Loading...
Agenda 06-11-02 Q CY COMMU EN 6:30 P,M, II. IlL Call to Order. Roll Call. Agenda Approval: A. Additions, Deletions, Corrections. B.~ Adoption. Consent Agenda. A~ Approval of Minutes. B. Authorize the Chair and Director to acquire office space and furnishings for CRA headquarters and hire additional personnel (previously approved and budgeted). C. CRA accounting management. 1) !Direct staff to move the balance of CRA funds to CRA b. an.k..ac.cou, nt.. . 2} AUthorize Director and Chair to open operating account wim aual s~gna[ure control. D. 8oard Attorney - Authorize Director to solicit CV for independent counsel. V. Director's Report: A. Financial 1) May 2002 Financial Statement, B. Project Updates 1) Federal Hwy 2) Heart of Boynton 3) Ocean District 4) Marina/Promenade/Riverwalk 5) Way-Finding Signage Any person w~o derides to appe~ an'/ derision of the Community Redevelopment Advisory Board wi~ respect to any matter considered at ~q~ meeting will need a record of file proceedings and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the Proceedings is made, which recom indudes the testimony and evidence upon which bhe appeal is to be based. 6) Property Acquisition (.lim Nardi of the Urban Group Inc.) a) Requested quotes (3) for appraisal services. C. Future Agenda Items. D. Commission Action. Unfinished Business. Public Hearings: Land IJse Plan AmendmentJRezoninq A. PRO.]ECT NAME: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESC~P'I"~ON: Zonin, Code Variance B. PRO3ECT NAHE: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCR.tP'['[ON: Kensington Place Vince Zabik, Showcase Contractors, [nc. Vince Zabik, Showcase Contractors, Inc. South side of SE 23ra Avenue between Federal Highway and the Flodda East Coast Railroad right-of-way. Request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map from Local Retail Commercial (LRC) to High Density Residential (HDR) and; Request to rezone C-2 Neighborhood Commercial to PUD Planned Unit Development. Proposed use to construct 17 fcc simple townhomes, Richardson Duplex Bud Gentry Robert Richardson Hathaway Park, Block "E'; Lot 19 Request relief from the City of Beynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 6, C.3. requiring a minimum lot frontage of 75 feet for a Any person who deddes to appeal any derision of the Community Redevdopment Advisory Board with respect to any matter considered at me~dng will need a mo3rd of the proceedings and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the a~opeal is to be based. The at,/shall fumish aPpo3P~ate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual witJ'l a disability an equal opportunity to C. PRO.1ECT NAME: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: D, PROIECT NAME: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DF_SCRIP'I-ION: duplex home within the C-3 zoning district, to allow for a variance of 15 feet, and a lot frontage of 60 feet and; Request relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development. Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 6, C.3. requiring a minimum lot area of 9,000 square feet for a duplex homewithin the C-3 zoning districtl to allow for a variance of 1,800 square feet, and a lot area of 7,200 square feet. Woolbright Grill Joe Peterson, Slattery & Associates Restaurant Holdings, Inc. SE Corner of Woolbdght & Federal at Riverwalk Plaza Request relief from Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 4..1.8 allowing a maximum encroachment of an awning into the rear setback of 2.5 feet, to allow a 7.5 foot variance, and an awning encroachment of ten (10) feet. Request relief from Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 4..1.8 allowing a maximum encroachment of an awning into the side setback of 2.5 feet, to allow a 5.5 foot variance, and an awning encroachment of eight (8) feet. Woolbright Grill ]oe Peterson, Slattery & Associates Restaurant Holdings, Inc. SE Corner of Woolbright & Federal Highway at Riverwalk Plaza. Request relief from Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 6.C.3, requiring a minimum side setback of thirty (30) feet, to allow for a variance of ten (10) feet, and a side setback of twenty (20) feet for a restaurant abutting a residential zone in a C-3 zoning district. Any Decson who decides to appeal any decision of the CommuniW Redevaloprnant Advisory Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting will need a record of the ~-oceedings and for such purpose may need to ensure ~ a verbatim n~'ord of th~ proceedings is mace, which record includes the testJmon7 and e~4dence upon which ~ apbea~ is to be based, The Oty shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to affo~l an individual with a disability an equal oppor~anity to E, PRO.1ECT NAME: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRZPT[ON: New Site Plan F. PRO]ECT NAME: AGENT: OWNER: LOCAT[ON: DESCRIPTION: G. PRO3ECT NAME: AGENT: OWNER: LOCA~ON: DESCRIPTION: Woolbright Grill .loe' Peters0n; Slattery & Associates Restaurant Holdings, [nc. SE Comer of Woolbright & Federal at Riverwalk Plaza. Buffer buffer to fence with ine. Kensington Place Vince Zabik, Showcase Contractors, [nc. Vince Zabik, Showcase Contractors, Tnc. SoUth' side of SE 23~ Avenue between Federal Highway and the 'Florida East Coast Railroad right-of-way. Request new site plan approval for 17 townhomes on a 1.62-acre parcel. Woolbright Grill .loe Peterson, Slattery & Associates Restaurant Holdings, [nc. SE Comer of Woolbdght & Federal Hwy at Riverwalk Plaza. Request new site plan approval for a 7,829 square foot two-story, sit-down, restaurant on a 0.6912-acre parcel. Any person who dedd~s to appeal any derision Of me Community Redevetof)ment Advisory Board with respect to any matra' considered at t~is me~dng will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record indudes b~e testimony and evidence upon which me appeal is to be based, The Ob/ shall f~mish appropdete au.