HomeMy WebLinkAboutDRC - 062807 - Gander Mountain1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
-1-
Development Review Committee Meeting
Petition No. PUD- 07 -05- 000014
Gander Mountain Retail
June 28, 2007
Present at Meeting
Brad Wiseman, Planning Manager, Growth Management
Ray Caranci, Forestry Technician, Growth Management
Officer Jules Barone, Crime Prevention, Police Department
Jim Orth, Assistant City Engineer
Ryan Johnston, Johnston Group
Jared Olsen, Ryan Co.
Doug Janpro, Oppidan
Pat Barret, Oppidan
Jay Moore, Oppidan
Don Hearing, Cotleur & Hearing
Angela Briagi, Cotleur & Hearing
Chris Heggen, Kimley -Horn
The meeting took place in the Council Chambers of the City of Palm Beach Gardens on
Thursday, June 28, 2007, and started at 3:00 p.m.
Purpose of the Meeting
This Development Review Committee was held at the request of Cotleur & Hearing for
an approval of a text amendment to Section 78 -159, Code of Ordinances, entitled
Permitted, Conditional and Prohibited Use Chart, specifically to the retail general use
category. A request for rezoning for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay with an
underlying zoning designation of General Commercial for a 13.18 acre parcel located on
the East side of I -95 with access from Sandtree Drive.
Comments
Growth Management
Bard Wiseman, Planning Manager addressed certification and non - certification issues.
Monument signs shall be no larger than 15 feet wide by 10 feet high. The proposed sign
is 17 feet wide by 15 feet high. Staff recommended that there be no loading zones in
close proximity to the existing residential community. It is recommended that an 8 foot
high decorative wall and significant landscaping be provided to mitigate potential
impacts from the proposed commercial use on the existing residential community.
Building
Certification and non- certification comments were reviewed and agreed upon by the
applicant.
1
2
3
4
5
6
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
-2-
City Forester
Ray Caranci, Forestry Technician addressed the Certification and Non - Certification
issues. It was asked that the applicant show the number and percentage of protected trees
that are and in place or trees that have been relocated on the site. All other items were
reviewed and agreed upon with the applicant.
City Engineer
Jim Orth, Assistant City Engineer, addressed the Certification and Non - certification
issues. These were reviewed and agreed to by the applicant.
Police Department
Jules Barone, Officer, addressed the lighting safety concerns with the applicant. The
surveillance with natural landscaping which does not create hiding spaces and a building
alarm system was reviewed. All other issues were reviewed and agreed upon with the
applicant.
With no further items to discuss, the meeting was adjourned at 4:15 p.m.
Submitted by:
P-L,
Ray Ellis
Deputy City Clerk
Note: These summary minutes are prepared in compliance with 286.011 F.S. and are not verbatim
transcripts of the meeting.
CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS
MEMORANDUM
TO: Julius Barone, Police (w /attachments)
Judy Dye, Engineering (LBFH) (w /attachments)
Scott Fetterman, Fire Marshall (w/ attachments)
Bruce Gregg, Seacoast Utility Authority (w/ attachments)
Mark Hendrickson, Forestry (w /attachments)
Doug Wise, Building Official (w/ attachments)
Via PSG Email:
James Brown, Building
Jack Doughney, Community Services
Ray Ellis, City Clerk
Todd Engle, Construction Services
Ross Gilmore, GIS
Tim Kasher, Recreation
Mike Kelly, Parks Division
Trecia McKellar, City Clerk
Mike Morrow, Public Works
David Reyes, Code Enforcement
Stacy Rundle, City Administration
Christine Tatum, City Attorney
Annette Tucci, City Clerk
Angela Wong, Operations
Via Email:
Alan Boaz, Florida Power and Light
Gerald Gawaldo, Palm Beach County
Rick Kania, Waste Management
Layle Knox, North Palm Beach Improvement District
Robert Lozano, Florida Power and Light
DATE: May 22, 2007
FROM: Brad Wiseman, Planning Manager
tpatton bofl.com
561 - 799 -4235 (direct line)
561 - 799 -4281 (fax)
SUBJECT: Gander Mountain Retail
Application for Land Development Text Amendment - Petition # LDRA 07 -05 -000015 &
Application for Rezoning to Planned Unit Development Overlay and Site Plan Approval —
Petition # PPUD- 07 -05- 000014
Please provide your comments on the subject DRC petitions to the Growth Management Department no later
than 5:00 p.m. on June 8, 2007. Your comments must be forwarded to our office (attn: Tara Patton
(tDatton6Dbgh &om) In order to provide written comments to the applicant in accordance with the timeframes
established in the City's Land Development Regulations. Your comments must be provided by the deadline
stated above. Should you have no comments, please indicate so next to your name on the second page and
forward this memo to our office. Additional copies of the application are available in the Growth Management
Department.
`dEETING DATE:
A Development Review Committee meeting will be held on Thursday, June 28. 2007 at 3:00 p.m., in the Ciyt
F' Council Chambers to review the following development applications:
PALM BEACH GARDENS PETITION NUMBER: #LDRA- 07 -05- 000015 - GANDER MOUNTAIN RETAIL
Request by Brian Cheguis of Cotleur & Hearing, Inc., agent for the applicant, for a request for an approval of a
text amendment to Section 78 -159, Code of Ordinances, entitled Permitted, Conditional, and Prohibited Use
Chart, specifically to the Retail, General use category. The applicant requests to include Boat and Marine
Sales within the Retail, General use category and to include it as a major conditional use within the General
Commercial District (CG -1) zoning district and to include special provisions for such a use.
PALM BEACH GARDENS PETITION NUMBER: #PPUD -07 -05- 000014 - GANDER MOUNTAIN RETAIL
Request by Brian Cheguis of Cotleur & Hearing, Inc., agent for the applicant, for a request for a rezoning for a
Planned Unit Development (PUD) overlay with an underlying zoning designation of General Commercial (CG -1)
for a 13.18 acre parcel located on the east side of Interstate 95 with access from Sandtree Drive. The property
is located approximately % mile south of Northlake Boulevard. The proposed development consists of 105,000
of retail and 15,000 of boat sales and storage.
The applicant will be in attendance at this meeting. Our office requests your participation in the review of this
project. Please review this request and attend the meeting if possible. Receiving your comments prior to the
meeting will allow staff to compile comments before the meeting to ensure the proper direction, land
development regulations and information are being conveyed to the applicant.
Thank you for your ongoing cooperation and assistance. Please contact our office at 799 -4288 should you have
any questions.
Julius Barone, Police
Jim Orth, P.E., Engineering (LBFH)
Scott Fetterman, Fire Marshall
Bruce Gregg, Seacoast Utility Authority
Mark Hendrickson, City Forester
Doug Wise, Building Official
Jack Doughney, Community Services
Todd Engle, Construction Services
Tim Kasher, Recreation
Mike Kelly, Parks
Mike Morrow, Public Works
David Reyes, Code Enforcement
Christine Tatum, City Attorney
Angela Wong, Operations
Alan Boaz, Florida Power and Light
2
Gerald Gawaldo, Palm Beach County
Rick Kania, Waste Management
Layle Knox, North Palm Beach Improvement District
Robert Lozano, Florida Power and Light
Brad Wiseman, City of PBG
Attachment: Development Plans (for both petitions)
cc: Without Attachments to:
Talal Benothman, AICP, Growth Management
Ray Caranci, Growth Management
Dan Clark, P.E. City Engineer (LBFH)
Kara Irwin, AICP, Growth Management
Patricia Snider, City Clerk
Nancy E. Stroud, Assistant City Attorney
Stephen Stepp, Police Chief
Brian Cheguis, Cotleur & Hearing
_TA ArJ
d'6 ?�H� 37
'Diou� �ar►M��� oPP�o� 4S�• o�qy• ta4�1
m�zl� �KSN��
PCR OA
�-' a �� ✓ 5 4 Ceres
V W�
� uccE
3
CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS
DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE
Gander Mountain
Prepared by: Brad Wiseman, Planning Manager
June 28, 2007
Deadline to Respond July 30, 2007
Planning & Zoning
Certification Issues:
Petition PUD- 07 -05- 000014
1. Pursuant to Section 78 -344 (e) wheel stops, bumper stops, or non - mountable
concrete curbing shall be provided in all parking spaces. The standard parking
layout reflects a curb. Please clarify if a curb will be provided for all parking
spaces. Please note that one of the above shall be provided for all parking spaces
or a waiver will need to be requested.
