Department of Engineering

and Public Works

P.O. Box 2 1229

West Palm Beach. FL 334 16- 1229

(561) 684-4000

FAX: (56 1) 684-4050

www.pbcgov.com

• Palm Beach County

Board of County Commissioners

Paulette Burdick. Mayor

Melissa McKinlay. Vice Mayor

Hal R. Valeche

Dave Kerner

Steven L. Abrams

Mary Lou Berger

Mack Bernard

Co u nty Adm inistrator

Verdenia C. Baker

"An Equal Oppommity Affirmative Action Employer"

@ printed on recycled paper

August 3, 2017

Karl B. Peterson, P.E. KBP Consulting, Inc. 8400 N University Drive, Suite 309 Tamarac, Florida 33321

RE: Round 2018-B Resort Lifestyle Community Policy 3.5-d Review

Dear Mr. Peterson:

Palm Beach County Traffic Division has reviewed the traffic impact study for the proposed Future Land Use Amendment for the above referenced project, revised July 20, 2017, pursuant to Policy 3.5-d of the Land Use Element of the Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan. The project is summarized as follows:

Location: PCN#: Size: Existing FLU: Existing Zoning: Existing Use: Existing Max Potential: Proposed FLU: Prop. Zoning: Proposed Use: Prop. Dev. Potential: Prop. Max Potential: Net Daily Trips (Prop): Net Daily Trips (Max): Net PH Trips (Prop): Net PH Trips (Max):

North side of Palomino Dr, East of SR-7 00-42-43-27-05-025-0090 10.02 acres Low Residential, 2 dwelling units per acre (LR-2) Agricultural Residential Vacant Single Family Residential = 15 Dwelling Units High Residential, 8 dwelling units per acre (HR-8) Planned Unit Development (PUD) Type Ill CLF Assisted Living Facility (ALF) = 191 Beds Multi-Family Residential= 80 DUs 358 382 16 (15/1) AM, 23 (6/17) PM 32 (6/26) AM, 31 (21/10) PM

Based on the review, the Traffic Division has determined that the proposed amendment meets Policy 3. 5-d of the Land Use Element of the Palm Beach County Comprehensive Plan at the maximum potential density shown above.

Please contact me at 561-684-4030 or email to gbari@pbcgov.org with any questions.

Sincerely,

~· Quazi Bari, P.E. Senior Professional Engineer - Traffic Division

QB:DS/bc ec: Dominique Simeus, E. I. - Project Coordinator II. Traffic Division

Lisa Amara - Senior Planner, Planning Division Khurshid Mohyuddin - Principal Planner, Planning Division Steve Bohovsky- Technical Assistant Ill , Traffic Division

File: General - TPS- Unincorporated - Traffic Study Review N:\TRAFFIC\Oevelopment Review\Comp Plan\18-B\Resort Lifestyle Community.docx

Resort Lifestyle Community9885 Palomino Drive

Palm Beach County, Florida

prepared for: Cameron General Contractors

July 2017Update July 20, 2017

KBP CONSULTING, INC.in association with Masoud Atefi MSCE

TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY FOR A PROPOSED

LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT

Resort Lifestyle Community 9885 Palomino Drive

Palm Beach County, Florida

PCN: 00-42-43-27-05-025-0090

Traffic Impact Study for a Proposed Land Use Plan Amendment

July 2017 Updated July 20, 2017

Prepared for:

Cameron General Contractors

Prepared by: KBP Consulting, Inc.

8400 N. University Drive, Suite 309 Tamarac, Florida 33321 Phone: (954) 560-7103

in association with Masoud Atefi MSCE

Karl B. Peterson, P.E. Florida Registration Number 49897

KBP Consulting, Inc. 8400 N. University Drive, Suite 309

Tamarac, Florida 33321 CA # 29939

i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 1 SITE DATA ................................................................................................................... 3 TRIP GENERATION ....................................................................................................... 3 TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS ........................................................................................ 5 RADIUS OF DEVELOPMENT INFLUENCE ................................................................... 6 TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT ................................................................................................ 6 TEST 2 – 5-YEAR ANALYSIS ........................................................................................ 7 LRTP TEST – YEAR 2040 ANALYSIS ........................................................................... 9 SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS ..................................................................................... 12

LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 – Project Location Map .................................................................................. 1 FIGURE 2 – Site Traffic Distribution Pattern ................................................................... 6

LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 – Land Use Characteristics .............................................................................. 3 TABLE 2A – Trip Generation Summary – Scenario 1 ..................................................... 4 TABLE 2B – Trip Generation Summary – Scenario 2 ..................................................... 5 TABLE 3 – Test 2 – Project Impact Significance ............................................................ 8 TABLE 4 – LRTP Significance Analysis ........................................................................ 11 Appendices

1

INTRODUCTION A future Resort Lifestyle Community assisted living facility (ALF) is planned to be built along the north

side of Palomino Drive, approximately 750 feet to the east of State Road 7 (SR 7), north of

Lake Worth Road, within an unincorporated area of Palm Beach County, Florida. This development

is planned to be built on a +/- 10.02 acre (436,522 SF) parcel and requires a change in the land use

and zoning designations within Palm Beach County. Figure 1 (below) provides an aerial illustration of

the location of the parcel.

Figure 1 – Site Location

Site

N

Resort Lifestyle Community ALF

2

The Parcel Control Number (PCN) for the proposed site is:

00-42-43-27-05-025-0090 Please see Appendix A for the County PAPA Report, the current survey, and a conceptual site plan

for the subject parcel.1 The proposed development plan requires changes in the current land use

designations for which KBP Consulting Inc., in association with Masoud Atefi & Associates, has been

retained to prepare a Land Use Plan Amendment (LUPA) traffic study complying with requirements of

the Palm Beach County (PBC) Unified Land Development Code. This LUPA traffic study evaluates

the impacts of additional traffic expected to be generated by the proposed changes in the land use.

The traffic impact analysis is conducted by comparing the traffic impacts of the maximum potential

development under the existing designation versus that under the proposed land use designation.

Also, per Palm Beach County requirements, an additional comparison was made between traffic

conditions for the maximum development potential under the existing land use designation with traffic

conditions under the actual development plan which is comprised of an ALF with 191 beds.