~lia~/ aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to H, PRO]ECl- NAME: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: M&L Roofing Riza N. Altan, P.E. Mel Lowe 630 Industrial Avenue Request a major site plan modification to add 8,283 square feet to a 2,275 square foot existing light industrial warehouse building for a total 10,558 square feet on a 0.64-acre parcel. VIII. New Business. A. Appointment of Board member to selection panel for LDR consultant. B. Reception for new CRA Director - Venue and dates to be determined. C. Director's Pdority Ust Other: A. Recent amendments to CRA legislation in the Florida Statutes (Spring 2002, FRA newsletter: The Banner). X. Public Audience. XZ. Adjournment. Any person who decides to appeal any derision of the Community Redevelopment Adviso~ Board witfl respect to any matter considered at this rnee~ng will need a record of the proceedings and for s~ch purpose may need to e~sure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the tesamony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based, The City shall fumisn appropriate atmliany aids and se~ices where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal oppe~aJnity [o ZV. Minutes MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGULAR MEETING, HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CiTY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON TUESDAY, MAY 14, 2002 AT 6:30 P,M. IV. Present Larry Finkelstein, Chairman Jeanne,Heavilin, Vice Chair Jos~ Aguila Alexahder DeMarco Don Fenton Michelle Hoyland Hendemon Tillman Nancy Byme. Asst. Director of Development Lindsey Payne, Board Attorney Mike Rumpf Planning & Zoning Director I. Call to Order Chairman Finkelstein called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. II. Roll Call The roll was called and a quorum was present. IIL Agenda Approval Chair Finkelstein indicated that the agent for the First Baptist Church had requested that their items be heard at the beginning of the meeting to allow the applicant's architect to attend an out-of-town meeting. Motion Vice Chair Heavilin moved to approve the agenda as amended. Mr. DeMarco seconded the motion that carded unanimously. IV. Minutes Approval 1) Special CRA Director Interview Meeting March 15, 2002 2) Special CRA Director Interview Meeting March 22, 2002 3) Special CRA Meeting Apdl 9, 2002 4) Regular CRA Meeting Apdl 9, 2002 Michelle Hoyland requested that the minutes be amended as follows. On pages 9 and 10 of the March 15, 2002 minutes, the name Roddguez should be changed to Dominguez. On page 15 of the Regular CRA meeting of April 9, 2002, the motion at the top of the page should be changed to reflect "Friday and Saturday" instead of Saturday and Sunday. Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida Motion Jose Aguila moved to accept the subject minutes as amended. seconded the motion that carried unanimously. VII. Public Hearing May 14, 2002 Vice Chair Heavilin Lindsey Payne, Board Attorney, administered the Oath to all who would be speaking at the meeting. Maior Site Plan Modification Project Name: - Agent: Owner: Location: Description: First Baptist.Church of Boynton B~ach 301 Nor:th seac~est Boulevard '- ,' Request for site plan. api~oval ~0 ~.o~stdJct a two-story, 3i ,19~ squa~ ~fc~ot.expans on to the exi~?g churCh ~/aCilit~..fo~-~a!t'otal ,o;f' 5,4;~ sguar~e [~et ~ a.3,.84~ac~e parcel Eric Johnson, Planner, gave an overview of t~e; project. Staff recommends approval of /he project contingent o~ the approval by th~ ~R~ of.the next agenda' it6rn; a he ght exception, and the 24 staff Conditions of ApprOVal Chair Finkelstein acknowledged the presence (n the audience of Mayor Gerald Broening and Dale Sugerman, Assistant City Manager, a~l welcomed theretO'the meeting. Bill Maddox, The Maddox Group, applicant, described the project in detail. H& great difference in the bdck "Colonial" style of the, Ultra- modem building, and had made some fa p to tie the two buildings over the desirous of establishing a fresh, new look 'honey to completely replace the existing facility. Mr. ) create a park-like atmosphere instead ( Chair Finkelstein acknowledged the presence-in the audience of Commissioner Mack . McCray and welcomed him to the meeting. ' ' Bradley Miller, Miller Land Planning Delray Beach, Florida, indicated that the ap Approval. 