2. Pursuant to Section 78 -285, a waiver request is needed for the principal tenant
signs to be larger than 36 inches. Please note that staff has concerns with the
sizes and the number of principal tenant signs proposed.
3. Pursuant to Division 7. Signs, the advertising building signage (hunt, fish, outdoor
apparel, bait shop, tracker, and etc are not a permitted sign type. The applicant
shall remove these signs from the elevations or request a waiver from Section 78-
285. Please note that staff has concerns with the number and the types of signage
requested.
4. Pursuant to Section 78 -285, a waiver is not required for a monument sign as the
subject site does provide at least 300 lineal feet of right -of -way. The applicant
shall withdraw this waiver request.
5. Pursuant to Section 78 -285, monument signs shall be no larger than 15 feet wide
by 10 feet high. The proposed monument sign is 17 feet wide by 15 feet high.
The applicant shall reduce the size of the sign or request a waiver. Please note
that staff recommends that the monument sign be reduced to the City Code
allowance.
6. Pursuant to Section 78 -285, landscaping around monument signs shall be not less_
than the height of the sign for the front and side, and three feet for the rear. Please
revise accordingly or request a waiver.
7. The applicant shall clarify if the monument sign is single, or double faced. Please
note Section 78 -285 limits monument signs to a single face.
1
.1
8. The applicant shall clarify if there are any outdoor storage areas to be proposed
for the site. If so, these areas shall conform to Section 78 -376.
9. Pursuant to Section 78 -344 (1) (2), 1.5 additional square feet of open space shall
be provided for each additional square foot of asphalt that is reduced through the
utilization of the reduced parking stall widths.
Non - Certification Issues:
1. Staff strongly recommends that the building be shifted to the north and the
northern lake relocated near the southern property line adjacent to the existing
residential community. This design will provide for additional separation from the
residential and a greater degree of compatibility between uses.
2. Staff strongly recommends that there be no loading zones in close proximity to
the existing residential community.
3. Staff has serious concerns with the proposed architecture of the retail store. Staff
recommends that the architecture be improved to soften the scale of the 105,000
square -foot building.
4. Staff recommends that an eight -foot high decorative wall and significant
landscaping be provided to mitigate potential impacts from the proposed
commercial use on the existing residential community. Additionally, staff
recommends that this wall be provided on the eastern side of the lake and the
northern side (if the other lake is relocated per comment #1). Staff recommends
that cross sections of this decorative wall and landscaping be provided. As result,
a specifically - identifiable benefit for City residents will be achieved, which is a
requirement for a PUD zoning.
5. Staff encourages the applicant to incorporate paths and pedestrian amenities such
as benches around the lakes to further improve these potential public benefits.
6. Staff is encouraged with the proposed cross - access to the Sand Tree office
development. However, access to the office complex may be difficult due to the
site configuration. Staff recommends that the applicant coordinate with the
owners of the office complex to pursue possible access to the office site.
7. Staff recommends that the applicant pursue a possible vehicle /pedestrian
connection to the Northlake Commons shopping center.
8. It is staff's professional opinion that the proposed building signage is excessive.
Specifically, the size and number of the "Gander" signs and the non - permitted
advertising signage (Hunt, Fish, Outdoor Apparel, Tracker, and etc.) negatively
impact the architectural elevations.
N
C
Certification Issues:
Petition LDRA -07 -05 -00001 S
1. Staff has serious concerns with the proposed amendment to the Land
Development Regulations (LDR). Please note that the General Commercial
(CG -1) zoning district is not intended to be suited for outdoor sales activities.
The proposed amendment seeks to allow the outdoor sale /display of boats,
which as proposed, would cause internal conflicts within the City's LDRs. It
is staff professional opinion that the amendment, as proposed, would
negatively alter the character of the City's CG -1 zoning district. Staff strongly
recommends that there be no outdoor sale /displays of merchandise.
2. In addition, staff strongly recommends that the LDR amendment be revised to
include specific criteria for boat sales that ensure compatibility with the
surrounding area.
3
Memo to File
To: Brad Wiseman, Planning Manager
Through: Mark Hendrickson, City Forester
From: Ray Caranci, Forestry Technician
Subject: PPUD- 07 -05 -14 Gander Mountain retail
Date: June 12, 2007
The applicant is proposing a Planned Unit Development (PUD) which is an overlay
district permitted by the city's LDR to encourage innovative concepts of development in
the creation of aesthetically - pleasing living, shopping and working environments. The
purpose and intent of a PUD is spelled out in LDR Section 78 -154. The proposed Gander
Mountain PUD petition does not mention one specifically - identifiable benefit to City
residents as required by a PUD.
We feel that the main problem with the site design is that the applicant is proposing a big
box retail building within an irregularly shaped parcel, which forces the building on the
south side of the parcel next to the residential units and their playground. The Sandtree
residents have had to endure the nuisances caused by the big box retail of Home Depot
for two decades. They should not have to be subjected to the rear service areas of another
closer retail provider. When this site is cleared, the applicant will be exposing the rear of
the Home Depot storage and service area to the City and all who travel I -95. Gander
Mountain, as proposed, will also be facing this very ugly storage and service area.
We recommend that the applicant flip their store and share the service area with the
Northlake Commons/Home Depot Shopping Center. This would accomplish the
following:
1. Hide both retail service areas (loading, unloading and storage) from I -95,
residents and Gander Mountain;
2. Free up land to provide more scenic and functional open space, which could be a
promotional asset to Gander Mountain;
3. Move the large box building away from the residential units and playground;
4. Separate the truck traffic from the vehicle traffic;
5. Allow all parking to be in front of the building for better security;
6. Orient the front of the store and associated wall signage to the I -95 north bound
traffic and Northlake Boulevard off -ramp for more visibility;
7. Allow for the two retention areas to be combined on the south side of the project
for more buffering distance between the residential community; and
8. Potentially, aligning the watercraft display area with the Home Depot outdoor
display area with a pedestrian connection for more exposure to all retail users, and
access to another large field of parking.
Understanding that the previous recommendation would change the entire site plan
significantly, we have reviewed the current petition, and provide the following
comments:
Certification Issues
1. In accordance with section 78- 320(a) (4) c. of the LDR, non residential
buildings shall have at least one shade tree or palm cluster installed for each 30
linear feet, or fraction thereof, of facade width. Trees and palms shall be of an
installed size relating to the height of the adjacent wall or facade, as indicated in
Table 30. Please revise the landscape plan to include the required number of
trees or palm clusters for the proposed building. There is a large gap in the
foundation planting on the east side of the building where the loading dock is
shown. The minimum height is not provided in the height of trees or the royal
palms around the building. Please revise the plant list to show the minimum
heights for trees and palms from Section 78 -320, Table 30 for heights of over 25
-35 feet the minimum tree height is 16 feet, minimum palm height is18 to 22
feet, and revise the plan to show foundation landscaping on the east side of the
building.
2. In accordance with Section 78 -313 (d) (1) of the LDR, concerning specimen
trees, please show the number and percentage protected in place or relocated on
site. A survey was included showing locations of a sampling of existing trees on
site. An accounting on the survey will establish that the number of trees, their
sizes, and species are adequately being protected. Please provide a survey
showing the existing trees on site, identifying the species, diameter at breast
height (DBH) and location. There are 336 Sabal pa s shown on the plant list.
Please indicate if these are to be relocated trees.
3. In accordance with Section 78 -305 (c) 7 d.[78 -287 (c)] of the LDR, landscaping
requirements for signs, minimum widths of front and side landscaping should
equal the height of the sign .There is inadequate landscaping around the
monument sign. A waiver would have to be requested to reduce the amount of
landscaped area from the requirement of side and front landscaping being equal
to the height of the sign.
