Loading...
REVIEW COMMENTS .0." .,,-.. .o~ :> " ~~ co'" 8:- ~~ _0 _0 Ut ~ .. <0 :T ~ ~ ~ L ~ (S) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~" i ~ ~ '8 I ! , I ,II I i~! ; ~ o ~ ! i -il)> "'T1lz! '-i !?IQ ole:' i IllICII ,0 3 S" <~ I~'g < ~ CII ~O.. .~ m CII;o m -~ ~I! ~ rr ~:~ Ilr Iz ICP 1 z !? '"'T1 I~!? CD 10 CD z I'!?' z o nll 0 i,.. i ee I ., J I I ~ ! Ilw - zzlrv: _w --J ....,_10 ,(0 ~I)>I)>;O i~ ; I ' 'II I ~ l~iZZ rv: l'wO? il" "18! ,," , I I !: ! I :i:~iU: I~ I I .......j ;0 gl ,3 ! I~ ,CD 'm '"'T1 10 I~ i3 '3 CII ;:; ~, m! ~I I~ I ICII : I i I . Irv m I i '~~: 8[ 'Ill CII, 1'1i ~i i'..' o! !~ c; :::! 3' rv III o :J 8[; ::: CII en; 0.., III 1 lDl 0.., II I ' I I I I ! I I II , I I : ZiCD 3e: I~ ,0.. gi:i" 9J6 mla ~ig: olm 11~ :"'T1 '0 Ii .~ I i 1m i--J : ~ l_t1I 17 I . 1~18 )>:8 I 10 I : ! I izl~ >r~ CD ~ - ~ ~ N o o o len a C/)ienl '"'T1 0 ..c 'C11 i__ 3 :ii!C11 I:J .... ,(") 1f2.~CII!o Ia. m "'T1!3 1:i" CD g 13 iee m Iii ~ 'I "'T1ee Q. II!? :0 g:,~ ~ @ UlIC < :::r Ul ~ 0' olCII 10.. ~ ~!Q ;0 0 CII!~ g: 0 ~ '!!!, ~:fC~ -,..,~Q) OJ CD CD e ,a. ~ I g '- 0 0, - .-!C/) 0.. ~ie: :E III 13 ~ @ ~3 ~Illlll rvlll m ::1)> CD '::: CD , III CD 10 ,:::r CII 0.. I II ~! I m Ul III m ;0 CII Iii ,- I irv m ~ ~, rv I 10 -0: 8 :;' III g-I :J .... 0.. -i, ,~ g' :::!3 rvlll g ~I I' o CII' ::: : I ~ I ! il ~I ~, : ....... ~ N o o o I 1 I I )>zl-i'z' l-i o I'e: i::: Ie: 10 @ 31<6 3 Iii cQ C"'lo C"' CII,~ 1t;1~ - :E 1- bl~ 0 _ .-.,:E Ul~I~ c':J :J !lC1 fti~ 1ft I " I! , , 1 i i I I 'I , I I I [ I IIII ~! 10 1 3;1 0' . I CD ( ! I < CII :::r 0' m -i ~' _Ul en CII 1Il Z o lD !z o 'CD')> I~I~ 'cE :~ I ~I ~: ~~ .g' _Ul !!: m 1Il CII Ii I Ii I, I.., ! i I 1<<31 I ~ '~I~I ~ I I! , I IIJ I i...a. m 1 ''"co ~ ffi(O li~ ~ OCII Ul , , I li,z It1I _ I':...J I)> I~i , Irv m m m i ~ ~ ~ ~ I I~ -ooio , 18 [ g;'g; lEU CD 1m leD :J ""Ic'c 0.. :;l'Ul Ul ~ 0 CII CII ~s.(")(") :::!3iii'iii' rv III Ul Ul g :J !!!. !!!. O[;~~ fif ~~. "" 0 0 Ul :J :J o..mm III e: e: CD 3 3 o..i3 3 .......: D:J Q) ~I-< ~ ~)>)> rv:::::: i 8ilil I I! . 'I I I. . -i o S" < CII :::r 0' m CD)> e: 0 ~; -, III c5!lC (i)/1Il 01 Ul (fl' ~ e: III "" CII "'T1 o o g ~ UI '"rv,~' ~(O w~ t1Im ~ ,w I~ ~I'~I' "~ ~ !CJ1~g I 10;CII. I IUl i ~IJ CDICDI ~'rv' wcn t1I--J ~ ..... I_CD I~ 'rv m mlm, ~ ~ I~ ':g , rv -0,-1-1 g _,::J :J o 1i'g-g-: III (I).Ul Ul, 5. ~t~ ~! ~ glCICi ~3ilGllGl' ~ ~iQIQ 0, 1ll!1ll o t>> ~ i~ ~ =: --1-0' I ~ ~'I~I I. fr gig' _:J:J lIlmm , 0..1e: e: ~'3 13 :::13 !3 -Jrr.;Q) :m ~rrrrl l:t~1 :J 0.. e: Ul ct ~ Ol'c;l ~ ~ 0S'@1Il -Ill, (")< 0 01ll~0 :J .:::r III a.~-' r+ -,'0 0" ~ar :J ,0 :J -i Ul .... ~' _Ul en 1Il 1Il Z o CD Z o 'z! . / ~' , I ~ J , -01- j!D 0 ..,oc.n..... oalt1l~ o Ul CII 0.. z z )>,0 01)> i ! i I , 'i ! 1 I I IWI I !1Il' I' Z ...... 1\J1s' !? -(0 rv CD CII w' rv t1It11. Z CD o CD ~ 1S:~i~H S:I(") s: !!: !s:!s:!~ !!:!o !!: o I!!: I!!: l!a 0 ~ 0 :::r,. . (I) :::rl_:::r rv'(O.(O...., rv CII rv 1- (0 (0 :E - I_X - ! cr; i SO cr; m cr; '(0, I (0,(1) (0 ,(0' )> (O'C11 (0 cl I[ ~ ~~, i! ~ ~I'i ~: CD CD- =t..... 0.. Ul 0',- s: 6' ....i~!:ol III ~'~ 7- s: 0_ m o 00 Q S'I W a. ~ 1Il1 !a(O:J ;1- s: (0 s: g: 06~ ! ~. c.n (i)' I II1I1I 1 LI )> ::: OJ S- o' :J III :J 0.. ;0 CII o "" 1Il III ~ o :J .) II -<' . "tJ1 m o ." r- )> Z C c: en m Z e: 3 t:r 1Il ..., o - m CII III en (") :::t: )> Z G'). m (") )> -i m G') o :;0 -< z )> Ii' I ;"tJ I !:;o II 'c "tJ ~ Z o ill ~ I II I~I II ~! ,~i 1- o c: en C p (") :::t:, I '~II ~ I, 'Co i~'I' Irri Igi (") :::t: )> Z G') m ,I>. u, o o I 1III \ L__ ..j rJJ ~ CO rJJ ~ .2 ~ s: t"" l::l t'!I!j <:: s: ~ - o .2 o t'!I!j ~ t'!I!j :::= :: - .2 > ~ - o .2 (1 - - > - "..., ~ c '" )> -n -I ,&I"" ..,,, .z;!; \~ ;~ "' ~ (l) 19- =' ~ It \ Ul\","\LV1!'-li~ 7} N -I',.I)~ 0 -f)i.~~.~I.~~ .~; ~ C')> (D 0 It ::l ',::l' 0 N iil !'\ ~ \a;' \::+ - 0> o (D 0 ~ 1'5'\0. CD : CD \::l-l'~'X ~ ?5'6r'~ n- O (I) _I(/) c. ~g<~% ::l 1(1) CD ,-' (fI t)) :r \.... "'" (fI -' 0 i<C ~ <D 1(1) (I)\~ 3' ~ ~ rg \::l. D>(fI(J)~~ or -" ~ co 't' :z::l::T-n0 Ul\O _ - 1Il ffi\\~ ~~ .~\-(I) 1Il (/) ::l S"~ o .... (ll C (I) (0 $ (U~; 3 !Il Cf It \::l (J) -I:~ 0.( ~\ ::T(I)CfI y> CD o.jO' ~ iil 16' \!Il ii1 3:0 IZ I~ .e.\& o! .~ 2'\1Il :;j',..lD :5 I It I~ .3.... D> NiC::l '-' ~ a:'\~1 \~ \ ccg~\ 3 ::l,....\-O :D> ;:;:\(1) Ie- I l::l (fI \ [I) I.... \ ,0> \ ~(fI\~'I.~' '~ \ <- :J ~.."" g (ii"n- ,;1.-. ~ -I~a\ 1"0.\ ~ \~ ~\\ ~.... \ ::l I~' iil: I"'".~ ~'~ ';jltl '(;, ~.!W r~.UI.~'\ \ 3 \:T '(D' \ (ll \ ~ 11tI :0 -ff ~\0\;\ '\ ,",,\0 'x \ ..._~'ro; . ~\ I g<i \ 0> ::l\- g Z,S-. [I) 01'0 \ I !Il (0' \~;~ \ >-r~ ~.\ (I) O' :a.::J \ \3 t (l) - ,::l 0- ,- (l) \Z- ,0,* <O,(f1 i \~ \ I:: i \ Ii \.... ,[I) \"0 '0 ~ 0. z ~ ... ,0 is" \- \t ('l, \ (0 Cf \ rt'j' . (fI ~ \ \ \ ~ @\ \ ~ ~\ \ "'" d'. o 0 It? o OJ! ,g. c. ' ::l'::;' )>\~ ""'10 ~ .... (fI \9\ I~\ ,::l ~ 0> o (I) G> ~ [I) 3 3 (J) ;1.- 11" 5' ~ e d'. o ::l ~ 1: "'" (I) ~ (I) -IZOJ)> o c. c. 0 S'3='ii1 _0-9:0> <(I)i.:2lQ ;\"'" e:-\CD -"!?.iG> ;\~Wi ~~ i i'ij' '0 (Jl (fI _ [I) C i.--' (I) 0> (Jl(fl.... [I) -(I) (I)(Jl-n Ze-o o 0. 0 1t~S' ,~ UTf (Jl:2iii~ Or-0-1 ~(I)(Jlg R:~~6r o.~-,(I) ~(I).....- .....~;-~ (J)(fIv- .....c..O(t) r+ ~b ~'\ (fI ~ i, ~ ~ iil ~ ::l 0. (I) $ 3 ~ ~ :2 III III (J) (J);1.- o>::l -0 ~ ~ g \ \ l 1 \ \ \11 iil\ .!'-l.!'-lzg\ .. ",io 0\'" '" '" l;1 ;; ~ ;; 'Ii \ \ \ \ \ \~\O;~ \010:0\0 \"'"' \N \ \ \ \ . 1 I I \\ \ '\I\i \~ ~ \ ~ \ \~!>~' '" ,.,IZ\Ul ~\ g'~\'~i~ E ~\~.\ ~\g\5>\~ \ : \ ' ' \ \ \ \ I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \11' 1\ \ \ I \ i \ i \ \ . \ \ o!"~!" cc)>cc 1 \ \ , \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ 1 i \ , \ I \ \ \J). o tQ ~ ~ ~ - > L' d ~ -< ~ - o Z d ~ ~ ~ """ Z ~ - o z n ::: > ~ I)> ,('l \.... ~ \(1) ~. iil 0> (fI ll> (/) 6' :r ('l C- o. (l) r- % LV <0 0> ::l 0. ~ o \~ I \ ' I~ \ ~ ~ .-1 __' __,--- _-u------------- O"TI rm "UtIl r;:O G)c z:t> 0;:0 (J)-< - co I\.) co ~ 0- 01\.) ~o ~o ~o - (J) (J) o ~ Z ::2 0 ~ -:3 ~ tn (") en g (JQ (1) <I> ::r c ~ ::l ~. ~ 3 ~ 5' E 3 Co (1) fD ..., 2. ::l g. C' '< ~ Co S' (JQ ~ m G) c.... I m X r !ii (1) (") S; <I> 2:. [ O' ~ ::l (") [ ~. ~ ::l g: !ii S. ::. 10 (1) on ciQ" ~ S' .... '"' (1) C!O Z 10 2 o n ~ o == ... --- ;:0 III l1> III < o (ii' ~l1> l1> a. E9.f\.) ;~ III ~ lC 0 1\.)0 c ,0 ~ -4 >>>>>>>>>>0 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ,2. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ U~ = = = = = = = = = = s' 3333333333~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ aggaggggggo ZZZZZZZZZZ> o 0 ceo 0 0 0 0 0 ......\OOO.....::lO'lUl~~N...... 0,.-...,.-... ,.-... en en en ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Z Z Z C 0 :2. ft ft ~ ...... ...... ...... ---- -- N~......~.........................................N OOOOO\O\O\O\O\O\O\OUl \ONN\O\O\O\O\O\O.....::I~ ......0'I0'1~~~~~~0'I.....::1 0'1.....::1.....::100000000 I ~000000000~ UlO~OOOOO\O~ I I I I I I I I I I ......NNNNNNNNN .....::I 00 00"""""""""""""""""" N \O~~OOOOOOOOOOOO~ NNN~~~~~~~~ "N ..~ ~ :.... :- ......... :- ~ :- :- :- .....::100000000000000000000 Ul~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~-:"':'-:"':'~.....::I-:"':'~.....::I-:"':'-:"':'~.....::I UlUlUlUlUlUlUlUlUlUlUl ~~~oooooooo I I ;;;:;o~ooooooo ~o~ooooooo I I I e;~~ooooooo 0'I~~0000000 o ~ ;3 ~ o "tl := ~ 2 >-3 o e; ~ ;0 t/.l ~ ~ t/.l ~~ ~ ~> t/.l~ > ~ w On~ =:::tn ~;g~~ ~9~ - ,-- C1 g ~ t/.l ~ "tl o l":l =:gFS ~.. 9 > r,o:I .. ..., 2 2 -C1>-3 :Jr,o:I> 2 C1 > r,o:I ~ t/.l C=C1 >;0= i::l:loC ~t/.l- .."t/.l~ 0>0 0i::l:l2 >-3l":lC1 >> C1 r,o:I .." " '"::l o l":l :=n" "tl::tn ~,,>r,o:I ~~22 <:C1>-3 _r,o:I> o C1 c= r,o:I t/.l ~ " ~g~ ~.." 0 > r,o:I ;022 -C1>-3 C1_> 2 L-_ C1 > r,o:I ~ - Z o c: rJ1 ~ ~ - > r::- c: rJ1 ~ (1 r::- > rJ1 rJ1 - ~ - (1 > ~ - o z D" ...... Z >>>>>>>>>>0 0 rm "'0 OJ -30 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 ~. l.":l r:;o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <: G)C ::r-3 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S' l.":l Z~ ~ rn Q.Q.Q.Q.o.o.o.Q.o.o.~ ~ 0:;0 0: 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 - 0 en-< - ("'l ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "tl CDI'.) ..., ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ S!:: CD ... ~ ~....,..t""'t-....,......,..t""'t-....,..t""'t-t""'t-....,.. 0- ~ ZZZZZZZZZZ> l.":l 01'.) (J'Q ~ ~ 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ...0 ...0 ~ 0 ::r ...... \0 00 ......:lO\VI~WN...... en 0 0.-.- E5 en ~ .- tI:l tI:l 0 ~ tI:l~ ~ l.":l ... m (;;. ~ ~ ~ ::0 G) ~ZZ 00 c.... ~ Zoo -3 ::r: 3 c ft ft > m ft............ a x ~ r >< ...... '-" '-" s' '-" 00 c:: ~ 8 i ~ Q. ...... N N ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... ...... - - ~ W N N W W W W W W W N 0 .- 0\ 0 0 W W W W W W W 00 > ~ a N N N ......:l ......:l ......:l ......:l ......:l ......:l - \0 ~ S' > ~ Q. ~ 0" "tl ~ o("}~ 0 ~ Q. I 0\ 3:SE("} ~ Q. W 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 W g "tl l.":l ~ S' 00 ~ ~2~ 0 ......:l 0 0 0 0 0 VI W ("') (J'Q N <:C1> e:.. -l.":lC1 ~ - g l.":l 0 c:: ~ 00 r.n ~ ~ ("'l S" ~ "tl ("') ~ ;!;. o(") l.":l t"'4 ::n ;SE ::0 > ("'l ......:l ......:l g (") r.n ~ VI 0 0 W W W W W W W l.":l ..... 0\ ......:l ......:l ......:l ......:l ......:l ......:l W ::02 2 r.n o' 00 00 -C1 -3 - ~ :2l.":l > ~ ~ 2 C1 - S' > l.":l ("') r. ~ > c ~ C- oo - ~. C::C1 0 ~ ...............................................................,................ >::0= :2 ~ \O~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~oc:: VI 0\0\\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\0 0 0000000\0\0\0\0\0\0\0\ 00- ~ ~ VlVI\O\O\O\O\O\O\O\O "",oo~ ......:l~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o>~ ~. ......:l......:l......:lVlVlVl VI VI VI VI VI r. 0 ::02 ~ N......:l......:lOOOOoooo NNOOOOOOOO -3 l.":lC1 0 > > ~ C1 ~ l.":l OQ' 0 ~ ~ "tl :=. 0 O(")~ ~ 3:SE("} .- I . ~ ~ 0 - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g "tl l.":l W 0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~22 (J'Q ~ ;:5C1-3 0 l.":l> o C1 '"0 c: l.":l C - 00 0 ~ "tl :;a - O(")~ :;0 n S!:::r:("} (II ~ ~ I . I UI < ~ VI ...... - 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 g O>l.":l UI -. c- ...... ~ ~ ::O2~ OUl 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ...(11 Q W ~ ~ c=5C1> (II c.. -n !f!. I'.) rzl.":lC1 ::r;:::; -t ::c >- l.":l (II ~ '-" III _ ~ (Q 0 1'.)0 ) _____n_ 'TI lD C" 2 Dl .:< ~ N 8 o III III ~ lD 1Q =r lD Dl 1Q .N c ;:;0 :t> ." -f ~ N ~ _0 :C!- N ." ~ ) N z o ~~ ~ ("l ~ ~ lICl CI> ~ .... o ~ = ; CI> t::C E. 0:: ~. t;I.) ,.c c:: ~ ~ "Ij o o E CI> '" ::r o ~ = ~ 0- o < CI> ~ o CI> '" = o .... S' ("l 2" ~ CI> g ::r o .... ~ ~ .... CI> ~ ("l ~ n c:: ;- ~ ~ e?- N 0'\ 00 t;I.) 't] "0 CI> .... .... o o 3 ..... '" ~ 3 ~ ~ S' c:: 3 ~ CI> .... CI> 3 ~. ~ 0- '< ~ ~ ~ ~. ~ c:: '" CI> ("l ;- '" '" Si ("l ~ .... o' ~ ..... ::: ("l i: ~ S' lICl ~ (J c ~ CI> .... ("l E o CI> '" liej' ~ o' ::: ..-.. CI> ~ (J o s: s: o n o :a ~ ::: ~ s: 5 -) ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ G G G G G G R B G ~ ~~~~~~~~~~[ CI> CI> CI> CI> ('I> CI> CI> CI> CI> CI> > aaaaaaaaaao zzzzzzzzzz> o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 -\Ooo.....:lO'\Ul~y.)N- 0..-....-.. ..