298 Pineapple Grove Way, of Mr. Aguila's major concerns were that there was Oot enough paved parking and that the building styles were incompatible. He asked M~. i~liller,,~h~ther the applicant Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach. Florida May 14. 2002 would be agreeable to a condition that wou~ld a,llow the City [o review the grassed part of the parking area at some point in the future and request That the applicant pave all of the parking lot if deemed aesirable. Mr. Miller did not think the grassed parking area would become a problem. The Code alloWs that stabilized sod may substitLite forup to 50% of the r~uired parking spaces and they had met this requirement. Also. they had to meet requirements~for pervious land and if they paved any more land, they would not be able to meet those req.uiCements Mr. M er d~d not be teve that the apphcant was go~ng to let t e propedcy go, including the grassed parking area, :andbelieved that this matter could safely be ieft ~n the hands of the City's Code Enforcement Division. Mr Aeuila's aeneral impression of the property was favorable. He was concerned about t'~ t' 'r~t~b-t~Tfor mpro'vements~to red'ucc th~ incompatibility betw¢en the existir)g and propo.~ed architectural sty es and did not support "an ongoing ~ttempt," but Wished to ~(n(~w exactly what was going to be done an~l when. He, an~d other Boacd members, expressed disappointment that the main orientation of the new building would be to the northwest, and not visible from Seacrest or Boynton Beach Boulevards since it could have had a dramatic impact onan important corner in the City. Ms. Hoyland asked for and received verification from Mr. Miller that the classrooms would be used for Sunday school only. She inquired whether the p ayground was go~ng to remain at its present location and Mr. Miller affirmed that it would. Ms. Hoyland also asked for and received ver'~cation from Mr. Miller that the 300 seats on the upper floor were not part of this proposal. She asked f one would be able to walk up to them Mr Miller responded that there would be an. access point from the stairwell to get back to the video area, but the area where the cha rs w~uld be n the ba cony would be walled off with a temporary wall. Ms. Hoyland was concerned about the traffic emptying out onto N:W, 1s~ Street because she believed that the stacking distance was too short. She suggested that the applicant work with staff about shifting this area. Ms. Hoyland agreed with Mr. Aguila about the elevations of the building and thought that Condition #24 should be modified to bring the phasing plan baCk to the CRA for approval before issuance of a building permit. Mr. Aguila indicated he also supported this. Henderson Tillman thought the overall design for the building was wonderful and that the ' building would be an asset to the community. He was conCerned about the access off of Boynt~n Beach Boulevard and N.W. 1~ Street and how the large amount of traffic generated by such a project would affect the rest of the community when ~n use. Chair Finkelstein echoed the concerns expressed so far but was especially concerned about the traffic flow and the stacking problem on N.W. 1~ Street. He felt that exiting onto this street would require a right-hand turn sign and a concrete curb to direct traffic to drive around to Thire Avenue and use that link for stacking, He was more concerned about when they came out on N.W. 1s' Street, trying to access Boynton Beach 3 Meeting M nutes Community Redevelopment Agency Beyn~n Beach F edda May d4, 2002 Boulevard,/~ecause there was on y stacking for four cars and then people trying to enter that neig~bborhood could not get in. . hair F~nke!stems,other concern wasw th the difference n characte[ between the style of the existing,,bui!¢iqg,.a~d the proposed one, It was a rq.ajor corridor and a prom nAnt [CC~tibr~ in ,~e ~i',~ahd"he Was"deSirous Of seein ;wha~ t i,i¢'~ gb~i, n~,~ ~J~ tnealspan 5etweenthe,s Mr. Aggila noted ~at there were severn site~ pan concerns and be eyed that the bef~e the Board, at a.later date, · Mr. Mil et .agreed t,~t the app 'cant ecu d address a right, in, right, out ossib o to N...t~t,S{r~t: which Wou ~ ~te people; arouna ~ fl~e exteiCOr'~f tl~e -P~ect, bluittY, no~;d .th~this~.Would ~e~i rnbr~ ~affi8 T~yAa~ieditot~eep~thestackir~gi~t~d~.tOthesite and r~ainiair~ it th.a~ way. TT. hey were not,Prepared to ,make a prese~tat on on the;facade ssue at this meet ng I~e ChUrch wa~ t~ndertakihg~ a $4.5~ p(ojeot a'nd tryr~ ~,k~e:) witt~Jn ~at buan,~t' They wi~ll ~ry to develop the pregO'am f~r th~ fagade and ~Se~ h°w the'v an aesthetic and financial Standp0int, Theyhpped to rec¢ ve ~ap~o~al-'~,r t' ' 'h-~'~e~i'~' ~h'~ pi;ejeCt se they ~uid ~ceed and justibd~ th~ fa~de '.plah Ms. Hoyland asked about the timefram~ ect and the reply was after reasonable Edc Johnson modified Condition of Approval ~9, which calls for submission of a color sample of all major extedor finishes, toladd "prior to theCity ~om~mission~ meeting." Motion Ms. Hoyland moved to approve the site plan request for the First Baptist Church based on the conditions listed in the staff report and modified as follows: that condition #19 include the welding "prior to the City Commission meetng";, that rend t on #24 be modified