Loading...
CORRESPONDENCE 4-02-2004 2,28PM FROM PLANNING AND REAL ES 561 434 8187 P.1 ~OOLDI&.A lIJ · ;o:l ~ 0 q "J, &""""=,,,J L'- ~ BEAOi COU~', THE SCHOOL DISTRICT OF PALM BEACH COUNTY PLANNING DEP,"RTMENT 3320 FOREST HILL BOIULEVARD - C331 WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33406 FACSIMILE TRANSMITfAL PHONE: 561/434-8020 FAX: 561/434-8187 Number of pages sent (including cover page): 3 TO: Dick Hudson, Senior Planner. City of Boynton Beach DATE: April 2, 2004 FAX NUMBER: 742-6259 FROM: David DeYoung. AICP, Planner, SDPBC COMMENTS: Attached please find a copy of the approved school equivalency application and provider form for Serrano Beach. cc: Angela Usher, AICP, Manager Intergovernmental Relati'Jns S~\P"anninQ\f'ublic\lNTERGOV\ConCUIT8ncy\ConeurrenCy Determination Letters\Faxes'F04022402Q.DOC 4-02-2004 2,29PM FROM PLANNING AND REAL ES 561 434 8187 P.2 TH~ SCHOOl. OISTRICT OF PALM B~ COUNTY, FLORIOA f'l.AI\I>llNG~ 3300 FORESTHILLBLVO., G-t10 WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33406-U13 (561) ~20 FAX: (561) 434-8187 ARTHUR C. JOHNSON, Ph.D SUPERINTENDENT April 1, 2004 Dick Hudson, Senior Planner City of Boynton Beach 100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd. Boynton Beach, FL 33435 RE: EQUIVALENCY DETERMINATION - CASE NUMBER 04022402Q - SERRANO BEACH Dear Mr. Hudson: The Palm Beach County School District has reviewed the request for an Equivalenclf Determination on the above referenced project. Serrano Beach was approved for 92 multi-family units by thE! City of Boynton Beach on April 1, 2003. The proposed modification to Serrano Beach to convert the approved 92 multi-famillf units to 47 single family units will generate an "Equivalen'I" impact on Schools located 11 Concurrency Service Area (CSA) 19. Consequently, the proposed conversion will n<It increase the number of school age children in CSA 19. Attached please find the approved Palm Beach Coun1y School District Concurrenclf Application and Service Provider Form for Serrano Beach. If you have any questions regarding this determination, please feel free to contact me (It (561) 434-7343. Sincerely, ~~ David L. De u , A~ Planner cc: Chip Bryan of Julian Bryan & Associates ene. S:\PlanninglPublic\lNTERGOV\Concurrency\Concurrency Determination Leners\Equivalency\Q04022402.doc AN EQUAl. OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYE R 4-02-2004 2,29PM FROM DLANNING AND REAL ES 561 434 8187 P.3 , L...... 11 '.1 4\,l I ""''''''- '.II- 3-02-2004 2, 2GPM FROM ~ANN1NG A/I() REAL ES 561 434 6187 P.2 m ~ l1'Iese_Of.tIItel"""-~c....r, ra...-.G l ..~ ,____l>IlO __-......-..u I_CIOl}_"(S61)_ _....Q....."'..."Il_. ~tll ~_ n.e__~__C!eunl1 ~_"'r. . .&~-""",, ".._If SIIldI:_~.,_..................~....tw..........................,......,.~~~...,.. .j~ ,..,........... ....,. r .. .""~wi'lhir.......(II)......,.."'......J............. Alii . 1 ....--................0IIe7SP _....~OIIOt*~OrIII'b.,...,.....~I . .11..~.tw_.~~....-OtdrL __1'1_"___ ./ !I""- . (1__ l"'_~ (.........."......DlII T r ~~'IlfM..... [ JT..,.... ,..C ....A,..........!b....4 ...--.-""'"' D,h.. .... ......,.,..._._,'.....,....~ .... ___,,_...._~.....__"'l ~~,~~~.-Li____ ,.... .."..,...... - '--"....""'~ ,.,......JIt- __ ~rHf.1WO ~(.Oi. t~~) .. I ~ 'T' C.J~ '1 ~nIon f!'fnrl-; ~~~~ OOQ&.l.oS'~( 00 DOc:I ~2D - TctI!~......". ~... .. C_-:'_"'7~-" ... I~~ ~- ~; ~~~"" M.F to~F;: ..~.....-.~~~""'~MI,..rIf.....lofmlt..__..,~,..,.,. .,,__.._..._--- t:;AC2iOl5 (,~--~e.. . =~ ~ ~~2i~Y ~""'t: Q,t NIl, -'!l71 ,.~ ~. ::J9~- ~~ I ~ ___........ Of' .... ---- .... ~ ~..............,.,... It.. ~"1fr:I 'Z.}J.OLJ - ,.,. ~~tl~FiftMI; -0" -;;-" ~:e~~ --,-.-..- NO(tfre.tnt~*",""""~Olill'!Ill DodI:a"Dlllllc~~ -~ V.'4"'1QI",~~'IrlIt...~UYtrIoOf~(c"osl"'~ , = '--~-_._~-- _ l-=--l'IlIift"'m~E_"'~_ie\* ,.,~ ........ 0 -6- ~ 3-02-2004 2,25PM FROM pi ANNING AND REAL ES 561 434 8187 P.1 Pkonc: (560434--8020 Facsimile Transmittal [ax; (560434-8187 . N' of P"ges sent (including Cover P"ge) ~ ~Or\ DA~E: :3/2/0L{ TO: fAX N" r(~k 7Lf2-~2S0 ~ FROM: COMMENTS: _O~ l'V\J\.... ~ on. ~ ~~i~~~: ~J2.RJ) ) fill fA ~~. ~ ~OLX J-Jo-<k~~(rY\-Q a:t Lf~4.- ?\~7 - T~ s;o j11JJ~ I cc: H'\I)ATA\WP51\I)OC'2 3-02-2004 2,26PM FROM pi 4NNING 4ND RE4L ES 561 434 8187 P.2 ~rJ '" . '" ~ Q ~ ~-~ "Tlle $chooI Di&bic:tQfP;a;lm Beach County Plannlng_ 3JZO tol'CltHillBlvd. ClIO WClit PaJm 8e;ld1,. Ft. 3:w05-S313 1'100.'" (S61)4~800 0.