4. In accordance with Section 78 -306 of the LDR, all locations for proposed
utilities, easements, underground drainage, and light fixtures shall be shown on
the landscape plan and the site plan to prevent possible conflicts with
landscaping. Please show any FP &L lines or existing easements, and where any
proposed lines or equipment will be located on the landscape plan.
5. The calculation of the landscape points required is missing from the landscape
plan, and the total of required points is not indicated. Please revise the site plan
and landscape plan to show the square footage area of open space used to
calculate the number of landscape points required, show the amount of points
per 100 square feet, and the total points.
6. Bougainvillea and Parsons Junipers are listed on the preferred species list.
Please revise the plant list to include them as preferred species.
7. The third column of the plant list should read "quantity" only. Please revise.
8. The size of the Live Oaks (QV I) does not meet the minimum required height of
12 feet. Please revise the plan to increase their size to the minimum required.
9. On the plant list, please indicate the type of sod proposed.
10. At the entrance road, the Royal Palms do not provide an adequate buffer for the
adjacent residential properties. Please revise the landscape plan to include trees
that will provide more of a visual and sound blocking buffer, for example, Live
Oak and Sabal palms. This should also be mirrored on the north side of the road
to buffer the view to the back of the commercial buildings to the north.
11. The parking area overlaps the lake maintenance easement at the north end of the
parking area, and limits the planting of trees in this area. Please revise the
landscape plan to remove this overlap, and add landscaping with the trees in the
parking islands in the affected area.
12. In accordance with Section 78 -186 (b) (10), a wall up to 8 feet in height, or a
berm with a 6 foot wall to total 8 feet shall be provided between the commercial
and residential use. Please revise the landscape and engineering plans to show
the 6 foot wall on a 2 foot berm, or as an 8 foot wall.
13. Please provide an explanation of why the water line that enters the property at
the northeast corner of the building has to go all the way around the north and
west sides of the building when it could go directly down the east side of the
building to reach the supply hookup for this building, the Sandtree office
building, and fire hydrant on the south side of the parcel.
14. In accordance with Section 78 -305 of the LDR, the surrounding landscaping
within 50 feet of the property shall be shown on the landscape plan. Please
revise the landscape plan to show landscaping and fencing.
Non - Certification Issues
1. Several encroachments into the site exist along the south property boundary
adjacent to Sandtree. Encroachments consist of patios, fences, and utilities. The
applicant shall provide information on how they propose to resolve these
conflicts.
2. We recommend that the wall proposed on the east and south side of the 0.72 acre
lake be placed on the west side of the lake to provide more noise mitigation and
amenities for the residential community.
Also, please understand that additional information may be requested, and staff may have
additional comments as the review process continues.
Memo to File
To: Brad Wiseman, Planning Manager
From: Mark Hendrickson, City Forester
Subject: Gander Mountain — Zoning Text Amendment
Date: June 12, 2007
The Gander Mountain Retail — Zoning Text Amendment narrative includes language that
would change LDR Section 78 -320, entitled Foundation landscaping and plantings, to
allow specific corridors for sufficient views of the purposed boat and marina sales. This
is alarming to me that a proposed text amendment for a retail use would affect the City's
landscape code. I do not support any text amendment to LDR Section 78 -320 for the
following reasons:
• The proposed text amendment would be in conflict with Section 78 -313,
entitled Minimum landscape requirements for nonresidential development,
which requires outside display or sales areas to be screened from public view;
• There really is no difference visually between boat sales /display and boat
storage, especially for a retail establishment that will probably have a high turn
over of makes and models of boats. Therefore, I believe any request to allow
for increased visibility would be in conflict with LDR Section 78 -159 , Table
21, note 59, which requires boats to be stored in areas that are completely
screened from public view or adjacent residential zoning districts;
• For the purpose of this text amendment, when the term boat is referenced, it is
referring to the City's definition of "watercraft ". It is also the intent of this
discussion that trailers or similar devices used for storage or transportation of
watercraft shall be considered a single unit and subject to the regulations and
restrictions applicable to a watercraft. These statements are made to insure that
any loop -holes potentially created by changing the LDR text on boat and marine
sales does not change the screening requirements of the City's LDR Section 78-
313.
• Based on the narrative, I also have a concern that the applicant needs to amend
the City's definition of "boat and marine sales" because they are proposing this
use within CG -l. Pursuant to LDR Section 78 -390, entitled definitions "boat
and marine sales ", means an establishment engaged in sales, rental, repair,
maintenance, and service of watercraft. According to the Chart of Permitted
Uses, boat repair is only allowed in MIA Zoning Districts. If the applicant is
not purposing to change this definition, then they are technically just a general
showroom, which is allowed in CG -1 and does not need a LDR text
amendment.
L h
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS,
SURVEYORS do MAPPERS
CIVIL
AGRICULTURAL
WATER RESOURCES
WATER & WASTEWATER
TRANSPORTATION
SURVEY & MAPPING
GIS
"Partners For Results
Value By Design"
3550 S.W. Corporate Pkwy.
Palm City, FL 34990
(772) 286 -3883
Fax (772) 286 -3925
www.ibffi.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Miller
FROM: Jim Orth, P.E. 5�1'�
TA—
DATE: June 7, 2007
FILE NO. 16881
SUBJECT: Gander Mountain
PUD Review
PPUD 07 -05 -14
We have reviewed the following plans and information for the above referenced
project received May 24, 2007:
• Development Application prepared by Cotleur Hearing
• Letter of Submittal of Requested Materials dated May 11, 2007 prepared by
Cotleur Hearing
• Project Narrative dated April 13, 2007 prepared by Cotleur Hearing
• Traffic Impact Analysis dated (signed) April 25, 2007 prepared by Kimley
Horn & Associates, Inc.
• Copy of SWA Capacity Letter dated January 17, 2007
• Copy of SUA Capacity Letter dated May 2, 2007
• Copy of Option Agreement dated (signed) March 19, 2007
• Copy of Written Action of Members of Garden Walk LLC dated October 21,
2005.
• Copy of Letter to City of Palm Beach Gardens Regarding Police Department
Capacity dated May 9, 2007 prepared by Cotleur Hearing.
• Copy of Letter to City of Palm Beach Gardens Regarding Fire Department
Capacity dated May 9, 2007 prepared by Cotleur Hearing.
• Copy of Letter to City of Palm Beach Gardens Regarding Engineering
Department Capacity dated May 9, 2007 prepared by Cotleur Hearing.
• Copy of Letter from City of Palm Beach Gardens Fire Department Regarding
Capacity dated May 14, 2007.
• Environment Assessment dated April 2005 prepared by Environmental
Services, Inc.
• Preliminary Architectural Plan (Sheet A203 & A301)
• Copy of Warranty Deed dated (recorded) October 31, 2005
• Copy of PBC Tax Map
• Copy of Owner's Authorization of Agent dated April 13, 2007 prepared by
Oppidan
• Color Rendering dated April 2007 prepared by Oppida !' F PA?.V Qrp •ABC
• Architectural Plan (Rendering & Sheet A201) dated April 2007 prepared by
Oppidan JUN 2 2 2001
PAP13GMEM0\16881 \16881 - 20070607 - PPUD- 07- 05- 14.doc
Gander Mountain Page 2 of 13
LBFH File No. 16881
• Boundary, Topographic and Tree Survey dated (survey) February 6, 2006
prepared by Donald D. Daniels, Inc.
• Copy of Drainage Statement dated (signed) April 26, 2007 prepared by
Keshavarz & Associates, Inc.
• Conceptual Engineering Plan dated April 26, 2007 prepared by Keshavarz &
Associates, Inc.
• Cover Sheet (Sheet 1 of 8)
• Key Plan (Sheet 2 of 8)
• Conceptual Drainage, Water & Sewer Plan (Sheet 3 thru 5 of 8)
• Grading, Paving & Drainage Details (Sheet 6 thru 8 of 8)
• Photometric Plan (Sheet SL1) dated April 25, 2007 prepared by Ryan
Companies US, Inc.