to indicate that a phased Plan for fac~ade improvements (with timeline for implementation) be presented to the CRA prior to the,isst~an~ o{"a building permit; that the second floor balcony inside the sanctuary of the new bui d ng not b~ Used for seating unless the applicant has the aPpr°va of the C,RA; that f0~ced d~ht tur~s, be prov ded at the a~ss [~0ints on Seacrest BOUlevard and N.W. 1~t Street. ~. Ag~il~ seconded the motion. Chair Finkelstein asked Ms. Hoyland if she wanted to include implementation in the fac,,ade phase plan. Ms. Hoyland modified her motion to include that the fac,,ade phase plan wo~ld ha~;e a timeline for implementation. This wa~'aCCeptab e to Mr. Aguila also. Mr. DeMarco asked the app cant f they had cheCked With the Police Department about the traffic flow at the site. Mr. Miller stated that as part of the Technical Review 4 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida May 14. 2002 Committee, the Police Department had reviewed the project. They had preliminary concerns about an en[rance on Boyn[on Beach Boulevard and when the applicant changed the design, the Police Departmen[ was satisfied. The motion carried unanimously. VII. Heiqht Exception Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: First Baptist Church (HTF_.X 02.001) Bradley Miller, AICP First Bapt st Church of Boynton Beach 301 Nor:th Seacrest B~[J[evard RequeSt for a he~ghtexcepfion as defined by t~'e Land De~[opnient RegUlations, Chapter 2,'Zoning, Sec. 4 F 1, to allow for an increase in the buiidinc~ height of a "place of assembly" to exceec the maximum height ~tngle-Fam[ y A Single-Family There were no comments from staff, the applicant, or the oublid on this item Motion Mr. Fenton moved to accept the recommendations of staff' pertaining to the height exception. Mr. DeMarco seconded the motion that carded unanimously. V. Director's Report Nancy Byme Assistant Development D rector, presented the Director's Reoort. The Deve opment Director Quintus Greene, was not present because he was serving on a panel to select consultants to prepare down(own guidelines and land development regulations for the CRA inthe City of Delray Beach. A. Financial 1 ) April 2002 Financial Statement Ms. Byrne related the highlights of the financial statement. Also, she remarked that there were some Development Department staff costs that have exceeded the amount budgeted by the Board. Development staff will continue to track these expenses on behalf of the CRA, but the June financial statement will reflect payment of the budgeted amount to the City of $25,000. 5 Meeting Minutes Community Redeve opment Agency Boynton Beach Florida B. Project Updates May 14. 2002 1 ) Federal Highway Standards and criteria for Mixed-Use Low and Mxed-Use H gh zonng districts authorized by the C ty Commission for inclusion in the zoning Code. as well as a new infill PUD zo.n, ing district for the FedOra Highway Corridor, are item(s) VII (A), (B), and (C) on tonight s agenda for Board action. 2) Hear~ Of BQy;nto. O (MLK) P an Staff con~!iiue~to: ~Or~:~'or~ ~ t4e~ve p an Amendment fgr Subm ss on to the transce, &r~'~:~i} 6~b~ no~ h ~-s te to the 3) Oceap'~ DJStri~:. A community visioni~ ses,sio,n was ~el~ on Apr t 1 2002 atthe L brary to so ct input fro~ residents,, and~'l~i~s~ in t~' ~ie? regarding the future of the D strict Staff s prePadn~ a!te~ati~e;¢~V,~i~,~rnerit ~8,~r~'i0s based on ideas and recommendat OhS from the pub!ir as ~elllaS,~,[t~i~¢[, Thalami'be presented at a fo ow-u me ' fi ..... ' ~ .- :~,~:~-~,., ~ p etng where Oal-lplan re~me~dafio~.s,,w~'tl be,de~rmmed, 4) ' Madn~r°~enade/Ri,/er~alk The revised Marina de, yelopment agreement is tentat ve y schedu ed for the May 21, 2002 City Commission ~ting. The 'resolution of neCessity authorizing the use of eminent domain to acquire property for the Promenade and Riverwalk has been deferred to a June City Commission meeting. 5) Way-find ng Signage Program This project was temporarily placed on hold by the Public Works Department staff due to other, more immediate priorities (i.e. space needs study and greenways/bikeways study). ,There have also been changes in senior management n the City of Hollywood that raise questions abbut their C°n'~nued role in this project. More nformat on will be provided at the next meeting. 6) Property Acquisition Update Ms. Byrne introduced Jim Nardi of the Urban Group who gave a report on the status of acquisitions in the CRA area. Ms. Byme stated that Quintus Greene. as current Director of the CRA, was requesting Board authorization for the Real Estate Administrator to proceed with securing additional 6 Meeting Minutes Commun ty Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach. Florida May 14, 2002 appraisals, with the objective of eventual acouisition, for three small, blighted, non- resident al proper[les in the MLK Corridor. Two of the properties are in the ~MLK Core Area" and the other is directly across the street to the west. Mr Nardf referred.to, seven parcels that they were trying to acquire that had six separate owners. AIl si~ owners have been c0ntact~d. ~0~ the six, there lS One firm refu§al to sell. There'are two OWners tba,t a~:e wil ng to Sell but at