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//