• Site Plan Area Calculation Plan (Sheet 1 of 1) dated (signed) April 27, 2007
prepared by Cotleur Hearing
• Site Plan dated (signed) April 27, 2007 prepared by Cotleur Hearing
• Master Plan (Sheet 1 of 7)
• Site Plan (Sheet 2 & 3 of 7)
• Site Details (Sheet 4 of 7)
• Landscape Plan (Sheet 5 & 6 of 7)
• Landscape Details (Sheet 7 of 7)
We have the following comments:
• The applicant proposes the commercial development of 105,000 sq. ft. of retail
and 15,000 sq ft of covered boat sales & storage on the proposed 13.18 acre
site, east of I -95, south of Northlake Blvd (behind Home Depot plaza) and west
of Sandtree Drive. It is bounded on the south by the existing Sandtree
residential development.
• We have forwarded the Traffic Impact Analysis, which is dated (signed) April
25, 2007 and received May 24, 2007, to the City's traffic consultant, McMahon
& Associates, and to Palm Beach County Traffic Department for review and
comment. We will forward their comments when they are received.
Certification Issues
1. The applicant provided a boundary, topographic and tree survey of the parcel.
However, the survey is signed but not sealed. The applicant shall provide a
revised survey that is signed and sealed by a professional, who is licensed in the
state of Florida, for conformance with Sections 78 -248 & 78 -448 of the LDR.
2. In accordance with Section 78 -46 Certified boundary survey. "A certified
boundary survey by a surveyor licensed by the State of Florida. "The survey
shall have been completed within one year of the date the application is
submitted. The survey shall be prepared at a scale of not less than one inch
equals 200 feet containing the following: ... " The survey submitted for this
review is dated February 6, 2006. The applicant shall provide a revised survey,
which has been certified within the one year of the date of application.
PAPBGMEMO \l688i \16881 - 20070607 - PPUD- 07- 05- 14.doc
Gander Mountain Page 3 of 13
LBFH File No. 16881
INC.
3. The engineering plans submitted for this review were not signed and sealed by
a professional licensed in the state of Florida. The applicant shall provide
revised plans which are signed and sealed by a professional who is licensed in
the state of Florida, for conformance with Sections 78 -248 & 78 -448 of the
LDR.
4. The applicant shall dimension the offset of the centerline of the entry drive
from the centerline of Constellation Boulevard, on the site plan and engineering
plan, for conformance with Section 78 -508.
5. The applicant shall modify the entrance drive at the intersection with Sandtree
Drive, opposite Constellation Boulevard, for conformance with Section 78 -508
of the LDR, which indicates New Intersections. "Proposed new intersections
along one side of an existing street shall, wherever practicable, coincide with
any existing intersections on the opposite side of such street. Street
intersections with centerline separations of less than 150 feet shall not be
permitted. Intersection of collector and arterial streets shall be at least 800 feet
apart, centerline to centerline, wherever practicable. "
6. If the applicant is unable to revise the design to align the centerlines, the
applicant shall request a waiver from said Section 78 -508 of the LDR.
7. The applicant indicates that they propose to take over the maintenance of the
lake on the northwest corner of the intersection of the entrance drive and
Sandtree Drive. The applicant shall provide evidence of acceptance by the
currently responsible entity for the proposed work and maintenance.
8. The applicant shall indicate and make necessary modifications to the lake to
allow conformance of the project to the requirements of Section 78 -508 of the
LDR, related to intersection alignment.
9. The applicant shall provide evidence of approval, from all affected regulatory
agencies, for the required permit modifications related to the proposed
modifications to the existing lake and to the proposed change in the entity
responsible for the future maintenance of the lake.
10. The applicant shall provide a narrative clarifying their proposal to resolve
conflicts with adjacent residential parcels per LDR Section 78 -46. The
Boundary Survey identifies several existing fences and a water management
tract of adjacent parcels that encroach upon the project boundaries.
11. The applicant shall clarify the intent of the proposed drive, which is shown
connecting to the parcel to the south at the southwest corner of the proposed
site (Sheet 1 of 7), for conformance with Section 78 -46 of the LDR.
12. The applicant shall identify any existing or proposed cross access agreement
with the abutting parcel.
P: \PBGMEMO \16881 \16881 - 20070607 - PPUD- 07- 05- 14.doc
Gander Mountain Page 4 of 13
LBFH File No. 16881
INC.
13. The applicant shall label the handicap ramps as "HR" or "CR" on the plans, or
where it is proposed that the walk be flush with the pavement it shall be so
labeled as "FW ", at the time of the site plan review, for conformance with
Section 78 -371 of the LDR. At time of construction plan review FDOT Index
304 CR numbers shall be identified for each location, in addition to the labeling
of flush walk ( "FW ") where appropriate.
14. The applicant shall show the storm line from the north lake to the existing
offsite lake on the landscape plan consistent with the site plan and engineering
plan. Specifically, the applicant shall show the line from the north structure, on
the lake interconnect pipe between the south lake and the offsite lake, and the
structure north of the first crosswalk to the north.
15. The applicant shall remove the trees shown over this storm line or relocate the
storm line to avoid the tree line in this area.
16. The applicant shall remove or relocate the tree, which is shown within the paver
crosswalk at the northerly corner of the island at the entry to the parking area.
17. The applicant shall remove or relocate the tree, which is shown within the
accessible route sidewalk within the island at the entry to the parking area.
18. The applicant shall label the lake maintenance easement on the landscape plan,
consistent with the site plan and engineering plan, for conformance with
Section 78 -563 of the LDR.
19. The applicant shall remove the two (2) trees shown at the southwest corner of
the 0.72 acre lake, which are shown within the 20' LME, for conformance with
Section 78 -563 of the LDR.
20. The applicant shall relocate the trees in the south cluster on the east side of the
0.72 acre lake, which are shown within the 20' LME, for conformance with
Section 78 -563 of the LDR.
21. The applicant shall show, label and dimension a 20 -foot wide unencumbered
lake maintenance access easement (LMAE) from the entry drive to the offsite
lake, midway on the south side of the lake and on the west end of the lake from
the proposed site (recommend in the area of the interconnect pipe), per Section
78 -563 of the LDR.
22. The applicant shall revise the conceptual engineering plan to identify proposed
reinforced concrete drainage pipe (RCP) under all load- bearing surfaces in
accordance with Section 78 -524 of the LDR.
P:\PBGMEMO \16881 \16881 - 20070607 - PPUD- 07- 05- 14.doc
Gander Mountain Page 5 of 13
LBFH File No. 16881
INC.
23. The applicant shall also revise the conceptual engineering plan to identify
acceptable materials for all roof drains under load bearing surfaces in
accordance with Section 78 -46 of the LDR. The applicant is advised that either
DI, SDR -26 PVC or C -900 PVC are considered acceptable for use as roof
drains under load bearing surfaces.
24. The applicant shall provide conceptual cross sections of the site at all
boundaries from the proposed buildings, clearly showing how the site matches
existing conditions, per Section 78 -46 of the LDR.
25. The applicant shall provide conceptual cross - section details for City review and
approval of proposed roads meeting the requirements of Section 78 -498 of the
LDR.
26. The applicant shall provide a detail of the loading zone sign per Section 78 -46
of the LDR.
27. We suggest that the applicant provide a stop sign/bar for the northbound traffic,
at the north end of the triangular parking area, in the first aisle west of the
diagonal aisle, in accordance with Section 78 -524 of the LDR.