unreasonable pdces. There are three potential properties !hat ¢~,ou d.be acquired at or near fair market vaiue and they are in the midst of negotiations at this time Mr, Nardi .ind(cated that. one of the. properties in question, the Relax Inn, wa~at a point that {erms COuld' be di~c~ssed 'and 'poSsibly authorization' give~ to e~ecute the agreement. The agreement <~n the, R? ( Inn is an option contract that The UrbanGroup obtained threug~ the City Attorneys afffce and it alioW~ a 120-day review period in ~hich due diligence ~ctivities can ~e ~erformed. An' ,a~bestos and environmental sur~ey would have to be done. The pLic6 a~ p~'ice 0~.the ~:~ont[act is $900K The aPpraisai that was pr0videdlby the CRA ind,i~: [tes ~ fair :~a¢~et ',lalue of $850~. i In..tt~e.ev.ent .!hat,the, agreement is.aCCePted,'Mr Nard¢ advfsed that there wou d b; a gra~t or opuon fee w~ere, the CRA pays $~1',£ )otc the ,~r¢~'ert~ owner to' sebu-e th'e right to hold the p[opefty' off the market .whiie it perf0.i-ms~',d'.:u,.e diligence.; in add~fion, there are. two refundable secudty .escrow deposits that w0tji~l be required. B 3th are $,20 000 with the first being, due on execu~ion o:~ the:C°htract;~&;d the second u~: on exer~;ising, the option agreement, anYWhere w,i~jn tl~e. 'i20-day p~d~d. The 0nly Cf~ lges made to the option ageeement we~ that the Seller had d~le~'d the language in' the Option' C0n[ractr that offers the contingency that the property 'app{aises out." The second change to our contract was an addendum disc osing the use of.a 1031 exchange. Mcr. Nardi asked the Boar~ if be wc~uld,be .requ. ired to get another appraisal, thinking that there might be such a r~e4uiremeht ii ~ip(~CY were over a 8ertai~ value. The Board Attorney was unawam o~f,a~y sudh legai :¢~irement..vice' i2~air Heavilin 'asked when the appraisal had been dO~e and Mr. Nardi~replied, June 4,, Mr. DeMarco asked about the asSeesme~t and Mr. Nardi stated that it had been aSSessed in 2001 for $3&5K Mr. Fenton aJ~ked if that were: the new 2001 assessment and Mr. Nardi responded that it was listed in t~e public reCOrd~ Of Pa m Beach County as a 2001 certified assessed and taxable value - assessed value $385,091. It did not say -when the assessment W~$ made. Mr. Fenton and MK DeMarco wished to knov~ whe~ the assessment was made. vChair Finkelstein indicat,ed that $650K was transferred to the CRA by the City from the isions 20/20 Plan for park ng sd that the' pi'operty. COuld be d;emolisl'ied and support a temporary parking lot tO ~e~ice the Pond ;~n~l~ the P~omenade until other arrangements are made as d~scusse~l at se.vera w0rl~$hoPs. ' They' .had' about $7001( for the Promenade, the mai~ reason the property was needed, be~;auSe the C ty he d back 7 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boy, qton, · Beach,· F orda May 14, 2002 $380K for another parcel that was not needed for the Promenade· If the CRA got the $380K 5ack from the City, he thought they would still have some seed money left. it is a ~ha:.e.r_,.of_Wh.e.~t~he~' the B~ard wants t,o. use the funds it has to move this projeCt forwa('d. .~ w~ue or m~s property was arguable and Chair ~-inkelstein bbtieved thb p~cb Was too high, He was no,t happy with thee ~pra_sa because t~ had.bee0 bas, ed ~ ~he sale of a PieCe-of and theft ~:~s':qot/-~ail~:~mp~ablei't~'th~ ~Pi' ~" the ,~ ~"' ~ ' ....... ~ .... P P ~., ~ .grase~d~d~tdo c~n ue ae~e~ep~~ ~t ~ne pmpefzy ~]t~'the ~etb'ack ahd Dafce ;i'ea'uirerhentS' bb~-t :~ , cos[ ~3u-~bUK to demolish [he 2rope~. ' .... "- Mr. Till~an asked how much the[e had,, ,~een fo[ the Promer)ade Fund and Char Fidkejst~ihbe.lieved:tliat ri D~e~bf:2~)O:~;there Was $1,27Z~;162 - - Mr. option and Mr. $50K because it was key to the the are~'He asked if-the currently property Inn 8 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Flodda May 14,2002 Motion Mr. Fenton moved thatthe CPA accept Mr. Nardi's recommendation to ~ke the option ~r $900K for the Relaxlnn conditioned on the acceptance of the environmental assessment. Chair Finkelstein asked that the environmental assessment be brought to the Board for review and that ti~e Board be able td seb the option contract. Ms. Payne said that the agreement was structured so that the Board would nave to approve it again after the environmental assessment was done. The mot on was du y seconded and carded unanimously. Appraisa,s & Acquisition of Three Parcels in CRA Area Ms Byme indicated that Mr. Nardi was prepared to give estimated costs for his firm to provide both the appraisal :service and the a~quisition work for these three parcels if authorized by the Board. Mr. Nardi distributed a report to the BOard members dated May 13. 