7 acres In"eviously approved Therefore, if 29 7 acres are developed for commercial use and the total s(luare footage has not reached 426,888 s(luare feet, additional commercial acreage could he developed heyond what was intended in the DIU, a shift away from the image of the I'ID as an industrial office parle 7 As stated in the zoning code, "The purpose of the PID district is to provide a zoning classification for light industrial development that will better satisfy cmTent demands for light industrial zoned lands by encouraging development which will reflect changes in the technologv of land development and relate the development of land to the specific site and to conserve natuntl amenities. II The relocation of commercial space causes a shift in the image of the PID, especially as viewed from the 1-95 interchange; one of the major gateways to the city This shift has no connection to any change in industrial technology and the demand for industrial land. Rather than creating unique opportunities for development not provided elsewhere in the city, the shift competes with other areas of the city 8 It has been argued by the applicant that the city can control undesirable commercial uses through the use approval process. The use approval process is the method devised 1'01" a PID to estahlish uses permitted for a specific PID dish"ict, rather than establish in the zoning code a rigid list of permitted uses. This method was devised for flexibility and to keep up with technology as new uses are created in the marketplace. However, to allow blanket approval of commercial at the magnitude proposed, without considering locational impacts, defeats the purpose of master planning and weakens the city's ability to deny a specific conunel"cial use at the time of use aplJroval if a parcel has Planning and Zon Ikpartmellt I\lt'morandmll No ~6-341 TO Planning and Development Board .June 21, 1996 Page 5 already been designated for commercial use. 9 The proposed commercial designation of all the lots south of Gateway Boulevard that back up to the railroad tracks and 1-9!S will encourage the confllcts with the PID peripheral greenbelt required to be Installed along the railroad tracks. This is due to the desire of these uses, more so than other uses, to have unobstructed visibility of buildings, signage and exterior storage and display areas from 1-95, examples of which can be seen within other cities along 1-95 This was the reason that the majority of the commercial lots are located internally to the park on the approved master plan. 10 It is anticipated that closure of a portion of Park Ridge Boulevard, in connection with construction of the high school, without providing an alternate road connection from Park Ridge Uoulevard to either Quantum Lakes Drive or Gateway Boulevard, will negatively affect the marketability of the industrial lots located in the vicinity of the Publix distribution center Over the past two years, there has been increasing interest in locating manufacturing uses along Quantum Boulevard, currently not designated for industrial use. There is also concern with future bus and school staff traffic from the high school conflicting with industrial traffic, since no alternate route is currently planned or required 11 The traffic analysis submitted exceeds the acreage and noor area ratios assumed for the land uses in the original DRI (40% for industrial and R&D, 30% for office and 33% for commercial) Traffic concurrency has not been addressed to the satisfaction of P~lIm Beach County A comparison of approved office space (287,250 square feet) for lots 80 - 82 to the proposed commercial sllace needs to be added to the analysis. The analysis does not clearly demonstrate the impacts associated with this amendment and improper trip generation rates have been applied In addition, the analysis evaluates the 400 room hotel, as above and beyond the commercial acreage/square footage, when the original DRI evaluated it as part of it \Vhere generation rates are available based on acreage, square footage should not he used (s{luare footage has been used to innate development potential) Regarding acreage and s{luare footage for each land use, the applicant should allply the following data to his analysis (this data was received verbally from DCA and may be subject to change after receipt of written comments from DCA) Industrial 125.2 acres 2,181,484 square feet Research! Dev' 1. 34 6 acres 602,870 square feet Office 129.4 acres 1,685,772 square feet Commercial 29 7 acres 426,888 square feet (This includes the 400 room hotel at 268 square feet per room and the 3 4 acre club) Gov't.lIns1. 46.8 acres 2,500 students 12 The majority of the lots owned hy the Palm Beach County School Board are designated for school use, as well as the option for research and development use. This was done in the event the school is not built. However, the traffic analysis does not evaluate the use having the greater impact on traffic It appears that the high school will not generate additional daily trips when compared to the optional land use. The m~or difference is the peal{ hour Plllllling ami Zon Departmellt J\ll'lIwramllllll No /o-34J TO Planning and Development Board .Jlllle 21, 1996 Page 6 trip generation. The high school will most likely have 2 5 times as many A M. penl, hour tripI, but balf the P.M. peak hour trips of tbe optional land use. RECOMMENDATION Due to the major traffic concerns that have been relayed to staff by outside reviewing agencies, further development of regional impact review is required before the proposed amendment can be determined as not being a substantial deviation, as defined by state law Therefore. It I. recQmmended that the development order amending Ol'dln8nCe 94-51, not be approved until all traffic concerns have been addressed and written comments have been received for incorporation into the development order (ordinance) With regard to the city's PID regulations and a determination of whether the master plan changes are substantial in nature, it is recommended that the determination be made that the changes are substantial in nature, unless the conditions listed below are incorporated into the ordinance amending the develol)l1lent order (Note - An asterisk * at the end of a condition indicates that it is to be addressed prior to approval of the development order) 1 \Vher'e s(luare footage is used to evaluate traffic generated by a given land use, gross square footage shall be used * 2 Commercial use shall be limited to 29 7 acres and indicated on the master plan For purposes of trallic analysis, 426,888 gross s(luare feet shall he used * 3 Lots 53 and 54 on the master plan are school lots and shall be designated accordingly and evaluated for traffic accordingly * 4 The traffic analysis shall be revised to evaluate all school owned lots as school use and the optional land use on the school lots shall be deleted, so that an automatic mechanism is in place to trigger reanalysis of traffic in the event the school is not built * 5 A revised traffic study shall be submitted and approved by FDOT, Palm Beach County and Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, prior to apl)roval of the development order * 6 A traffic analysis shall be submitted with subsequent site plan approvals for uses that are served by Park Ridge Boulevard to monitor when 1,200 p m peak hour trips (re(luiring restriping of the southbound approach for dual lefts and a combination through/right turn lane), 1,300 p.m. peak hour trips (requiring construction of an additional right turn lane on the northbound approach to provide dual right turns), 1,935 P 111. peak hour trips (r"equiring adding a southbound through lane and separate out the through/right into a through and right turn only lane) and when 2,300 p m. peak hour trips (indicating the physical limit of this intersection) is reached 7 Utility analysis shall be submitted providing information on the location of the fire now test and impacts on the sewage lift station to determine whether existing utilities can accommodate the proposed changes. * 8 Show on the master lllan anew, public road connection from Park Ridge Boulevard mI(l Quantum Lal{es Drive along the west property line of Puhlix (lot 55) to ~dlow emergency access to the industrial areas near the C-16 Canal Add a note to the master" plan that this road shall be constructed upon opening of the high school * (Timing or the road construction should be Planning alUl Zmt Deparfment J\ Il'lIIunuHlulII No ,6-341 TO Planning and Development Board .Iune 21, 1996 Page 7 made a condition of the development order as well.) 9 On the master plan, revise the shaded area of the roadway at lot 45A to permit public access to the cul-de-sac.... 10. The applicant shall contact the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council to determine if the proposed chnnge hns nny Impact on the 14.3 acre sand pine preserve, south of Gateway Boulevard.'" 11 Delete the additional 26 lots proposed for commercial, except for lots 76 - 80 (CarMax - 16 54 acres) and restore lot 61 as commercial to identify the exact location of 29 7 acres of commercial space.'" If the Commission determines that additional commercial space is acceptable along Gateway Boulevard, specifically lots 65A, 65B, 82, 83, 84, 85 and 91, the following additional condition is recommended. 12 Prior to the first site plan approval of a commercial lot along Gateway Uoulevard, design standards shall be developed in conjunction with staff and the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council for commercial lots along Gateway Boulevard to prevent the following: a) subdivision of parcels into smaller lots yielding a net increase in the current number of lots; b) retail buildings with multiple bays leasable to different uses (single use buildings required), c) an increase in the number of freestanding signs that is currently permitted (one per lot), d) an incn~ase in the numher of huildings that is currently anticil>ated to be constructed (one building per lot with no outparcels or outbuildings), e) an increase in the number of access points onto Gateway lloulevard currently anticipated to be constructed (one access point Ilel' lot with cross access encouraged), and to encourage the following. o landscaping in excess of the landscape code T JH bme xc: Central File a:QUANTI'IlK.T.J11 E X H I BIT nAil ; ~"n. -;-. ,.