28. We recommend that the applicant revise the alignment of the stop bars, for
intersecting northbound traffic along the diagonal drive aisle to be parallel with
the diagonal aisle, in conformance with the intent of MUTCD Section 3B.16 -
Stop and Yield Lines - Guidance: which states, "If used, stop and yield lines
should be placed 1.2 m (4 ft) in advance of and parallel to the nearest crosswalk
line, except at roundabouts as provided for in Section 3B.24. "
29. We recommend that the applicant show pedestrian crossing signs for the
crosswalk at the entrance to the parking lot. The applicant is referred to Section
2C.41 of the MUTCD, which notes; "When used at the crossing, Nonvehicular
signs shall be supplemented with a diagonal downward pointing Arrow (W16-
7p) plaque (see Figure 2C -11) showing the location of the crossing. "
30. The applicant provided a photometric plan, for review and approval. However;
the applicant is advised of the following;
a. The applicant shall revise the photometric plan for compliance with
Ordinance 26, 2006 and the City's lighting standards, which amends
Section 78 -182 and Section 78 -751 of the LDR.
b. The photometric plan was not signed and sealed by a professional engineer
licensed in the state of Florida. The applicant shall provide a signed and
sealed photometric plan for review.
P:\PBGMEMO \16881 \16881 - 20070607 - PPUD- 07- 05- 14.doc
Gander Mountain Page 6 of 13
LBFH File No. 16881
INC.
c. The applicant shall provide the following information on the luminaire
schedule of the photometric plan. Freestanding light poles located within
the residential portion of a PUD or PCD shall be a cutoff luminaire, or
equivalent, with a maximum angel of 90 degrees in accordance with
Ordinance 26, 2006.
d. The applicant shall revise the detail (Sheet 4 of 7) indicating the height of
the light fixtures, to show the height of the fixture measured to the center of
the fixture. The height shall not to exceed 25 feet when located in vehicle
use areas, or 12 feet when utilized in pedestrian areas in accordance with
Ordinance 26, 2006.
e. The lighting plan shall identify all pedestrian areas and shall provide the
lighting levels for the back side of the walk area. The lighting level shall be
a minimum of 0.6 fc in pedestrian use areas.
f. The applicant shall provide separate lighting level data, in the "Statistics"
table, for the following areas of the project; pedestrian areas, parking stall
areas, drive aisles, ramps, stairwells, vehicle entrance area and pedestrian
entry areas. The following data shall be specified; the minimum fc,
maximum fc, average fc, max /min ratio, avg/min ratio, minimum average fc
maintained, maximum average fc maintained, minimum initial fc.
g. The applicant shall identify the minimum average maintained, which shall
not be less than 1.5 fc per Ordinance 26, 2006, based on the vehicle use area
designation.
h. The applicant shall identify the maximum average maintained, which shall
not be more than 10.0 fc per Ordinance 26, 2006, based on the vehicle use
area designation.
i. The applicant shall identify the minimum initial fc required, which shall not
be less than 1.0 fc per the City's lighting standard.
30. The applicant shall revise the lighting levels to conform to the above
requirements as noted in Ordinance 26, 2006 and the City's lighting standards,
including;
a. The applicant currently shows lighting levels exceeding 10 fc within the
vehicle use areas.
b. The applicant currently shows lighting levels to be less than 1.0 fc within
the vehicular use areas.
c. The applicant currently shows lighting levels exceeding 10 fc within the
pedestrian use areas.
P:\PBGMEMO \16881 \16881 - 20070607 - PPUD- 07- 05- 14.doc
Gander Mountain Page 7 of 13
LBFH File No. 16881
INC.
d. The applicant currently shows lighting levels to be less than 0.6 fc along the
sidewalk of the pedestrian accessible route.
31. The applicant shall identify the curb radii throughout the project, in accordance
with Section 78 -46 of the LDR. While the applicant has indicated the radii of
some curb locations, not all are shown, including the entry from Sandtree
Drive.
32. The applicant shall relocate the bike racks in close proximity to the entrances.
The locations of the bike racks shown, on the site plan, do not address the LDR
requirement that the location be near an entrance. We question the usability and
security of the two (2) bike racks shown in the rear of the building.
a. Per Section 78 -412 of the LDR, "... Bicycle parking shall be located as
close as is practical to the entrance to the use served, but situated so as not
'to' obstruct the flow of pedestrians using the building entrance or
sidewalk ". Further, Per Section 78 -413 of the LDR, "... "Wherever the
design of the building, or use being served by the bicycle parking facility,
includes either covered areas which could accommodate such facilities, as
proposed or through economical redesign, covered bicycle parking shall be
encouraged."
33. The applicant shall provide a note on the engineering plan in accordance with
Section 78 -371 of the LDR and for consistency with the site plan, stating, "All
handicap accessible ramps shall meet all applicable local, regional and state
accessibility guidelines and regulations. Any modifications shall be approved
by the engineer -of- record. "
34. The applicant shall provide a note on the engineering plan in accordance with
Section 78 -344 of the LDR and for consistency with the site plan, stating, "All
pavement marking and striping, excluding parking stalls, shall be installed with
thermoplastic materials. Also, paver bricks of appropriate color shall be used
on paver brick areas, in lieu of paint or thermoplastic material".
35. The applicant shall provide wheel stops within all non parallel parking spaces
for conformance with Section 78 -344 and 78 -315 of the LDR. In lieu of wheel
stops, the applicant may utilize a type D curb and a 2.5 foot overhang area in
addition to the required 18.5 -foot paved length. If the parking space abuts a
sidewalk, then the sidewalk shall be increased in width to accommodate the 2.5
foot overhang. If the parking space abuts a landscape area, then the 2.5 foot
overhang area shall be sod only and is excluded from the open space
calculations.
36. The applicant shall show wheel stops on the plans consistent with the details on
the engineering plans (Sheet 6 of 8).
37. The applicant shall revise the details of the parking stalls (Sheet 4 of 7) for
consistency with the engineering plan (Sheet 6 of 8).
P:\PBGMEMO \16881 \16881 - 20070607 - PPUD- 07- 05- 14.doe
Gander Mountain Page 8 of 13
LBFH File No. 16881
INC.
38. The applicant shall revise the 10' x 16' parking space detail label to reflect the
19' dimension shown (Sheet 6 of 8).
39. The applicant is requesting a waiver (waiver request #5) from the required four
(4) loading spaces to provide only three (3) loading spaces. However, the site
plan only shows two (2) proposed loading spaces. The applicant shall revise the
waiver request and site plan for consistency.
40. The applicant shall show and label all pavement marking and signage on the
site plan and engineering plan, or provide a pavement marking and signage
plan, for conformance with Section 78 -46 of the LDR.
Waiver Requests
1. The applicant requests a waiver from Section 78 -285 (Table 4), which permits
one (1) 36" high principal tenant sign. The applicant requests up to two (2)
additional principal tenant signs. Please note we remain in support of the City's
LDR requirements.
2. The applicant requests a waiver from Section 78 -285 (Table 4), which permits
one (1) ground floor tenant sign per tenant. The applicant requests up to two (2)
additional ground floor tenant sign. Please note we remain in support of the
City's LDR requirements.
3. The applicant requests a waiver from Section 78 -285 (Table 4), which requires
a minimum frontage for monument sign of 300 feet. The applicant requests
permission to place a monument sign on 70 feet of frontage. Please note we
remain in support of the City's LDR requirements.
4. The applicant requests a waiver from Section 78 -285 (Table 4), which permits
90 sq ft of sign area. The applicant requests 280 sq ft, 700 sq ft, 150 sq ft & 255
sq ft signs. Please note we remain in support of the City's LDR requirements.
5. The applicant requests a waiver from Section 78 -364 (Table 35), which requires
three (3) loading spaces for 100,000 sq ft and one (1) for each additional
100,000 sq ft, total four (4) loading spaces for this development. The applicant
requests that only three (3) loading space be required. Please note we remain in
support of the City's LDR requirements.
Non - Certification Issues
NOTE: All engineering/infrastructure plans are considered conceptual during
the planning and zoning review phase and are subject to further review during
the final construction review. These non - certification comments shall be
satisfied prior to construction plan approval and the issuance of the first land
alteration permit.
P:\PBGMEMO \16881 \16881 - 20070607 - PPUD- 07- 05- 14.doc
Gander Mountain Page 9 of 13
L LBFH File No. 16881
INC.
1. The applicant shall dimension the engineering plan or provide a horizontal
control plan, which provides "complete horizontal control of the project
sufficient to construct the project and determine the dimensions of all site
improvements" in accordance with Section 78 -448 of the LDR.