-..t;I.)t;I.) t;I.) CI> CI> CI> CI> CI> Cl>zz Z C 0 sa. CD g CI>__ N-- - ~::J::J::J~~~~~~!j UlOOO.....:l.....:l.....:l.....:l.....:l~O'I - -oO~OOOONO - O'\OONOOOOy.) N.....:I.....:I.....:I _ ~ooo.....:l.....:l.....:l.....:l.....:lo ~y.)y.)y.)0'I0'\0'\0'\0'\ O'\y.)y.)y.)y.)y.)y.)y.)y.)y.)y.) .....:1.....:1.....:1.....:10000000 Uly.)y.)y.)OOOoooo ~ N-NNO-gooooo 0'10000000 00000 000000000000000 ~OO~OOOOOO \OOO~OOOOOO -NNN ~~~~oooooo ~~~000000 I ; '0 1"1 <: t>:l t"" o "l:l s:: t>:l Z >-3 o ~ t>:l " Vl ~ ~ Vl ~; > ""l " "l:l o t>:l ~~~ ~"z~ t>:lC')>-3 <:-> - L-' C') g 1"1 Vl ~ "l:l ol":l~ ==~I":l ~~z~ ~-C')>-3 C')1"1> 21 C') > 1"1 t"" Vl ~C')= ,,"c::: t>:lo_ ""l~b 8~21 >-3t>:lC') >> C') 1"1 ~ ":l o 1"1 3:1":l" ":l=1":l ~,,>~ ~1"1Z"" <:C')>-3 _1"1> o ~ c::: 1"1 Vl ""l " "l:l o 1"1 3:1":l::C ot::1":l ~"z~ -C')>-3 C')_> 2 L-' ~ > 1"1 t"" ("') o ~ ~ ~ := ("') s: r:- ~ t;I.) ~ = ~ Vol - C'J 2 ~ :j o 2 t;I.) ~ s: s: ~ := -< Conditions of Approval MASTER PLAN MODIFICATION IT] W D r? L.! r I ~ I 1\ 'I I ~ i i .' u~ U iJ PrOject name' Quantum Park - Amendment #11 File number MPMD 00-007 Reference' 2ndreVlew plans identified as Master Plan ModificatIOn... File # MPMD 00-007 WIth a January 24, 2001 PI d Z D d 10 anmne: an omne: Jeoartment ate stamn mar ne:. DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS - General Comments. NONE PUBLIC WORKS - Traffic Comments. ~ ~ '-"" UTILITIES Comments. 2. Any upgrades reqUIred to the water and sewer systems WIthm the PID due to the intensification of land use proposed WIth thIS applIcation must be performed, at the applIcant's expense. FIRE Comments NONE POLICE Comments, NONE ENGINEERING DNISION Comments. NONE BUILDING DNISION Comments NONE P ARKS AND RECREA nON Comments 3 The CIty ComrmssIOn did exempt from the Recreation DedIcatIOn ReqUIrement, 272 umts of the 1,000 umts reqUIred m the most recent master plan revision. The developer dId pledge, however, to - "-, ~ Conditions of Approval 01/31/01 2 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT public recreation facihtIes for these umts. (To be deterrmned 10 conjunctIOn with the Parks DIVIsIOn.) At a nummum the developer IS reqUIred to prOVIde 1,000 umts - 272 units = 728 D U 728 DUX 015 acres = 10.92 acres assunung Yz credit for private recreatIOn = 546 acres assunung ~ credit for natural reserve = 2 73 acres 4 Natural resource credIt, If approved by the comnussIOn, IS subtracted off the IQ 4;;1. cUre RecreatIOn DedIcatIOn Requirement. 5 According to Chapter 1, Article V Section 3 of the Land Development Regulations, the developer must prOVIde five (5) park elements 10 order to fefl1ect ~ lC quahfy for Yz credIt for private recreatIon prOVIded. bosea (/(l W-+otvl- fp~ u q;L o:~ u 6. If the property IS not further platted, RecreatIOn Fees or DedIcations for the 728 non-exempt dwelling units are due pnor to the Issu10g of theIr reSIdential build10g perrmts. FORESTERlENVIRONMENT ALIST Comments' NONE PLANNING AND ZONING Comments. 7 ThIS NOPC/Master Plan submittal dId not include a prehnunary sIte plan or justification for the requested change. PrOVIde a wntten justification for the proposed change, and 10clude a descnptIOn of the nuxed use pod (i.e. use locations, circulatIOn systems, conceptual deSIgn concepts, etc). Since It represents a change 10 pnncIpalland uses (or potential land uses), 10dIcate whether the proposed change' would be conSIstent With comprehensIve plan policies; IS contrary to the eXIst10g land use pattern, IS based on change or changing conditIOns; and whether the proposed change is of a scale which IS reasonably related to the needs of the Immediate area and the CIty as a whole. Also indicate If the property is developable under the eXIst10g categories and whether there are adequate SItes elsewhere 10 the CIty for the proposed use, in areas where the use IS already allowed. JustificatIon and data shall support ehnunatIOn of the land available for 10dustnal uses based on CIty-Wide needs and supply 8. Staff recommends that the NOPC/Master Plan approval 10clude a condItIOn which reqUIres a nunimum of 20 acres of land designated as nuxed use be developed With the full mix of commercial/retail/and office before the addItIonal 500 umts of reSIdential may be constructed. Conditions of Approval 01/31/01 3 MWR/blw J:ISHRDATAIPLANNINGISHAREOIWPlPROJECTSIQUANTUM PARK AMEND. #11IQUANTUM PARK AMENDMENT #11- MPM0I1ST REVIEW COMMENTS.DOC t ~ 'Qrn~ 4-- s4f fR-wIL MASTER PLAN MODIFICATION MAS1rfL Project name Quantum Park - Amendment #11 ~ 2~ ?'-'u I FIle number' MPMD 00-007 :J alUlWf ,?V Reference '2l1PevIew plans IdentIfied as Master Plan ModIficatIOn.., File # MPMD 00-007 wIth a-D@sembi:r ~Planmng and Zomng Department date stamp marking, DEPARTMENTS PUBLIC WORKS - General Comments NONE PUBLIC WORKS - Traffic Comments. Jit{(~ b /We.. and UTILITIES Comments t~ t! ~~ ~r 2. ( the surface, theIr request to change th zomng on Lots 7 through 11, and Lo 23 through 31 (a total of 14 lots) fr m Office & Industnal to Mixed Use, see sImple enough. Howeve , wIth the ongInal DR! fi the total park designed for CommercIal, Industnal, nce, or an combm on of Office and Industnal, and/or Office, Industnal and ommercIal, bo the water and wastewater systems to support these type of ant Ipated use was designed and constructed for those antlcIpated uses. ur (4) ft statIOns were configured to handle the wastewater generatIO a cIpated on the 550 acre park. Recently, the CIty all e he converSIOn of three (3) lots (#59 through 61) from Office & Indu nal to Ixed Use, WhICh mcluded some 272 apartment umts, some 228 a rtment umt awaIt mcorporatIOn mto Lots 62 through 67 Now, WIth the ticIpated addItl of approxImately 500 apartment umts on the 14 lots not above, the eXIsting tlhty support facihtIes could be taxed to theIr Imuts. A proviso eeds to be mcorporated mto eac ot(s) approval process that the design e gIneenng consultants shall demonstra that sufficIent utihty system s) capaCIty IS available to support the prop ed use, or they will proVl e the necessary upgrade(s) to allow for the pro sed use Failure to do so could result m msufficlent utlhty support to thIS park, ffectmg other current (exlstm ) users. 'tln4- 4.f; U'~ (ZJ ~c/- Y-o II. u~ ~ , fJO {)dM.e Yo 'tU- n r ro(()jpct: tv Nt.- 1'L.e.A C!. c2nu..-- fr\Uo t'0/- INCLUDE REJECT 1ST REVIEW COMMENTS. doc 01/22/01 2 DEP ARTMENTS POLICE Comments. NONE ENGINEERING DIVISION Comments NONE BUILDING DIVISION ~ )./OfJ L Comments. Add to the site plan drawmg all eXIstmg sements that are shown on the urvey Also, add all proposed easeme s. The locatIOn, type and SIze of the e ements shall be shown and Identifi a on the SIte plan. Where apphcable, am d the lans so that structures d ot encroach mto an easement. ~ subrmt sIgned and sealed workmg drawmgs of the ~ I '\ Add to all p n VIew draWIngs of the SIte labeled symbol that represents the location a perimeter of the hrmts of con chon proposed wIth the subject re uest. / At tU1Jf of pemut of review, prOVIde a copy of a ty-approved WaIver of plat sho';0ng approval for subdIVidmg the property Tn WaIver shall describe ea<;h lot, parcel or tract ofland. At hme ofpemut re\ w, subrmt separate s}:i'rveys of each lot, parcel or tract. For purposes of settI up property and )>wnershIp m the CIty computer, prOVIde a copy of the rec ded deed for each 1 lot, parcel or tract. The recorded deed shall be submitted at me of pemut reVIew P ARKS AND RECREA nON Comments. INCLUDE REJECT 1ST REVIEW COMMENTS.doc 01/22/01 3 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT QAS a condItIon of Issuance ofa land development order for resIdentIal planned umt developments, the developer shall dedIcate land, pay a fee m heu thereof, or both, at the optIOn of the CIty, for park or recreatIOnal purposes and accordmg to the standards and formula m Chapter 1, ArtIcle V m the Land Development Code. The total recreatIOn dedIcatIon credIt will be calcu~ed as follows .-- ~ );c~) 1000 d. u. x 015 acres = 15 acres (2J.AJ / ~\ \ (1JJJl1f Y2 credIt may be gIVen against the reqUIrement of land dedIcatIon or payment fees. Y2 pnvate recreatIon credIt WIll be calculated as follows. 15 acres /2 = 7.5 acres The Developer may want to consIder dedIcatIOn of the land, or a combmatIon of dedIcatIOn and fee 1"11f.iP \iD Ifthe property is not ~eqUIred to be platted, the recreation dedIcatIOn fee, \yil~/J V be due nor to the bUIldm emut bem Issued. - JOt) ad~~ FORESTER/ENVIRONMENT ALIST Comments. NONE PLANNING AND ZONING Comments Th otice of Proposed Change (NOPC) document whIch accompames thIS Maste Plan eVIsion has errors m the Land Use Acreage Table on page 3 The Of ndustnal (01) category shows eXIstmg acreage as 84.35-It should b 4 he Office/lndustnaVCommercIal (01C) category shows proposed and eXIstm crea e as 26.33-It should be 22 94 Please correct and resubmIt 1 ST REVIEW COMMENTS.doc 01/22/01 4 DEPARTMENTS the table. s 1-3 have been removed from the Master Plan. Note 1 ,~, U ~ Mas r PI shows a new note whIch proVIdes for the ResIdentIal dwellIng umt co v rSIon to Industnal use The second such note refers to a converSIon of one IdentIal umt to 725 square feet of Industnal. The NOPC mdIcates thIS a Of e use not Industnal. Pro\lde JuStIficatIOn for these converSIOn fo ulas which were not mcluded m the last NOPC '0t Approval of the Master Plan IS contmgent upon a findmg of no substantIal I \levIation by the CIty ThIS IS based on th ollowing sectIOns of the Flonda Statues. a) Chapter 38006 (19(b) 9 An mcrea m the number of dwellmg umts by five (5) percent or 50 umts, whIchever,l~ greater b) Chapter 380 06 (19)( e) 5 c. N ovwIthstandmg any prOVIsIOn of paragraph (b) to the contrary, a proposed change consIstmg of sImultaneous mcreases and decreases of at least two of the uses wIthm an authonzed multI-use development of regIOnalll'npact which was ongmally approved wIth more than three uses specIfie.d m 380 0651 (3)(c), (d), (f) and (g) and reSIdentIal use. I L ~ (9J\ The applIcatIOn as pr.esented IS presumed to be a substantIal deVIatIOn. ThIs presumption may b,e rebutted by clear and conVIncmg evidence. The applIcant must provIde adwtIOnal mformatIOn before a detenmnatIOn of no substantIal deVIatIOn IS made The addItIonal mformatIOn mcludes . ~ -ProvIde a revised traffic analysIs based on Items dIscussed m comments #1\and #18. ) / s. The follo\VIng .1 a) \\~~ b) '" \~ DY c) d 2/17/00, 2/28/00 and 12/18/00 Please ~. ~Yf'\v. INCLUDE REJECT Galav Lusia From Sent: To Subject: Rumpf Michael Thursday January 25, 2001 5 18 PM Galav Lusia Revised text for #20 Lusia, this is how I suggest we present # 20 to Quintus and Kurt: This NOpe/Master Plan submittal did not include a preliminary site plan or justification for the requested change. Provide a written justification for the proposed change and include a description of the mixed use pod (i e use locations, circulation systems, conceptual design concepts, etc.), and since it represents a change in principal land uses (or potential land uses), indicate whether the proposed change would be consistent with comprehensive plan policies, contrary to the existing land use pattern is based on change or changing conditions the property is developable under the existing categories the proposed change is of a