Loading...
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