2. The applicant shall revise the references to the 2004 FDOT Standard
Specifications (Sheet 7 of 8) to reference either the current "2007" FDOT specs
or the "Current Edition" of the FDOT specs. As the applicant does reference the
2007 edition on that page, the applicant shall review the text and change the
references for consistency.
3. The applicant shall label the handicap ramps, on the engineering plan, with the
appropriate CR# per the FDOT Index 304.
4. The applicant shall provide details of all non - standard (modified) curb ramps,
which are not identified with a FDOT CR #. Said ramps shall be labeled "mod ",
for modified, with the appropriate FDOT CR# representing the ramp
modification.
5. The applicant shall provide surface water management calculations.
6. The applicant shall submit signed and sealed drainage calculations (for pipe
sizing), along with a drainage area map indicating the drainage area for each
contributing structure, along with exfiltration calculations for any exfiltration
proposed.
7. The applicant shall provide a copy of SFWN D Permit #50- 01482 -S referenced
in the General Drainage Statement.
8. The applicant shall identify the improvements proposed for the existing 1.09 -
acre lake located within the adjacent existing shopping center that is proposed
to serve both the existing shopping center and the proposed project, in
accordance with Section 78 -46 of the LDR.
9. The applicant shall identify any proposed improvements to the existing outfall
pipes and control structure from the 1.09 -acre lake.
10. The applicant shall show the minimum road, building floor and perimeter berm
elevations per flood routing calculations for the SFWNID permit, on the
Drainage Plans.
11. The applicant shall provide the area (sq. ft.) at the top of bank and at the toe of
slope for the lakes.
12. The applicant shall label the proposed pipe material on the engineering plan.
13. The applicant shall provide a "Pipe Outfall - Section" detail identifying the 2'
separation between the control elevation and the top of pipe.
P:\PBGMEMO \16881 \16881 - 20070607 - PPUD- 07- 05- 14.doc
Gander Mountain Page 10 Of 13
LBFH File No. 16881
INC.
14. Satisfied. The applicant has indicated the structural numbers for the `Asphalt
Section (Typ.)' and the `Vehicular Concrete Pavers' section detail on the
Engineering Detail Sheet in accordance with Section 78 -499 Table 41 of the
LDR. The applicant provided a table indicating the layer, material, LBR/FBV,
material thickness, FDOT layer coefficient; the SN for the pavement section,
base section, and subgrade section; and the total SN for the total pavement
section and the required SN in accordance with the FDOT Flexible Design
Manual.
a. The applicant is advised of a typo in the paver pavement section table. The
FDOT layer coefficient should be 0.06 rather than the 0.08 shown for the
paver design section.
P:\PBGMEMO \16881 \16881 - 20070607 - PPUD- 07- 05- 14.doc
As halt Pavement Section Table
Layer
Material
LBR/FBV
Thickness
FDOT Coefficient
SN
Surface
Asphalt
- --
1.5"
0.44
0.66
Base
Limerock
LBR 100
6.5"
0.18
1.17
Sub grade
Stabilized
50 FBV
12"
0.06
0.72
Total SN
Required SN
2.55
1.50
a. The applicant is advised of a typo in the paver pavement section table. The
FDOT layer coefficient should be 0.06 rather than the 0.08 shown for the
paver design section.
P:\PBGMEMO \16881 \16881 - 20070607 - PPUD- 07- 05- 14.doc
bc I Gander Mountain Page 11 of 13
._— _�• LBFH File No. 16881
15. Prior to the issuance of the first land alteration permit, the applicant shall
provide a copy of the following approved permits, as applicable:
a. SFWMD
b. NPBCID
c. PBC
d. FDOT
e. PBC Health Department/FDEP
f. NPDES
16. The applicant shall provide a cost estimate for the project, including public
infrastructure and all landscaping and irrigation costs for review and approval
by the City in order to establish surety. The cost estimate shall be signed and
sealed by an engineer and landscape architect registered in the state of Florida.
Surety will be based on 110% of the total combined approved cost estimates
and shall be posted with the City, prior to the issuance of the first land
alteration permit.
SUMMARY OF ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
of Probable Construction Costs
for On -site and Off -site Public Im rovements
Grading & Paving
Sanitary Sewer
Water
Storm Water Maintenance
Subtotal
Landscaping
rri ation
Subtotal
Total
110 %Total Required Surety
17. The applicant shall provide a cost estimate for the on -site project
improvements, not including public infrastructure, landscaping and irrigation
costs (which were previously submitted by the applicant) for review and
approval by the City. The cost estimate shall be signed and sealed by an
engineer and shall be posted with the City prior to the issuance of the first land
alteration permit.
SUMMARY OF ENGINEER'S ESTIMATE
of Probable Construction Costs
for On -site Non Public Im rovements
Grading
Sanitary Sewer
Water
Storm Water Maintenance
rl'otal
PAPBGMEM0\16881 \16881 - 20070607 - PPUD- 07- 05- 14.doc
Gander Mountain Page 12 of 13
LBFH File No. 16881
hINC.
Conditions of Approval
1. "Applicant shall copy to the City all permit applications, permits, certifications
and approvals. " (City Engineer)
2. "Applicant shall provide all necessary construction zone signage and fencing
as required by the City Engineer. " (City Engineer)
3. "Prior to the issuance of the first land alteration permit, the applicant shall
plat the site to include all existing and proposed easements and like
encumbrances, in accordance with LDR Section 78 -446 for City Council
approval. " (City Engineer and Planning & Zoning)
4. "Prior to construction plan approval and the issuance of the first land
alteration permit, applicant shall provide a cost estimate and surety in
accordance with LDR Section 78 -309 and 78 -461 and a cost estimate for on-
site project improvements, not including public infrastructure, or landscaping
and irrigation costs for review and approval by the City. The cost estimates
shall be signed and sealed by an engineer and landscape architect registered in
the state of Florida and shall be posted with the City, prior to the issuance of
the first land alteration permit. " (City Engineer)
5. "The construction, operation andlor maintenance of any elements of the subject
project shall not have any negative impacts on the existing drainage of
surrounding areas. If, at any time during the project development, it is
determined by the City that any of the surrounding areas are experiencing
negative drainage impacts caused by the project, it shall be the applicant's
responsibility to cure said impacts in a period of time and a manner acceptable
to the City prior to additional construction activities. " (City Engineer)
6. "Prior to issuance of the first land alteration permit, applicant shall submit
signedlsealed/dated construction plans (paving /grading /drainage and
waterlsewer) and all pertinent calculations for review and comment. (City
Engineer)
7. "Applicant shall comply with any and all Palm Beach County Traffic Division
conditions as outlined in PBC Traffic Division equivalency and concurrency
approval letters. " (City Engineer)
8. "Prior to construction plan approval and the issuance of the first land
alteration permit, applicant shall schedule a pre - permit meeting with City
staff. " (City Engineer)
9. "Prior to the issuance of the first land alteration permit the applicant shall
provide to the City letters of authorization from the applicable utility companies
allowing landscaping and light poles to be placed within the utility easements. "
(City Engineer)
P: \PBGMEMO \16881 \16881 - 20070607 - PPUD- 07- 05- 14.doc
Gander Mountain Page 13 of 13
LBFH File No. 16881
INC.
10. "Applicant shall notify the City's Public Works Division at least 10 working
days prior to the commencement of any work/construction activity within any
public right -of -way within the City of Palm Beach Gardens. In the case of a city
right -of -way, the applicant has at least five working days to obtain a right -of-
way permit. Right -of -way permits may be obtained at the Building Division.
Failure to comply with this condition could result in a Stop Work Order of all
work/construction activity within the public right -of -way and the subject
development site. " (Public Works)
The applicant is requested to return a copy of our comments with the
applicant's acknowledgement of each comment and the response. Compliance
will expedite the subsequent review.
The applicant is reminded that all submittals are to be made to the City of
Palm Beach Gardens Growth Management Department.