-($01) %3.3877 Fa)I.1 (S61) 434-1187 1;1("(561) 4J4-8S1 S AttentIon: Concurrenc:y The School District of Palm Beach County School Concurrency Application & SeIV;ce Provider F"nn Ins~~ Submit OM COPY of the COl'npl*d appllcatJon and ffllI$ fer each new r.$~1 projec::t requiring oil d~itlation of ooncurren~ fqr sdKr9l$. A~. . t:.w. vnll be proVided within fifteen (13) working d&)'S or~ipt ofa cotql.appliWton. A&~ is oot~ ~ is valkl forOMyeM hm _ (lfi$$ll&ftCe. 0Dcc ~ DevcloprYlellt Ol'def i$ i~ the OOr'IC\llTCl1oC;Y t1etsn'ninatiO'ft shall be valid ~tbe tHe ofUlt DeNelopment Ocdc:c. PIeiJ.&V d'I<<;k (v) type of ~pfieatiaft (one only): / ll"""""""'~'" I JCo_~ lo1~rl!qW>ol.ll'Y { )~Scb;IoI~dliticsOdermirmtion ( ]f,.etterofNol~ [ JT;mll~ Fees: ConQ.llmney ~inetlOfl or Adequate Sdtoot FOIIc;.ilitiC5 De-~ln~o(1 ($200.00 fat more thatl 20 UfUb,/20 UI'Iits Of" Ies$ $100.00); Equill;llency ($125.00); Ex*"'ption or &Mter of No Impact {$2S.00}; Time Extension ($75-.00) ~~~~;..~;~!'d.;:i};":i-'.f'~I0f't~4~ ~ IIIt11cn /I cqPFt>fth~$lIUJIifx(ffl8;t1Rp[tm, W1~r~,d~Jutltool Cf1l~1I1fr1r- ProjoOl....... "'_.. r"", f.. A~ Ir> /~(.f", CM Se;v~) M.....;.....,,' Il_ 3. J' 11. 0\.1- '- _ /l.__ - , ~r ,..-~V '-'~\ . ~ 1--' t''trJY1 'J..{J.[..i'J P..."..".Co_' N......' (peN)' 00'I,?45?;o1 00 me 5"02.0 F:--~-'"' -, -,-- - . - - ._, ".:.i )"J:. ""';y. -~'_h _c _, L~~J ~n I ~ofSl.lbjectProplllrty: e.. " j]~::~~~,; L~:;:;'~ I C"r a -I >Sche;ol] ~:..~.;" ~" ,'~: $e(:aoofT own:;"'ip{Range Projad ___oe TotaINllmberofU~ WiU the Project be Ph~7' (YIN) ~encY~S6Mee Area (CSA) . 'I,: ':~~' :r.X1 Single Famity MI,II~smily (othm"th3n ,apartments) ~ments{3~ Of less) HlghRissApar(tnents ..... __ (AdUlls Only)- ~~ '.lOIl\ 9 2. - ) I.t?; cJA,"-'W- ~ fv1,F m~f" $/''I>f' ~ .7 If7 1 to If a~ieatlle. ptsasc attach a Pha~ing PliJn ~110~ng tile ~bef and type of 1,JI'Ii\$ to fecer/El certificate of oeQ.JpSnCy yearly. . A Restrictive Covenant is rB:Quire<l rOf age-restricted com(!'l!,.lt~$. 5 A c 270 V3 QWNEJtSHlP, AGENT IN'FOaMATIQN; """"'."..~ ~~""" ~:&N**, .lJ.clJ i--.~,.~.I~ Maltillg' MdrtsSl ~ .J\.~"~I~~ ~Q.~L."" ~ '"'7:-A-:>-.;:L T....._"......~ =1 ?-AI,fl'( 'nN_, _ ~/- ::>/11- ne,,~ I henllby certify tfMt ~9nt~ or InforJTliJtiOfl. -, or p1'i11l$ $UbmltWd ~h iIlrt' true and !;QlTC:d to the bftt Qf my 2.11.0'-/ Do" '~.".~ I: 'i " ' , ' , . ~ O;jlb! Appllg~ Filed:. Re'rieWed By: p ., PetltiOJ1 Num~'t": TIUc: 'ftj~~~tYL- cant p;llY lhe filing fee to )'IJu? Yl$ (Please ilIttaeh proof of payn\er\Q NO (If no, the ~ic:3trt. must pay ~ School D1sb1Cl Oate&'nroe.Rt!l:ei'r'tlf: C'~N:~:~~~~~ I Y8rify t!'lallhe pr*d compl~ wlth 1h6 a,dQpI~ Level of $e!'\lice (lOS) for School5 J veritYdtatthC'pn;l~twill ~ompry witll ttw IWClpl.l:d t.e'..~1 of!=;~'t (LOS) mr ~hooIJs.\lbjl!d: to the :l.ItIlebtd~ 1 ~ veri1Y!bat lht project will COI'I'IPly with ~ ado'pl~ Level of~\vice (LOS) fl>l' ScboQl~ S<:l1qolDistridRepre$mtati'lrt 1>0" -8" FACSIMILE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH City Hall, West Wing 100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd. P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, Florida 33425 (561) 742-6260 (561) 742-6259 Fax Planning & Zoning Division TO: Inga FAX: 434-8187 FROM: Dick Hudson NUMBER OF PAGES: (including cover! 2 DATE: 3/2/04 RE: Serrano Beach If you receive this fax in error, or experience trouble with transmission, please notify our office immediately, at (561) 742-6260. Thank you. TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT TIME NAME FAX TEL SER.# 01/09/2002 03:59 PLANNING 5517425259 BR0L3J875851 DATE,TIME FAX NO./NAME DURATION PAGE(S) RESULT MODE 01/09 03:58 94348187 00: 01: 05 02 OK STANDARD ECM ADMINISTRATION 21 COUNTRY ROAD VILLAGE OF GOLF FLORIDA 33436.5299 (561) 732-0236 FAX 1561) 732.7024 t/ ~ 1/-;:; \ 1'l? CxJ.h ~\.\..s.1.'Y' .:~~Vf1l[Y. DEPARTMEN-v'\,k f-. ~ _ L~1)'''''J4-2918 ",7 :; UTILITY ?;PAATMENT 1,)- 3 .,u (561/ ,37.7995 ) RECEIVED Mr. Lee Wische, Chairman Boynton Beach Planning and Development Board P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, FI 33432 JUL 23 2003 CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE July 21, 2003 RE: SERRANO BEACH ANNEXATION (ANEX 03-001) LAND USE AMENDMENT ( LUAR 03-005) Dear Mr. Wische: We have reviewed the proposed Annexation and Site Plan for Serrano Beach, and we would like to compliment the developer and the staff for a project that limits the traffic impacts and demand for City services by reducing the number of units on the property, yet increases the tax base for the City. There are a few comments we would like to