1 The site plan presented in Appendix A is provided for illustrative purposes only. The survey of the subject parcel contains the latest confirmed information for the site.

3

SITE DATA

The site parcel with a total area of 10.02 acres, has a current County land use designation of LR-2,

Low Residential, with a maximum development potential of 1.5 dwelling units per acre. The proposed

land use designation is HR-8, High Residential, with a maximum development potential of eight (8)

multi-family dwelling units (apartments) per acre. Existing and proposed land use characteristics are

illustrated below in Table 1. Also illustrated in this table is the maximum development potential for the

10.02 acre parcel under the existing and proposed land use designations. As illustrated on Table 1,

under the existing land use designation, the maximum development potential for the parcel is

15 dwelling units (single-family), while under the proposed conditions, the maximum development

potential for the parcel is 80 dwelling units (multi-family) or 191 beds within a Type III assisted living

facility.

Table 1 – Land Use Characteristics

Existing Proposed

Parcel Size Land Use Max. Development Potential Land Use Max. Development Potential (acres) Designation LU Intensity Units Designation LU Intensity Units 10.02 LR-2 SF-Res* 1.5 DU/acre 15 HR-8 MF-Res** 8 DU/acre 80***

* Single-Family Residential ** Multi-Family Residential *** Or, 191 Beds in an ALF

TRIP GENERATION

The trip generation analysis is commonly conducted under the following two (2) scenarios:

Scenario 1 – Maximum development potential under existing land use designation versus the

maximum development potential under the proposed land use designation.

Scenario 2 – Maximum development potential under existing land use designation versus the actual

development plan for the subject parcel.

4

Note that the actual development plan is an assisted care living facility (ACLF) with 191 beds. The

analysis was performed using the trip generation information published by the Institute of

Transportation Engineers’ (ITE) Trip Generation Manual (9th Edition) and the information documented

by the Palm Beach County Engineering Traffic Division (Trip Generation Rates – August 13, 2014 –

see Appendix B of this report).

Tables 2A and 2B provide a summary of the trip generation results for this LUPA analysis. As

indicated in Table 2A, the proposed changes in land use will result in 382 net new daily trips, 32 net

new AM peak hour trips, and 31 net new PM peak hour vehicle trips. Furthermore, as Illustrated in

Table 2B, implementation of the actual development plan will result in 508 daily trips, 27 AM peak

hour trips, and 42 PM peak hour trips.

Per results of this trip generation forecast, the Test 2 traffic impact analysis provided in this report

shall be based upon 42 PM peak hour trips (i.e. the highest of the actual peak hour trips to be

generated or the net increase in peak hour trips when comparing land uses) and the LRTP analysis

shall be based upon 382 net new daily trips (i.e. the highest of the net increase in daily traffic for the

two scenarios).

Table 2A – Trip Generation Summary – Scenario 1 Maximum Development Potential

Daily AM PH Trips PM PH Trips Land Uses Size Trips In Out Total In Out Total

Existing Designation LR-2 Single Family Residential 15 DU 150 3 8 11 12 7 19 - Pass-By (0%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Existing LU Sub-Total 150 3 8 11 12 7 19 Proposed Designation HR-8 Multi-Family Residential 80 DU 532 9 34 43 33 17 50 - Pass-By (0%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Proposed Sub-Total 532 9 34 43 33 17 50 Additional Trips due to Change in LU 382 6 26 32 21 10 31

5

Table 2B – Trip Generation Summary – Scenario 2 Actual Development Plan

Daily AM PH Trips PM PH Trips Land Uses Size Trips In Out Total In Out Total

Existing Designation LR-2 Single Family Residential 15 DU 150 3 8 11 12 7 19 - Pass-By (0%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Existing LU Sub-Total 150 3 8 11 12 7 19 Actual Development Plan ALF 191 Beds 508 18 9 27 18 24 42 - Pass-By (0%) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Proposed Sub-Total 508 18 9 27 18 24 42 Additional Trips due to ACLF 358 15 1 16 6 17 23

Compiled by: KBP Consulting, Inc. and Masoud Atefi, MSCE (July 2017). Source: Palm Beach County Trip Generation Rates (August 13, 2014). SF Residential Daily: 10 AM: 0.75 PM: Formula 1 Pass-By: 0% Formula 1: Ln(T) = 0.90 Ln(X) + 0.51 AM In: 25%, PM In: 63% MF Residential Daily: 6.65 AM: Formula 2 PM: 0.62 Pass-By: 0% Formula 2: T = 0.49 (X) + 3.73 AM In: 20%, PM In: 65% ALF Daily: 2.66 AM: 0.14 PM: 0.22 Pass-By: 0% AM In: 65%, PM In: 44%

TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS

The purpose of this analysis is to determine the optimum traffic impact of the proposed changes in

land use required by the planned development on all major roadway links within the site’s radius of

development influence. The analysis will identify significantly impacted roadway links and determines

if any of the significantly impacted links will exceed the level of service adopted by Palm Beach

County. The traffic impact analysis shall be conducted under interim (five years – County TPS

Test 2) and long term (Year 2040 – County Long Range Transportation Plan – LRTP) scenarios.

6

RADIUS OF DEVELOPMENT INFLUENCE (RDI)

With the maximum 42 peak hour vehicle trips projected during the PM peak hour, the Test 2 RDI for

the proposed LUPA (as defined by Table 12.B.2.D-7 3A of the Traffic Performance Standards) is one-

half (0.5) mile. Furthermore, based on Table 3.5-1 of the County Comprehensive Plan (see the report

Appendix C), for a total daily traffic increase of 382 trips the RDI for the Year 2040 analysis is only the

directly accessed link.

TRAFFIC ASSIGNMENT Trip distribution pattern and traffic assignment for the proposed LUPA was developed based upon

knowledge of the study area, examination of the surrounding roadway network characteristics, review

of current traffic volumes, previous approvals for similar land uses in the vicinity of the site, and

existing land use patterns. Figure 2 illustrates the anticipated project trip distribution pattern within

the one-half (0.5) mile radius of development influence for Test 2.