JRO /mef
cc: Kara Irwin — Palm Beach Gardens (kirwin @pbgfl.com)
P: \PBGMEMO \16881 \16881 - 20070607 - PPUD- 07- 05- 14.doc
L h
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS,
SURVEYORS & MAPPERS
CIVIL
AGRICULTURAL
WATER RESOURCES
WATER & WASTEWATER
TRANSPORTATION
SURVEY & MAPPING
GIS
"Partners For Results
Value By Design"
3550 S.W. Corporate Pkwy.
Palm City, FL 34990
(772) 286 -3883
Fax (772) 286 -3925
www.lbflh.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: Brad Wiseman �.�
FROM: Jim Orth, P.E. 5� e �� /�
DATE: June 12, 2007
FILE NO. 16881
SUBJECT: Gander Mountain
Traffic Impact Analysis
uSY OF PALM BCN GDN$
JUN 212007
The City's traffic consultant, McMahon & Associates, Inc., has completed their
review of the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Kimley Horn & Associates, Inc.,
dated (signed) April 25, 2007 and received May 24, 2007, pursuant to the Palm
Beach County Traffic Performance Standards and the City of Palm Beach Gardens
Land Development Regulations for the above referenced project.
A copy of McMahon & Associates, Inc. comment memorandum, dated June 4,
2007 is attached. A copy of Palm Beach County's review comments will be
forwarded upon receipt.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please do not hesitate
to contact me at (561) 799 -4129.
JOR/mef
cc: John Kim — McMahon & Associates, Inc. (John.Kim @mcmtrans.com)
Masoud Atefi — PBCTD (matefi @co.palm - beach.fl.us)
PAPBGMEM0\16881 \16881 - 20070612 - Transmit McMahon comments to City.doc
��� �� 7741 N. Military Trail I Suite 5 1 Pam each Gardens, FL 33410
p 561. 840 -8650 1 f 561.840 -8590
' • www.mcmtrans.com
PRINCIPALS
Joseph W. McMahon, P.E.
Rodney P. Plourde, Ph.D., P.E.
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Joseph J. DeSanti P.E., PTOE
John S. DePalma
William T. Steffens
ASSOCIATES
Casey A. Moore, P.E.
TO: Judy Dye, P.E., Assistant City Engineer Gary R. McNaughton, P.E., PTOE
John J. Mitchell, P.E.
City of Palm Beach Gardens Christopher J. Williams, P.E.
John F. Yacapsin, P.E.
Thomas A. Hall
FROM: John P. Kim, P.E., PTOE, Senior Project Manager
McMahon Associates, Inc.
SUBJECT: Gander Mountain Traffic Impact Study
McMahon Project No. M06344.06
DATE: June 4, 2007
McMahon Associates, Inc. (McMahon) has reviewed the Traffic Impact Study prepared by
Kimley -Horn Associates, Inc., dated April 2007. A partial site plan was included with the
study. Our review has generated the following comments:
1. Pass -by reductions are not applicable to Sandtree Drive. The analysis must be revised to
include an analysis of Sandtree Drive with pass -by traffic included as part of the project
traffic.
2. The distribution percentages must be revised as reflected in the attached revised figure.
3. Table 2A and 2B must be revised to show the corresponding significance, v/c values and
whether or not roadway capacities are met separately for the AM and PM peak hours.
4. The report inaccurately indicates that Sandtree Drive ends at the subject site. Sandtree
Drive continues south of this project's proposed driveway connection to serve
residential areas and terminates at a non - residential development. The report fails to
provide driveway turning movements at its connection to Sandtree Drive. Figure 3 of
the report must provide the daily, AM and PM peak hour turning movements for this
project at the connection to Sandtree Drive. The number of trips generated by this site
will require the construction of a southbound right -turn deceleration lane on Sandtree
Drive for the project driveway.
5. The north arrow in the conceptual site plan included in Appendix F is not oriented
correctly. It also shows a driveway connection on the southern property line. Please
clarify what this driveway is connecting to.
MA Boston PA Fort Washington I Exton I Mechanicsburg NJ Yardville FL Palm Beach Gardens I Fort Lauderdale I Fort Myers I Miami
Gander Mountain TIS - Technical Memorandum
June 4, 2007
Page 2
6. The key map from the partial site plan that was included with the submittal (sheet 2 of
7) suggests that this project's driveway connection will create an offset intersection with
Constellation Boulevard. The project's driveway connection must align with
Constellation Boulevard.
Please feel free to contact me with any questions you may have concerning this review.
JPK /ac
cc: Trent Ebersole, P.E., Senior Project Manager
F:\FL\06344M\06344M06 -Gander Mountain TIS\ Admin \ Gander Mountain - 052507.doc
t
i
i
i
i
i
i
i
�%D 6 3S/y/ d 6 �cvJrFv co t��S/D ;z
L h
CONSULTING CIVIL ENGINEERS,
SURVEYORS & MAPPERS
CIVIL
AGRICULTURAL
WATER RESOURCES
WATER & WASTEWATER
TRANSPORTATION
SURVEY & MAPPING
GIS
"Partners For Results
Value By Design"
3550 S.W. Corporate Pkwy.
Palm City, FL 34990
(772) 286 -3883
Fax (772) 286 -3925
www.lbfh.com
MEMORANDUM
TO: Todd Miller
FROM: Jim Orth, P.E.
�2
DATE: June 7, 2007
FILE NO. 16881
SUBJECT: Gander Mountain
Land Development Text Amendment
LDRA- 07 -05 -15
We have reviewed the following plans and information for the above referenced
project received May 24, 2007:
• Development Application prepared by Cotleur Hearing
• Warranty Deed dated (recorded October 31, 2007
• Project Narrative dated April 13, 2007 prepared by Cotleur Hearing
• Copy of SWA Capacity Letter dated January 17, 2007
• Copy of PBC Tax Map
• Copy of Owner's Authorization of Agent dated April 13, 2007 prepared by
Oppidan
• Color Rendering dated April 2007 prepared by Oppidan
• Architectural Plan (Rendering & Sheet A201) dated April 2007 prepared by
Oppidan
• Boundary, Topographic and Tree Survey dated (survey) February 6, 2006 prepared
by Donald D. Daniels, Inc.
• Conceptual Engineering Plan dated April 26, 2007 prepared by Keshavarz &
Associates, Inc.
■ Cover Sheet (Sheet 1 of 8)
■ Key Plan (Sheet 2 of 8)
■ Conceptual Drainage, Water & Sewer Plan (Sheet 3 thru 5 of 8)
■ Grading, Paving & Drainage Details (Sheet 6 thru 8 of 8)
We have the following comments:
• The applicant proposes to provide boat and marine sales within the CGl zoning
district, which is not currently permitted. The applicant is requesting a text
amendment to address this issue.
We have no engineering concerns with the proposed X,�o „ , vt
amendment. k,11T 1lYl
JRO /mef JUN 22 2007
cc: Kara Irwin — Palm Beach Gardens (kirwin @ -pb flg comPI_Ak1N!N & I
ZONING DV
PAPBGMEM0\16881 \16881 - 20070607 - LDRA- 07- 05- 15.doc I f�1
PALM BEACH GARDENS POLICE DEPARTMENT
SPECIAL OPERATIONS BUREAU
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: TARA PATTON, PLANNING MANAGER
FROM: OFFICER JULES BARONE
SUBJECT: GANDER MOUNTAIN RETAIL
DATE: JUNE 1, 2007
CPTED Compliance:
Crime Prevention Through Environment Design is a branch of situational crime prevention
that maintains the basic premise that the physical environment can be designed or
manipulated to produce behavioral effects that will reduce the incident and fear of crime.
The review performed by the police officer listed above shall encompass but not be limited
to the following principles: natural surveillance, natural access control, territorial
reinforcement and maintenance. The police department has reviewed the site plan and
strongly recommends the following minimum conditions be met.