provide to ensure that the project is compatible with the surrounding neighbors. They are as follows: 1. The proposal calls for a 10 foot landscape buffer and a 10 foot building setback along the west property line adjoining the Village of Golf, for a 20 foot total and a 15 foot setback along the north property adjoining Silverlake for a 25 foot total setback. The City PUD regulations require that perimeter buffers and setbacks within PUDs must mirror those in abutting development to ensure adequate separation between buildings. The rear setback requirement in the Village of Golf is 25 feet, the same as Silverlake. Therefore, to meet the City regulations, the rear setback for the lots along the west property line must also be increased to 25 feet. 2. The developer is proposing 7 model homes that would be available for development on this property. Two models are single or one story units and 5 models are two story units. The Village has restricted the units along the Village's west property line to one story units, and we are requesting that at least half or 7 of the lots along our border be restricted to the single story models to avoid the potential for a solid wall of concrete 30 feet high. The residents of Silvertake have requested that the lots along their border also be restricted to the single story models. 3. There was no mention in the plan of any street lights. If street lights are to be installed, the Village would like to request the lights not be located so as to shine onto any of the adjoining residential property. Decorative front yard lights, at a height of 5-6 feet might be more suitable in this development. 4. A general comment regarding the upkeep and maintenance of the fence and landscape buffer, as the trees and plants will be in the rear yards, there should be a provision in the PUD for continued maintenance as well as a requirement that the property owners not be allowed to remove the trees along the landscape buffer. The hedge along the fence line is to be installed at a height of 2 feet. The hedge should be allowed to grow to a height of 6 feet and maintained at 6 feet. The above points are being requested by the Village of Golf. There are some general review comments being provided as follows: A. The developer is proposing to construct an entrance with a new bridge area outside their property in the LWWD property. Provisions should be made for continued maintenance, as the LWOD maintenance schedule is not suitable for residential development. B. The residents of SlIverlake are requesting that the lift station be relocated from the northern boundary of the development. A possible location is along the eastern boundary, as that is adjacent to the school drainage area and would only require a minimum of additional piping to reach the northern manhole connection point. C. It is not clear from the plans that on the south side of the property, along the front of the development, that the fence should be located on the inside of the landscape buffer, so the landscaping faces the street, and along the rest of the property the landscaping should be on the homeowners side of the fence. D. The drainage in this section runs from a high point of Military Trail to a low at Congress Avenue. The entire area was previously all muck and as Silverlake was developed in the early 1970's, the drainage regulations were not as stringent as they are today. The drainage plan needs to be reviewed very closely as this area has historical drainage problems. Thank you for your consideration of our requests. City staff will be available at the hearing to address any questions you may have. Sincerely, 2 ~ ~otos Mayor, Village of Golf Cc: Mayor Broening and City Commission City Manager Kurt Bressner Mike Rumpf, Dir. Of Planning and Zoning Department of Engineering and Public Works Po. Box 21229 West Palm Beach. FL 33416-1229 (561) 684-4000 www.pbcgov.c?m . Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners Warren H. Newell. Chairman Carol A. Roberts, Vice Chair Karen T Marcus Mary McCarry Bun Aaronson Tony Masilotti Addle L. Greene County Administrator Rob~rt \Velsm3.:1 "An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer- , printed on recycJed paper March 7, 2003 ATTACHMENT 1 (fZ~I?'>="~=[Q) C.'-" '. \, ,t,.r.