scale which is reasonably related to the needs of the immediate area and the city as a whole and whether there are adequate sites elsewhere in the city for the proposed use, in areas where the use is already allowed Justification and data shall support elimination of the land available for industrial uses based on city-wide needs and supply Make any changes you feel are necessary to eliminate any redundancy with other comments or clean it up Thanks, MR. 1 Galav Lusia From Sent: To Subject: Rumpf Michael Thursday January 25 2001 5 18 PM Galav Lusia Revised text for #20 Lusia, this is how I suggest we present # 20 to Quintus and Kurt: This NOpe/Master Plan submittal did not include a preliminary site plan or justification for the requested change. Provide a written justification for the proposed change and include a description of the mixed use pod (Le. use locations circulation systems, conceptual design concepts, etc.) and since it represents a change in principal land uses (or potential land uses), indicate whether the proposed change would be consistent with comprehensive plan policies, contrary to the existing land use pattern is based on change or changing conditions the property is developable under the existing categories the proposed change is of a scale which is reasonably related to the needs of the immediate area and the city as a whole, and whether there are adequate sites elsewhere in the city for the proposed use, in areas where the use is already allowed Justification and data shall support elimination of the land available for industrial uses based on city-wide needs and supply Make any changes you feel are necessary to eliminate any redundancy with other comments or clean it up Thanks, MR. 1 Conditions of Approval MASTER PLAN MODIFICATION fID[fJffi~'iJ PrOject name Quantum Park - Amendment #11 File number MPMD 00-007 Reference 2nd review plans identIfied as Master Plan ModIfication... File # MPMD 00-007 WIth a January 24, 2001 Plannmg and Zoning Department date stamp markIng. K DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS - General Comments. NONE PUBLIC WORKS - Traffic Comments 1 UTILITIES Comments. 2. -Iltll Ii: .llh}illll Ifl1Jl J~. 3hvuld ;uelud", the; fullv.. ~1\~ 8SRliiitiim. Any upgrades reqUIred to the water and sewer systems WIthIn the PID due to the IntenSIficatIOn of land use proposed with thIS applIcation must be performed, at the applicants expense. FIRE Comments. NONE POLICE Comments NONE ENGINEERING DNISION Comments. NONE BUILDING DNISION Comments. NONE PARKS AND RECREATION Comments 3 As a conditIOn of issuance of a land development order for resIdentIal planned umt developments, the developer shall dedIcate land, pay a fee In lIeu ConditIOns of Approval 01/29/01 2 DEPARTMENTS thereof, or both, at the optIon of the CIty, for park or recreatIOnal purposes and accordmg to the standards and formula m Chapter 1, ArtIcle V m the Land Development Code. The total recreatIon dedicatIOn credIt will be calculated as follows. 1000 d. u. x 015 acres = 15 acres Yz credIt may be gIVen agamst the reqUIrement of land dedIcatIOn or payment fees. Yz pnvate recreatIOn credIt will be calculated as follows. 15 acres /2 = 75 acres The Developer may want to consIder dedIcatIOn of the land, or a combinatIOn of dedication and fee. 4 If the property IS not reqUired to be platted, the recreatIon dedicatIon fee will be due nor to the buildm enmt bem Issued FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST Comments. NONE PLANNING AND ZONING Comments. 1- 5 ThIS NOPClMaster Plan subrruttal did not mclude a preliminary SIte plan or JustIficatIon for the requested change. ProVIde a wntten JustIficatIOn for the proposed change, and mclude a descnption of the rruxed use pod (i.e. use locatIons, CIrculation systems, conceptual deSIgn concepts, etc). Smce It represents a change m pri' d uses (or potentIal land uses), mdIcate whether the proposed . wo , be consIstent With comprehensIVe plan policies, IS contr~ the ~;is~~f l~ d use pattern, IS based on change or changmg condItI s, anat~e propo~ change IS of a scale whICh IS reasonably relate to the1ieeds of t 'e Immediate area and the city as a whole. Also mdIcate 1ft velopable under the eXIstmg categones and whether there are adequate SItes elsewhere m the CIty for the proposed use, m areas where the use IS already allowed. JustIficatIon and data shall support elImination of the land available for industnal uses based on CIty-wide needs and su 1 6 Staff recommends that the NOPClMaster Plan approval mclude a condItIon which reqUIres a rrummum of 20 acres of land deSIgnated as rruxed use be developed with the full rrux of commercial/retail/and office before the addItIonal 500 units of residentIal ma be constructed. A roval of the Master Plan IS contin INCLUDE REJECT Conditions of Approval 01/29/01 3 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT receIvmg approval for a text amendment to the ComprehensIve Plan to permIt resIdentIal use in the Industrial land use cate 0 MWRlblw J:ISHRDATAIPLANNINGISHAREOIWPlPROJECTSIQUANTUM PARK AMEND. #111QUANTUM PARK AMENDMENT #11- MPM0I1ST REVIEW COMMENTS.DOC ~i1. Jtf; { i ,,,~ f ~ c! ~yjlW .1, A {V' "'~ ~M f .k(tJ '\ 'f~ I JV\ li '-- v (./~.( J.J,. 1,r J,J>4{'^i //)4-" \) vP' I '. f1 1#'JV.f , 0 . ~. ~. J I] ~ ~ f {e 1;( J 6 ~~, 10 ?~ c ~ 0(- 0' "'- C"{c~__I'-~' (~ -r" L\.. _i' .:P I / L..J. . J "'{. lC. < c;.J ~ cf'I"'1e; Js L J;..e e- ( l' ~ . ~..."" . I""~ ljoJ (.'~ . ,L (.;:.t ~ 10 -{e s. (.7.1 j~ i~_ I lv:Y< 11 t..(~ .~"'" e tJ-- iY?~.-r1ll--: t" )fV, U ~J~ r~ y ((:""1 W,,:/y'S ~ +- (J~7eiK-lopv-f .fro y,.?~~e tJ.-l/) e!\ f"_(f(! v, j \, {- 1)1 C> ~. r '/ hd- -rt:r (,.)/ If .{t'-\"(\,- ~ld5 ~ _(?'fcK e~ /'r' o'{ ~t(U I'- ,ft, _ ~ ~CC~~ C/f.;', ~{\t~ J ~ pc ~ , {;j l'A 11 ~ f d.... IS, "'~ flu (f-~ {fc p . CA"'\..~ i1<>1'I'~..fp" 0> f~j "'if/' c' 4"" I~ $ ( /.-o-f 5 . f ..( K"' _ v . L--{ t ~ f (I(V( , / (;/ YO" i .~--- ---------------------------- --- ~ TO FROM CC RE Date I '. '~y. LEISURE S CES. PARK! "~r.... """.' <'" ,,'~ e . . Michael Ru 4- Di 'ctor of Plar ,. '~~~JJit',uJu~:~ cf'rU-r }'}'l0>>to ~w/ A- ec~ .lncLc.dl'6 fY\3 {t{fWJ~dt Ov"d ~(/WJ. I'k~ ~liLL hd- -10 ~~. ". ..~a-J( cJt! _=._,~ John Wildner, Parks DirectoC:f Lusia Galav Quantum NOpe #1 January 30, 2001 The Parks DiYision has reviewed the developer's response to the first review comments to Quantum NOPC #1 The following comments are submitted 1 ) The City Commission did exempt from the Recreation Dedication Requirement of 272 units of the 1,000 units required in the most recent master plan revision The developer did pledge, howeyer, to proYide appropriate public recreation facilities for these units. (To be determined in conjunction with the Parks Division) At the minimum the developer is required to provide 1,000 units - 272 units = 728 D U 728 DUX 015 acres = 10 92 acres assuming V2 credit for priyate recreation = 5 46 acres \. assuming 1f4 credit for natural reserve = 2 73 acres ~ (]J;...,Qt!' -- ~ J. ~o.,J ~~ering the impact of the original 272 units, this 2 73 acres should be v ~~.e ~higher (3 75 acres), depending on agreements with the City ...::'3 fY 2) Natural resource credit, if approved by the commission, is subtracted off the Recreation Dedication Requirement. t,~~1a~ -;;73 ) l1o.iiu D0'< v, . cl-- ~ 4 ) "t.r. JEt" \ p..~'\~ ~\l"" ~V"~) lW~\~~ ~ 5 ) ~~ 0' JW /vlr Comment regarding V2 credit for private recreation remains. ~? If the property is not furthe plante]) Recreation Fees or Dedications are r/ddtt;...JJ due prior to the issuing of additional residential building permits prlft-L 5~Jr dr-tJ' ? Comment concerning the as built plans for irrigation in rights of way and medians is requested in case the City needs to perform future maintenance and/or modification 'f:-~"~; ", ./ '1 '~'l"n.:,". ;.Y/ ;' w' JVIEW COMMENlS.doc .dOl ~CQ)[P)W DEP ARTMENTS <t:~.i~:;1i~e:1j;l~1fif~1~:''tl~~~~-~.jf:~ ~i'::';;;;:;;:~~ INCLUDE REJECTI., f )::1 t"ot j t:i I,' Ii !~ 11 ~~~ ti.~ ......",., ";~:~~~.tUl~~i'~.i~~~-(~!~~ti:.!~r:::~; QAS a condItion of Issuance ofa land development order for resIdentIal planned umt developments, the developer shall dedIcate land, pay a fee In heu thereof, or both, at the optIOn of the CIty, for park or recreatIonal purposes and accordmg to the standards and formula m Chapter 1, ArtIcle V In the Land Development Code. The total recreatIon dedIcatIOn credlt will be ca1cu~ed as follows. ..- ~ ):;c:~) 1000 d. u. x 015 acres = 15 acres (2)>J I ~ \ (1.lJ1) f ~i Y2 credIt may be gIVen agamst the reqUIrement of land dedIcatIOn or payment fees. Y2 pnvate recreatIon credlt will be calculated as follows ....:.. ,~, ~:"r"" 15 acres / 2 = 7.5 acres -f1 The Developer may want to conslder dedlcatIOn of the land, or a combInation of dedicatIOn and fee. -1 i:P GD If the property IS not requIred to be platted, the recreatIOn dedlcatIon fee, \rl~/,l be due nor to the buildmg errmt bem Issued. - 5(Jc) a.d~.f:/ .~i IVlsIOn at the close of the constructIon contract as-built Ions oflm atIOn lmes m the riahts-of-wa s and medIans. i . i Y2 recreatIOn credIt, the developer needs to proVIde a f' ~(;;.:~- f ~.~~ .rJ\w,:r~':'S",,,,,' ~.~ ;~H~. "'0: "';.....:: ..._..._...,( ;__~.;.. it -ft t: l' {ti Yo \ " i . ~ ,~ '1 "'-"!,J-'~ .- -r~.\f ~F --{1.i"'~".r' fr:r.~~~~'- --:~,.,... -;":t":pr.:.~Jl';:H -'~'Z~:''l!''''~''"",,,,-:-~~ ~ FORESTER/ENVIRONMENT ALIST Comments NONE PLANNING AND ZONING Th otIce of Proposed Change (NOPC) document whIch accompames thls Maste Plan eVlSlon has errors m the Land Use Acreage Table on page 3 The Of dustnal (01) category shows eXlstmg acreage as 84.35-lt should b 4 he Office/Industnal/Commerclal (0lC) category shows proposed and eXlstma creaO'e as 26 33-lt should be 22 94 Please correct and resubmlt LEISURE SERVICES. PARKS MEMORANDUM #01-12 FROM Michael Rumpf, Director of Planning and Zoning John Wildner, Parks Directo~ Lusia Galav TO CC RE: Quantum NOPC #11 Date January 30, 2001 The Parks Division has reviewed the developer's response to the first review comments to Quantum NOPC #11 The following comments are submitted 1 ) The City Commission did exempt from the Recreation Dedication Requirement of 272 units of the 1,000 units required in the most recent master plan reYision The deyeloper did pledge, however, to provide appropriate public recreation facilities for these units. (To be determined in conjunction with the Parks Division) At a minimum the deyeloper is required to provide 1,000 units - 272 units = 728 D U 728 DUX 015 acres = 10 92 acres assuming V2 credit for private recreation = 546 acres assuming V4 credit for natural reserve = 2 73 acres 2 ) Natural resource credit, if approved by the commission, is subtracted off the Recreation Dedication Requirement. 