-... r\ ; 1 ! ! ! J ~ ! !! ! !~ ! .. . '" p P---"''' ".. ......... _'-' ~I ~. III '-' I '~ l"\ n {\ (""""'l,. n. !! 1\ !J ",..,........,. IVI.I ~I ~ I I l\ f\ 1-.-1 In n "" ~.-.. """ ~ 1\-'-'- ~ l\ ~I / ! I! I I \ !I' I I I !!\ II . - ! 1 !-1I.J I 'L.../ 1 \ ! I=- !.....I I \ 1_' tiC: .. ". ...--..,. · · ....". · ... "...... .. · I ... J"-!. I I .-,.- 1; "- ~......,. ,. \I . ,-,.VI """"-''-'... '-' .." ... I:. \~'.. ( / n -i+ t! "U III - -- 11-- j.. E X H I BIT liB II i ~ ,1 I . I I -.:-1-, 1 1_=:1- :.:.: ~~ i\ r 3 !~ ~: Ii ~ ~~ .:> LtJ Q I~ a:J lU :z 085 ~<(o t ~ -""\ , \ , . ? I ~~ ~ oo:f:. l~'" I, . . -=- ~ ! ", .::. v- 0.-~: =~f:1Yj ~.- -v~,_ /1" ... . ADDITION OF COMMERCIAL , _ -- ........... _...,' .~". j _ _ ,... ...... ,........... -- . . =~,;-.:::?;::,~:::....~.l\\\I DELETION OF COMMERCIAL PLANIoING ClEPT 1188 -~-- ----------- II::-~ MASTER PLAN AWENDMENT NO. 6 JUU[ II 1996 " MASTER SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN " .... lY- .J_~ ~ ....... r LEGEND KEY PLAN QubJCol'l",...11II Coft'",.claI 0'_ Ollk.,c.-"''''''' otnc,/H.tellC""",.,.,.1 Offie',",.'" 011"./11." offtu/CA:I tndust.d/C.""",crC.1oJ tndushlClllj'R60/0fftCt It>dl.l"hd R~O R'O/L.QIIn,"""C::ooI Rlo/&Jr1 Co~~nl(f,l'...shh.Jt,onQI .~(Ia\ds ~"d ~. NtICrW Ao<uh - ,.) ,"cr.' . It .IC'" . ,,,. ..".. " U A"'" ".1' ...,r." ,..c. "'~r.. 101 Ac'" 2.38 Act" ..951 ,.,rrU 20 H "cref 92 )8 A('eos 1611 Aera'f ,"0 '140 ",r..S ~I }IJ 6 (10 4ll0{1I'<..t:. 4:11.\ QUAI-nUM "SSOCIA TES Nollonol Clly Cenlor 115 Wesl Washington SI Indianapolis It I 46204 (317) 6~6-'600 -- ---------- Ol':N .....u = I 1.:.!IoU tl'l"'~hU" .It. QUANTUM PARK o 11.'''1 -~---------_._----~------------ A P PEN D I X SHUTTS & BOWEN ^ n OHNEY<; ^ Nil ("()\IN<;Flloll., AT I ,\ \V 10\ "'\IIINI H'dlll' Jf"CI.llf,INI 1'lIftll t.,o.;ION,\1 A.... H.I\1I1IN'" ~Il NOIIIII 'lI\ANl I ,\ VENII!. .11111 IIIIHI 11111 ,\NI'" IIIIIIIP,\ :1:'11111 1111.I'llfJ'lI 1111 II .1 Villi I \1 dl'llIl 1-11171 I IU It. June 11, 1996 via FEDERAL EXPRESS Ms Tambri Heyden Planning and Zoning Director City of Boynton Beach 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310 Re Revised NOpe - Quantum Park DR! Dear Tambri: As a result of recent discussions with your office and other agencies, particularly the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, Quantum Associates has elected to revise the Nope to the Quantum Park DR! as follows 1 Enclosed are twelve (12) copies of the revised Master Plan Amendment No 6 dated June 11, 1996 The changes to this plan from the version originally submitted with the NOPC as Exhibit "A" dated April 18, 1996, are itemized below: a The applicant proposes to change the permitted uses on Lots 58, 59, 60 and 61 from commercial to industrial/R&D/office b No commercial land use is requested on Lots 56 and 57, which shall remain industrial. Consequently, requested as following: the lots on which commercial land use is an additional permitted use are the Lots 65A, 65B, 66, 67A, 67B, 67C, 68A, 68B, 69, 70, 72, 73A, 73B, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85 and 91 \1\1~ 'I III \ 1 HI H , ~ I \" I \It( ,0 H I U I 1\11;111 11'11 , , 1\\1\ I 11'1 I :1J1)~ H I if I l'~ II II ',... I II! II I I) ,111 It 1\.1 1\11 '~III,11 II I .11.' ~,II I II II I llll1ll1' \ r;1 111.111 \11) II II I I I I 1111 I' I It 11-1'111:.11 II \:.11 II 'HlI, II \\ I'd ",\1 "'1111.\1 II r III I IIr I II d;1 . I I 1111 .1'111 \1 II: II 1,IIf II III \\1 I' I III II 11'1111 Ill'''' 1\11111 III I'"l \l \ '1\\1\ .1 II I " I I III lil III 1\"11 11 \1\ r III I , f' ., ,-, II I I. I I I Ms Tambri Heyden June 11, 1996 Page 2 2 Two (2) copies of the June 10, 1996 supplemental analysis for the intersection of Gateway Boulevard and Park Ridge Road prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, lnc , are enclosed herewith for your review This supplemental analysis has been performed in accordance with methodology and revisions requested by TCRPC Although the methodology was revised, the conclusions and staging of proposed improvements to the intersection remain the same as originally proposed 3 Enclosed is a revised Exhibit "0" to the NOPC which is the requested amendment to the Development Order It is blacklined to show the changes from the original draft submitted with the April 25, 1996 NOPC. 4 For your information, enclosed are copies of letters sent by our traffic consultant, Kimley-Horn and Associates, lnc , to the FOOT and to Palm Beach County in response to questions from those agencies regarding traffic impacts of our proposed revision These agencies have also been sent copies of the supplemental analysis of the intersection performed by Kimley-Horn Other than the foregoing changes, the original NOPC request dated April 25, 1996 remains unchanged I would like to point out that the land use intens! ties modeled in the supplemental traffic analysis are baaed upon th9 original estimates in the 1984 ADA which were recently brought to our attention by Mike Busha at TCRPC. See Table I of the supplemental analysis. For example, the commercial square footage projected in the ADA was 426,888 square feet. Notwithstanding the expanded number of lots that would be eligible for commercial use, the enclosed Master Plan includes a notation that limits the total commercial use to the 426,888 square foot figure. Based on the foregoing changes and additional analysis, we would like the NOPC to be scheduled for public hearing by the City Commission on July 2, 1996 Please make arrangements for publica- tion of the required fifteen (15) day public notice Ms Tambri Heyden June 11, 1996 Page 3 It is also my understanding that we will make the presentation of the NOPC to the City Planning and Development Board at a special meeting on Tuesday evening, June 25 Please call with any questions or if you desire additional information JGW/smw Enclosures Willard cc Steven E Fivel, Esquire (Federal Express) Steven G Godfrey (Federal Express) Rocky Biby (Federal Express) James D Thornton, Esquire (Federal Express) Paul McClellan (Federal Express) Michael B McLoad (Federal Express) James Snyder, TCRPC (Federal Express) Greg stuart, DCA (Federal Express) ORL9S 19719.1 SMW FORM RPM-BSP-PROPCHANGE-l STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS DIVISION OF RESOURCE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT BUREAU OF STATE PLANNING 2740 Centerview Drive Tallahassee, Florida 32399 904/488-4925 QUANTUM PARK NOTIFICATION OF A PROPOSED CHANGE TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI) SUBSECTION 380 06(19), FLORIDA STATUTES Subsection 380 06(19), Florida Statutes, requires that submittal of a proposed change to a previously approved DRI be made to the local government, the regional planning agency, and the state land planning agency according to this form 1 I, JAMES G WILLARD, the undersigned authorized representative of QUANTUM ASSOCIATES, hereby give notice of a proposed change to a previously approved Development of Regional Impact in accordance with Subsection 380 06(19), Florida Statutes In support thereof, I submit the following information concerning the QUANTUM CORPORATE PARK (formerly known as Boynton Beach Park of Commerce) development, which information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I have submitted today, under separate cover, copies of this completed no~ification to City of Boynton Beach, to the Treasure Coaqt Regional Planning Council, and to t~e Bureau of State Planning, Department ,-(-); -1{, (Date) ..r'. 2 Applicant (name, address, phone). Quantum Associates, a Florida general partnership National City Center 15th Floor, East Tower 115 West Washington Street Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 317/263-7936 (Office) 317/263-7038 (Fax) 3 Authorized Agent (name, address, phone) James G Willard, Esquire Shutts & Bowen 20 North Orange Avenue, Suite 1000 Orlando, Florida 32801 407/423-3200 (Office) 407/425-8316 (Fax) 4 Location (City, County, Township/Range/Section) of approved DRI and proposed change The Quantum Corporate Park DRI is located in Sections 17 and 20, Township 45 South, Range 43 East, Palm Beach County, Florida The description of the property which is the subject of the proposed change is as follows A Add to the DRI, Lots 80, 81 and 82 as per the plat of P C D Center, Plat Book 60, Pages 106 and 107, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida, collectively containing approximately 14 acres B Include commercial land use as a permitted use to the following lots as identified on the Master Site Development Plan for Quantum Park, last revised by Master Plan No 5 dated October 28, 1994: Lots 6~A, 658, 66, 67A, 678, 67C, 68A, 68B, 69, 70, 72, 73Ai 13B, 14. 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80A, 83, 84, 85 and 91. 