-,,::";' J . -' Mr. Michael W. Rumpf Director of Planning & Zoning Department of Development City of Boynton Beach P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, FL 34425-0310 RE: Serrano @ Boynton Beach - Bach Property TRAFFIC PERFORMANCE STANDARDS REVIEW Dear Mr. Rumpf: The Palm Beach County Traffic Division has reviewed the traffic study for the project entitled; Serrano @ Boynton Beach - Bach Property, pursuant to the Traffic Performance Standards in Article 15 of the Palm Beach County Land Development Code. The project is summarized as follows: Location: Municipality: Existing Uses: Proposed Use: New Daily Trips: Build-out Year: Hunters Golf club, Summit Lane, West of Congress Ave. Boynton Beach None 98 MF Residential Units 686 2004 Based on our review, the Traffic Division has determined that the project meets the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County. Sincerely, If you have any questions regarding this determination, please contact me at 684-4030. " Masoud Atefi, MSCE Sr. Engineer - Traffic Divisio cc: Pinder Troutm Co tting Inc. Fiie: General- IPS - Mun - T rafic Study Review F :\TRAFFIC\ma\A.dmin\A.pprovals\030222.00c Attachment 2 DACH Property Trip Generation Comparison #PTC03-13 5/30/2003 tripgen Comp 03-13 5-29-03jo.xls Page 1 ofl Approved Daily ITE Total land Use Code Intensity Trip Generation Rate (1) Trips Residential Multi Family 230 98 Dus 7/DU 686 Prooosed Daily ITE Total Land Use Code Intensity Trip Generation Rate (1 ) Trips Residential Single Family 210 47 Dus 10 /DU 470 Net New Trips (216)1 Approved AM Peak Hour ITE Total Trips land Use Code Intensity Trip Generation Rate (2) In 1 Out 1 Total Residential Multi Family 230 98 Dus 0.51 /DU (17/83) 91 411 50 ProDOsed AM Peak Hour ITE Total Trips Land Use Code Intensity Trip Generation Rate (2) In I Out 1 Total Residential Single Family 210 47 Dus 0.75 /DU (25/75) 91 261 35 Net New Trips (15)1 Approved PM Peak Hour ITE Total Trips Land Use Code Intensity Trip Generation Rate (2) In I Out I Total Residential Multi Family 230 98 Dus 0.62 /DU (67/33) 411 201 61 Proposed PM Peak Hour ITE Total Trips Land Use Code Intensity Trip Generation Rate (2) In 1 Out 1 Total Residential Single Family 210 47 Dus 1.01 /DU (64/36) 301 171 47 Net New Trips (14)1 (1) Soun::e: Section 10.8, Fair Share Road Impact Fees, of the Palm Beach County Unified land Development Code (ULDq. (2) Source: Institute of Transportation Engineers (lTE), Trip Generation, 6th Edition. FACSIMILE CIl Y OF BOYNTON BEACH City Hall, West Wing 100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd. P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, Florida 33425 (561) 742-6260 (561) 742-6259 Fax Planning & Zoning Division TO: Kathleen Chang FAX: 233-5365 FROM: Dick Hudson DATE: July 8, 2003 NUMBER OF PAGES: [including cover) 15 RE: Serrano Beach Traffic Study ( Kathleen, The attached Concurrency Tratfic Impact Analysis is a copy of the one Khurshid reviewed in April, and had no comment on. When the applicant reduced the density of the project and resubmitted his application, I saw no reason to request an updated Concurrency Analysis, since the Planning Division had "no comment" on the more intense development proposal. I have also included the updated tratfic equivalency statement from the traffic consultants for the project, and County response to the TPS Review, even though I realize that you are interested in impacts to the 2020 network and not Traffic Performance Standards. If you need anything more, please call. Dick Hudson If you receive this fax in error, or experience trouble with transmission, please notify our office immediately, at (561) 742-6260. Thank you. ITRANSMIS'~ION IIERIFICATIOt: REPORT] DATE,TIME FAX NO./NAME DURATION PAGE(S) RESULT MODE 07/1'8 09: 4E: 923:'5355 00: 1:3: 03 15 OK STAt.DARD ECM TIME: 07108.'20133 1'9 !il ~IAME: FAX TEL ~;ER. # BRCiE:?..J40948<1 DACH PROPERTY CONCURRENCY TRAffiC IMPACT ANALYSIS Prczpared for D.R. HORTOtt. IttC. Prczpared by PlttDER TROOTMfitt COttSOL TlttG. IttC. 2324 Sooth Congrczss fivcznocz. Saitcz 1 H Wczst Palm Bczach. FL 33406 (561) 434-1644 1\ / (~V ~ \\~. \ \ ",,\ \~'IJ \ f~ \\?h A :tfl! M. Troutman, P.E. Flor~:~1gistration #45409 ~ IU FEB I 9 2cm #PTC03-13 )anoary 30. 