3 ) According to Chapter 1, Article V Section 3 of the Land Development Regulations, the developer must proYide 5 park elements in order to qualify for V2 credit for private recreation provided 4 ) If the property is not further platted, Recreation Fees or Dedications for the 728 non-exempt dwelling units are due prior to the issuing of their residential building permits. JWjvlr """'7" 'I ~ , MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA March 7, 2000 / XI. LEGAL: A. Ordinances - 2nd Reading - PUBUC HEARING 1. Proposed Ordinance No. 000-02 Re. Providing for determination whether changes to the comprehensive development of regional impact constitutes a substantial deviation under 380 06 F,S. and whether further development of regional impact review is necessary, amending the development order for Quantum Park Attorney Cherof read Proposed Ordinance No. 000-02 by title only David Nom,. Attornev for Ouantum Limited Partners. reported that Condition #5 in Exhibit 0 has been indicated as "rejected" That condition should have been included. The conditions that should be included are #1, #5, #7, #8 and #11. In addition, he requested that typos in the Ordinance be corrected as follows: Page 2 - Second Une - The word "loot" should be changed to "lot" Page 3 Under Lot SOB - Should read, "The land Use Designation has been changed from Office/Industrial to Industrial " ( Based upon- discussion with the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, the reference and request with regard to Lot 91 should be withdrawn. Remove all references to an amendment to Lot 91. Treasure Coast feels the present zoning is more consistent with what is planned. Lusia Galav, Senior Planner in the Planning & Zoning Division, advised that staff concurs with Mr Norris' comments with respect to the four additions he made. Condition #5 required revision to the master plan to be consistent with the application. The applicant has done that and submitted the document this evening. Staff received a letter from the School Board regarding some general comments for the development. Because of its residential nature, they would like to see a bus stop incorporated in the site plan process. In addition, they require the selling agents to notice the public regarding school districts. These were additional comments that have been recommended by staff Staff's final recommendation, based on thorough analysis of all information present, was that the Quantum Park DRI does not constitute a substantial deviation pursuant to Rorida Statutes Chapter 380.06. Mr Norris advised that the Code amendment revision is included as Condition #11. The Comp Plan text change is Condition #10. The Commi5$ion rejected that and the applicant felt that should not be tied to this project. r ~ MAYOR BROENING ANNOUNCED THE PUBUC HEARING. .- 17 ..d4 'It.....,.. v.1..-v". .....,,_. 0." ._. 03/03/00 12 46 FAX 1 5B..l 364 0990 r HCMAHON ASSOC ~ 0021002 J -', ~C:~';1~~?~~!:2~9.S~~~. I.~S'. R ESPONSIV E T!t.~NSI'ORTATlON SOLUTIONS PRINCIPALS: Jo,c"b W. lIf.cMul."", P fl. Red".}. P P!nllTdc. Ph.D Pl:. ASSOCIATES; Jo",pb J O.s.:..,;.. P.IZ. Jo-'a $. O"'olroo Ca.:, A. MOOT<, Po!:. March 2, 2000 Lusia Galav, Senior Planner Planning and Zoning Division City of Boynton Beach 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard POBox 3 10 Boynton Beach, FL 33425-03) 0 RE. Quantum Park DR! NOPC - Amend ment # 1 0 McM Project No. M00037 0 Dear Ms. GaIaV" Based on our review of new mformation that was provIded by the Department of Commumty Affairs (DCA), the Department of Transportation and Pmder Troutman Consultmg,lnc., it is apparent that the proposed Amendment # 1 0 to the Quantum Park Development Order does not constitute a substantial deviation from thl:: original Development Order In particular, the review by DCA deteonined that the changes presented in NOPC Amendment #10 are not expected to exceed the criteria established in Chapter 380.06 (19), Flonda Statutes. Also, revised tables presented by Pinder Troutman Consulting, Inc. resolved several questions that were raised by McMahon Associates during our review In light of this n:w mformatlon, McMahon, Associates concurs that the proposed development does not constitute a substantial deviation. However, while we also agree that the proposed change should not result in a significant increase in traffic from the development mix approved through Amendment #9) we still feel that it is prudent for the CIty to require an analysis of traffic conditions in the immediate area of the SIte, and the impacts of this proposed NOPC. During our revie.... of Amendment # 1 0, it became apparent that traffic impacts associated with changes to dlC original Development Order have not been subjected to scrutiny As an e}(BIIlple, none of the amendments, since Amendment #3, have provided a Substantia! DeviatIOn Determination Chart. It is our opinion that NOPC Amendment # 1 0 provides an opportunity to re-visit the premises that were adopted by the onginal Development Order (which is almost 16 years old), and to determine the current and anticipated future operation of key roadways and intersections adjacent to the DR!. Weare available to consult you on this issue, and provide further clarification, should you find It necessary If you have any questions concerning the aboV'e matter, please do not hesitate to call me. WWB:JJM/hsv f'\M00037 _0\D0CUMENT$\1lrUJ030300.DOC 2240 WOQI"ri~nt R".d, Suite 204 Boynton Beach. Florida 33426 S61.J64 1666 fax 561 .364 0990 e-ll'I;lil: mcmtu'U@2ate.nct S~T"ini tltt Mid-Alancic, Sowrlwut and Ne..., England Rtlfjo,,~ Y."#,...r'{, ~.t 1~ y ;r 0' o rd IJ(J 0 q 1- :. 20 Section 2. The Development Order shall be amended to include the following provisions 1 Master Plan Amendment No 8 to the Master Site Development Plan for Quantum Park, dated May 20, 1997, is hereby approved subject to the following conditions a) A traffic study shall be submitted with any future application requesting a change in the use designation of any lot. The City snail hire at the applicant's expense, an independent traffic consultant to review the traffic study ..~ t"~...;. , ~ ." b) Any upgrades required to the water and sewer systems within the PID due to the intensification of land use proposed with this application must be performed, at the applicant's expense 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 :...~~_";.. .-,6.'~-:>:<-_.~D- ~-- ~- 'M--~--~::,~-.~~-,,!:.-.-.-- local comprehensive plan and local land development regulations, subject to the conditions outlined above C The amendments proposed by Developer are consistent with the recommendations of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council subject to the conditions outlined above Page 4 of 6 Facsimile TRANSMITTAL CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH 100 E. BOYNTON BEACH BOULEVARD POBOX 310 BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 33425-0310 FAX. (561) 742-6259 PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION to: Eugene Gerlica/Quantum Group of Companies fax #. 561-740-2429 date: January 17,2001 from. LusIa Galav, PnncIpal Planner re: Quantum Park - Amendment # 11 Please find attached the first review comments for your project. To stay on the current review schedule, please do the following steps listed below, and bring all documents to the TRC scheduled for January 23,2001 at 1.30 PM 1 RevIse your plans mcorporatmg all comments lIsted herem, mcludmg the addItIOn of notes on plans to confirm response to general statements/ comments, and bnng 10 copIes to the TRC reVIew meetmg (full sets mcludmg all pages ongmally submItted), 2 SubmIt the addItIOnal mformatIOn as requested wIthm the attached comments, (l.e traffic analYSIS, engmeenng certIficatIOn, etc) 3 Prepare a wntten response (7 copIes) consIstmg of a lIst bnefly summanzmg how each comment has been addressed on the revIsed plans or wIth the supplemental mformatIOn mcludmg locatIOn on the plans ( thIS promotes an expedItIOUS 2nd reVIew by staff and your project representatIves dunng the TRC meetmg ),and 4 SubmIt reductIOns (8 Yz X 11) for the proposed SIte plans, elevatIOns and landscapmg plan (thIS IS reqUIred for the final report and publIc presentatIon) Planning and Zoning Division City of Boynton Beach Boynton Beach, Florida 33425 742-6260 Fax: 742-6259 The applIcant should not attend a TRC (2nd reVIew) until all documents have been revIsed and copIed for staff reVIew If plans wIll not be fully revIsed and brought to the scheduled TRC meetIng, contact LUSIa Galav In thIS office by the Thursday pnor to the scheduled meetIng date Projects devIatmg from the ongInal schedule are elIgible for reVIew at subsequent meetmgs, WhICh are held every Tuesday To reschedule, contact Blythe WillIamson, by the Thursday pnor to the Tuesday TRC meetIng that you desIre to attend. The remaInder of the reVIew schedule WIll be adjusted accordIngly If you have questIOns on the attached comments, please contact the respective reVIewer usmg the attached lIst of TRC representatives. Ifthe plans are reasonably complete and all sIgmficant comments are addressed follOWIng TRC (2nd reVIew), the project IS forwarded to the Planmng and Development Board MeetIng that falls approxImately 2 to 3 weeks follOWIng the TRC meetIng. An "*,, by any comment Identifies a comment that must be addressed pnor to mOVIng forward to the PlannIng and Development board. Note' Items recognIzed by staff as typIcally outstandIng at thIS pOInt Include a traffic report and/or confirmation of the traffic concurrency approval from the Palm Beach County dramage certIficatIOn by a lIcensed engIneer, SIgned "RIder to SIte Plan ApplIcation" form and colored elevations of the proposed proJect. ThIS InfOrmatIOn IS necessary for the project to proceed. If you have submItted thIS InfOrmatIOn, please dIsregard thIS note. Engmeenng John Gmdry H. DaVId Kelly Ir 742-6488 742-6285 BuildIng Timothy Large Don Johnson 742-6352 742-6357 FIfe Department Steve Gale Bob Borden 742-6602 364-7382 Ene Wandell 742-6603 364-7382 Pollee Department Marshall Gage Officer John HuntIngton 737-3136 742-6185 Officer Louie ZeIhnger UtilIhes John Gmdry H. DaVId Kelly Jr 742-6488 742-6285 PublIc Works-General Larry QUInn Ken Hall 742-6283 742-6285 Public W orks- Traffic Jeffery Livergood 742-6201 742-6211 Parks & Recreahon John Wildner Barbara Meacham 742-6227 742-6233 Forester/EnvIronmentalIst KeVIn Hallahan KeVIn Hallahan 742-6267 742-6259 Planmng & Zomng Michael Rumpf, LUSIa Galav 742-6262 742-6259 CHAIRMAN IICH\.'dAINISHRDATAIPlanningISHARED\WPIPROJECTSIQuantum Park Amend. #1 lITRe FAX 1st Review.doc 1 1 TRANSMISSIot~ v'ERIFICATIm.j REPORT TIME 01/17/2001 17 19 NAME BOYNTON BEACH P & Z FAX 5613756259 TEL 5613756260 DATE. TIME FAX NO. mAME DURATION PAGE(S) RESULT MODE 01/17 17 14 97402429 00 05 10 09 Ok STANDARD ECM 1 st REVIEW COMMENTS MASTER PLAN MODIFICATION Project name Quantum Park - Amendment #11 File number MPMD 00-007 Reference' 1 SlreVlew plans Identified as Master Plan ModIficatIOn... File # MPMD 00-007 WIth a December 19.2000 Planmng and Zomng Department date stamp markIng. DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS - General Comments. NONE PUBLIC WORKS - Traffic Comments. 1 See attached memorandum dated January 16, 2001 (ExhibIt A) UTILITIES Comments. 