5. Provide a complete description of the proposed change. Include any proposed changes to the plan of development, phasing, additional lands, commencement date, build-out date, development order conditions and requirements, or to the representations contained in either the development order or the Application for Development Approval Indicate such supplementing changes on with other the project master detailed maps, as site plan, appropriate -2- Additional information may be requested by the Department or any reviewing agency to clarify the nature of the change or the resulting impacts. Applicant seeks to add Lots 80, 81 and 82 to the DRI Master Plan and to include commercial use as a permitted land use per the DRI Master Plan for those lots referenced in paragraph 4 B., above Attached as Exhibit "A" is Master Plan Amendment No 6 dated April 18, 1996, reflecting the foregoing changes The applicant submits that the proposed changes are non- substantial for the following reasons: A The added land area, i e Lots 80, 81 and 82, has long been considered a part of the Quantum project Due to the timing of land acquisitions by the applicant's predecessor in title, these lots were not formally included in the original 1984 DR! Development Order However, these three lots were platted in 1988 and are served by the same infrastructure, including roads, uti 1 i ties and stormwater drainage system, serving the balance of the Quantum Park DR! Also like the balance of the Quantum project, these lots are within the City of Boynton Beach and are a part of both the Quantum Park Communi ty Development District and the Quantum Park Property Owners Association B Nei ther the addition of Lots 80, 81 and 82, nor the inclusion of commercial use as a permitted land use for the lots identified in paragraph 4 B , above, will result in the development of greater commercial square footage than is already permitted by the Development Order Pursuant to methodology agreed upon by the applicant, City of Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County, Treasury Coast Regional Planning Council and the Florida Department of Transportation as part of the trip generation analysis required for the Fourth DRI Amendment in April of 1994 (which approved a portion of the land in Quantum as a Palm Beach County high school site), it was established that the original 29 7 acres of commercial land within the DRI was vested for 517,493 square feet of commercial development. Attached as Exhibit "B" is a copy of the March 8, 1994 report to Sally Black of the TCRPC, outlining the agreed upon methodology. As a condition of the currently proposed NOPC, applicant proposes not to construct more than the previously authori~ed 517,493 square feet of commercial space, including Lots 80, 81 and 82, without further amendment to the Development Order Because of this limitation, the additional land -3- area represented by Lots 80, 81 and 82 will not result in more impacts than already permitted for the Quantum DRI C The inclusion of commercial land use as a permitted designation on more lots in the DR! Master Plan will provide greater flexibility to the applicant to respond to market conditions substantially changed from the time of the original 1984 Development Order D Notwi thstanding the DR! Master Plan Amendment authorizing commercial use on more lots within the project, specific land uses ultimately constructed on each lot are still subject to review and approval by the Boynton Beach Plannin9 and Zoning Board since all the Quantum property is zoned either PID or PCD, both of which require specifJ= use approval by the Planning and Zoning Board E As required by the Fourth Amendment to the Development Order, attached as Exhibit "e" is a transportation analysis of the intersection of High Ridge Road and Gateway Boulevard in Quantum Park This analysis was requested to study the operating characteristics of said intersection in light of the planned closure of a portion of High Ridge Road when the high school site is developed As can be determined from the analysis in the report, development in the vicinity of the High Ridge Road/Gateway Boulevard intersection may ultimately require turn lane improvements which the applicant commi ts to install as and when needed and which will ultimately provide for an intersection peak hour design capacity of 2,300 trips 6 Complete the attached Substantial Deviation Determination Chart for all land use types approved in the development If no change is proposed or has occurred, indicate no chan~e No change to the DRI is proposed other than as discussed in paragraphs 4 and 5, above Because of the multiple land use designations on many lots within the project, both already approved on the Master Plan and as herein requested, the applicant submits that completion of the Substantial Deviation Determination Chart would not be productive. 7 List all ~he dates and resolution number. (or other appropriate identification numbers) of all modifications or amendments to the originally approved DRI development order that have been adopted by the local government, and provide a brief description of the previous changes (i.e, any information not already addressed in the Substantial Deviation Determination Chart) Has there been a change in local -4- government jurisdiction for any portion of the development since the lart approval or development order was issued? If so, has the annexing local government adopted a new DRI development ~rder for the project? Original Development Order December 18, 1984 First Amendment to Development Order June 3, 1986 Second Amendment to Development Order October 21, 1986 Third Amendment to Development Order February 2, 1988 Fourth Amendment to Development Order April 19, 1994 Fifth Amendment to Development Order November 15, 1994 The purpose of each amendment was to change the Master Site Development Plan to achieve more flexible land use approval There has been no change in local government jurisdiction for any portion of the development 8 Describe any lands purchased or optioned within 1/4 mile of the original ~RI site subsequent to the original approval or issuance of the DRI development order Identify such land, its size, i~tended use, and adjacent non-project land uses within 1/2 mile on a project master site plan or other map No additional lands were purchased or optioned since the approval of the initial Development Order. 9 Indicate if the proposed change is less than 40\ (cumulatively with other previous changes) of any of the criteria listed in Paragraph 380.06(19)(b), Florida Statutes. Response: The proposed change is not less than 40' of any of the criteria listed in paragraph 380.06(19)(b). -5- Do you believe this notification of change proposes a change which meets the criteria of Subparagraph 380.06(19)(e)2., F.S YES NO x 10 Does the proposed change result in a change to the bui1dout date or any phasing date of the project? If so, indicate the proposed new bui1dout or phasing dates. The proposed change does not result in a change to the buildout date or any phasing date of the Project 11 Will the proposed change require an amendment to the local government comprehensive plan? The proposed change will not require an amendment to the local government comprehensive plan 12 An updated master site plan or other map of the development portraying and distinguishing the proposed changes to the previously approved DRI or development order conditions The proposed Amended Master Site Development Plan is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" 13 Pursuant to Subsection 380 06 (l) (f), F.A., include the precise language that is being proposed to be deleted or added as an amendment to the development order This language should address and quantify: a. All proposed specific changes to the nature, pha.tog, Ilnd build-out date of the development; to development order condi tions and requirements; to commi tments and representations in the Application for Development Approval; to the acreage attributable to each described proposed change of land use, open space, areas for preservation, green belts; to structures or to other improvements including locations, square footage, number of units; and other major characteristics or components of the proposed change; -6- b. An updated legal description of the property, if any project acreage is/has been added or deleted to the previously approved plan of development, c. A proposed amended development order deadline for commencing physical development of the proposed changes, if applicable; d A proposed amended development order termination date that reasonably reflects the time required to complete the development; e A proposed amended development order date until which the local government agrees that the changes to the DRI shall not be subject to down-zoning, unit density reduction, or intensity reduction, if applicable; and f. Proposed amended development order specifications for the annual report, including the date of submission, contents, and parties to whom the report is submitted as specified in Subsection 9J-2.025(7), F.A.C. The proposed Amended Development Order is attached hereto as Exhibit "D" -7- 7.A.l QUANTUM PARK PID SUBDIVISION Master Plan Modification PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM NO. 96-340 TO. Chairman and Members Planning and Development Board FROM: Tambri J Heyden Jfif ;J Planning and Zoning Director DATE: June 21, 1996 SUBJECT: Quantum Park of Commerce - DRIA #96-002 and MPMD #96-004 Master Plan Amendment No.6 (add lots 80 - 82, add commercial to lots 65A, 65B, 66, 67 A, 67B, 67C, 68B, 69, 70, 72, 73A, 73B, 74 - 85 and delete commercial on lots 58 - 61) NATURE OF REOUEST Quantum Park of Commerce, a partially developed Development of Regional Impact (DRI) comprised of 539 9 acres, zoned PID (Planned Industrial Development), is located on the west side of 1-95, between Miner Road extended and the Boynton (C-16) Canal (see attached location map - Exhibit "A") James G Willard, Esquire and agent for Quantum Associates, property owner of the Quantum Park of Commerce, has requested amendments to their DRI development order, Ordinance No 84-51 as amended by Ordinance No. 86-11, 86-37, 88-3, 94-10 and 94-51 The proposed amendments are as follows: 1 Incorporation of the undeveloped P C D Center subdivision property (lots 80, 81 and 82), containing 13 17 acres at the southeast corner of Park Ridge Boulevard and Gateway Boulevard and a change to the master plan designation from office use to industrial/commercial use; 2 Change in the master plan designation of lots 58, 59, 60 and 61 from commercial use to industrial/research and development/office use; 3 Change in the master plan designation of lots 65A, 65B, 66, 67 A, 67C and 91 from office/hotel use to office/hotel/commercial use; 4 Change in the master plan designation of lots 83, 84 and 85 from office use to office/commercial use; 5 Change in the master plan designation of lots 68A and 68B from research and development to research and development/commercial use; and 6 Change in the master plan designation of lots 69, 70, 72, 79, 78, 77, 76, 75, 74, 73A and 73B from industrial to industrial/commercial use. The amendment request is governed by Section 7 of Appendix A, Zoning, City of Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances, which establishes Planned Industrial Development Districts and by Chapter 380 06(19), Florida Statutes, for a determination of substantial deviation. The amendments are submitted in