2003 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPT , ;0j ~ DACH PROPERTY CONCURRENCY TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS Introduction Pinder Troutman Consulting, Inc. has been retained to conduct a traffic impact analysis for a proposed 98 multi family DUs in the City of Boynton Beach. The purpose of this study is to determine if the proposed development meets the requirements of Article 15, Traffic Performance Standards, of the Palm Beach County Unified Land Development Code (ULDC). Site Data The site is located on the west side of Congress Avenue as shown on Exhibit 1. Access to the proposed project is via local roadway connections to Congress Avenue. Year 2004 conditions were examined for this analysis. Existing (2001) Traffic Conditions Exhibit 2 provides the 2001 annual average daily traffic (MDT) volumes for the surrounding roadway network as compiled by the Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) of Palm Beach County. Peak hour traffic volumes were determined by applying a 'K' factor of 9.3% to the MDT volumes. These volumes are also shown on Exhibit 2 along with roadway lanes, levels of service (LOS) and the adopted LOS 0 service volumes. Project Traffic Trip Generation The daily trip generation rate used for this project was from Section 10.8, Fair Share Road Impact Fees, of the Palm Beach County ULDC. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), Trip Generation, 6th Edition was the source of the peak hour trip generation rates. Exhibits 3 provides the daily, AIv\ and PM peak hour trip generation data for the proposed development. For Traffic Performance Standards purposes, based on the net new external Report 03-1] 1-29-03 daily trip generation of 686, the Test 1 radius of development influence is one (1) mile. The Test 2 radius of development influence is one-half ('/2) mile. Trip Distribution and Assignment A directional distribution was developed based on review of land use patterns and existing travel patterns. Exhibit 4 shows the assignment of daily and peak hour project traffic as well as the project impact percentage (% of daily adopted service volume). Future T raffle Conditions Roadway Improvements The Fiscal Year 2003-2007 Transportation Improvement Program from the MPO of Palm Beach County and the Palm Beach County Five Year Road Program were reviewed to determine if any roadways within the study area are scheduled to be improved. There are no scheduled improvements within the study area. Background T raffle Historic growth trends and Major Project traffic must be analyzed in the projection of future background traffic volumes. Historic growth data is provided on Exhibit 5 for the surrounding roadway links. Major Project data, compiled by Palm Beach County, was reviewed. No Major projects are projected to have a 10% impact on the study area roadways within the analysis time frame of the proposed development. Background growth projections based on historic data account for traffic associated with the committed developments in the area. T raffle Performance Standards Analysis Test 1 (link Test) This fir.;t test of the Traffic Performance Standards examines if any roadway links required to be analyzed are projected to operate below adopted level of service standards. Roadway links within one-half mile and those outside one-half mile with a project impact greater than 1 % of the LOS D are required to be analyzed. Exhibit 6 shows future daily, AM and PM peak hour traffic conditions for the analyzed roadway links. All analyzed roadway links are Rl..'pvrtOJ-1J 1-29-03 2 projected to operate above the adopted Test 1 level of service standards, therefore, the requirements of Test 1 are met. Test 2 (Model Test) The second test examines traffic conditions based on model projections that are developed and maintained by Palm Beach County. No roadway links within one-half ('/2) mile are Test 2 deficiencies; therefore, the requirements of Test 2 are met. Intersection Analysis Major intersections for which a proposed development adds more than 10% of the total traffic on any link connecting a major intersection are required to be analyzed. No major intersections meet this requirement based on the proposed development's impact. Oriveway Volumes AM and PM peak hour project driveway volumes are provided on Exhibit 7. Conclusions This analysis shows that the proposed development meets all of the requirements of the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County. Report O]~ 13 , .29.0J 3 o OLD BOYN rON ROAD c < o ~ U z ~ ~ :5 [ BOYN TON BEACH FJOUI FV,\RD 5 z ;; < ~ ~ ~ u z o u ~ ~ WOOLBRIGHT ROAD COlF ROAD (SW 23rd AVENUE) ~ LAKE IDA ROAD DACH PROPERTY o ~ < :;; :; o ~ ~ ~ u < ~ NTS. > < f ~ ;;' i g [ 01/28/03 EXHIBIT 1 PROJECT LOCATION ~ [ o 010 BOYNTON ROAD N.TS. 80YNTON I3fACH IiOUUVARD > < ~ 0 0 ~ " ~ < < Z j I 0 > " < < ~ " U ~ ~ 0 3 ~ m 8 " ~ " u ~ > z " ~ 0 u u < ~ 6lD 51620 48900 32700 4550 WOOLBRIGHT ROAD I I I GOLF ROAD (SW 23rd AVENUE) ~ 2l 105860 14900 9840 1390 6lD ]5540 48900 31210 4550 I 2l :127760 II 14900 ,11880 1390 I I I [ 6lD 27810 48900 27810 4550 LAKE IDA ROAD 'lD 19920 32500 20450 3020 LEGEND 6lD 54800 48900 3300 0 4550 "0 190-150 32500 1771 D ! 