Figure 2 – Site Traffic Distribution Pattern

3%

SR-7

N

Palomino Drive3%97%

52%

42%

Resort Lifestyle Community ALF

7

TEST 2 – 5-Year Analysis

Significantly impacted links for Test 2 are defined as those links within the radius of development

influence with a project impact equal to or greater than three percent (3%) of the adopted LOS ‘E’

capacity, or those links outside of the radius with a project impact equal to or greater than five percent

(5%) of the adopted LOS ‘E’ capacity. Table 3 on the next page presents the AM and PM peak hour

significance analysis. As documented in the table, the net new peak hour trips generated by the

actual development plan will not constitute significant impact (3% or more) on any of the analyzed

major County thoroughfare links within its area of influence, therefore Test 2 is met.

9

Table 3 - Test 2 - Project Significance - (Resort Lifestyle Community ALF - LUPA)

AM PM

In Out In Out

Project Generated New Trips 18 9 18 24

Project Traffic Project Impact

Facility LOS E In AM In PM Out AM Out PM AM PM

Link From To Dir Class Type Cap % Asgn Trips % Asgn Trips % Asgn Trips % Asgn Trips % impact Sig? % impact Sig?

Palomino Dr West SR 7 EB II 2L 860 3 1 3 1

0.12% N 0.12% N

WB II 2L 860

3 0 3 1 0.00% N 0.12% N

SR 7 Site EB II 2L 860 97 17 97 17 1.98% N 1.98% N

WB II 2L 860 97 9 97 23 1.05% N 2.67% N

Site East EB II 2L 860 3 0 3 1 0.00% N 0.12% N

WB II 2L 860 3 1 3 1 0.12% N 0.12% N

SR 7 Lake Worth Rd Palomino Dr NB II 8LD 3780 42 8 42 8 0.21% N 0.21% N

SB II 8LD 3780 42 4 42 10 0.11% N 0.26% N

Palomino Dr Stribling Wy NB II 8LD 3780 52 5 52 12 0.13% N 0.32% N

SB II 8LD 3780 52 9 52 9 0.24% N 0.24% N

10

LRTP Test (Year 2040)

The LUPA process also required a long term analysis to test the long range impact of the proposed

changes in land use. The analysis was conducted using the Palm Beach County MPO Year 2040

Cost Feasible Plan SERPM7+ Model volume outputs. Results of the analysis illustrated on Table 4

indicate that neither of the directly accessed links of SR 7 is significantly impacted and neither is

expected to operate at V/C over 1.0. Therefore, the proposed changes in land use for the planned

Resort Lifestyle Community ALF meets the Palm Beach County long range transportation plan

(LRTP) test.

See Appendix D for Palm Beach County MPO 2040 Cost Feasible traffic volume sheet used in this

analysis.

11

Facility LOS D 2040 SERPM7+ Total 2040 LUPA Impact

Link From To Class Type Cap % Assgn Project Traffic % Increase PBC MPO Volume V/C Significant ?*SR 7 Lake Worth Rd Palomino Dr II 8LD 67,300 42 160 0.24 55,800 55,960 0.83 N

Palomino Dr Stribling Way II 8LD 67,300 52 199 0.30 55,800 55,999 0.83 N

LUPA Trips 382

Table 4 - LRTP Significance Analysis (Resort Lifestyle SLF - LUPA)

LUPA Impact

* Project impact is significant when net trip increase is greater than 1% for V/C of 1.4 or more, 2% for V/C of 1.2 or more and 3% for V/C less than 1.2.

12

SUMMARY & CONCLUSIONS The proposed Land Use Plan Amendment (LUPA) for the Resort Lifestyle Community ALF meets the

requirements of Palm Beach County Unified Land Development Code (ULDC), without any required

improvements to the roadway system.

LUPA Summary Resort Lifestyle Community ALF – SR 7 / Palomino Drive Municipality: Unincorporated Palm Beach County Location: North side of Palomino Drive, east of SR 7 PCN #: 00-42-43-27-05-025-0090 Total Area: 10.02 acres Actual Development Plan: ALF with 191 Beds Existing Land Use: LR-2 – Low Residential Max Development Potential Existing: 15 Single Family Residential Units Proposed Land Use: HR-8 – High Residential Max Development Potential Proposed: 80 Multi Family Residential Apartments Max New Peak Hour Trips – Actual Development Plan: 27 AM and 42 PM Max Net New Daily Trips for Proposed Land Use: 382

APPENDIX A

Resort Lifestyle Community

PAPA Report Site Survey

Conceptual Site Plan

6/11/2017 www.co.palm-beach.fl.us/papa/Asps/PropertyDetail/PropertyPrintNew.aspx?pvalue=y&p_entity=00424327050250090

http://www.co.palm-beach.fl.us/papa/Asps/PropertyDetail/PropertyPrintNew.aspx?pvalue=y&p_entity=00424327050250090 1/2

�������� ����

Parcel Control Number:  00424327050250090 Location Address:  9885 PALOMINO DR

Owners:  AANONSEN ERIC K

Mailing Address:  9885 PALOMINO DR,LAKE WORTH FL 33467 1000

Last Sale:  Not available Book/Page#:  09510  / 1371 Price:  Not available

Legal Description: PALM BEACH FARMS CO PLAT NO 3 TR 9 BLK 25

��� ����� ��������� ��� ����

Improvement Value $106,634

Land Value $508,200

Total Market Value $614,834

Assessed Value $190,474

Exemption Amount $0

Taxable Value $190,474All values are as of January 1st each year

Ad Valorem $3,425

Non Ad Valorem $638

Total Tax $4,063

��� �������� ����������

No Details Found

����� ���

No Details Found

!������" #�������� �!������" �� $�%�� �� $&��� #���"� �!������" ��

Description Area Sq. FootageBAS BASE AREA 1 672

Total Square Footage : 672

���� #������

Description Unit

PATIO ROOF 6211

PATIO ROOF 510

PATIO ROOF 1280

PATIO ROOF 200

PATIO ROOF 680

GREENHOUSE WOOD FR GLASSCOVER

2280

PATIO ROOF 1972

PATIO ROOF 6084

PATIO ROOF 1300

Unit may represent the perimeter, square footage, linear footage,total number or other measurement.

