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