connection with a request that the City Commission make a determination that the amendments are not substantial in nature and that the proposed changes do not require further Development of Regional Impact review BACKGROUND A public hearing must be conducted by the City Commission prior to making a determination as to whether the proposed change is substantial in nature and whether further development of regional impact review is required. If no further review is required, the City Commission shall issue an amended development order which, in this instance, requires the passage of an ordinance which amends the original development Planning and Zoning Department Memorandum No. 96-340 TO. Planning and Development Board June 21, 1996 Page 2 order If a determination is made that the proposed change requires further development of regional impact review, the review shall be conducted only on those aspects of the development order required to be changed. The required public hearing shall receive a fifteen (15) day public notice, following the passage of thirty (30) days, but not more than forty-five (45) days after receipt of the amendment materials. The City Commission will conduct its hearing on July 2, 1996, as advertised, and if the City Commission determines the proposed changes to be non- substantial, with no further review required, first reading of the amended Quantum Park development order (an ordinance) will occur on July 2, 1996, as well. This amendment will require a one-time change to our development process. For non- development of regional impact planned industrial developments, the City Commission must make a finding related to the degree of change, that is, whether or not it is substantial, and then, the Planning and Development Board approves, approves with modification, or denies the request. In this instance, the City Commission must approve any change. Therefore, the Planning and Development Board must act in an advisory capacity to the City Commission, as the State Statutes prevail over City ordinances. ANALYSIS The changes itemized above can be summarized as the addition of 13 17 acres of land into the DRI, deletion of 20 14 acres (lots 58 - 61) of commercial use along Quantum Lakes Drive, and the addition of commercial use along the eastern segment of Gateway Boulevard and along the portion of Park Ridge Boulevard, south of Gateway Boulevard (see attached proposed master plan amendment - Exhibit liB ") The addition of land area satisfies a condition of Ordinance 94-10; the development order which approved the high school in Quantum Park, to meet state law which requires that land under common ownership, adjacent to a DRI, must be included within the boundaries of the DRI. This 13 17 acres of property was originally owned by the city and was exchanged with the original DRI developer for the city park property located within Quantum Park. This additional land area has been under common ownership since approximately 1986 when it was rezoned from Recreation to Planned Commercial District (PCD) for 287,250 square feet of office. This PCD, known as the PCD Center, was platted into three lots (lots 80, 81 and 82) in 1989 and is vested for office use, but has never been developed. A land use amendment and rezoning application was approved by the Board at the June 11, 1996 meeting (pending before the Commission) to unify the land use and zoning of the property with the land use and zoning of Quantum Park. The master plan amendment with the subject request also changes the proposed use from office to commercial/industrial for these three lots. With respect to the deletion of 20 14 acres (lots 58 - 61) of commercial use along Quantum Lakes Drive, this commercial acreage is proposed to be relocated elsewhere in Quantum Park, specifically along the east end of Gateway Boulevard and along Park Ridge Boulevard, south of Gateway Boulevard, between the 14.3 acre sand pine preserve and the railroad tracks/Interstate 95 The total commercial acreage allowed in Quantum Park is 29 7 acres, therefore 20 14 acres represents relocation of 2/3 of the commercial space. The applicant has stated that the reason for relocation of these 20 14 acres and redesignation as either industrial, research and development or office (at the developer's option) is because the developer has received little interest in Quantum Lakes Drive from commercial ventures (the last developer that approached city staff for development of this commercial area wanted to construct a Scandinavian village retail/hotel complex) In 1986, Quantum Park submitted a DRI amendment to, among other things, locate a total of 24.4 acres of commercial space along the south side of Gateway Boulevard. This portion of the amendment was denied because it was in opposition to the zoning code stated purpose of the PID (Planned Industrial Development) district regulations and projected an image of a commercial strip, rather than an industrial office park. A condition of the 1986 Planning and Zoning Department Memorandum No 96-341 TO. Planning and Development Board June 21, 1996 Page 3 amendment was that the majority of the commercial space be relocated to a less prominent site within the PID, specifically along Quantum Lakes Drive. With respect to the addition of commercial use to seven (7) lots along Gateway Boulevard, west of 1-95 and to 19 lots along the portion of Park Ridge Boulevard which is south of the intersection of Gateway Boulevard and High Ridge Road, the applicant states that this is requested for flexibility of marketing The applicant is proposing commercial use as an option to the current use of these referenced lots and that not all the lots would be developed for commercial (just those the developer could market for commercial) In addition, the applicant is proposing a total limit of commercial use of 426,888 square feet (not the 29 7 acres currently allowed) Also part of this amendment, pursuant to a condition of the revised development order which approved the high school, is a traffic analysis of the intersection of High Ridge Road and Gateway Boulevard. This analysis was required to study the operating characteristics of this intersection, since the high school approval included closure of a portion of Park Ridge Boulevard when the high school is constructed. Although, as discussed further on in this report, the traffic analysis requires revision, the following intersection improvements are indicated in the analysis and shall be constructed at such time as that portion of the project served by Park Ridge Boulevard exceeds the following trip generation levels: 1 1,200 p.m. peak hour trips - restripe the southbound approach for dual lefts and a combination through/right turn lane. 2 1,300 p.m. peak hour trips - construct an additional right turn lane on the northbound approach to provide dual right turns. 3 1,935 p.m. peak hour trips - add a southbound through lane and separate out the through/right into a through and right turn only lane. In addition, the analysis indicates that when 2,300 p.m. peak hour trips is reached, further review of the intersection is necessary, as this is the physical limit of this intersection (the peak hour design capacity of this intersection) The Technical Review Committee met on May 21, 1996 to review the plans and documents submitted. The Planning and Zoning Department also met on June 12, 1996 with the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council staff and the agency's traffic consultant. The Planning and Zoning Department has also been in contact with certain other agencies that review DRI amendments, the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) and Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering. As of today, no written comments have been received from the outside reviewing agencies regarding their review of the second revision of the traffic analysis. However, all agencies expressed major concerns with the traffic analysis and stated that further revisions were necessary due to inaccurate information and comments from first review that had not been satisfactorily addressed. The concerns from city staff and the outside agencies are summarized as follows: 1 The "option" of commercial on such a large number of lots (26 new commercial options proposed) defeats the purpose of master planning and will lead to spotty locating of commercial uses with no consideration for adjacent uses. 2 Commercial uses, which draw customers, pedestrians and vehicles, haphazardly mixed with industrial uses, which require greater tractor trailer traffic, as proposed along Park Ridge Boulevard, is potentially unsafe and is not recommended by transportation planners. Planning and Zoning Department Memorandum No. 96-341 TO. Planning and Development Board June 21, 1996 Page 4 3 The relocation of 2/3 of the commercial uses from Quantum Lakes Drive to the intersection of Gateway Boulevard and High Ridge Road and along the railroad tracks and 1-95 will impact the type of commercial ventures interested in locating in Quantum Park. This shift will attract commercial uses such as service stations, fast food restaurants, oil change garages, and strip commercial that will be interested in the 1-95 visibility and capturing external project traffic, with little relation to the planned industrial park. 4. In the vicinity of Boynton Beach Boulevard and Old Boynton Road, west of Congress Avenue alone, there is already 500,000 square feet of commercial square footage approved, unbuilt and vested since 1990 These approvals, as well as the commercial revitalization efforts planned for Federal Highway, will be competing with the relocated commercial space in Quantum Park, due to the type of commercial uses that will now be interested in locating in Quantum Park. Since the demand for commercial land use is finite, some existing commercial uses within the city may migrate to Quantum Park. 5 Strip commercial and the types of commercial uses that will be interested in locating close to the 1-95 interchange will lead to re-subdivision of the seven new commercial parcels along Gateway Boulevard into smaller parcels and the creation of outbuildings, which will increase the appearance of more commercial