$��� ���� ����� �!������" ��� ��� '( )

+��

No Description  1. BAS BASE AREA 672

Ow

ner: AA

NO

NS

EN

ER

IC K

PC

N: 00424327050250090 1 of 1

6/11/2017 www.co.palm-beach.fl.us/papa/Asps/PropertyDetail/PropertyPrintNew.aspx?pvalue=y&p_entity=00424327050250090

http://www.co.palm-beach.fl.us/papa/Asps/PropertyDetail/PropertyPrintNew.aspx?pvalue=y&p_entity=00424327050250090 2/2

Palm Beach County

Dorothy Jacks, CFA, AAS PALM BEACH COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER www.pbcgov.org/PAPA 6/11/2017

ALTA/NSPS LAND TITLE BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEY LYlNG IN TRAer 9, BLOCK 25, THE PALM BEACH FARMS CO., PLAT NO.3,

RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2. PAGE 45 AND A PORTION OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 44 SOU'IH, RANGE 42 EAST

PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA

LI!CIAl. D!IC111'11011

'IMmi.-..:IIIIIC..IB.~IIIIIUI~,_,.I!II:L.IIUII'IB.a,.--m,..urr ..... lllll ... ~'!l& ..._OIII'IHI--QII~-PJilUI'I'II,_Ifiiii:MJI_,.,.OQIIIIY,II..Qitm,...,.._~,._.,...cMI'I.

I'MI<M:fMIIIIDe~UM,__.MMIMltl....,,~ ...,... ............. ,o.lftll,.. ..... ~

l ~l..l!lil,~,.,.,.._a.-.. CIIHI!!a-.ni!!III,..Mitai!JII!II,PIUI',__.'IHI!IIUII.JC -----~-~,....a~MIIIInllrl' .... ~,.lllln,.~--...­,.W.Ioii ...... Tlllll'll'n'I'Oa~M~,_~.,.-~ . .., .. _..M'W. ~-:-IIIIIII.AoB..,';.~~-~~~~~-= ......-u'-'.-r~W~~'81 ..... ~.nt~..,..._NU......._,..GII.._ ..... E&I"'-..--..-.r•~.K»B~• ........ ......

,..,...,... .... ..._ n.._·--·z-·wz~·-·~mnee•._.,.. • ..,.wr_ •• ......, •• _.._ ·=--.. -~II,,J9WFQ1!,8j•JIII,__,.IIIIF_.--

"" ................. I'IIIC!811,_, -·-wmw. 4. ~~~1:.-T~~MU&ni.&I--,.FJIIIIIT,fllllliiHiiillillll:l'l'lllliiiTIIiiilliiii:IF..,... ,._ .. _ .... Ill .......... ~.,.,..MIIIA....aiiii ..... Willll! ... ~'fte~flii'AIIii~W!!IUIIIl ....... -·-wmw. .. ...,.'IIF....,...IIICII:III ....... III...._,__,_,,..........,.,...,._. .. ~..:I,_.-. • ..,.,...~.,.'ftl-&-=-ae~aa.,._...,..,.

.t. ~~~llflllltii'\AT.,.,_PIIIIoll__, ..... fUaiiO.IiiiM,__III"'R-.s,....,...

••MttW••eezc~

!l.~allmiiR!!III._,.,., ... IRICIDimi!II.OI'ft:W..~--N.III!!,. __ _.._., ._,.,. .... .,. ... ~·-

LEGEIID .__,.I,NUmu;~

. .,..........,.._., ~

-MWM«~- .. .......

' ... • --~ --- •llllniiiN.~IIIf' -- "'

--_...,.._ •eaiiCIII!!'II!!III'VI"'"N2.

·~IIIIMIII:LE .......... ~ -~-----

-a- •I'IIICII'! ...... R§IIfl~ .. .... ~,.,..,. .. -.~ ... "' .... ~-•aa.v.....nciiWIIII~

_....,._ .. ---•.-ti..WPCIL~ ... -- ... . .,. .... ,..,. --- •IWIIai.CIIIfl'fllll,._ [;;;] ---- ... -IIIIDI."NM'L~,.. -OU- •~lnUIY&M .. --- ................... ............ oo.m.~~~r ....... •lMI'BII~=-'Mn' .. --- ..

"' ~·" _.,.,1111....mo 8 _..,.tlfll' .......... .. --- ~ ---- ....... __.-.raw .... _,., ....,.. ._,.,......,.'IIIIIII'ICM....,.. --.,.,. ---

e .. ~ """'-}:1 • .,.l.liiJI'I"~ • -~---M.-all' ~._IIlii,._

0 •POUDIDN..,.

"' •PQ~,tG---....r • . _,_..,_ ..... ~ il:• •cwtEMlw:Ewat DIMETBl • --i -CNI;....-.m1..........:

• ........ ,_'Mill ....... •IIM!!'I'Im!!!'MIII....n!ll

I!!Rl!EJOD !!!l!Eii

L.OCATlON~ _,...,...

1.'M&Boii....,....MD~&IIIIIfe'MIII!!!I'ImiiMIHI"'''!!!A ... I,~.........ml!~ _....,.IIEI'!I"'ne..-OI"'___..._.._... ... ....._ ... eTI'allll.nte,....... __ .,.,__.._~.AIB--IIIDtfiRI!!III~I .......... .....a!MfM!!!~~ ~o4ft..IIJ,I'Ia.M.ai!VII!II.

'lle~...a ..... ~.-..~-~..r!IIHI!21111-~..:M.

:=..':.::=..:.=:=::..~-=:...~~'·" ....... "1.-n!II_,.NUIOIMI-..-r"l'llll...__....,.._ .. ~ ..... ""-­~ .._IINDMl'_.,.,.MI...W.III'IBIIMI'TIILK__,..eDWII...:IN. NO -..w~.,..,_.,.,.....,......,..,.OfML

NCPMMIO'TMLI'W': ·---~.-.......r~ ............ .-r. •Timii-NtNMIIIJ .,.. ... ,.llltOMm'. •r....••-.. Nrf-.....mtliii(Mrrflli .... ~........,.,...~ ~r....·IIJ-OI'Nif_.,_GR-...:;~

L'TMI ...... J-.~---.311-.Rt*n.NMIIIAI'nlnl...,_~..,.,_

~-=-~.==-~-=::~~~~~~~ ~---====:=.--=:..--:.~~~.-_:: ...--.~~~~--........ ~~D.----·~ ... ,.... lia..•II.1,WI'~AIII• ..... 115GIITDII.A.I'Ili.I.M...a!_.,~15111115IGIITIIIMICFA-RIIn"'mmic:aa&Tii~11f&T amtDF115~QF115~1DFIITu.MM'l.MDMa.DIIIWiij,.,.MAD'IIUTIR'.