2002 entitled Task Authorization No. CRA-02 - proposed Scope of Work, ACquisition/Property Management Services from h s firm, the Urban Group. The Scope of Work was followed by a document entitled Price Proposal for the Acquisition of CRA Sites. Mr. Nardi advised that the Proposed Scope of Work before the Board was identica~t to the one for the work they are currently doing. The only difference is that this time, they were asked to provide the appraisal. The pri.ce proposal is identical to the first assignment, structured the same way, and in~:ludes ~he Price for an appraisal. He commented that the first pnce proposal and this one were both structured in milestones and in the event they go out and speak to owners and they ara unwilling to sell, their assignment ends there and no additional funds are expended. Vice Chair Heavilin asked f they were referring to the parcels in the MLK area previously dentified by the Board. Chair Finke stein (Jid n°t knowl He wanted to know what they were and, what the appraised values were. He did'not want to Spend money for appraisals if they did not even know if they had any .intentions of selling. He asked who had identified these Pai~cels for, acquisition. Ms.. Byme ~esponded that' she believed that Development Director Quintus Greene had identified them. Ms. Byrne indicated that two properties were in the core area and one was immediately across the street and to the west of the core area. Mr. Nardi stated that his office could provide fair market value but they liked to have a third party, appraisal performed.. In tl~ case just discussed, The Relax Inn, there was a d fference between fiie assessed va ue and appraised va Ue. Also the current ownei' Purchased it for $570K in 1990 and had an offer for it of $950K. With all these different numbers, it is nice to have an appraisal. At the request of Char Finkeistein, Mr. Nardi confirmed that all three properties had structures and that he had not made any contact to date with the owners. Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Flodda May 14, 2002 Ms. Hoytand referred to page 3 of the document where there was a total of $4.250 and asked that he clarify this. Mr. Nardi stated th.at the tit~e to the far left described this as 'Sfff-contained Complete Appraisa Report. Ms Hoyand sad they paid for an appraisal Under Task I and then Would pay for it again? Mr. Na~di responded that this was correct and that Tasks, 1 through 5 isentifies labor hours and expenseS ~nd ~l~.~t under Other Expenses they wcud orde~r~the appr~sas as a separ~te item Chair Finke stern 'sard that'gne was sett hg up a § e,,and the ether ~was~d~,~ng. :the aB~ra sa Ms. Hoyland stated that it appeared t~at the' ~ do_oe by toe Urban, Gropp ,costs $8,750 per property lid that was cbr~ect, including the appraisal, if they acquire the commented that.this that it did. cost Mr. Mr. N.ardi s position on appra sa s was that t wa~ important to have an appraisal tha~ would stand up ~n court part;cularly f~he Issu,~of ernment doma n were ¢o be ca led nto play. He would have ooe of the review ap..Bra~ers.: put ~ether a sbo..rt s.qope of work, fax t to three Sta~e-cert ~d ASA, aPPraiserS, get;~ q~te, ~d proceed fr6~ there. Consensus Chair Finkelstein determined that it was the consensus of the Board that Mr: Nardi would come back to the CRA with three bid proposals for appraisals on the proper'des, at which time the Board Would take the next step. Vice Char Heav in wanted to know what the total acquisition cos, ts would be if the CRA were able to acquire the seven parcels that Mr, Nardi Was pursuing. Mr. Nardi said that he had worked with Quintus Greene when the scope0f work was put together and they identified all the appraised values and what the total expense could be and that MF Greene had that in{cirmation, Chair Finkelstein asked ~What the to~al asseSsed value was on the three parcels in question;and Mr. 'Nardi did no[ ~now~ He ~ad ho'~ d(~ne any work On this task yet. Vice Chair H'eavilin wanted to knbw what they were ,planning on Spending and where they were dollar-Wise 'with; ail these :acqu sitiops before they go ahead and approve three more ;properties: ' Ch~ir Finkelsf~in thought that the Board m ght want to set uP a wbrkshol~' to c0~s der their s{~ategy f0~further acquisitions. Chair Finkelstein noted that the six November them, other than the Relax Inn. would be taking; that the CRA was first i Nardi mentioned that ir be required from his office to find a doingthat now. site, the been in the works since last information on one ~ noted ~ would process of 10 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach. Florida May 14, 2002 Ms. Byrne concluded the Director% Report with a City Commission action upoate. Future agenda items scheduled for the June 11 meeting are a new site plan and land use amendment for Showcase Townhomes and a new site plan and zoning code variances for Woolbright Grill. Ms. Byrne advised that in recent staff discussions about the pending hire of the new CRA D rector Assistant City Manager Da e Sugerman hadgrac ous ~,' offered temporary office quarters n the East Water P ant for the new Director for a period of sixty days, if the Board so desired. Chair Finkelstein stated that $750K had been held back from the money that was transferred from the Ci~ to the CRA but there was no interest shown for that money on the report Ms Byme d d not kr~ow abOdt this but stated that she would find out. (~hair Finkel~tein'als0 asked about th~ $2,025 for pdnting and binding. Ms. Byme believed this was' related to du~licatibn Costs for the Heart of Boynton stud~;. Quite a few books were made after the Public He~ring and the, CRA has absorbed about ~ of the cost of