use in the PID This is because, although the land area would not increase, more commercial buildings would result since the types of commercial referenced requires smaller parcels than is currently platted along Gateway Boulevard Also, there would be the potential for stacking of buildings and signage; all competing for visibility and access to remain viable; factors less important for office and manufacturing uses. 6 Although the applicant is proposing a limit of 426,888 square feet of commercial square footage, he does not want to limit commercial space to the 29 7 acres previously approved. Therefore, if 29 7 acres are developed for commercial use and the total square footage has not reached 426,888 square feet, additional commercial acreage could be developed beyond what was intended in the DRI, a shift away from the image of the PID as an industrial office park. 7 As stated in the zoning code, "The purpose of the PID district is to provide a zoning classification for light industrial development that will better satisfy current demands for light industrial zoned lands by encouraging development which will reflect changes in the technology of land development and relate the development of land to the specific site and to conserve natural amenities." The relocation of commercial space causes a shift in the image of the PID, especially as viewed from the 1-95 interchange; one of the major gateways to the city This shift has no connection to any change in industrial technology and the demand for industrial land. Rather than creating unique opportunities for development not provided elsewhere in the city, the shift competes with other areas of the city 8 It has been argued by the applicant that the city can control undesirable commercial uses through the use approval process. The use approval process is the method devised for a PID to establish uses permitted for a specific PID district, rather than establish in the zoning code a rigid list of permitted uses. This method was devised for flexibility and to keep up with technology as new uses are created in the marketplace. However, to allow blanket approval of commercial at the magnitude proposed, without considering locational impacts, defeats the purpose of master planning and weakens the city's ability to deny a specific commercial use at the time of use approval if a parcel has Planning and Zoning Department Memorandum No. 96-341 TO. Planning and Development Board June 21, 1996 Page 5 already been designated for commercial use. 9 The proposed commercial designation of all the lots south of Gateway Boulevard that back up to the railroad tracks and 1-95 will encourage the conflicts with the PID peripheral greenbelt required to be installed along the railroad tracks. This is due to the desire of these uses, more so than other uses, to have unobstructed visibility of buildings, signage and exterior storage and display areas from 1-95, examples of which can be seen within other cities along 1-95 This was the reason that the majority of the commercial lots are located internally to the park on the approved master plan. 10 It is anticipated that closure of a portion of Park Ridge Boulevard, in connection with construction of the high school, without providing an alternate road connection from Park Ridge Boulevard to either Quantum Lakes Drive or Gateway Boulevard, will negatively affect the marketability of the industrial lots located in the vicinity of the Publix distribution center Over the past two years, there has been increasing interest in locating manufacturing uses along Quantum Boulevard, currently not designated for industrial use. There is also concern with future bus and school staff traffic from the high school conflicting with industrial traffic, since no alternate route is currently planned or required. 11 The traffic analysis submitted exceeds the acreage and floor area ratios assumed for the land uses in the original DR! (40% for industrial and R&D, 30% for office and 33% for commercial) Traffic concurrency has not been addressed to the satisfaction of Palm Beach County A comparison of approved office space (287,250 square feet) for lots 80 - 82 to the proposed commercial space needs to be added to the analysis. The analysis does not clearly demonstrate the impacts associated with this amendment and improper trip generation rates have been applied. In addition, the analysis evaluates the 400 room hotel, as above and beyond the commercial acreage/square footage, when the original DRI evaluated it as part of it. Where generation rates are available based on acreage, square footage should not be used (square footage has been used to inflate development potential) Regarding acreage and square footage for each land use, the applicant should apply the following data to his analysis (this data was received verbally from DCA and may be subject to change after receipt of written comments from DCA) Industrial 125 2 acres 2,181,484 square feet Research/Dev't. 34 6 acres 602,870 square feet Office 129.4 acres 1,685,772 square feet Commercial 29 7 acres 426,888 square feet (This includes the 400 room hotel at 268 square feet per room and the 3.4 acre club) Gov't./lnst. 46.8 acres 2,500 students 12 The majority of the lots owned by the Palm Beach County School Board are designated for school use, as well as the option for research and development use. This was done in the event the school is not built. However, the traffic analysis does not evaluate the use having the greater impact on traffic. It appears that the high school will not generate additional daily trips when compared to the optional land use. The major difference is the peak hour Planning and Zoning Department Memorandum No 96-341 TO Planning and Development Board June 21, 1996 Page 6 trip generation. The high school will most likely have 2.5 times as many A.M. peak hour trips, but half the P.M. peak hour trips of the optional land use. RECOMMENDATION Due to the major traffic concerns that have been relayed to staff by outside reviewing agencies, further development of regional impact review is required before the proposed amendment can be determined as not being a substantial deviation, as defined by state law Therefore, it is recommended that the development order amending Ordinance 94-51, not be approved until all traffic concerns have been addressed and written comments have been received for incorporation into the development order (ordinance) With regard to the city's PID regulations and a determination of whether the master plan changes are substantial in nature, it is recommended that the determination be made that the changes are substantial in nature, unless the conditions listed below are incorporated into the ordinance amending the development order (Note - An asterisk * at the end of a condition indicates that it is to be addressed prior to approval of the development order) 1 Where square footage is used to evaluate traffic generated by a given land use, gross square footage shall be used. * 2 Commercial use shall be limited to 29 7 acres and indicated on the master plan. For purposes of traffic analysis, 426,888 gross square feet shall be used. * 3 Lots 53 and 54 on the master plan are school lots and shall be designated accordingly and evaluated for traffic accordingly * 4. The traffic analysis shall be revised to evaluate all school owned lots as school useandtheoptional land use on the school lots shall be deleted, so that an automatic mechanismisinplace to trigger reanalysis of traffic in the event the school is not built. * 5 A revised traffic study shall be submitted and approved by FDOT, Palm Beach County and Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, prior to approval of the development order * 6 A traffic analysis shall be submitted with subsequent site plan approvals for uses that are served by Park Ridge Boulevard to monitor when 1,200 p.m. peak hour trips (requiring restriping of the southbound approach for dual lefts and a combination through/right turn lane), 1,300 p.m. peak hour trips (requiring construction of an additional right turn lane on the northbound approach to provide dual right turns), 1,935 p.m. peak hour trips (requiring adding a southbound through lane and separate out the through/right into a through and right turn only lane) and when 2,300 p.m. peak hour trips (indicating the physical limit of this intersection) is reached. 7 Utility analysis shall be submitted providing information on the location of the fire flow test and impacts on the sewage lift station to determine whether existing utilities can accommodate the proposed changes. * 8 Show on the master plan anew, public road connection from Park Ridge Boulevard and Quantum Lakes Drive along the west property line of Publix (lot 55) to allow emergency access to the industrial areas near the C-16 Canal. Add a note to the master plan that this road shall be constructed upon opening of the high school. * (Timing of the road construction should be E X H I BIT II A II Planning and Zoning Department Memorandum No. 96-341 TO. Planning and Development Board June 21, 1996 Page 7 made a condition of the development order as well.) 9 On the master plan, revise the shaded area of the roadway at lot 45A to permit public access to the cul-de-sac. * 10 The applicant shall contact the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council to determine if the proposed change has any impact on the 14.3 acre sand pine preserve, south of Gateway Boulevard. * 11 Delete the additional 26 lots proposed for commercial, except for lots 76 - 80 (CarMax - 16.54 acres) and restore lot 61 as commercial to identify the exact location of 29 7 acres of commercial space. * If the Commission determines that additional commercial space is acceptable along Gateway Boulevard, specifically lots 65A, 65B, 82, 83, 84, 85 and 91, the following additional condition is recommended. 