4.1Hii_.....,...CIIITMiiii....,..,~WiiiiR!ii~n"IIIIIV'II __ _...

IIIWIEIIETU"..,.'I'BW'Eiii ... A~IF.,........GJtlHE~CIII'flla.I'DWJMI'\IIii.J.a !WftMMIGIIaiCIIIUR'I'I -TIE._. .... ,...IEIIII:Ha:llllf!Y ... _oiE'IWGM:IIETE~~ .......... E•llti.11L1l

._ .... TIE._. .... NUIIEIIII:Ha:llllf!YIMIIB-oiE'IWCZM:IIE'I'Eimi!IA3I'W:IIIIOI'IIIWI Ill• .... . e • .,.....,.

4.~ .... ~fti&HI&IM't'IIIEIE~iln.QMiaJ".a..R.TJC.I'IIXBMR3I....aMI

=--~~~-=,::a-a~~~CIII.....:J" l.'TN!!.Ma __ ...,...&Wie'f',_I.DCXT'I!IIIIIN~Gm.-c'W' ... I'UDIII~IIII!I"':--....

·~llld!IIII--.. =~"':.,-='M!~ ...... ~ .,.,....~

.,..,...~,....,.

·~ll.lo..a.&-.. ,.,_.a.4G"!!"

7'.'1Hl...,....., .. LWII...,.,,.....,,,.~w'IHI._....~r.w., __.. .... ~lAMI.,. ....... ~~·.rN,. ................ ~"'-=~~.:='.:J.rU:..~~.=r:=-..:.r~ ............. .__~IIMIImT-~IMAMIDTA.IWl'I"OI'tloll .......

t.MJ.IUINICIItMMII._IMIIt.Y..,.,..,..ND-.!,....,,

1 .. '111 ....... '1rN......_.II._,MIItNI'II,..,._NI'IIIIII.....,..It)lllll'lflr.~ll ... ...-.. ~ ....... 1t. HtoHI.I'IIIImiiiiMt11o11.,..111....._..,

1LIItOIID~--~IIWIIIM'IIOa.

, .. ,...,_,_.......,..TO.,._~-~~~~...oMnctn.~nv.r..:-..MOTO!I ..... II ~~~--.r ... ,.. .... P.MIYflll:f!MiaL

:.:-..n::-"~...,.t..:~MIIO.C.W.~ .... CII'AI"LLODiia.-...._..

IURVE'IOR"I CEKTFieAllON: TO; ~...::r:;:::,~rn~__..,.. ,...lUCIIKIW'YTiftTlMI.,..,.I'\AJ',......_~'-...... rr•.,..--.. .._......,.. -n._,,_,.~llnla~ .... ~..,...,TIIW ........ .IIIf!U"____,,_ =l'fiiii.'IIII.-. ... MU~ ..-...tli'RIIIIati, ....... ~I, .. 11,Wo,1,RIIUWIIII"v.K'W'

~~~lMJ"Ti'e~..,...m.-..tr~lltiiiiJMIIRJIIOF~.rRifllltll

IIAiiUo'llCIFTMiii'IQAIIIIII~~

c z j

"' IL

"' z

"""""""" _.......,

--1'1'1.11 ..... -17-'IIU -~ ,.._,.,. --·

D,"L. R.E.B. ...... ..... .- Ill., CMn-m--om Wllli:.U..T12, ~7

f'I.E NO:Ml!Al'Tl

.... 1 Of 3

OCCI..PIED

LOTI BlOCK25

1tE PALM BEACH FARMS CO., PLAT N0.3

-:~ --~~~-LLC ~~~---~IIW'Ii,

---.~ OJU.JIIa, .... IIR

ALTA I NSPS LAND TITI..E BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPIDC SURVEY LYING IN TRACT 9, BLOCK 25, THE PALM BEACH FARMS CO., PLAT NO.3, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 45

AND A PORTION OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 44 SOUTH, RANGE 42 EAST

I l I I I I I I

:~ -~-~~ ._ .... _ . ..,. 1!. ___ ....

~~ :-:.·~· ..

PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA

MATCH UNE ·SEE SHEET I -- -z-

TALAYERAP.UD. ""T~I~.-..

. ~

LO'TO ·"' BlOCK .II lHE PALM BEACH FARMS CO .• PLAT NO. S

l'l.lt.TIOCIKI,I'I'IIIIii41 --­<l'Met~CII.olrMOMDI

~~· Ml):!ie~~ ..... ·"'

ua• ~~­--~ .._a.u_. r~.-~.11

E.•tt7.4n'.C IL•t ... ,.AY.D.II)

OOCLPIED --.tWII.aM.­~I!IIt~EI.....U.

~~~-:..::.-:.~ EUU.JDN,,_IiD

IIWII....ai~UIWTAIDTIIIill'Jil .~ ..

LO'T10

----n:iEPALMB~-:CO .. PLATNO.a-- -MTIIOOKI.P...:.Q

OCCUPED

I hii I ~ li - I! f HU f Ji I.