that. Ms. Hoyland asked if the books were ma~le available to the public and Ms. Byrne replied that they were for sale to the public for $32 each. Ms. Hoytand asked if t.,hat money comes bacl~ intb the CRA and MS. B~me be ieved it goes ba<~k into the City s Genera Fund. Chair Fin'kelstein asked abou[ ~he $800 for land acquisition ir~ the budget. Ms. Byme stated that this ha~ been for A~derson and Carr, who did the appraisal for the Relax Inn. Chai~ Finke Stein did not ~ei eve the Board had appi:oved another appraisal and Ms. Byrne will investigat~ and rePOrtback to the Board. Chair Finkelstein stated that th s had be~n pa d for in F-eb~:u~ry w~ th$12K and he d d not want to pay it tw ce VI. Unfinished Business A. Approval of contract for CRA Director Chair Finkelstein advised the Board that Ms. Beverly Tew-Circe had unexpectedly declined to accept the p0sitOn as the new CRA Director for personal reasons. Acting on the pdor authorization of the Boardl Chair Finkelstein presented an offer to Mr, Douglas Hutchinson, the Board's second .choice, Mr. Hutchinson made a counter-offer and that contract was being brought'to.the Board for rev ew The Board discussed the contract atlength and made the following changes. Motion Mr. DeMarco moved to approve the contract for Mr. Douglas Hutchinson with the following modifications: 1) leave salary as is at $77,500 with $80K after 90 days; 2) delete sections 3.5 and 3.6 pertaining to holidays and sick pay; 3) change car allowance from $400 a month to $300 a month; 4) reduce 3.3 to $20K contingent on Class A term life insurance of $1500 or $2K a year, if in good health, and renegotiate after one year; 6) insurance cancellation notice to be In writing; 7) add 10.2, "No subcontractor or outside employees allowed unless approved by the: CRA." Ms. Hoyland seconded the motion that passed unanimously. Chair Finkelstein will present the amended contract to Mr. Hutchinson o~ the day following this meeting. 11 Meeting Minutes CommunityRedevelopment Agency ~oyntgn Beach, Florida May 14,2002 THE MEETING RECESSED AT 8:55 P.M. AND RECONVENED AT 9:05 P.M. VII. Public Hearing (Resumed Code Review Project Name: Agent: Description: Federal Highway Corridor Communk"y Redevelopment Plan Mixed Use-Low Zoning District (MU-L) City of Boynton Beach R, lue~t~or aq.~ame~ ~dment to Chapter 2, ing',; Secti0~i6~ t~ -es{ablisb ~ ~lixed. h~a~yc0rddgrR~ ~e~i~P~ B. Project Name: Agent: Description: Dick Hudson, Senior Planner, of the City of Boynton Beach Code of C districts (High and Low Intensity), The recommendations of the "Federal adopted by the City on May 15, 2001. Mr these recommendations several as previously reviewed with one amendments but were only establishing At a later date, they will come back and through a large-scale land use map that currently has the mixed-us it and rezone to that designation. Later, amendment to they knew that the Heart of be put in place west of the FEC tracks BoulevarC an amendment to Part III the seen any map districts in,the Code. /lU-H can b® placed uses it ask for a land use lid this because ;to Beach 12 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach Flodda May 14 2002 Mr. Hudson pointed out the following changes from a previous version alreaoy reviewed by the CRA. Table 6. F. 1, Schedule of Permitted Principal, Accessory, and Conditional Uses, was changed to add "Pest Office" as a permitted use; "Warehouse/Distribution" as a not- permitted use in General' Commercial Use Group; and "Soup Kitchens/Substance Abuse Centers/Shelters/Half-way Houses" as prohibited uses in the Service Use Group. Section 6.F.4, Building and Site Regulati,,o. ns, was ch,anged ,,b.y .the addition of a reduct on in the required rear yard setbacks for mu ti-family and othe¢, uses adjacent to the Intracoastal WaTerway (ICWW), which makes those setbacks subject to requirements of any permitting agency having jurisd ct On over construction abutting the ICVVW. Section 6.F.7, Landscaping has been expanded to nc ude add tonal requirements for landscaping within the MU-H district. In a'd~1 t on~ to the requirement for street trees, standards are included for sidewalk ~eplacement to replicate ~he ~aver-block sidewalks on Ocean Avenue. Section 6.F.13, Definitions has been expanded from the four definitions in the odginal draft to a total of twenty-three, which Staff considers important for: the clarity of the proposed ordinance. In Mixed Use High Intensity, a requirement was added that any development facing an arterial 'oad like Federal Highway, Ocean Avenue, and Boynton Beach Boulevard have a mixture of residential and commercial along the street frontage for the establishment of mass and density. Mr. Hudson gave a bdef slide show presentation of some local streets that showed ideas for redevelopment that could be applied in Boynton Beach; Board Comments & Questions Chair Finkelstein was concerned about the addition of Government Office/Civic Center/Libraries as permitted uses in the Federal Highway Corridor. These entities do not pay taxes and he was not in favor of losing what little land was available for redevelopment for any more of these facilities. Mr. Hudson stated that the Federal Highway Corridor