12 Prior to the first site plan approval of a commercial lot along Gateway Boulevard, design standards shall be developed in conjunction with staff and the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council for commercial lots along Gateway Boulevard to prevent the following: a) subdivision of parcels into smaller lots yielding a net increase in the current number of lots; b) retail buildings with multiple bays leasable to different uses (single use buildings required), c) an increase in the number of freestanding signs that is currently permitted (one per lot), d) an increase in the number of buildings that is currently anticipated to be constructed (one building per lot with no outparcels or outbuildings), e) an increase in the number of access points onto Gateway Boulevard currently anticipated to be constructed (one access point per lot with cross access encouraged), and to encourage the following: f) landscaping in excess of the landscape code. Planning and Zoning Department Memorandum No. 96-341 TO. Planning and Development Board June 21, 1996 Page 7 made a condition of the development order as well.) 9 On the master plan, revise the shaded area of the roadway at lot 45A to permit public access to the cul-de-sac. * 10 The applicant shall contact the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council to determine if the proposed change has any impact on the 14.3 acre sand pine preserve, south of Gateway Boulevard. * 11 Delete the additional 26 lots proposed for commercial, except for lots 76 - 80 (CarMax - 16.54 acres) and restore lot 61 as commercial to identify the exact location of 29 7 acres of commercial space. * If the Commission determines that additional commercial space is acceptable along Gateway Boulevard, specifically lots 65A, 65B, 82, 83, 84, 85 and 91, the following additional condition is recommended. 12 Prior to the first site plan approval of a commercial lot along Gateway Boulevard, design standards shall be developed in conjunction with staff and the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council for commercial lots along Gateway Boulevard to prevent the following: a) subdivision of parcels into smaller lots yielding a net increase in the current number of lots, b) retail buildings with multiple bays leasable to different uses (single use buildings required), c) an increase in the number of freestanding signs that is currently permitted (one per lot), d) an increase in the number of buildings that is currently anticipated to be constructed (one building per lot with no outparcels or outbuildings), e) an increase in the number of access points onto Gateway Boulevard currently anticipated to be constructed (one access point per lot with cross access encouraged), and to encourage the following. f) landscaping in excess of the landscape code. TJH.bme xc: Central File a:QUANTPRK. TJH E X H I BIT II All ~OCATION MAP QUANTUM CORPORATE PARK ---- 11'~'~IClJ-1U ~{i-rnlim::'c'~I'L~~_ :,\, \ I l!~~~.,L~~-1 ~ ~ll t:: I:,,~ .-~, .. ". "I -~- ~ I ~~~~ t ~Jl S ; t:: f \, '. '.", '-:. h"i ~~ (- , . ~ ' ," , " ,.R · · ::::I.U I - III' '" - ~.---- "t:d'~' cd I f~ AR Rla~ , = rr ., ~lU~ - =i I ~."}3/1 i '.'\" __ ',---.--'.:, j ~ I~, STATIl:~~~\ ! _ II k . K/.:_-, ',H,"'" / I ~ ........i :3 ~,'''<< /~~_~I_I_!~~t I' '.~ '. - :- I ....IGH .~ I WlIJ-' t ~'f it:: " R4'J AAi ~'~ T~ _E I "IT ~ w: )~ / ~'~ ,,,.. ;; I -jl = ~ -111 :'___ .___ul/"-; ~ Ii",] I I!!!'~~_._I!. I'~ .~I~~IIII.I.I__.I.I~I~: . ..' .'. I~'" IIIoj 'I , .'..'. - ft .............. I" . ..f:/:':".............:f,....... I I T I I ~~ ".l.K 1D-" ~ '1./ ./! ;~~;(;,.~.;.;.t.~j.i:~.i/::?i!i~!:!\~~~!.r:~E/f::L:~::~:.::"'::'fUJ ~ ~~' i (jj GJ , .... ~ ~ /. ;' !~~i~;~~\ii!&~~;J!i~~ft~l~t~.J, N ~ 1" ~ : M1 ': , r ~ , U . ~ = ~ /![~ii~~~~~~~!~i!~:~f:!~;:~~f{rf~{i~ft.~{iit; f:\il:~ttWJtl:!1~1R~;?X:~ c: I T V ~ ~v ~ fl < ~ ~ _" ' ; ~ ~ ,. ':iii: i ,~'lrt~~il~,.f~fA;'~~~i i =~^^' ~"~ J ! ~ ~ lW ~ ::~;;~.::~~:~~WE?j:ii\~:fttl;t~~?!!/~::~JyW:;~~;~~f~)~~i' . ::.:..::;'.:.:...:.....:.. : IT J ~ 4) If:l; ~~l/Ij. hhl...~...m. .. '. '[1 N;~h"h'~l I h PIG- ~.( ..... ..... .................... U~NUM J:rA"K'~w.' 0/' I { ~'MOTORO~A,: ':';!~~i!!\ii,li;l','."~:':'~;ih~:::1h"!j":::;:;C:"+,h" h';;'JiJ!!;~B;; I., t: :~ i~;%~.:;ii~!'!~lj~,I~i~g~r~J.i5.t;!~;~1.,~::;:;~[';,~fltilr~;~ ..~ "~f~':@?~Esh];j"i)ifti)N!;;~E;0i'!!\'J~1L~c;r~~';f;~~~~n ffi I . P u \\ \:r-1 J I I I I I I I I I I I J I I I III' I ,., "T I' . ~ .'~ II " \: iP f I I r J TT _ ,'l.l . .I:..!ll!I. ' I = r==- . ~. - 1= " ;::... .- ;;~ :~ -...== =~ == :::: T V - - . ~>= _.- I.. 0 1/8 MILES -~: -,,=::::: ~- == - ~ t.: _ I - - - . ~ \\\11 I I _ h~~ =' ~ ~ _ =E:~ - '" = ~ '0 400 800 FEET oJ ~- = ~ _ - ?r-:- . I I'J.ANNIN/: OF;.Or. 3-~ III ,"'\,...., [IJJJlr~ - 1/), I r ~t:J~ I If re l- ~_ _. I' I I , " .......1 :' ., ,,::' I 1:'cll~trl ~~u~~.ttmtl ~~ I mwt#~41~[;n rttm ,,"1'1 flT1 ~ Im:l'i ! I::i;::: . "~I c..JJ c m!i~l'i!'!:':"~~":' fTTIl 1!I'I"~:I;i :11,1' . '" r {- If , . I E X H I BIT "B" -. II I l: .i I 11 I I l --, ::11 1 1 --:-l - n. ~: i~ T , !p ~: Ii ~ - I 1- i. .....~ I --, -- , ~ . GATtW", ILYU. \ \\ ~ r J 1\ ~ 1 -~ -.., 5 I on I , j I .. . .1 "---- L..: ..,J .li J I I - ... i, . ~ . _ ~~GE .....::___:" - - -==' ~ -ft. t.. MASTER PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 6 JUNE II 1996 \,. * 1:3; .f - I~ - :-.: ADDITION OF COMMERCIAL _ .......~Ilh'El~""'SMIlI.~IIC1[....[[t '_ , i~~-:;;~;;;:..~ mIl DELETION OF COMMERCIAL PLANNNG DEPT' "88 - ..... ~ LW.D.D. lOU.t.UIINQ CANAL. C-It -- ..... MASTER SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN '" .~ LEGEND - f;;;3i- h.,... - '--" I.'" ) - T KEY PLAN e ClubjtGmmorciOl c:.mnwclal 0IfIc0 OIIlcOtt-_ OII1c:./Hol../C"""".,....' OIfIco/lto... Offico/lWl OIfIco/CaO Industnol/CotntnerCtal IndustrialJRliD/OfftCe Industrial Rid) B&cD/Cammerciol RltD/CaO Covemmentgl/lnslilutlonol WettaRGs Sand Pwta RCHf"w Roads 3 43 Acr.. a 18 Ac:r.. 17 41 Acrl. 1t 13 At'.. 21.11 ",cr.. 3.!>6 Aer.. 6.03 Acre. 2.39 Acres 49.52 Acres 20.14 "eres 9;'2.38 Acres 36.11 Acre" J 60 Acres 2 40 Acres 29.30 Acrc. 6 00 Acres 40.00 ..ere:. 41 1) Acres QUANTUM ASSOCIATES National City Center 115 West Washington St Indianapolis, IN 46204 (317) 636-1600 OPEN SPAa:~ 9067 Acres Panos l.... Dot...... QUANTUM PARK ror.... ~53_1j A.~rt A P PEN D I X SHUTTS & BOWEN ATTOR:-.!EYS Al\D COU"SELLORS AT LAW IA I'ARTi'iERSHIP INCLl'Dli'iG PROFESSJOi'iAL ASSOCIA riO\;SI 20 NORTH ORANGE AVDICE S CITE 1000 ORLA:--JDO, FLORIDA 32801 TELEPHONE H07l 423 3200 FACSI\'llLE (4071 425.8316 June 11, 1996 via FEDERAL EXPRESS Ms Tambri Heyden Planning and Zoning Director City of Boynton Beach 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310 Re Revised NOPC - Quantum Park DR! Dear Tambri As a result of recent discussions with your office and other agencies, particularly the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, Quantum Associates has elected to revise the NOpt to the Quantum Park DR! as follows 1 Enclosed are twelve (12) copies of the revised Master Plan Amendment No 6 dated June 11, 1996 The changes to this plan from the version originally submitted with the NOPC as Exhibit "A" dated April 18, 1996, are itemized below: a The applicant proposes on Lots 58, 59, 60 industrial/R&D/office to change the permitted uses and 61 from commercial to b No commercial land use is requested on Lots 56 and 57, which shall remain industrial Consequently, requested as following the lots on which commercial land use is an additional permitted use are the Lots 65A, 65B, 66, 72, 73A, 73B, 74, 83, 84, 85 and 91 67A, 67B, 67C, 68A, 68B, 69, 70, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, AMSTERDAM OFFICE EUROPA BOULEVARD 59 10B3 AD AMSTERDAM, THE :--;ETHERLANDS TELEPHO!\"E 011 3120-661-0969 FACSI~1ILE 011-3120-642 1475 KEV LARGO OFFICE OCEA:'> REEF CWB 31 OCEAN RE:EF DRIVE SUITE A206, DeEAt-; REEF PLAZA KEY LARGO, FLORIDA 3303:- TELEPHO"E 13051 367-2881 LONDON OFFICE 48 \10U"T STREET LO;..JDO;-.J W1Y SRE Ef\GLA:-.JD TELEPHO~E 011-44171-493-4840 FACSIMILE 011-44171-493-4299 MIAMI OFFICE 1500 MIAMI CE"TER 201 SOUTH BISCA YNE BOULEVARD ~lIAMI. FLORIDA 33131 MIAMI (3051358-6300 BROWARDf305)46788","1 FACSIMILE (30S) 381-9982 WEST PALM BEACH OFFICE OI'\E CLEARLAKE CE~TRE, SUITE 500 250 AUSTRALIA" A VEN[;E SO[;TH WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33401 MAILI~G ADDRESS P O. BOX 3555 WEST PALM BEACH. FLORIDA 33402 3555 TELEPHONE (407) 835 8500 FACSIMILE 14071650-8530 Ms Tambri Heyden June 11, 1996 Page 2 2 Two (2) copies of the June 10, 1996 supplemental analysis for the intersection of Gateway Boulevard and Park Ridge Road prepared by Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc , are enclosed herewith for your review This supplemental analysis has been performed in accordance wi th methodology and revisions requested by TCRPC Although the methodology was revised, the conclusions and staging of proposed improvements to the intersection remain the same as originally proposed 3 Enclosed is a revised Exhibit "0" to the NOPC which is the requested amendment to the Development Order. It is b1acklined to show the changes from the original draft submitted with the April 25, 1996 NOPC 4 For your information, enclosed are copies of letters sent by our traffic consultant, Kimley-Horn and Associates, Inc , to the FOOT and to Palm Beach County in response to questions from those agencies regarding traffic impacts of our proposed revision These agencies have also been sent copies of the supplemental analysis of the intersection performed by Kimley-Horn Other than the foregoing changes, the original NOPC request dated April 25, 1996 remains unchanged I would like to point out that the land use intensities modeled in the supplemental traffic analysis are based upon the original estimates in the 1984 ADA which were recently brought to our attention by Mike Busha at TCRPC See Table 1 of the supplemental analysis For example, the commercial square footage projected in the ADA was 426,888 square feet Notwithstanding the expanded number of lots that would be eligible for commercial use, the enclosed Master Plan includes a notation that limits the total commercial use to the 426,888 square foot figure Based on the foregoing changes and additional analysis, we would like the NOPC to be scheduled for public hearing by the City Commission on July 2, 1996 Please make arrangements for publica- tion of the required fifteen (15) day public notice Ms Tambri Heyden June 11, 1996 Page 3 It is also my understanding that we will make the presentation of the NOPC