.J :!!

i II. ~ ~ ::;)

II)

I w ... !::: 1-Q w z > s ii!

c II) 0 II. II) i! z :I ~ - 0

~ ~ ~ ... ; < 1ft .. = ~

PROJECT NO. MCM72-0\--<IDI

PLAN STAT\JS

..,. .. F1E1D.:JOIC F'AG!t

tlAlE .U...Y 12, 2017

Fl.£ N&0+72 I.I.TA

t lbHs::::~~T-____ ....._lU-~ A'IAIICIAIA~t'•III'CIR~

OCCUPIED

L.Orr Bl.OCK25

lHE PALM BEACH FARMS CO., PLAT NQ. I f'U.TIOQICI,I'ME+fi

OCCUPIED

LOTI Bl.OCK2&

TliE PALM BEACH FNV.tl CO .• P\.ATNO.a

PUI'I'ICIDMI.I'WII! .. --GMjljR -~·,.,g-ii.G

AIIJ-:~Il~ -GJU.--,I'IIIE11W

ALTA I NSPS LAND TITLE BOUNDARY AND TOPOGRAPIDC SURVEY LYING IN TRACT 9, BLOCK 25, THE PALM BEACH FARMS CO., PLAT NO.3, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 2, PAGE 45

AND A PORTION OF SECTION 19, TOWNSHIP 44 SOUTH, RANGE 42 EAST

-~ .f

.~.~

~

-~

·"

PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA

.~

·"'

...

OCCUPIED

LOT8 BI..OCKJI

lHE PALM BEACH FARM I CO .• PLAT NO. S IUt.TiaiKLrMIIii ..

-:-...--- a.J!ICI.JliXI-IIUD

.Ill--~--~:~"'; ..

-~

-~

.•'

=· BLOCK25

, ..

~

nn::: PAl..N ~ FARMI CO.. PLAT NO.3

-~ PU.'TIOC*I.~ .. -- ~

OMatE!ICIC.~ NJIIIElU;-I'.Iii.CWIODAfi'E;

:.,~~

·"'

IIATCH LINE -IEIESHEET2

-~ -~

-~ -~

;I

-~

·"'

-~ .-'

...

-~

·"'

·"'

·"

...

OOCLPIED LOTS

BLOCK,. lHE PALMBEAai FARMS CO., PLAT NO.3

~LATICIKJ,,_ ..

OOClPIED

L.Or1D BLOCK >I

lHE PALM BEACH FARMS~ PLAT N0.3

PLATIOliii,PME41

OCCLPIED

I hii I ~ li - I! f HU f Ji I .

.J :!!

i II. ~ ~ ::;)

II)

I w ..I !::: 1-Q w z > s ii!

c II) 0 II. II) i! z :I ~ - 0

~ ~ ~ ..I ; < 1ft ..

= ~ PROJECT NO. MCM72-0\--<IDI

PLAN STAT\JS

DAlE ON F1E1D.:JOIC F'AG!t

tlAlE .U...Y 12, 2017

Fl.£ N&0+72 I.I.TA

3 "' 3

~

r D~ si~ In II! r ~

• Q

Pl!PI'!I (') m ; ~ ~ § ~

~; ~ ~ ~ 0 a . ~ ~ ~

0 h '§ ~ ••• ~ ~ 0

... ~ !; ?i ~ ~~ a !~li (')

~ • ' ~ ~ ~

§

~~ ~ ~ i ~~ l~i~ ~~~ ~~ I ~ ' "C

~ r~~ ~~ • ::<:1

"' . .. ·~~ • ~ 0 iii

0 ~ • 1p1:r "~~ ~ i 2 ~~~~;IIi-~ q 0

~, 0 • "C t < ,.

i !fi ~~· ~j I 0 ~ ~

,. r/)

r/)

6 2 -<

:=i ?l ~ m

~ § ~

i ~ -· !d m ; 9 ~'"'" ~ ~ • h ' ~§ .,; "C

. . • ~ ~

• I . r ~ ~ ~ ~ . ~ ~ ~ ~ .

ub ~ CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN JC Bowman Consulting Group, ltd.

.USOW.EauGallieBNd

~ RESORT LIFESTYLE COMMUNITIES SUI8232 Bowman 2 1-1~1~1~ lb Molboume,FL32!KW

; 9885 PALOMINO DRIVE Phone:(321)255-5434

~ PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA 33467 Fu:(321)256-7751 c 0 N 5 u L T I N G ~~ -.bowmanooiiiiJidng.CQm

PALM BEACH COUNTY LAKE WORTH, FLORIDA O BowmiW1CofiMAtin00<014).Ltc~. CortifocaleotAuthoriretionl..icll:lnseNo.30462

APPENDIX B

Trip Generation Information

Palm Beach County Trip Generation Rates

ITE

Landuse Code Unit Daily Rate/Equation Pass-By % In/Out Rate/Equation In/Out Rate/Equation

Light Industrial 110 1000 S.F. 6.97 10% 88/12 0.92 12/88 0.97

Warehouse 150 1000 S.F. 3.56 10% 79/21 0.30 25/75 0.32

Flex Space - IND FLU PBC 1000 S.F. 7.86 10% 64/36 1.53 40/60 1.21

Flex Space - COM FLU PBC 1000 S.F. 29.67 45% 72/28 2.12 40/60 2.67

Mini-Warehouse/SS 151 1000 S.F. 2.50 10% 55/45 0.14 50/50 0.26

Single Family Detached 210 Dwelling Unit 10 0% 25/75 0.75 63/37 Ln(T) = 0.90 Ln(X) + 0.51

Apartment 220 Dwelling Unit 6.65 0% 20/80 T = 0.49(X) + 3.73 65/35 0.62

Condo/TH (Fee Simple) 230 Dwelling Unit 6.65 0% 17/83 Ln(T) = 0.80 Ln(X) + 0.26 67/33 Ln(T) = 0.82 Ln(X) + 0.32

55+ SF Detached 251 Dwelling Unit 3.68 0% 35/65 0.22 61/39 0.27

55+ SF Attached 252 Dwelling Unit 3.44 0% 34/66 0.2 54/46 0.25

Congregate Care Facility 253 Dwelling Unit 2.02 0% 59/41 0.06 55/45 0.17

Assisted Living Facility 254 Beds 2.66 0% 65/35 0.14 44/56 0.22

Ldg Hotel 310 Rooms 8.17 10% 59/41 0.53 51/49 0.6

Movie Theater 444 Seats 1.8 5% N/A 0 60/40 0.144

Health Club 492 1000 S.F. 32.93 5% 50/50 1.41 57/43 3.53

Elementary School 520 Students 1.29 0% 55/45 0.45 49/51 0.15

Middle/Junior School 522 Students 1.62 0% 55/45 0.54 49/51 0.16

High School 530 Students 1.71 0% 68/32 0.42 47/53 0.13

Private School (K-8) 534 Students Use Private K-12 rate 0% 55/45 0.90 47/53 0.19

Private School (K-12) 536 Students 2.48 0% 61/39 0.81 43/57 0.17

Church/Synagoguea

560 1000 S.F. 9.11 5% 62/38 0.56 48/52 0.55

Day Care 565 1000 S.F. 74.06 50% 53/47 12.18 47/53 12.34

Library 590 1000 S.F. 56.24 10% 71/29 1.04 48/52 7.30

Hospital 610 1000 S.F. 13.22 10% 63/37 0.95 38/62 0.93

Nursing Home 620 beds 2.74 10% 69/31 0.17 33/67 0.22

General Office 710 1000 S.F. Ln(T) = 0.76 Ln(X) + 3.68 10% 88/12 Ln(T) = 0.80 Ln(X) + 1.57 17/83 1.49