2. On the surface, theIr request to change the zomng on Lots 7 through 11, and Lots 23 through 31 (a total of 14 lots) from Office & Industnal to MIxed Use, seems SImple enough. However, WIth the ongtnal DR! for the total park designed for CommercIal, Industnal, Office, or an combInatIon of Office and Industnal, and/or Office, Industnal and CommercIal, both the water and wastewater systems to support these type of antICIpated uses was deSIgned and constructed for those antIcIpated uses. Four (4) hft statIOns were configured to handle the wastewater generatIOn antIcIpated on the 550 acre park. Recently, the CIty allowed the conversion of three (3) lots (#59 through 61) from Office & Industnal to Mixed Use, WhICh Included some 272 apartment umts, some 228 apartment umts awaIt IncorporatIOn into Lots 62 through 67 Now, WIth the antIcipated addItIon of approxImately 500 apartment umts on the 14 lots noted above, the existing utility support facilities could be taxed to then hmIts. A prOVISO needs to be Incorporated into each lot(s) approval process that the deSIgn engineering consultants shall demonstrate that suffiCIent utility system(s) capaCIty IS available to support the proposed use, or they will provide the necessary upgrade(s) to allow for the proposed use. Failure to do so could result In InSUffiCIent utihty support to thIS park, affectIng other current (exIstIng) users. FIRE Comments NONE 1ST REVIEW COMMENTS.doc 01/17/01 2 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT POLICE Comments. NONE ENGINEERING DIVISION Comments. NONE BUILDING DIVISION Comments. 3 Add to the SIte plan drawmg all eXIstmg easements that are shown on the survey Also, add all proposed easements. The location, type and SIze of the easements shall be shown and Idenhfied on the SIte plan. Where apphcable, amend the plans so that structures do not encroach mto an easement. 4 At hme of permit reVIew, proVIde a completed and executed CIty umty ofhtle form. The form shall describe all lots, parcels or tracts combmed as one lot. A copy of the recorded deed WIth legal descnptlOns of each property that IS bemg umfied IS reqmred to be subnutted to process the form. The property owner that is identified on each deed shall match. 5 At time ofpenmt reVIew, submIt signed and sealed workmg draWIngs of the proposed construchon. 6 At hme ofpenmt reVIew, submIt a copy of the recorded resolutlOn that venfies the abandonment of the allev_ rif!ht-of-wav or easement, 7 At tIme ofpenmt review, submit for reVIew an addressmg plan for the project. 8 Add to all plan VIew draWIngs of the SIte a labeled symbol that represents the 10catlOn and penmeter of the hmIts of construction proposed with the subject request. 9 At hme of permit of review, provIde a copy of a CIty-approved waIver of plat shOWIng approval for subdIVIdmg the property The waiver shall describe each lot, parcel or tract ofland. At hme of permIt reVIew, subnut separate surveys of each lot, parcel or tract. For purposes of settmg up property and ownership in the CIty computer, provIde a copy of the recorded deed for each lot, parcel or tract. The recorded deed shall be submitted at hme of penmt reVIew P ARKS AND RECREA nON Comments. 1ST REVIEW COMMENTS doc 01/17/01 3 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT 10 As a condItIon of Issuance of a land development order for residentIal planned umt developments, the developer shall dedIcate land, pay a fee m heu thereof, or both, at the option ofthe city, for park or recreatIOnal purposes and accordmg to the standards and formula m Chapter 1, ArtIcle V m the Land Development Code. The total recreation dedIcatIOn credIt will be calculated as follows. 1000 d. u. x 015 acres = 15 acres Y2 credIt may be gIVen agamst the reqUIrement of land dedication or payment fees. Y2 private recreatIOn credIt will be calculated as follows. 15 acres /2 = 7.5 acres The Developer may want to conSIder dedIcation of the land, or a combmatIon of dedicatIOn and fee. 11 Ifthe property IS not reqUIred to be platted, the recreation dedICatIon fee will be due pnor to the bUIldmg pemnt bemg Issued. 12. ProVIde to the Parks DiVISIOn at the close of the constructIon contract as-built plans showmg locatIOns of ImgatIOn hnes m the nghts-of-ways and medIans. 13 In order to earn Y2 recreatIOn credIt, the developer needs to proVIde a rmmmum of 5 of the local park baSIC reqUIrements hsted below, or a combinatIOn of such, and other recreatIOnal Improvements that will meet recreation park needs of future resIdents of the area. a) Children's Play Apparatus Area b) Landscape Park-Like and QUIet Areas c) Family PIcmc Areas d) Game Court Areas e) Turf Playfield f) SWlTIunmg Pool & Lawn Areas g) Recreation Center Buildmg FORESTER/ENVIRONMENT ALIST Comments. NONE PLANNING AND ZONING Comments. 14 The NotIce of Proposed Change (NOPC) document WhICh accompames thIS Master Plan RevlSlon has errors m the Land Use Acreage Table on page 3 The Office/Industrial (01) category shows eXIstmg acreage as 84 35-It should be 87 74 The Office/IndustnallCommercIal (01C) category shows proposed and existing acreage as 26.33-it should be 22.94 Please correct and resubmit 1 ST REVIEW COMMENTS.doc 01/17 /01 4 DEPARTMENTS the table. 15 Tnangle notes 1-3 have been removed from the Master Plan. Note 1 corresponds to Lot 91, 47A and 47B Note 2 corresponds to Lot 65B and Note 3 corresponds to Lot 17 ProvIde wntten explanatIOn for thIS reVlSlon. 16. Master Plan shows a new note WhICh prOVIdes for the ReSIdential dwellmg umt converSIOn to lndustnal use. The second such note refers to a converSIOn of one ReSIdential umt to 725 square feet of Industnal. The NOPC mdIcates thIS as Office use not Industnal. ProVIde juStificatIOn for these converSIOn formulas WhICh were not mcluded m the last NOPC 17 Approval of the Master Plan IS contmgent upon a findmg of no substantial deVIation by the CIty ThIS IS based on the followmg sections of the Flonda Statues. a) Chapter 380 06 (19(b) 9 An increase m the number of dwelhng umts by five (5) percent or 50 umts, whIchever is greater b) Chapter 38006 (19)(e) 5 c. Not Wlthstandmg any proVISIOn of paragraph (b) to the contrary, a proposed change consIstmg of SImultaneous mcreases and decreases of at least two of the uses Wlthm an authonzed multI-use development of regIOnal Impact whIch was ongmally approved WIth more than three uses specIfied m 380 0651 (3)( c), (d), (f) and (g) and reSIdential use The apphcatIon as presented IS presumed to be a substantial deVIation. ThIS presumptIOn may be rebutted by clear and conVIncmg evidence. The apphcant must prOVIde addItional mformatIOn before a determmatIOn of no substantial deVIation is made The addItional informatIOn mcludes. -ProvIde a revised traffic analysIs based on Items dIscussed m comments #1 and #18 -Demonstrate how the proposed project IS conSIstent with the local comprehensIve plan. -ProVIde an updated projection of water and sewer demands. 18. The traffic analysIs for NOPC #1 dated 12/18/00 IS flawed. The followmg mconsistencIes were found. a) Office square footage shown m the traffic analYSIS 725,850 is not conSIstent WIth what IS shown as a note on the Master Plan, 888,850 Please clanfy b) The total square footage m the traffic analysIs equals 3,323,718 square feet. The total generated from the amounts shown m the notes is 3,514 618 Please clanfy c) A different A.M. and P.M. Peak Tnp Generation Rate IS bemg used for the office and convemence store category than was used for Amendment #10 Refer to Pmder Troutman letters dated 2/17/00, 2/28/00 and 12/18/00 Please clanfy 19 Under the conditIOn of Amendment #8 to the Quantum Park Development Order and Chapter 3, ArtIcle N of the Land Development RegulatIOns, a INCLUDE REJECT 1 ST REVIEW COMMENTS.doc 01117/01 5 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT traffic analysIs IS reqUlred and was sublllitted for thIS Master Plan approval. ThIS traffic analysIs will be reVIewed by the Palm Beach County Traffic DIVlslon. In heu of an mdependent traffic consultant, the CIty'S Pubhc Works Department staff Wlll review the traffic study The cost of the reVlew fee IS based on hourly salanes plus 35% for funge benefits. 20 ThIS NOPC/Master Plan submIttal did not mc1ude a prehlllinary SIte plan or JustIficatlOn for the requested change. ProVlde a wntten JuStIficatlOn for the proposed change. JustIficatlOn and data shall support elilllinatIon of the land available for mdustnal uses based on city-wlded needs and supply (update Land Use Distribution and needs and supply data withm ComprehensIve Plan.), document fiscal Impact of the mcrease m resIdentIal land uses, and be based on market data that favors the proposed uses over the currently desIgnated land uses. 21 IndIcate the target market for the reSIdential umts. 22. In accordance Wlth Chapter 2, SectlOn 7, a Master Site Plan will be reqUlred for thIS mixed use pod. A mixed use pod, when complete, will have all the following uses. a) MultI-family reSIdential b) CommercIal/retail c) Office/professlOnal 23 Staff recommends that the NOPClMaster Plan approval mclude a condItIon which requues a mmimum of 20 acres of land desIgnated as mlXed use be developed Wlth the fulllllix of commerCial/retail/and office before the addItional 500 umts of reSIdentIal may be constructed. 24 Approval of the Master Plan IS contmgent upon the apphcant fihng for and recelVing approval for a text amendment to the ComprehenslVe Plan to perrmt residentIal use in the Industrial land use category MWRlblw J:ISHRDATAIPLANNINGISHAREDlWPIPROJECTSIQUANTUM PARK AMEND. #11\QUANTUM PARK AMENDMENT #11- MPMDl1ST REVIEW COMMENTS.DOC EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT INTEROFFICE l\'IEMORANDUM TO Mike Rumpf, DIrector ofPlannmg and Zomng FROM. Jeffrey R. LIvergood, DIrector ofPubhc Works DATE January 16,2001 SUBJECT Quantum NOPC #11 I have reVIewed the petItIOner's request to modIfy the overall sIte plan for Quantum Park and offer my traffic-related comments. It IS apparent that there IS a long hIStOry of cooperatIOn between the developer and the CIty and It IS desIrable to contmue buildmg upon thIS spmt. However, traffic Impact from thIS development will affect many thousands of people each day Therefore, It IS m both the CIty'S and developer's best mterest to msure that traffic generated by the development can be reasonably accommodated both mternal and external to the sIte Based upon my bnef reVIew of the many development documents, It appears that the Quantum Park DR! has been vested wIth a total of 63,752 daily vehIcle trIps. However, each subsequent reVISIOn of the DR! has suggested a new allowance for daily vehIcle trIps and the assocIated peak hour generated traffic Agam, all allowances are based upon the total trIps denved m 1984 based upon vanous use types as well as generatIOn rates m effect at that tIme. Although I have not had the OppOrtunIty to reVIew the mItIal traffic report developed m 1984, I can only assume that the report conSIdered off SIte traffic growth and other development m the Boynton Beach area. It IS qUIte common for local governments to "vest" certam developments wIth allowable traffic generatIOn because often times development build out occurs over multiple years. It IS Impractical to analyze traffic generatIon as part of each construction phase. ThIS would Impart a sIgmficant burden upon a developer who must secure fundmg and tenant commItments. However, local government and the developer must also recognIze that development extended over long, and unexpected, pen ods will cause many of the ongmal assumptIOns to be changed, often large m scale AssumptIOns related to types of land use as well as regIOnal traffic growth are all unknown vanab1es when proJectmg many years mto the future The developer IS now requestmg further modIficatIOns to the vanous land uses m the approved DRI. These changes, while not SIgnIficantly a1tenng the overall traffic generated m a 24-hour penod, will most certamly change the peak hour traffic flows. Thus, concerns about the capaCIty of both the mternal and external roadway networks anse I belIeve It prudent to reqUIre the developer to address traffic Issues as a result of Plan Amendment #11 It IS mcumbent upon both the CIty and developer to msure that traffic related assumptions developed nearly 17 years ago remam valId. The developer should prOVIde further detail about the vanous land uses m the DRI and then allocate generated traffic to known condItIons on the surroundmg artenal roadway network mstead of traffic condItIons that were prOjected m 1984 EXHIBIT "A" I recommend that the developer provIde the followmg addItIOnal mformatIon. 