to the City Planning and Development Board at a special meeting on Tuesday evening, June 25 Please call with any questions or if you desire additional information JGW/smw Enclosures cc Steven E Fivel, Esquire (Federal Express) Steven G Godfrey (Federal Express) Rocky Biby (Federal Express) James D Thornton, Esquire (Federal Express) Paul McClellan (Federal Express) Michael B McLoad (Federal Express) James Snyder, TCRPC (Federal Express) Greg Stuart, DCA (Federal Express) ORL95 19719.1 SMW FORM RPM-BSP-PROPCHANGE-1 STATE OF FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS DIVISION OF RESOURCE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT BUREAU OF STATE PLANNING 2740 Centerview Drive Tallahassee, Florida 32399 904/488-4925 QUANTUM PARK NOTIFICATION OF A PROPOSED CHANGE TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT (DRI) SUBSECTION 380 06(19), FLORIDA STATUTES Subsection 380 06(19), Florida Statutes, requires that submittal of a proposed change to a previously approved DRI be made to the local government, the regional planning agency, and the state land planning agency according to this form 1 I, JAMES G WILLARD, the undersigned authorized representative of QUANTUM ASSOCIATES, hereby give notice of a proposed change to a previously approved Development of Regional Impact in accordance with Subsection 380 06(19), Florida Statutes In support thereof, I submit the following information concerning the QUANTUM CORPORATE PARK (formerly known as Boynton Beach Park of Commerce) development, which information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge I have submitted today, under separate cover, copies of this completed no+-ification to City of Boynton Beach, to the Treasure Coa~t Regional Planning Council, and to the Bureau of State Planning, Department ~/ - ); - CJ b (Date) 2 Applicant (name, address, phone). Quantum Associates, a Florida general partnership National City Center 15th Floor, East Tower 115 West Washington Street Indianapolis, Indiana 46204 317/263-7936 (Office) 317/263-7038 (Fax) 3 Authorized Agent (name, address, phone) James G Willard, Esquire Shutts & Bowen 20 North Orange Avenue, Suite 1000 Orlando, Florida 32801 407/423-3200 (Office) 407/425-8316 (Fax) 4 Location (City, County, Township/Range/Section) of approved DRI and proposed change The Quantum Corporate Park DRI is located in Sections 17 and 20, Township 45 South, Range 43 East, Palm Beach County, Florida The description of the property which is the subject of the proposed change is as follows A Add to the DRI, Lots 80, 81 and 82 as per the plat of P C D Center, Plat Book 60, Pages 106 and 107, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida, collectively containing approximately 14 acres B Include commercial land use as a permitted use to the following lots as identified on the Master Site Development Plan for Quantum Park, last revised by Master Plan No 5 dated October 28, 1994 Lots 65A, 65B, 66, 67A, 67B, 67C, 68A, 68B, 69, 70, 72, 73A, 73B, 14, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, BOA, 83, 84, 85 and 91 5 Provide a complete description of the proposed change Include any proposed changes to the plan of development, phasing, additional lands, commencement date, build-out date, development order conditions and requirements, or to the representations contained in either the development order or the Application for Development Approval Indicate such supplementing changes on wi th other the project master site plan, detailed maps, as appropriate -2- Additional information may be requested by the Department or any reviewing agency to clarify the nature of the change or the resulting impacts Applicant seeks to add Lots 80, 81 and 82 to the DR! Master Plan and to include commercial use as a permitted land use per the DR! Master Plan for those lots referenced in paragraph 4 B , above Attached as Exhibit "A" is Master Plan Amendment No 6 dated April 18, 1996, reflecting the foregoing changes The applicant submits that the proposed changes are non- substantial for the following reasons A The added land area, i e Lots 80, 81 and 82, has long been considered a part of the Quantum project Due to the timing of land acquisitions by the applicant's predecessor in title, these lots were not formally included in the original 1984 DR! Development Order However, these three lots were platted in 1988 and are served by the same infrastructure, including roads, utilities and stormwater drainage system, serving the balance of the Quantum Park DR! Also like the balance of the Quantum project, these lots are within the City of Boynton Beach and are a part of both the Quantum Park Community Development District and the Quantum Park Property Owners Association B Neither the addition of Lots 80, 81 and 82, nor the inclusion of commercial use as a permitted land use for the lots identified in paragraph 4 B , above, will result in the development of greater commercial square footage than is already permitted by the Development Order Pursuant to methodology agreed upon by the applicant, City of Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County, Treasury Coast Regional Planning Council and the Florida Department of Transportation as part of the trip generation analysis required for the Fourth DR! Amendment in April of 1994 (which approved a portion of the land in Quantum as a Palm Beach County high school site), it was established that the original 29 7 acres of commercial land within the DR! was vested for 517,493 square feet of commercial development Attached as Exhibit "B" is a copy of the March 8, 1994 report to Sally Black of the TCRPC, outlining the agreed upon methodology As a condition of the currently proposed NOPC, applicant proposes not to construct more than the previously authorized 517,493 square feet of commercial space, including Lots 80, 81 and 82, without further amendment to the Development Order Because of this limitation, the additional land -3- area represented by Lots 80, 81 and 82 will not result in more impacts than already permitted for the Quantum DRI C The inclusion of commercial land use as a permitted designation on more lots in the DRI Master Plan will provide greater flexibility to the applicant to respond to market conditions substantially changed from the time of the original 1984 Development Order D Notwi thstanding the DRI Master Plan Amendment authorizing commercial use on more lots within the project, specific land uses ultimately constructed on each lot are still subject to review and approval by the Boynton Beach Plannin~ and Zoning Board since all the Quantum property is zoned either PID or PCD, both of which require specifi= use approval by the Planning and Zoning Board E As required by the Fourth Amendment to the Development Order, attached as Exhibit "C" is a transportation analysis of the intersection of High Ridge Road and Gateway Boulevard in Quantum Park This analysis was requested to study the operating characteristics of said intersection in light of the planned closure of a portion of High Ridge Road when the high school site is developed As can be determined from the analysis in the report, development in the vicinity of the High Ridge Road/Gateway Boulevard intersection may ultimately require turn lane improvements which the applicant commi ts to install as and when needed and which will ultimately provide for an intersection peak hour design capacity of 2,300 trips 6 Complete the attached Substantial Deviation Determination Chart for all land use types approved in the development If no change is proposed or has occurred, indicate no change No change to the DRI is proposed other than as discussed in paragraphs 4 and 5, above Because of the multiple land use designations on many lots within the project, both already approved on the Master Plan and as herein requested, the applicant submits that completion of the Substantial Deviation Determination Chart would not be productive 7 List all ~he dates and resolution numbers (or other appropriate identification numbers) of all modifications or amendments to the originally approved DRI development order that have been adopted by the local government, and provide a brief description of the previous changes (i e, any information not already addressed in the Substantial Deviation Determination Chart) Has there been a change in local -4- government jurisdiction for any portion of the development since the laFt approval or development order was issued? If so, has the annexing local government adopted a new DRI development ~rder for the project? Original Development Order December 18, 1984 First Amendment to Development Order June 3, 1986 Second Amendment to Development Order October 21, 1986 Third Amendment to Development Order February 2, 1988 Fourth Amendment to Development Order April 19, 1994 Fifth Amendment to Development Order November 15, 1994 The purpose of each amendment was to change the Master Site Development Plan to achieve more flexible land use approval There has been no change in local government jurisdiction for any portion of the development 8 Describe any lands purchased or optioned within 1/4 mile of the original ~RI site subsequent to the original approval or issuance of the DRI development order Identify such land, its size, i-tended use, and adjacent non-project land uses within 1/2 mile on a project master site plan or other map No additional lands were purchased or optioned since the approval of the initial Development Order 9 Indicate if the proposed change is less than 40\ (cumulatively with other previous changes) of any of the criteria listed in Paragraph 380 06(19)(b), Florida Statutes. Response The proposed change is not less than 40% of any of the criteria listed in paragraph 380 06(19)(b). -5- Do you believe this notification of change proposes a change which meets the criteria of subparagraph 380.06(19)(e)2 , F.S YES NO x 10 Does the proposed change result in a change to the buildout date or any phasing date of the project? If so, indicate the proposed new buildout or phasing dates The proposed change does not result in a change to the buildout date or any phasing date of the Project 11 Will the proposed change require an amendment to the local government