Medical Office 720 1000 S.F. 36.13 10% 79/21 2.39 28/72 Ln(T) = 0.90 Ln(X) + 1.53

Medical Office (Reduced)b

PBC 1000 S.F. 18.07 10% 79/21 1.2 27/73 T = 1/2 Med. Office PM

Government Office 730 1000 S.F. 68.93 10% 84/16 1.16 31/69 1.21

Med

Off

ice

Re

cIn

sti

tuti

on

al

PM Peak Hour

Re

sid

en

tial

Cat.

AM Peak Hour

Ind

us

tria

l

Trip rates taken mostly from ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition except as noted.

Page 1 of 2

August 13, 2014

F:\TRAFFIC\Development Review\Trip Generation\Trip Generation Rates for Web 8-13-2014

Palm Beach County Trip Generation Rates

ITE

Landuse Code Unit Daily Rate/Equation Pass-By % In/Out Rate/Equation In/Out Rate/Equation

PM Peak Hour

Cat.

AM Peak Hour

Ind

us

tria

l

Nursery (Wholesale) 818 acre 4.50 0% N/A 0.26 N/A 0.45

Gen. Commercial 820 1000 S.F. Ln(T) = .65 Ln(X) + 5.83c

Note d 62/38 0.96 48/52 Ln(T) = 0.67 Ln(X) + 3.31e

New Car Sales 841 1000 S.F. 32.30 15% 75/25 1.92 40/60 2.62

Tire Store 848 1000 S.F. 24.87 28% 63/37 2.89 43/57 4.15

Pharmacy + DT 881 1000 S.F. 96.91 50% 52/48 3.45 50/50 9.91

Drive-In Bankf 912 1000 S.F. 148.15 47% 57/43 12.08 50/50 24.3

Quality Restaurant 931 1000 S.F. 89.95 44% 50/50 0.81 67/33 7.49

High Turnover Sit-Down Rest. 932 1000 S.F. 127.15 43% 55/45 10.81 60/40 9.85

Fast Food Restaurant w/o DT 933 1000 S.F. 396.90 45% 60/40 43.87 51/49 26.15

Fast Food Restaurant + DT 934 1000 S.F. 496.12 49% 51/49 45.42 52/48 32.65

Gas Station 944 Fuel Positions 168.56 50% 50/50 12.16 50/50 13.87

Convenience Store 851 1000 S.F. 737.99 61% 50/50 67.03 51/49 52.41

Carwash (Automated)g PBC Lane 166.00 0% 50/50 11.97 50/50 13.65

Footnotes: a) Weekend peak hour rate = 12.04 per 1,000 s.f. with a 49/51 directional split

b) To be used only when adjacent to hospital, for Med. Office square footage not to exceed 44% of the hospital square footage

c) For intensities under 10,000 s.f., use a rate of 152.03 / 1,000 SF instead of the equation.

d) Pass-by percent = 62% for 10,000 sf or less, otherwise = 83.18 - 9.30 * Ln(A) where A is 1,000 s.f. of leasable area

e) For densities under 10,000 s.f., use a rate of 12.81 / 1,000 sf instead of the equation.

f) Use these rates for a drive-in bank with up to 4 drive-thru lanes (excl. ATM lane). For additional drive-thru lanes,

use per lane rates from ITE Code 912 (139.25 daily, 9.29 AM, 33.24 PM. Use same in/out splits)

g) Daily rate taken from PBC trip gen. study. Peak hour rates derived by applying peak to daily ratios for gas station to daily carwash rate

Se

rvic

es

Re

tail

Trip rates taken mostly from ITE Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition except as noted.

Page 2 of 2

August 13, 2014

F:\TRAFFIC\Development Review\Trip Generation\Trip Generation Rates for Web 8-13-2014

APPENDIX C

Radius of Development Influence Table

TABLE 3.5-1 s· ·fi 1 1gm 1cant mpact

Net Trip Generation*" Distance

1- 50 No significant impact

51 - 1,000 Only address directly accessed link on first accessed major thorouqhfare*

1,001- 4,000 One (1) mile*

4,001 - 8,000 Two (2) miles•

8,001 -12,000 Three (3) miles•

12,001-20,000 Four (4) miles•

20,001- up Five (5) miles•

APPENDIX D

Palm Beach County MPO 2040 LRTP Volumes

19

Co st Observed Observed Observed Feasible 2005 2010 2015 2040 SERPM 6.5 2040 SERPMH

Station Roadway From To Own on Lanes Counis Counts Coun ts Adj usted Volume Adjusted Volume

~37 SOUTH ERN BLVD Cvoress Hea-d Roval Pakn Beach 61..-c:l FOOT 60 45,352 53. 158 55.995 73,800 72.000 ~5 SOUTHERN BLVD IRootal Palm Beach. Blvd Lamstein ln FOOT 80 48.n9 NIA 0 82,500 83.400 ~g SOUTH ERN BLVD lamst:in Ln SR-7 FOOT 80 5 1.263 65.897 74,163 86,900 81,700

~15 SOUTHERN BLVD ~7 Sansbury's Waot FOOT 80 38,854 61.147 68,835 75.700 87.700 3 105 SOUTHERN Bl VD aruburv's Wav Pik.e Rd FOOT 80 43.64" 62.0 10 64,009 88,700 78,600