30~O 610 - ROADWAY LANES 35480 D- DAilY TRMFtC AND LOS 48900 . DAllY ADOPTED SERVICE VOLUME 33000 - PEAK HOUR: TRAffiC AND LOS 4550 - PEAK HOUR ADOPTED SERVICE VOLUME 01/26/03 EXHIBIT 2 r::::l EXISTING (2001) TRAFFIC CONDITIONS ~ DACH PROPERTY ....,...., "',-- 0""')(,- M ~ 0 0 B ~ r.,o- N . t-cD~ It:: ~a... S ~ ,:., o c . "" n. S CC ~ 0 OJ '.i:j 0.'" o ~ ~ Q) M Cl.. C Q) :0 I u ~I ~ u 0. x <( .<;: w... 0 I- '" '" <Xl <Xl '" '" -9 ~ .<;: l- I- - S <IJ :0 '" c: ::J 0 0 .'" ~ ~ "- <IJ c: Q) ~ ~ .? ~ ~ ::l ::l 0 0 ~ c: <Xl <Xl <IJ 0'> 0'> c: 2 E <IJ '" ~ u... ::J -0 ::l c: ::;;: '" -' .!l1 c: <Jl -' cu ~ -0 .;;; <IJ 0 '" I- ~ ::l o I -'" '" Q) Cl.. ~ <( 0 0 '3 '" '" 0 I- .~ - - .". .". .= ~ ::l '3 0 0 I- 0'> 0'> c: - !:!. ;;:; <Xl <IJ ~ ~ "- '" S '" c: ::J 0 0 .~ ~ - Qj '" c: c:i <IJ U .e- .= ~ ~ ?- ::l ::l 0 0 ~ c: <Xl <Xl <IJ - 0'> 0'> -= ~ E <IJ '" ~ u... ::J .'" -0 0; c: ::;;: '" -' ~ c: <Jl -' <IJ <( -0 .;;; I- <IJ 0 '" I- ~ ::l o I -'" '" Q) Cl.. ~ Cl.. - - '" '" 19 0 I- I.e- 0 0 N N ~ ~ I- ::l 19 0 0 I- - - .". .". -= !:!. ;;:; ,., <IJ ~ :0 "- '" '" c: ::J .2 0 :0 ~ N Qj '" c: c:i <IJ U .e- .= .?- ~ ~ ::l ::l 0 0 ~ c: <Xl <Xl <IJ 0'> 0'> c: 2 'E cu '" ~ u... ::J - -0 0; c: ::;;: '" -' -;;; --g <Jl -' cu <( -0 .;;; I- <IJ 0 '" I- 0 9 2- . ." 0 U C . E n. 0 " > . 0 ." C . ~ ." . C 'c :J C >- 0 c ~ 0 '" 0 U ~ .c .c u ,;; . ! . ~ c ~ . -5 (; ~- . "' . ~ >- u '" . n. . .s . c ." '00 . c 0 ~ '" c ~ .~ . ~ .c ~ <5 .'" Si- c ~ . 0'- eo <0 '0 . 3 :'j 5 , . ~ .E ;; ;; u u 5 5 0 0 ~ ~ :: is! [ o ~ COlF ROAD (SW Z3rd AVENUE) OLD BOYN rON ROAD o < o ~ U ~ ~ ~ < ~ s% " 3 3 0.23% SITE lAKE IDA ROAD s% " 3 3 0.10% LEGEND 60% . PERCENT DISTRIBUTION 412 - DAilY PROJECT TRAFFIC 30 . AM PEAK HOUR PROJECT TRAFFIC 37 - PM PEAK HOUR PROjECT TRAFFIC 0.84% - '" OF DAilY ADOPTED SERVICE VOLUME BQYN TON BEACH BOUllVAl-1:O N.TS. ~ o ~ < ~ " o . ~ ~ ~ u ~ ~ > < ~ ~ ~ ~ > < ~ ~ oc U Z o u SO% HJ " I " 10.70"," < '" o [ WOOLBRIGHT ROAD 60% '" 30 " 0.114% sr. " 3 3 0.23% 01/28/03 DACH PROPERTY '0% m 20 " 0.56% )U% 20' " " O.4Z~ S% " 3 3 I O.10~ EXHIBIT 4 r::::l PROJECT TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT ~ #PTC03-13 9rowth 03-13 1-27 -03jo.xls 1/29/2003 Exhibit 5 DACH Property Historic Growth Daily Volumes Growth Roadway 1998 2001 Rate Golf Road West of Congress Avenue 9,805 10,586 2.59% /Year East of Congress Avenue 11,316 12,776 4.13% /Year lake Ida Road West of Congress Avenue 20,555 21,992 2.28% /Year East of Congress Avenue 16,124 19,045 5.71% /Year Congress Avenue North of Golf Road 31,798 35,162 3.41% /Year South of Golf Road 33,349 33,554 0.20% /Year North of lake Ida Road 25,882 29,906 4.93% /Year South of lake Ida Road 29,908 35,480 5.86% /Year (f')('f)(/)....... ""'0 x- MOO~ o ~;,;r..- UC>>OQ) I-~'Ol a.......<O(Q ~ C';'lo.... ~ '" ~ rO o "' 'in >- m c: '" E.!!! OJ "' o..~ 0 '" '" ct c: ~ <( :0 I ~ ~ U ~ <( "' X OJ w 0 >- ;;; .!!l VJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -' .~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9- '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" <C <C <C <C ... ... N N '" ... ... ... ... ~ ~ M M U -;;; ... '" <C '" '" ... '" '" ~ 0 N '" N '" '" '" '" M " N ~ <C N ... ... '" '" 0 '" ... ... N ~ ... M N >- ~ M M M ... ~ ~ N N Ei u M N .". '" .". ... .". .". Q) .". ~ "- a M M M M '0' M .". N N >- ct -' <( 0 - :;; ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ~ Q) - 0 M '" '" M <C ~ <::. "': N ~ <<! '" ~ ~ "- ::< ..... M 0 .". '" N .". N '" 0 0 N .<: ~ OJ E - N '" 0 .". '" '" N 0 ::l N 0 .". :.0 .". ... M '" 0 "- '" '" '" .". 0 M N ... '" <C - - M > 00_ N .". '" 0 '" '" N '" c: .'" 0 '" '" 0 <C <C "- '" .". "' 0 - '" '" .". '" "- '" 0 'x '" M '" '" 0 N - '" W ~ M M N M - - N ~ ~"' 0 0 0 0 0 0 .;:; Q) -' -' "' c: -' -' -' -' N N -' -' 'x '" '" '" '" '" .". .". w -' '0 '0 :;; :;; > > Q) Q) Q) Q) :; Q) :; " ::l 0 ::l 0 '0 c: c: CD c: CD '" Q) Q) 1>: Q) ~ 0 ~ > > "' -" '" <( Q) <( Q) c: ~ u "' b "' b -' 0 .g "' '" "' '" Q) Q) Q) Q) lJ '0 '" 19! '" 9! VJ 9 '" ~ c: 9 c: 9 0 0 0 '0 & '" 9 u Q) u '" '" '" " ::l 0 Ui :2 '0 9 c: 9 e: '" 9 '" - '" Q) ~ Q) 0 '<ij > '<ij > '0 -" '" I~ <( ~ <( '" '" '" "' "' 15 0 -' "' "' :2 '" '" '" 9 19! 