1 Measurement of eXIstmg traffic condItIons (2001) on Gateway Blvd. between 1-95 and Congress Avenue 2 EvaluatIon of eXIstmg (2001) Level of ServIce (LOS) at all sIgnalIzed mtersectIOns between, and mcludmg, 1-95 and Congress Avenue 3 IdentIficatIOn of traffic generatIon from all development WIth pnor CIty approval. 4 IdentIficatIOn of future traffic generatIon from antICIpated build out of Quantum Park. S Assessment of background traffic growth on Gateway Blvd between 2001 and the antICIpated build out date of the entIre Quantum Park development. 6 EvaluatIOn of LOS along Gateway Blvd. and at all SIgnalIzed mtersectIons gIVen full build out of Quantum Park and assummg normal growth m background traffic 7 The traffic report should detail traffic condItIons m both the mornmg and afternoon peak hours. LOS for each penod should be clearly IdentIfied at all referenced locatIons. 8 The traffic report should determme If addItIOnal on SIte or off SIte Improvements are necessary to support the proposed development. Summary The traffic reports presented thus far by the developer have done a satIsfactory Job, If one assumes that the current mIX of land use IS conSIstent WIth the vanous land uses as approved in 1984 However, as would be expected, a changmg economIC clImate has brought modIficatIOns to the development mIX. We would expect thIS of any qualIty developer such as Quantum. However, m addItIon to realIzmg that economIC demands are forcmg development modIficatIOn, we must assume that other changes to traffic condItIOns on the surroundmg roadway network have occurred, or will occur, as well. Thus, It IS only logIcal to fully evaluate the changed traffic condItIons as we evaluate the modIfied land uses. They are mterrelated. JEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM NO PZ 00-362 TO' TRC MEMBERS Bob Borden, Deputy Fire Marshal Kevin Hallahan, Forester/Environmentalist Louie Zeitinger, Police Department John Huntington, Police Department H David Kelley Jr , Utilities Department Timothy K. Large, Building Division Ken Hall, (Engineering) Public Works-General Jeffery Livergood, Public Works-Traffic Barbara Meacham, Parks Division H David Kelley Jr Engineering Department Lusia Galav, Planning Division FROM f;~ Michael W Rumpf Director of Planning and Zoning DATE. December 26,2000 RE. SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCEDURES 1 ST Review - Master Plan Modification Approval Project Quantum Park Amendment #11 Location - Quantum Park Agent Eugene Gerlica/Quantum Group of Companies File No - MPMD 00-007 Find attached for your review the plans and exhibits for the above-referenced project. Please review the plans and exhibits and transmit formal written comments or e-mail to Blythe Williamson and me no later than 5.00 P.M. on January 12. 2001. When preparing your comments, please separate them into two categories, code deficiencies with code sections referenced and recommendations that you believe will enhance the project. Adhering to the following review guidelines will promote a comprehensive review and enable the applicant to efficiently obtain Technical Review Committee approval 1 Use the review standards specified in Part IV, Land Development Regulations, Site Plan Review and the applicable code sections of the Code of Ordinances to review and formulate comments 2 The documents submitted for the project were determined to be substantially complete with the exception of traffic data, however if the data provided to meet the submittal requirements is insufficient to properly evaluate and process the project based on the review standards or the documents show code deficiencies, additional data and/or corrections should be requested by the reviewer by contacting Lusia Galav, or myself 3 Each comment shall reference the section of the code that is incorrectly depicted on the documents 4 Technical Review Committee member(s) shall identify in their comments when the plans depict or Page 2 when the location and installation of their departmental required improvements may conflict with other departmental improvements 5 When a TRC Member finds a code deficiency that is outside of his/her review responsibility, the comment and the specific code section may be included in their review comments with the name of the appropriate TRC Member that is responsible for the review specified 6 If a TRC member finds the plans acceptable, he/she shall forward a memorandum, within the time frame stated above, to me The memorandum shall state that the plans are approved and that they do not have any comments on the plans submitted for review and that they recommend the project be forwarded through the approval process All comments shall be typed, addressed and transmitted or e-mailed to Blythe Williamson and I for distribution to the applicant. Please include the name and phone number of the reviewer on this memorandum or e-mail Lusia Galav will be the Planning and Zoning staff member coordinating the review of the project. First review comments will be transmitted to the applicant along with a list of Technical Review Committee (TRC) members. MWR.blw Attachment XC Steve Gale, Fire Marshal Marshall Gage, Police Department John Guidry, Utilities Director and Interim Director of Engineering Don Johnson, Building Division Christine Roberts, Director of Public Works Central File J:ISHRDATAIPlanningISHAREDlWPIPROJECTSIQuantum Park Arrend. #11ITRC Memo for Plans Review Richardson Bldg..doc PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM NO 00-000 TO FROM Lusia Galav, Principal Planner Dick Hudson, seni~nner January 16, 2001 DATE SUBJECT Quantum Park DRI Amendment #11 MPMD 00-008 Contrary to response 11 1 contained in the NOPC accompanying the Site Plan Modification application, the Comprehensive Plan must be amended to accommodate the addition of residential uses to the DRI The definition of the "Industrial" land use category, found in Policy 1 16 1, of the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan, reads as follows 'The uses allowed in this land use category shall be limited to, but shall not necessarily include, the following Industrial uses, research and development, wholesale and distribution, business and repair services, warehousing and storage, transportation, communication, and utility facilities, retail sale of home improvement goods, tools, machinery, and the like, Adult Entertainment Establishments, trade and industrial schools, major recreation facilities such as racetracks, arenas, amusement parks, exposition halls, and the like, offices and restaurants which are accessory to the above uses, temporary amusements, revival tents, and the like, uses allowed in the Office Commercial, Local Retail Commercial, and Public and Private Governmental/Institutional land use categories, if approved as such in a planned industrial development; provided, however, that all of the abovementioned zoning districts are shown on the Future Land Use Map within the Industrial land use category " Since residential uses are not a listed, permitted use, the Comprehensive Plan must be amended to specifically allow residential uses within planned industrial developments The limiting of residential uses to planned industrial developments is necessary because of policies 1 10 1 and 1 10.2 of the Future Land Use Element, which address the incompatibility of residential land uses in close proximity to industrial land uses and provide directions for ameliorating those incompatibilities The Comprehensive Plan encourages mixed residential/commercial uses, commercial/ industrial uses, and commercial/warehouse uses It does not encourage industrial/ residential uses Therefore, response 11.2 should not be used to support the site plan modification There should be data included to support the implication made in the NOPC that the proposed housing will be priced within the range of affordability for a majority of workers in the DRI and also that commercial development within the DRI will primarily serve the occupants of the residential units Both of which would lessen dependence upon the automobile There should be a statement as to how much of the proposed and unbuilt commercial square footage will be built to primarily serve the residential portion of the DRI, as well as a firm commitment on the part of the developers that up to fifty (50) % of the commercial development to serve the needs of the residential component of the DRI will be constructed simultaneously with the first 500 residential units The remainder of the commercial square footage to serve the remaining residential needs should be constructed at the same time the second 500 residential units are constructed Finally, there should be a firm commitment that the areas of the DRI shown on the site plan as Mixed Use will in fact be developed with a true mixture and integration of uses J: ISHRDA T A IPlanning\Hudson\QUANTUM MPMDOO-008.doc Galav Lusia From Sent: To Subject: Livergood, Jeffrey Tuesday January 16 2001 8:23 AM Galav Lusia Quantum Lusia, Please give me a call sometime today after you get in to discuss the Quantum traffic study I have reviewed the material you provided me and find it difficult to fairly evaluate the data Because I am not familiar with the history of this project, written or otherwise, I want to be sure that any comments I will formally provide keep us out of hot water so to speak. My initial comments would be similar to the following. 