STANDARD CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL:
Professional Office /Commercial/Industrial PUDs
1. Prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, all on -site lighting shall be installed.
All exterior pedestrian walkway lighting shall utilize 12 foot pedestrian scale light poles, and
all on -site lighting shall consist of metal halide or equivalent lighting approved by the Police
Department and, shall not conflict with planted landscaping. Luminaire type should optimize
light distribution and minimize glare and up lighting. (Police Department)
2 Landscaping shall not obstruct the view from windows or walkways. Ground cover should not
exceed 24" in height and high branched trees should be trimmed to seven feet. (Police Department)
Prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the Gander Mountain retail
building, the Applicant shall provide photocell sensor engaged lighting, "dusk to dawn ",
above or near entryways, all four sides of building and adjacent sidewalks for said building.
(Police Department)
4 Prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for the Gander Mountain retail
building all entry doors (non -glass single /double) shall be equipped with astragal over the
threshold of the locking mechanism and case hardened deadbolt locks shall be provided on all
exterior /interior doors with a minimum one (1) inch throw or mechanical interlock.. Doors
secured by electrical operation shall have a keyed- switch or signal locking device to open the
door when in the locked position. Exterior doors should have a holding force of at least
1000lbs. Door hinges shall employ non- removable hinges, and the main entries to the
building shall be wired for closed- circuit digital camera surveillance system. (Police
Department)
5 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the Applicant shall submit a construction site
security and management plan for review and approval by the Police Department. Non-
compliance with the approved security and management plan may result in a stop -work order
for the CPUD. (Police Department)
Prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy for each building, all numerical
addresses shall be placed at the front and rear of each building. Each numerical address shall
be illuminated for nighttime visibility, with an uninterruptible A.C. power source, shall
consist of twelve (12) inch high numbers, and shall be a different color than the color of the
surface to which it is attached. The rear door of the building shall have an illuminated 6 inch
number on or along side the door.(Police Department)
7 Prior to the issuance of the first Certificate of Occupancy, buildings with a total square footage
of at least 10,000 square feet shall have roof top numbers placed parallel to the addressed
street, only visible from the air. The numerals should be blocked lettered, weather resistant
material, four feet in height and 18 inches wide. (Police Department)
Non- Certification Conditions of Approval:
Natural Surveillance
• Provide landscaping that does not create hiding spaces.
• Provide clearly marked transitional zones that indicate movement from public to
semi - public through use of brick pavers.
• Windows and exterior doors should be visible from parking area.
• If practical, designate separate parking area for employees
• Parking areas should be visible from windows not blocked by landscaping.
• Allow shrubbery to be no more than two feet high for clear visibility in vulnerable
areas.
All Structures shall be target hardened, to include but not limited to:
• Buildings shall be wired for an alarm system.
• Doors shall be equipped with metal plate over thresh- hold of the locking mechanism.
• Interior doors to offices shall have 180 degree peephole viewers or a vision panel.
• Case hardened commercial grade dead bolt locks shall be installed on all exterior
doors with minimum of one inch throw into the strike receiving the bolt. The cylinder
shall have a cylinder guard and a minimum of five -pin tumblers.
• Door hinges shall be installed on interior side of door or non - removable
hinge pins or a mechanical interlock to preclude removal of door from the exterior.
• Doors secured by electrical operation shall have a keyed- switch to open the door
when in a closed position, or by a signal locking device.
• Glazing in interior doors, or 40 inches within of any locking device shall be rated
burglary resistant glazing.
• Enhance natural surveillance of restrooms by placing them in central areas and install
maze entrances; avoid double door entry systems.
• It is strongly recommended a digital CCTV system be installed to monitor all
pedestrian activity (boat/atv display area, cash room, gun stock/gun smith, parts /stock
areas and loading docks).
• Bicycle racks should be placed in close proximity to buildings and
not within parking lots.
• All hatchway openings to roof shall be secured from inside with a slide bolt or slide
bars. Outside hinges shall be equipped with non - removable pins.
• Exterior /interior pedestrian doors which provide access into parking lots shall be
solid core with burglary rated vision panels and where applicable emergency doors
shall have no exterior handles. Panic hardware shall have self locking mechanism,
may have one locking point and shall have a protective astragal attached to the
exterior of the door.
• Loading dock doors should have two lock receiving points; if slide bolts are utilized
they should have a minimum '/2" bolt diameter and protrude at least 1 1/2" into the
receiving guide.
cc: Chief Stepp
Major Artola
Major Carr
Major Facchine
Capt. Wesenick
Capt. O'Neill
Files
PALM BEACH GARDENS POLICE DEPARTMENT
SPECIAL OPERATIONS BUREAU
INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO: CHIEF STEPHEN STEPP
FROM: OFFICER JULES BARONE
SUBJECT: GANDER MOUTAIN- CH PROJECT #07 -0320
SERVICE PROVIDER CAPACITY REQUEST
DATE: MAY 15, 2007
The Police Department has reviewed the applicant's request for confirmation that the Police
Department has the adequate capacity to service the proposed development.
The proposal calls for the development of a 120,000 square foot sporting goods retail center
which includes a covered outdoor storage /sales area. The store provides a vast array of retail
items for sale and rental that include hunting (firearms and ammunition), camping, outdoor
apparel, marine products and equipment, ATVs, water craft, utility trailers, service center and a
snack food service.
The proposed development is for 13.18 acre property located on the west side of Sandtree Drive
east of I -95 and south of Northlake Blvd. The vacant parcel is fronted by Northlake Commons
retail center which includes The Home Depot and Ross department store.
During the calendar year January- December'06 the police department responded to /paroled the
Northlake Commons /Home Depot /Ross department store retail complex 2,826 times (2,271
routine patrol). The balance of calls was divided among part one /two and non - criminal calls for
service, in addition there were 25 reported car crashes. The residential component for that area
Sandtree generated 517 visits by officers.
The applicant submitted a traffic analysis impact study based on current County- wide Traffic
Performance Standards for Palm Beach County. This site previously received traffic concurrency
approval for a residential development which was withdrawn. The proposed development is
expected to generate 4,370 net new external daily trips. The traffic study performed an
intersection analysis and link evaluation: Northlake Blvd. & Sandtree Dr., Northlake Blvd. &
McArthur Blvd. and Northlake Blvd. & I -95 interchange. Based on the analysis, the intersections
analyzed are expected to operate below critical sum threshold of 1500 vehicles per hour through
2009. The impacted links are also expected to meet peak hour level of service standards through
2009. In conclusion the analysis states the proposed project will meet Palm Beach County's
traffic performance standards through 2009.
The proposed project based on 2006 police activity could generate between 1,000 and 1,200
additional police trips to the area. Initially the project should not negatively affect the level of
service provided by the police department. However, the increased density to the area plus the
residential development proposed at Congress and Northlake (former Hill Top Gardens Mobil
home park) could impact response times and uncommitted patrol time. The department reserves
the right to comment further as the project moves forward.
cc: Chief S. Stepp
Major R. Artola
Major E. Carr
Major R. Facchine
Capt. A Wesenick
Capt. D. O'Neill
To
May 31, 2007
Ms. Tara Patton
Planning & Zoning Division
City of Palm Beach Gardens
10500 North Military Trail
Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33410
RE: Gander Mountain Retail
Dear Ms. Patton:
We offer the following comments on your transmittal dated May 23, 2007 concerning the referenced project.
1. The applicant needs to address the fire flow requirements for the project.
2. The applicant needs to revise the site plan and landscape plans to show a corridor for wire
utilities and provide the proposed locations of switch cabinets and transformers.
3. It is our understanding that the outfall pipe for the Northlake Commons project (fka
Crossroads/Home Depot) was not dedicated to the City of Palm Beach Gardens and is a
private system. The applicant needs to clarify maintenance responsibility for the off site
drainage facilities that are currently not being maintained.
4. The applicant will need to obtain off site easements from both the Northlake Commons
project and the Sandtree Plaza property the south in order to make water and sewer
connections.
Please call if you require additional information.
Sincerely,
SEACOAST UTILITY AUTHORITY
Bruce Gregg
Director of Operations
..
cc: R. Bishop
J. Callaghan
J. Dye
J. Lance