19!: 0 ~ Q) ~ lS 0 0 & -" e: c: ~ '" i 0 i 0 lJ Ui -' u u Q) Q) '" Q) ::l ::l " ::l '0 '0 ~ e: e: e: e: '" '" Q) '" '" Q) '0 '0 0 0 > > > > '" '" '" '" ~ <( <( <( <( 0 0 '0 "' "' "' "' '" '" '" '" '" "' "' "' "' ~ ~ :2 :2 0 Q) '" '" '" 0 0 I~ 9!: ~ ~ Q) Q) '" lJ lJ -" -" e: e: e: e: '" '" 0 0 0 0 -' -' U U U U VJ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 -' .~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 u 9- '" '" '" '" '" '" N N '" '" '" '" M M 0 0 '" .". .". ... .". - - M M U -;;; ::< "- "- "- M '" .". - '" " 0 .". "- M M '" .". '" '" 0 '" - N '" 0 M - 0 >- ~ M M M M ~ - N N '" ~ ::l 0 ~ "- ... '" u - M M M M I '" M M N - '0' " ct <( w 0- w lJ :;; ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... ..... i::i ~ '" ~ 0 M '" '" M <C - - ~ "': N '" <<! '" - N "- W ~ 0 .,,: > M ... '" N N '" <( 0 0 N .<: ~ Q) E '" N '" M M - 0 ::l .". '" M - <C '" .". N 0 0 M - .". '" "- - - M > 00_ e: ~ 0 - ;;; 0 .". <C '" - .'" 0 "- N 0 <C .". "- "' 0 N - "- M <C - 0 "- 'x ~ M M N M '" - N - W ~"' 0 0 0 0 0 0 .;:; IV -' -' "' c: -' -' -' -' N N -' -' 'x '" '" '" '" '" .". ... w -' '0 '0 :;; :;; > > Q) '" Q) OJ :; '" :; " " 0 ::l 0 '0 e: e: '" e: CD '" '" OJ ~ '" - 0 > > "' > "' -" '" <( <( :!! <( Q) c: u "' u "' b .- 0 .~ "' '" "' '" -' '" '" Q) '" lJ '0 ~ 9! VJ 15; '" 9 '" <' e: 9 e: 9 0 0 0 '0 & '" 9 u OJ U '" '" " ::l 0 Ui '" 9 e: 9 e: :2 '0 '" 9 '" '" '" 1:' '" 0 .- > '<ij > '" <( <( '0 -" '" ..= I~ I~ '" '" '" "' "' 0 -' ~ "' "' .D :2 '" Q) 0 '" 9 ~ I?] ~ t;;, '" 0 0 & -'" e: e: ~ '" i 0 i 0 lJ Ui -' U U Q) OJ '" Q) ::l " ::l ::l '0 '0 ~ c: c: c: c: '" '" Q) OJ OJ '" '0 '0 0 0 > > > > '" '" '" '" ~ <( <( <( <( 0 0 '0 "' "' "' "' '" '" '" '" '" "' "' "' "' ~ ~ :2 :2 0 '" '" Q) Q) 00 9!: I!j! !j! ~ '" '" '" lJlJ -'" -" c: c: c: '" '" 0 0 0 0 -' -' U U U U u-i~ - E.:.c :.c.:.c x x ~ ~ OJ '" OJ '" V> V> s~ ) "- .-1--" ~~_':'.':-": -I~" . tl ~s--'_."':,.-:::---"":7'---:-~"~- l T ~um"~f"~"~::~'i";."'-T"rO'J ~#'/~::~:.:;;. ~-~ ' . ''''''''~-J'..) ~J ~_#'~l:..::;~~.. - no \. "_..,,,,,-,-_ _ '_m_ .a.~..... ~=--~: _._:~~ It....~7--~--:-......... 1 1--\ --r I V_-',-T_ .-.~ ....-------~~ ~-r+-j ,. . ...~;-::~~~:.l.-,.,",/~-:,.t-.: .__,~~LJ_. " _--,__l.~~ ...~:':."':~v~.__ ,."., C.3':.:-'~:,-~rZ'.' -', j, rt; ill / i[f! t1J .' - J v \ " '--- ~;::~;~.{:. : , :~~f:::~~:.~.:. ...., r...t---'~'--ru'-~-T:..~t-.~~~ r ~-rr~";-";'- MAP KEY RESIDENTIAL o LOW DENSITY . (LDR) J MAX 4.84 D.U)ACRE ~ ~~ , MODERATE DENSITY. (MOOR) . .. -. . (- . I 'MAX 7.26 D.U.lACRE , . "1 '~"l I" " ) '., ~ " ,I" 'r"" ~ :~ 7 'w~.; u . 'S '-" ,.. C BITIl............. ........ ........ MEDIUM DENSITY.(MeDR) MAX 9.68 D.U.lACRE' , " " , ~Jtt'_:::_' ,.,';;':',"-- ~ ; - ! ; , l , ,~. -"'-~- .~~~\<1"t ~ "-'!l'c I U I' -- ! $ I.~I .f ~ ,":- : I,l, __ _ HIGHDENS[TY' (HDR). M:!I.X 10.8 D.U.lACRE lffiilill) SPECIAL HIG!iDENSITY"(SHDR) .MAX 20-D,U.l ACRE " F .-~:9-MMEJJ_CIAb.;:: ~ OFFICE (OC) ~. , , ',----,-.: , . .' ';J.">\~' , : C:0J;:,f,j.:z.6.1 I' .: ' " --------, ~ LOCAL RETAIL (LRC) ~ GENERAL (GC) o INDUSTRIAL" (I) Ilb'_~w DIl. '- /) \) - - -- - OTHER '.~ ,-- 1""1 AGRICULTURE ". (A) f . lc,.._. FS.\.:j RECREATIONAL (R) ~ . M!Xfib.-USE COREIi!"jtitl I . I (MX-C) .,. ---'-"-"-- -, -.. PUBLl.C & PRIVATE (PPGI) GOVERNMENTAL/INSTITUTIONAL J , .~ f='c~ CONSERVATION (CON) ~ (MX) t , . , MIXED USE ..... :...~, DIFFERENT LAND USE CATEGORY. THAN THAT SHOWN ON MAP APPLIES (AS INDICA TED BY ABBBEVIA TION), . i IF USE AND DEVELOPMENT COMPLIES WITH .USE' . . 1'. .RESTRICTIQNSAND RECOMBINATIONu.OF PARCELS . .SPECIFIED IN TEXT OF FUTURE LAND USE AND . COASTAL MANAGEMENT ELEMENTS. ~. , . - '-. ""- - . -- . --,-- -- ' t'~ CONSERVATION OVERLA_Y DISTRICT--USE AND . DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY SUBJECT TO CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM COVER SHEET AND CHECKLIST This completed cover sheet must accompany all agenda item requests. Please place check marks in the boxes as indicated. Initiating department must prepare Agenda Item Request Form. Submit original agenda request (with back up) and one CODY of aaenda reauest (with back UD) to the City Clerk's office. Items must be submitted by the deadlines indicated below. Incomplete or late items will be returned to originating department. Requested City Commission Meeting Dates DAu ust 5 2003 DAu ust 19, 2003 ~Se tember 2 2003 DSe tember 16 2003 DOctober 7, 2003 DOctober 21 2003 DNovember 5 2003 DNovember 18, 2003 Deadline for Submittal to City P & DjCRA Requests Deadline Clerk's Office Departments are responsible for securing the following si