1 Many years have passed since the initial traffic study 2 Many assumptions in the original study are very likely no longer valid 3 Traffic generation rates have changed over the years 4 Today's baseline traffic in the area mayor may not be the same as originally assumed 5 Full actual impact of the Gateway/l-95 interchange has not been formally considered or assessed Normally with long term developments such as Quantum cities are compelled to approve phased construction of original site plans irregardless of the time required to complete construction In these instances, the developers do not change their plans thus commitments of approval must remain intact. However when a number of years pass and developers make substantial changes in use of a property, it is absolutely essential that a new traffic study be developed and "start from scratch" Changing to multi family housing at the scale proposed is a substantial use change I am leaning toward recommending that a new study be prepared by the developer We must assess existing traffic conditions on Gateway from 1-95 to Congress We need to assess impacts to intersections and we need to carefully consider peak hour levels of service With respect to level of service, I can't find anything in the correspondence you provided that specifies the limit of acceptable level of service For example I have always assumed that the upper limit of LOS 0 is the maximum that we should accept. This however is based upon regional perception of traffic congestion South Florida seems more tolerant of congestion than is Illinois With respect to a new traffic study I have experienced developments where a new study was required of the developer and, based upon the new figures developers were allowed to build at a higher density than was originally approved So a new study can at times be in the interest of the developer In the case of Quantum my initial opinion is that the proposed multi family housing will not negatively impact the traffic limitations placed on the development. However the developer can enhance credibility by providing a new study The present revisions of years old traffic studies do not provide the assurances needed to confirm my assessment. Although I have an opinion I can not formally state this opinion without a more current traffic assessment. Jeff Jeffrey R. Uvergood Director of Public Works City of Boynton Beach MW t! emrna~ LEISURE SERVICES. PARKS MEMORANDUM #01-04 TO' Michael Rumpf Director of Planning & Zoning FROM Barbara J Meacham Par Landscape Planner ~CVVVl THRU John Wildner Parks Director RE Quantum Park Amendment #11 Date January 11 2001 The Parks Division has reviewed the revised site plan for Quantum Park Amendment #11 The following recreation-related comments are submitted As a condition of issuance of a land development order for residential planned unit developments, the developer shall dedicate land, pay a fee in lieu thereof or both at the option of the city for park or recreational purposes and according to the standards and formula in Chapter 1 Article V in the Land Development Code The total recreation dedication credit will be calculated as follows 1 000 dux 01 5 acres = 1 5 acres % credit may be given against the requirement of land dedication or payment of fees. % private recreation credit will be calculated as follows. 15 acres / 2 = 7 5 acres The Developer may want to consider dedication of the land, or a combination of dedication and fee 2. If the property is not required to be platted the recreation dedication fee will be due prior to the building permit being issued 3 Provide to the Parks Division at the close of the construction contract as-built plans showing locations of irrigation lines in the rights-of-ways and medians. 4 In order to earn % recreation credit, the developer needs to provide a minimum of 5 of the local park basic requirements listed below or a combination of such and other recreational improvements that will meet recreation park needs of future residents of the area. a. Children s Play Apparatus Area b Landscape Park-Like & Quiet Areas c. Family Picnic Areas d Game Court Areas e Turf Playfield f Swimming Pool & Lawn Areas g Recreation Center Building Plannine: Memorandum. Forester / Environmentalist To LusIa Galav, PnncIpal Planner From KevIn J Hallahan, Forester / EnvIronmentalIst Subject: Quaantum Park-Amendment # 11 MPMD-00-008 1 st RevIew Date January 4, 2001 I have no comment on the proposed changes to the Master Plan. The project should contInue In the normal reVIew process. Kjh Xc Blythe WillIamson thru E-maIl file DEPARTMENT OF ENGINEERING MEMORANDUM NO 01-010 THRU Michael W Rumpf, DIrector of Planmng and Zomng John A. GUIdry, InterIm DIrector OfEngUIeenng~ H. DavId Kelley, Jr, PE/PSM, CIvll/Utthty Engmee/~ Ken Hall, Engmeenng Plans AnalystQ' January 11,2001 TO' THRU FROM. DATE RE. QUANTUM PARK AMENDMENT #11 MPMD 00-007 (1sT REVIEW) ThIS department IS now assIstmg the Department of Pubhc Works m the plan techmcal reVIew process. Our engmeenng reVIew WIll be preceded by our reVIew on behalf of the Department of Pubhc Works. Therefore, we offer the followmg comments on the above noted proJect: PUBLIC WORKS A. No comment on the request to change the zomng on Lots 7 through 11, and Lots 23 through 31 (a total of 14 lots) from Office and Office & Industnal to Mixed Use. ENGINEERING 1 No comment on the request to change the zomng on Lots 7 through 11, and Lots 23 through 31 (a total of 14 lots) from Office and Office & Industnal to Mixed Use JAG:HDK.KRH/ck Xc FIle C'\My Documents\Quantum Park Amendment # 11 1st Review Engr Comments.doc DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT BUILDING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO 01-009 TO Michael Rumpf, Planmng & Zomng DIrector TImothy K. Large, Bmldmg Code Adnllmstr~ January 8, 2001 FROM. DATE RE Quantum Park Amendment # 11 Site Plan (MPMD 00-007) - 1 st review comments We have revIewed the subject plans and recommend that the request be forwarded for Board reVIew WIth the understandIng that all remaInIng comments WIll be shown In complIance on the workIng drawIngs submItted for permIts. Buildin~ Division (Site Specific and Permit Comments) - Timothy K. Lar~e (561) 742-6352 1 Add to the SIte plan drawIng all eXIstIng easements that are shown on the survey Also, add all proposed easements. The locatIOn, type and SIze of the easements shall be shown and IdentIfied on the SIte plan. Where applIcable, amend the plans so that structures do not encroach Into an easement. 2 At tIme of permIt reVIew, prOVIde a completed and executed CIty umty of tItle form. The form shall describe all lots, parcels or tracts combIned as one lot. A copy of the recorded deed WIth legal descnptIOns of each property that IS beIng umfied IS reqUIred to be submItted to process the form. The property owner that IS IdentIfied on each deed shall match. 3 At tIme of permIt reVIew, submIt SIgned and sealed workIng drawIngs of the proposed construct! on. 4 At tIme of permIt reVIew, submIt a copy of the recorded resolutIOn that venfies the abandonment of the allev. right-of-wav or easement 5 At tIme of permIt reVIew, submIt for reVIew an addreSSIng plan for the proJect. 6 Add to all plan VIew drawIngs of the SIte a labeled symbol that represents the locatIOn and penmeter of the lImIts of constructIOn proposed WIth the subject request. Bmldmg DIVISIOn Memo No 01-009 to Michael Rumpf RE Quantum Park Amendment # 11 Site Plan (MPMD 00-007) - 1 st review comments January 8, 2001 Page Two 7 At tIme ofpenmt reVIew, prOVIde a copy ofa City-approved waIver of plat showmg approval for subdlvldmg the property The waIver shall describe each lot, parcel or tract of land. At tIme ofpenmt reVIew, submIt separate surveys of each lot, parcel or tract. For purposes of settmg up property and ownershIp m the CIty computer, proVIde a copy ofthe recorded deed for each lot, parcel or tract. The recorded deed shall be submItted at tIme of permIt reVIew TKL:rd J '\SHRDA T A \Development\Building-6870\Documents\TRC\MPMD 00-007 Quantum Park Amendment II I st review comments. doc DEPARTMENT OF UTILITIES MEMORANDUM NO 01-012 DATE Michael W Rumpf, DIrector of Planmng and Zonmg John A. GUidry, Vuhues DIrector ~ H. DavId Kelley, Jr , PE/PSM, UtIlIty Engmee~ January 11,2001 TO THRU FROM RE QUANTUM PARK AMENDMENT #11 MPMD 00-007 (1st REVIEW) We offer the followmg comments on the above noted project: On the surface, theIr request to change the zonmg on Lots 7 through 11, and Lots 23 through 31 (a total of 14 lots) from Office and Office & IndustrIal to Mixed Use, seems sImple enough. However, WIth the orIgmal DR! for the total park deSIgned for CommercIal, IndustrIal, Office, or an combmatIOn of Office and IndustrIal, and/or Office, IndustrIal and CommercIal, both the water and wastewater systems to support these type of antIcIpated uses was deSIgned and constructed for those antICIpated uses. Four (4) lIft statIOns were configured to handle the wastewater generatIOn antICIpated on the 550 acre park. Recently, the CIty allowed the converSIOn of three (3) lots (#59 through 61) from Office & IndustrIal to Mixed Use, whIch mcluded some 272 apartment umts, some 228 apartment umts awaIt mcorporatIOn unto Lots 62 through 67 Now, WIth the antIcIpated addItIon of approxImately 500 apartment umts on the 14 lots noted above, the eXIstmg utIlIty support faCIlItIes could be taxed to theIr lImIts A prOVISO needs to be mcorporated mto each lot(s) approval process that the deSIgn engmeerIng consultant shall demonstrate that suffiCIent utIlIty system(s) capaCIty IS avaIlable to support the proposed use, or they will proVIde the necessary upgrade(s) to allow for the proposed use. Failure to do so could result mto msufficIent utIlIty support to thIS park, effectmg other current (exIstmg) users. JAG:HDKfck Xc Georganne Barden Engmeermg FIle C"\My Documents\Quantum Park Amendment # 11 1st Rev Utilities.doc DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT MEMORANDUM NO PZ 00-362 TO. TRC MEMBERS Bob Borden, Deputy Fire Marshal Kevin Hallahan , Forester/Environmentalist Louie Zeitinger, Police Department John Huntington, Police Department H. David Kelley Jr , Utilities Department Timothy K. Large, Building Division Ken Hall, (Engineering) Public Works-General Jeffery Livergood, Public Works-Traffic Barbara Meacham, Parks Division H David Kelley Jr , Engineering Department Lusia Galav, Planning Division ~ &N-~/Jf J.,4?Y~7~? Ac:,c~ Z>/~~/ FROM Michael W Rumpf Director of Planning and Zoning DATE. December 26, 2000 RE. SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCEDURES 1 ST Review - Master Plan Modification Approval Project Quantum Park Amendment #11 Location - Quantum Park Agent Eugene GerlicalQuantum Group of Companies File No - MPMD 00-007 Find attached for your review the plans and exhibits for the above-referenced project. Please review the plans and exhibits and transmit formal written comments or e-mail to Blythe Williamson and me no later than 5:00 P.M. on January 12. 2001. When preparing your comments, please separate them into two categories, code deficiencies with code sectiolls referenced and recommendations that you believe will enhance the project. Adhering to the following review guidelines will promote a comprehensive review and enable the applicant to efficiently obtain Technical Review Committee approval: 1 Use the review standards specified in Part IV, Land Development Regulations, Site Plan Review and the applicable code sections of the Code of Ordinances to review and formulate comments. 