comprehensive plan? The proposed change will not require an amendment to the local government comprehensive plan 12 An updated master site plan or other map of the development portraying and distinguishing the proposed changes to the previously approved DRI or development order conditions. The proposed Amended Master Site Development Plan is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" 13 Pursuant to Subsection 380 06 (1) (f), F language that is being proposed to be amendment to the development order address and quantify A , include the precise deleted or added as an This language should a All proposed specific changes to the nature, phasing, and build-out date of the development; to development order condi tions and requirements; to commitments and representations in the Application for Development Approval; to the acreage attributable to each described proposed change of land use, open space, areas for preservation, green belts; to structures or to other improvements including locations, square footage, number of units; and other major characteristics or components of the proposed change; -6- b An updated legal description of the property, if any project acreage is/has been added or deleted to the previously approved plan of development; c A proposed amended development order deadline for commencing physical development of the proposed changes, if applicable; d A proposed amended development order termination date that reasonably reflects the time required to complete the development; e A proposed amended development order date until which the local government agrees that the changes to the DRI shall not be subject to down-zoning, unit density reduction, or intensity reduction, if applicable; and f Proposed amended development order specifications for the annual report, including the date of submission, contents, and parties to whom the report is submitted as specified in Subsection 9J-2 025(7), F A C The proposed Amended Development Order is attached hereto as Exhibit "0" -7- HANDOUT "QUANTUM PARK PCD CENTER" Department of Engineering and Public Works Po. Box 21229 West Palm Beach. FL 33416-1229 (561) 684-4000 . Palm Beach County Board of County Commissionen Ken L. Foster. Chairman Burt Mronson. Vice Chairman Karen T. Marcus Carol A. Roberts Warren H. Newell Mary McCarty Maude Ford Lee County Administrator Robert Weisman. P.E. An Eqwd Opportunity AffirmJJrive Action Employer' '7'.. IT ~.~'WI I . JVN'24lS ~~ IllitittttUtmllttQ)".,~~ HmIlIIm: ,..."..' June 19, 1996 Ms Tambri Heyden, Director Boynton Beach Planning and Zoning Department 100 E Boynton Beach Boulevard POBox 310 Boynton Beach, Fl 33425-0310 RE: QUANTUM PARK PCD CENTER Dear Ms Heyden The Palm Beach County Traffic Division has received additional information from Steven Godfrey of Kimbley-Horn and Associates Our primary concern is that any traffic associated with any proposed amendment to the Master Plan not exceed the traffic associated with the approved Master Plan on a peak hour or daily basis Any increase in traffic would be subject to the Traffic Performance Standards in Article 15 of the Palm Beach County land Development Code A trip generation analysis for both the proposed amendment to the Master Plan and the approved Master Plan, on both a peak hour and daily basis, is needed to make this determination Mr Godfrey has provided a trip generation analysis in Tables 7, 8, and 9 for the PM peak hour only A comparison of the total peak hour trips for the approved Master Plan and the proposed Master Plan, in Tables 8 and 9 respectively, shows an increase in of 80 PM peak hour trips This is not consistent with his claim that there will be no increase in "entilelemts" He has also provided two Master Plans identified as Master Plan Amendment No 5 and Master Plan Amendment No 6 I am concerned that many of the parcel in the proposed Master Plan have mutiple uses identifed on them I assume that this means that any of the listed uses would be allowed on the various parcels For these parcels, speCific uses were assumed in the trip generation analysis For a majority of the parcels, the uses assumes in the trip generation analysis generate less traffic than the other listed uses It is possilbe the uses actually built on these parcels could generate more traffic than the uses assumed in the traffic generation analysis The specific parcel of concern are as follows - Parcel 1 is identified as office / hotel in the Master Plan It is identified as office in Table 9 g \user\dweisber\wp50\tps\boyn63b JUN-2~-i995 16 13 , , TCRPC 40~ 221 40~ P 02 ~ treOlU(e c~ (9910001 plonniQ9 council June 25, 1996 Ms. Tambri Heyden. Director Planning and Zonmg Department City of Boynton Beach 100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard POBox 310 Boynton Beach, FL 3 3425~03 1 0 Subject: Quantum Park Development ofRegjona1 Impact - RevIew of Proposed Change Dear Ms.. Heyden. In accordance with the requirements of Section 330 06(19), Florida StatuteS, we have reviewed the .'Notification of a Proposed Change to a Previously Approved De~elopment of Regional Impact (DRI)" (NOpe) for Quantum Park DRI dated April 25. 1996 and submitted to Council by James G WJllard on Apri125, 1996 (re"\.'l$ed June II, 1996) The NOpe proposes to (;hange Its Il1115ter pIa.., to include lots 80, 81 and 82 as p~ the P C.D plat. and include commercial uses as a permitted use for the following lots 65A, 6SB, 66, 67 A, 67B, 67C, 68A, 68B, 69, 70, 72, 73A. 73B. 74. 75. 76, 77 78. 79 80A. 83 84. 85 and 91 Based on concerns of the City and our Council, the NOpe application was rev1~ to change the pennttted uses on lots 58, 59, 60, and 61 from commeraal to mdustnal/research and development/office, no I;;ommcrdal land use requested for lots 56 and 57 Which remain industrial and lots on which commercial land use is requested as an additlonal pennitted use are lots 65A, 65B, 66, 67A, 67B, 67C, 68~ 68B, 69, 70, 72, 73A, 73B, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 19 80. 81 82. 83, 84 85 and 91 Also a revised traffic analYStS was ~one for the intersectIon of Gateway Boulevard and Pack RJdge Road as requtited by Council :stafT. The proposed change does not meet or exceed any of the criteria in Sections 3~O 06(19Xb), Flonda Sta.tutes, which would reqUIre Substantial DeviatIon RevIew However, the mfotmation submitted IS not correct for determining wbether the proposed changes would create additionallmpa.cts not previously reViewed and, therefore, require $ub~tarrtial deviation review Council staff' believes that. 1) parceb 53 and 54 do not show the prcxnt approved land UK whlclI should be govcrnmentli.nstitutional and not research and development. 2) the hotel use should not be considered a separate use but part of the eorruneraal land use allowance when detennining amount of commercial development approved for the project and 322& s..w. marlin downo btvd. sulh:: ~ IM1. I:/QK 1,ay _1m ~IIY. lIot1do 24_ phOne (.un 22t...060 !iC 26~ fax (407) 22".<1067 JUN-2=-1996 16 13 TCRPC 40~ 2~1 40~ P 03 Ms Tambri Heyden June 25. 1996 Page Two the traffil; gcnerat~ by thox: U:K:5, and 3) that the nwwnwn square footage of development . I for each of the approved uses should be shown on the proposed revised D~ master plan wlnch will be mcorporated Into the lUfIended deveiopment order The revtsed traffic analYSIS subrrutted on June 11 1996 as part of the revised NOPC bas not been completely revIe\1t-ed by Council ..taff at tlns tune and further concerns may be submttted by Counc.-i1 pnor: to the public heanng. Council also believes design cnteria should be created for Gateway Boulevard ~ civilize the entranceway to the community At the City's request, Council will be more than willing to help with ideM on how to de!dgn the boulevard. If you have any questions, please call. ~ Sincerely'?T 4.Jfrv ~1 Busha, AlCP Executive Director MJB/jti cc Denny Green, TCRPC Chainnan Tom Beck, FDCA James G Willard. Applicant TOTHL P 03 VM-<r-~+ PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM NO. 96-259 TO: FROM: TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE MEMBERS Carrie Parker, City Manager Bob Eichorst, Public Works Director Al Newbold, Building Division Ken Hall, Department of Development William Cavanaugh, Fire Prevention Officer Sgt Marlon Harris, Police Department John Wildner, Parks Superintendent Kevin Hallahan, Forester/Environmentalist Clyde "Skip" Milor, Utilities Chief Field Insp Mike Haag, Planning & Zoning Department Jerzy Lewicki, Planning & Zoning Department William Hukill, Development Department Tambri J Heyden -r:> ~L Planning & Zoning Director DATE: May 14, 1996 SUBJECT: Administration Technical Review Committee Meeting - Tuesday, May 21, 1996, followed by Applicant Technical Review Committee Meeting On May 21, 1996, at 9 00 A.M , a staff-only meeting to discuss the submittal below will be held in the 2nd Floor Conference Room, Room 201, Mangrove Park School At 10: 00 AM, a standard applicant TRC meeting will convene regarding the same submittal (because the item below is an amendment to a DRI, the condensed time frame for processing is governed by state law) 1 Old Business None 2 New Business Master Plan Modification: 1 PROJECT Quantum Park PID LOCATION: West side of the intersection of Interstate 95 and Gateway Boulevard AGENT James Willard, Shutts & Bowen OWNER Quantum Associates DESCRIPTION Request to amend the previously approved PID master plan in connection with an amendment to the DRI to add 14 acres (the pcn Center subdivision) to the PID boundaries and designate it for commercial use and to add the option of commercial use to the existing land use designated for lots 57, 64, 65A, 65B, 66, 67A, 67B, 67C, 68A, 68B, 69, 70, 72, 73A, 74, 75, 76, 77, 78, 79, 83, 84, 85 and 91 NOTE: Written comments and plans regarding this submittal shall be returned to the Planning and Zoning Director no later than 5:00 P.M., Friday, May 24, 1996. 4 Other Business NONE 5 Comments by members 6 Adjournment The City shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the City Please contact Joyce Costello, (407) 375-6013 at least twenty-four (24) hours prior to the program or activity in order for the City to reasonably accommodate your request. a TRCSPECL 521