SOUTHERN BLVD fiDe Rd Fla T...-nc*e Ennnoe FOOT 80 45.951 56.749 0 80,800 72,QOO

3223 SOUTH ERN Sl VO Fla. Tumnik~ Entra nce JooRd FOOT 80 3-Q.180 56.858 65 Q67 75.800 75500

3643 SOUTHERN BLVD LJoo Rd Hawemill Rd FOOT 80 32,658 61. 432 69.801 39,300 75.600 3035 SOUTH ERN BLVD Haverhill Rd Mii'tary Tr FOOT 80 30,88~ 64. 446 n .359 39,600 82. 100 3637 SOUTHERN BLVD IMiitarv Tr KidtRd FOOT 80 26.961 67.701 68.672 52,600 86,300 3673 SOUTHERN BLVD Kn Rd Congress Ave FOOT 80 33,449 58.752 65.258 56,700 73.700 3639 SOUTHERN BLVD AveSB Conaress Ave NB FOOT 80 53.584 NIA 0 67,300 29.500 3675 SOUTHERN BLVD ongr=ss Aw:. NB Gem Lak: FOOT 80 53,584 58.349 0 74,600 74.400 3217 SOUTHERN BLVD klem lake 1-95 FOOT 80 31,292 51.9611 58,703 52.200 68,700 3313 SOUTHERN Bl VD ~95 Pariter Ave FOOT 80 30:197 30.776 34.484 38.100 34.600 3823 SOUTHERN BLVD ~Ave Dixie Hwy FOOT 5 22.160 22.301 25,426 25.900 21.300 3825 SOUTHERN BlVD Dixie Hwy Fl.-:gl•r Dr FOOT ; 13.3n 11 .5Q5 17,152 17,100 11.100 3827 SOUTHERN BLVD =laaler Or Ocean Btvd FOOT 2 14.504 12.830 14.411 15.800 10.100 6605 SPANISH RIVER BLVD !Military Tr IBM Access SR 4 24.6 18 22&574 29.285 27.100 26.700 6305 SPANISH RJI/ER BLVD lBNAcoess Perimeter Rd BR 4 22.n6 23. 173 27.823 20,700 25.300 6811 SPANISH RNER BLVD Perim:ter Rd Old Q;xie H\'rY SR 40 2 1.491 19 . .254 22.555 33,900 24, 100

6813 SPANISH RJI/ER BLVD Old Dixie HwY F-raiHwv BR 40 16.980 15.945 18.750 20,700 18.300 6801 SPANISH RIVER BLVD FederaJHwv Ocean Blvd SR 40 1 8 ,4 19 18. 762 1 9. 154 23,000 2 1.200 7013 SR- 15 ~Markel Rd SR-729 Secbon20Rd FOOT 2 8,040 11.523 9,2115 11.600 14.300 70 12 SR- 15 McClure Rd State Market Rd SR-72Q FOOT 2 7,300 6,666 6,395 9,600 7,900 7009 SR- 15 twMafiSt McClure Rei FOOT 2 4.113 3.651 3.501 4,100 4,300 7008 SR- 15 WMU. S1 N Stat: Market Rd SR-729 FOOT 2 6,149 3,530 2.933 6 ,300 4,100 7007 SR- 15 R-729 Mudt CO¥ Rd SR-700 FOOT 2 8,379 5.289 5.061 7,000 6,200 70 05 SR- 15 iolcf Conoors Hwv monsRd FOOT 2 5.270 4,352 4 ,559 6 ,800 5,100 6 110 SR-7 -C...,tyli>e sw 18St FOOT 60 51.123 51.995 5 1,Q65 62.100 62.300 6414 SR-7 W 18 St PaWnetto Part Rd FOOT 60 53,733 48.959 52,909 60.200 57.100 6400 SR-7 Palm.eoPar1tRd Glades Rd FOOT 60 58692 58187 57n1 64 500 87100 6402 SR-7 fG~es Rd ~amatoRd FOOT 60 51,532 44,141 45,14·1 52,700 55.300 6412 SR-7 aGlaiO Rd ctint Moore Rd FOOT 60 37,804 31.986 36.321 58,800 43,600 6 102 SR-7 lint Moore Rd Wnner's Cir FOOT 60 32.366 30.642 28.306 55,900 45.800 5404 SR-7 ~ner·scir W Atlantic Awe FOOT 40 28,073 23.965 27.414 52,600 43.000 5<00 SR-7 tw A tlantic Ave l eeRd FOOT 40 25.797 2·1.746 24,509 43,800 37,000 5402 SR-7 leeRd Boynton Beach Blvd FOOT 40 27.483 22.402 23.191 49,600 37,600 5 102 SR-7 3ovnton Beach Blvd Hvooluxo Rd FOOT 60 32.692 26.203 27.687 56,600 41.300

4402 SR-7 IHvooluxo Rd lamana Rd FOOT 60 31171 28880 3 1 450 57 4()0 38800 «00 SR-7 lantana Rd l ab WOl!h Rd FOOT 60 42.485 40.402 4 1.210 67.900 40.200 4406 SR-7 lakeWor11>Rd Striblina Wn FOOT 80 NJA 53,939 65,398 60,900 55,800 4102 SR-7 lrilliog Way Forest HA Blvd FOOT 80 5 1.821 43.846 49,6 45 72.900 54.700 ~52 SR-7 Focest Hil Blvd Pioneer-Rd FOOT 80 55.024 54.731 58,868 83,700 66,400 34{)8 SR-7 ?ioneer Rd Soothem Blvd FOOT 80 55.628 52.008 56,643 84.100 64.100 ~ SR-7 Blvd -Rd FOOT 80 59,099 50,065 5 1.645 n .60o 64,600 34{)< SR-7 3ehfedere Rei Okeechobee Blvd FOOT 80 47,176 36,000 38.4 17 57.4{10 5 1.200

-8 SR-7 o........-..- Orange Grove Blvd P9C • JI/A ,13.66l J 7803 27600 2ll500

8/17/20 16 S:\LRTP\2040 LRT?\Mo~ling\COst feasib!e Plan\ 2040 Cf Mod~ Volumes S6S&s7-D62{Pius).xlsx p-oge 18 of 22