2 The documents submitted for the project were determined to be substantially complete with the exception of traffic data, however, if the data provided to meet the submittal requirements is insufficient to properly evaluate and process the project based on the review standards or the documents show code deficiencies, additional data and/or corrections should be requested by the reviewer by contacting Lusia Galav, or myself 3 Each comment shall reference the section of the code that is incorrectly depicted on the documents 4 Technical Review Committee member(s) shall identify in their comments when the plans depict or when the location and installation of their deDartmental reauired imDrovements may conflict with CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO' Mike Rumpf, DIrector of P1anmng and Zomng FROM. Jeffrey R. LIvergood, DIrector of PublIc Works DATE January 16,2001 SUBJECT Quantum NOPC #11 I have reVIewed the petItIOner's request to modIfY the overall SIte plan for Quantum Park and offer my traffic-related comments. It IS apparent that there IS a long hIstOry of cooperatIOn between the developer and the CIty and It IS desirable to contInue buildIng upon thIs spmt. However, traffic Impact from thIS development will affect many thousands of people each day Therefore, It IS In both the CIty'S and developer's best Interest to Insure that traffic generated by the development can be reasonably accommodated both Internal and external to the SIte. Based upon my bnef reVIew of the many development documents, It appears that the Quantum Park DR! has been vested With a total of 63,752 daily vehIcle trIps. However, each subsequent reVISIon of the DR! has suggested a new allowance for daily vehIcle trIps and the assocIated peak hour generated traffic AgaIn, all allowances are based upon the total trIps denved In 1984 based upon varIOUS use types as well as generatIon rates In effect at that tIme Although I have not had the opportumty to reVIew the inItIal traffic report developed In 1984, I can only assume that the report conSIdered off SIte traffic growth and other development In the Boynton Beach area. It IS qUIte common for local governments to "vest" certaIn developments With allowable traffic generatIOn because often tImes development build out occurs over multIple years. It is ImpractIcal to analyze traffic generatIOn as part of each constructIon phase. ThIS would Impart a sIgmficant burden upon a developer who must secure fundIng and tenant commItments. However, local government and the developer must also recognIze that development extended over long, and unexpected, pen ods will cause many of the ongInal assumptIOns to be changed, often large In scale. AssumptIons related to types of land use as well as regIOnal traffic growth are all unknown variables when projectIng many years Into the future The developer IS now requestIng further modIficatIOns to the vanous land uses In the approved DR!. These changes, while not SIgnIficantly altenng the overall traffic generated In a 24-hour penod, will most certaInly change the peak hour traffic flows. Thus, concerns about the capaCIty of both the Internal and external roadway networks arise I belIeve It prudent to reqUIre the developer to address traffic Issues as a result of Plan Amendment #11 It IS Incumbent upon both the CIty and developer to Insure that traffic related assumptions developed nearly 17 years ago remaIn valId. The developer should prOVIde further detail about the vanous land uses In the DR! and then allocate generated traffic to known condItIons on the surroundIng artenal roadway network Instead of traffic condItIons that were prOjected In 1984 I recommend that the developer proVIde the folloWing addItIonal InformatIon. 1 Measurement of eXIstIng traffic condItIons (2001) on Gateway Blvd. between 1-95 and Congress Avenue. 2. EvaluatIon of eXIstIng (2001) Level of SerVIce (LOS) at all SIgnalIzed IntersectIons between, and IncludIng, 1-95 and Congress Avenue. 3 IdentIficatIon of traffic generatIon from all development With pnor City approval. 4 IdentIficatIOn of future traffic generatIon from antICIpated build out of Quantum Park. 5 Assessment of background traffic growth on Gateway Blvd between 2001 and the antICIpated build out date of the entIre Quantum Park development. 6 EvaluatIOn of LOS along Gateway Blvd. and at all SIgnalIzed IntersectIons gIVen full build out of Quantum Park and assumIng normal growth In background traffic 7 The traffic report should detail traffic condItIons In both the mornIng and afternoon peak hours. LOS for each penod should be clearly IdentIfied at all referenced locatIOns. 8 The traffic report should determIne If addItIOnal on SIte or off SIte Improvements are necessary to support the proposed development. Summary The traffic reports presented thus far by the developer have done a satIsfactory Job, If one assumes that the current mIX of land use is conSIstent With the vanous land uses as approved In 1984 However, as would be expected, a changIng economIC clImate has brought modIficatIOns to the development mIX. We would expect thIS of any qualIty developer such as Quantum. However, In addItIOn to realIZIng that economIC demands are forCIng development modIficatIon, we must assume that other changes to traffic condItIons on the surroundIng roadway network have occurred, or will occur, as well. Thus, It IS only lOgical to fully evaluate the changed traffic condItIons as we evaluate the modIfied land uses. They are Interrelated. EXHIBIT "A" CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO' Mike Rumpf, DIrector of Planmng and Zomng FROM. Jeffrey R. Livergood, DIrector ofPubhc Works DATE January 16,2001 SUBJECT Quantum NOPC #11 I have revIewed the petItIoner's request to modIfY the overall SIte plan for Quantum Park and offer my traffic-related comments. It IS apparent that there IS a long hIStOry of cooperatIOn between the developer and the CIty and It IS deSIrable to contInue buildIng upon thIS spmt. However, traffic Impact from thIS development will affect many thousands of people each day Therefore, It IS In both the CIty'S and developer's best Interest to Insure that traffic generated by the development can be reasonably accommodated both Internal and external to the SIte Based upon my bnef reVIew of the many development documents, It appears that the Quantum Park DR! has been vested WIth a total of 63,752 daily vehIcle trIpS. However, each subsequent reVlSlon of the DR! has suggested a new allowance for daily vehIcle trIps and the aSSOCIated peak hour generated traffic AgaIn, all allowances are based upon the total trIps denved In 1984 based upon vanous use types as well as generatIOn rates In effect at that tIme. Although I have not had the opportumty to reVIew the InItIal traffic report developed In 1984, I can only assume that the report conSIdered off SIte traffic growth and other development In the Boynton Beach area. It IS qUIte common for local governments to "vest" certaIn developments WIth allowable traffic generatIOn because often times development build out occurs over multIple years. It IS ImpractIcal to analyze traffic generatIOn as part of each constructIOn phase. ThIS would Impart a SIgnIficant burden upon a developer who must secure fundIng and tenant commItInents. However, local government and the developer must also recognIze that development extended over long, and unexpected, penods will cause many of the ongInal assumptIOns to be changed, often large In scale AssumptIOns related to types of land use as well as regIOnal traffic growth are all unknown varIables when projectIng many years Into the future The developer IS now requestIng further modIficatIons to the vanous land uses In the approved DR!. These changes, while not SIgnIficantly altenng the overall traffic generated In a 24-hour penod, will most certaInly change the peak hour traffic flows. Thus, concerns about the capaCIty of both the Internal and external roadway networks arise I belIeve It prudent to reqUIre the developer to address traffic Issues as a result of Plan Amendment #11 It IS Incumbent upon both the CIty and developer to Insure that traffic related assumptIOns developed nearly 17 years ago remaIn vahd. The developer should prOVIde further detail about the vanous land uses In the DR! and then allocate generated traffic to known condItIons on the surroundIng artenal roadway network Instead of traffic condItIons that were projected In 1984 EXHIBIT "A" I recommend that the developer provIde the follOWIng addItIonal InformatIon. 1 Measurement of eXIstIng traffic condItIons (2001) on Gateway Blvd. between 1-95 and Congress Avenue 2. EvaluatIOn of eXIstIng (2001) Level of ServIce (LOS) at all SIgnalIzed IntersectIOns between, and IncludIng, 1-95 and Congress Avenue 3 IdentIficatIon of traffic generatIOn from all development WIth pnor City approval. 4 IdentIficatIOn of future traffic generatIOn from antIcIpated build out of Quantum Park. 5 Assessment of background traffic growth on Gateway Blvd between 2001 and the antIcIpated buIld out date of the entIre Quantum Park development. 6 EvaluatIOn of LOS along Gateway Blvd. and at all SIgnalIzed IntersectIons gIVen full build out of Quantum Park and assumIng normal growth In background traffic 7 The traffic report should detail traffic condItIons In both the mornIng and afternoon peak hours. LOS for each penod should be clearly IdentIfied at all referenced locatIOns. 8 The traffic report should determIne If addItIonal on SIte or off SIte Improvements are necessary to support the proposed development. Summary The traffic reports presented thus far by the developer have done a satIsfactory Job, If one assumes that the current mIX of land use IS conSIstent WIth the vanous land uses as approved In 1984 However, as would be expected, a changIng economIC clImate has brought modIficatIons to the development mIX. We would expect thIS of any qualIty developer such as Quantum. However, In addItIon to realIZIng that economIC demands are forCIng development modIficatIOn, we must assume that other changes to traffic condItIons on the surroundIng roadway network have occurred, or will occur, as well. Thus, It IS only logIcal to fully evaluate the changed traffic condItIons as we evaluate the modIfied land uses. They are Interrelated. 1- 0- 0, cC c:G j-- -~ Tc,J5flTtCc-~l\sh....(( n~d....(t s [ ( ~s.s S. '-'p F~ -f f~_j ( Mint'- -fr:3.,- ~f\ ~ /0.- nc!:- d- VolLt (o-f.,fc ~'h.1,-,.51\.. v-( Uses bcs-s~ ~4'- . C-r~ - r- ,c...C~ }1e_~. ~._ . \ ~&'IOd" (~(t::" 1"[- .~.~~ ~y r-- CL")nL .$'1'1' ?~-' q,4cAlr'" ;.f,,?..,r~ [~~ .c '-# / /;~n(r' ~r- ~ ~~C-<-v--"l~V'-+ { t~.lt:;:~ /--<5: <!-/ /h?pc<c:. + " r ~ ;>>c~-.S~ (")0 ,,~ T C"'~~~ }y"- /b Yc:s.-c-c;,,-.,4~r r::~- ~~ _ o-~d7 .. I P ./ L.... ~,'&&'Y5 ke 4 r.li~ l;-'t fit I"n:::..../-.L:.. />''--'T . /507 Ii',! ,,~. _ . y Y- ....~ .. / p?... ~ ;-rf y- / .r{.t-.... ~ bn...J <:'"../ c::J'L' //n~ r&.f ~..~ l).'blJ ~+-f:~~- ~.,?- ~ ..&/;~~ d_ ~ F'f" 6~ \ r_"\ = v'-, ~ (./) p ~50cse_k _ ~<S.$,... <'- ~ C .~ {( OiS , fl..~' / k", ryo::- .......t-ry> ~d:"s.-'-51rc-~ 6 ,.,.(5~ .-Pe:.::-CL.-..,e.:..l-ri A~(.) /L7c~~.5<a _4' s. No t'r>f~'('7 ~",~ 0:J ,-."r ec-~,,//4//