natures on attached A enda Re uest Form: De artment Head D Wilfred Hawkins for de artments under Administrative Services D Finance De artment for items that involve ex enditure of funds D All back u material is attached ~ All exhibits are attached & marked e. ., Exhibit "A' ~ 'i'\UJ\Z-- Department Head's initials: Serrano at Boynton (WAR 03-00S) Second Reading - Amend Please do not write in the shaded area below. Legal Department signature D City Manager's signature D ITEM RETURNED FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON(S): Signature(s) missing D Incomplete submittal D Missed deadline D Other D Reason: Person contacted to pick up rejected request by bg - 7/19/02 S:\Planning\Planning TemplateslAgenda Item Cover CHECKU5T Aug S-Nov 18, 2003.doc on (Date) - ((...--.... I, \ ' \J tc NO.S:J~203 NonCE OF PUBUC HEARINGS NOncE OF ANNEXATION NoncE OF lAND USE AMENDMENT NonCE OR REZONING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that !he PIann;ng ~'~NG~'-' iloa<<I clM aTY Of BOYNTON 1lfA0i, flORIDA, wiD conduct 0 HCAOO on T~, Apn1 22 2003 016:30 p'.m. in ~ CIT'( HAll. COMMI~~~" 100 EasI_'_ BouIoooaril, 10 awidoo-Ih.. ~ subm""", """ ..... on beI-df of BeIfi !'eod.;. Tho CiIv Ccmmiuion oIM aTY OF BOYNTON 01, FlORIDA, ...~ obo hold PIJBUC HfAlltolGS 10 con.;d...Ih;. _, on T.....dav Wwzt 6, 2003 and T.....dav,.Iuno 3 2003. Each eubl;c hearing wiD be hokI 01 7:lX> p.m., '" '" ""'" ~ '" h agopdo f'.O'!!'ib 01 !he CITYHAll. COMMISSION OiAMIlERS, 100 Eoot I\oynIon -. lOuIe,aid. Tho ..,...., ;, de.cribed '" fellow" LOCA_ 1,300'feet -' of ec-e.. A,..., on !he noo1h .;de cl!he l<Ooo Wo<th Dm~ 0;_ COteroII'.28) CoooI. An_ ~!he eomp..I.emNe PIon FulunlIond U. Map: From. MR'5IPa1m_r_~) T.. Mod;um DoNity ~ (MoOR) Rezone: IIEQUEST: IIEQUEST: ~ From - AR (Palm Beach C<ounlr! To - PlIO PkJnned Unit 0..-'1"""_<< -.I (TowMou.e) o...iopment The 5outhomt _IS.E. 1/4) of !he _....... (S.w. I/M cl!he SoIAh-tquo".dS.E. 1/4) cl Section 31, T.........;p, 45 s...h, ~ <!j Eoot. Palm _ CounIy, FIoriilo. LESS oke Souoh 40 feet lhen.oI. AREA OF SITE: 424,377' ~ feel '" 9.742 """', more or leu. PROPOSED USE: lEGAl. DESCIII'IION: Location u..... Sem.loat ~.a.:r \l.V' 1fpU - 4' , -~ 1h;, __ can be '"-eel boow.en!he hou" 018:00 ..m. and 5~~._"'_~5oty cllloynion Beach Plann;ng and Zoning OM';""', 100 EaslIloynion _u. All irltw,sI&d parties, are notified 10 Of?P8Or at soid hearilJ9l in per)O!1 or by ~ and be heonI. AnY ~ who dec;ae. 10 oppeoI _ dOc;,;.".,. of !he I'lo,,"ng onCl I:leYeIopm.II Boan1 or City CommisWor\ with respect to any molter" considered at these _ng. will need 0 ..a.d of !he pn>oeecl;!1ll' and r... ouch P.U'P"'" may need 10 ensure ihat 0 ...nxmm JKOrd of the proceedir'!9s is mode. 'WhiCh record inCludes the ...many and ...n.lence ..".., whK:l. rhO oppeaI ;.10 be bo.ed. The Gty shaI fumid-. PPP"9.P'iote auxiliary atds and services where neceuory to aHord on individuol with a diSability an ~ ~nity 10 P.CJrticiJ>Oh! in and enjoy the benefits of a 581'Vic:e. p~, or octtvity Conducted ~ the CIty. Please contoct l'oIricio TucQ,-I561) 742,6268, oIleo., _.Iou, 124) hQu" pric' 10 !he prog",m or odivity in order fOr the City Ie reasonably accommodatie your request. OTY OF BOYNTON IlfAOi PlANNING AND ZONING DlV1SION 1561) 742'0260 PntDER TROUTMAN CONSULTING. INC. Transportation Planners and Engineers 2124 South Congress Avenue, Suite 1 H West Palm Beach, FL 33406 15611434-1644 Fax 434-1663 www.pindertroutman.o)m May 30, 2003 Mr. Michael Rumpf City of Boynton Beach 100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard Boynton Beach, FL 33452 Re: Serrano at Boynton Beach - #PTC03-13 Dear Mr. Rumpf: The purpose of this letter is to provide a traffic equivalency statement for the above referenced project. Approval from Palm Beach County Traffic Division showing that the Traffic Performance Standards were met for the 98 multi family residential units is provided on Attachment 1. It is now proposed to develop 47 single family residential units. Attachment 2 provides the trip generation comparison between the approved and proposed development. The proposed development generates less daily, AM and PM peak hour trips than the approved development. Therefore, the project is in compliance with the Traffic Performance Standards. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. l/;/I--;1' 01;;'~;-> Adrea M. Trout~~/P.E. 5/3tjo:; FI rida Registration .#45409 AMT/ldr Attachments cc: Karl Albertson Masoud Atefi Letter Rumpf 03-13 5-30-03 Pi