was not the only place that this would be applied. To make government offices a conditional use would make the Senior Center a non-conforming - use and the Board did not wish to do that. Mr. Rumpf stated that the intent was to allow future flexibility. If the Board were comfortable with a conditional use restriction note being added to this item, then staff would probably support it. It could be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. Chair Finkelstein thought this would be satisfactory. Ms. Hoyland asked if the Board was comfortable with allowing houses of worship in the area. Mr. Hudson stated that this had not been changed since the Board's onginal review. Mr. Rumpf responded that they had told the consultant that churches should be excluded from the redevelopment area, but later changed this position in light of some Supreme Court or State rulings that ran counter to this. Ms. Hoyland thought they could be allowed through conditional use subject to square footage or other limitations such t3 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton ,Beach Ftodda May14,2002 that they could maintain large buildings but not completely overtake an area. Vice Chair Heavilin stated that they were talking about adding residential units to this area and at some po nt they may need some houses of worsh p to accommodate the re~i0ents. Ms, Hc~ylar~cFdid n~ot n.ece~Sadly ~agre;e:~ith tha~ ¥ice Chair Hea~ilin~fa~(~r~ed,~,aking the ent re U~e G{Oup subject tO ,cond tie.~l, use~appr0vat::i~ Ms. Hoylana ~v0uid,~ot~h~ve'a p~0b~e~w th tha~ exc~pt~ that a publi~c park shobld be:~a permitted g}se. Chair Finkeistein asked Mr. Hudson for an example of "Recreation Outdoor" that would be pemlitted,in Mixed ,Use Light;,sir~¢e par~ w, ere listed elsewhere. :Ms.'H,o~l, and asked what the d fference was beN/eOn (his,; tern.and a,pubiiC p;ark. ;MC, Hudson istated that a shuffleboard area wo~ld ,qualify, ; I Sales Only), which had an attached Also. should fall under, mak~ were g Finkelstein was ncit sure that the .' and at the existing ~ost office.- Regard qg the!vet offiCes;and the limitation of not exceeding 30% of the gross floor area of a development, char Finkelstein thdught-that with a 150-fOot high dove opment with 80 units to the acre. 30% of that would ?present ahuge amount of square footage. Mr. Hudson sta~d that there may be small ~'nfil! parcels tOO where it may only,be 500 square feet. Chair FiBkelstein thought them sboul~"be a cap. If the building were 300K square feet, 30% would be 90.000 square feet. Chair Finkelstein asked about auction houses like they have in Lake Worth and this document prohibits them. Ms.-Hoyland thought that an ~auction ,house would be like Sotheby's. Chair Finketstein thought an antique stere could have an auction and not be called an auction house. Mr. Hudson stated that this covered a shop that heid auctions on a regular basis. Ms. Hoyland asked about antique malls. They operate in a similar fashion to flea markets and occupy large areas ,of land and were not desirable. Mr, Rump¢ thought the Tequireddistance separations would take caj'e of this. He also thought thai quality antique stores were desirable. Char Finkelstein asked about the Dve Shop and- Instructipn as Accessory Use, noting that it was permitted ia the high densitY and rastriCted in the;,iow-dens ty category. The Board noticed that~ under General Commercial in the Use Group/Use List. Outdoor Storage or Display was not permittedin either MU-L or MUFH and Personal Watercraft Sales/Rental/Parts/Reoairs was a permitted use but no outdoor displays allowed. Ms. Hoyland did not think note#13 should be included since it was addressed as a category in both areas and not,permitted in either. 14 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynt0n Beach. Florida May 14. 2002 Chair Finkelstein inquired about the category Residential, Single Family Detached with Accessory Unit - is Accessory Unit the same as an apartment? The response was yes. Chair Finkelstein thought that the requirement for M nimum Living Area, Single Faro ly Detabhed of 11000 SqLJare feet was too small. Vice Chair Hear lin thought there were. a number of homes in the area that would be less than 1,000 square feet. Ms. Hoytand. th?ught apa'rtments and town homes should be based on the number of bedrooms provided: Mr. Rumpf replied ~hat'these requ rements were comparable to the existing Code, which specifies a minimum total square footage instead. Mr. RumDf indicated that there was no minimum number of bedroom units in an apartment, just minimum total:area. Each residential dwelling ur~it requires tWo parking spaces. Mr. Rumpf stated that there was a 500/0 reduction for park ng in the Contra Business District.. ,¥hese parking requirements refleCt:equivaler~t ~atiosland dorepresent the 50% reduction. The one element that this excludes; which ,s n the current Code is the shared parking requiremerjt. If ~ou prbvide 'less~an 100% of the spaces, current Code allows that b~t mandates that ~;OU r~°t'reS'0'ict yc~ur parking to pdvate Use, but ~pen it up to public use. Ms. Hoyland §tated that bh~ ~pace"per unit did not all°w for guest parking. Mr. Aguila also.did ,not belieye, ~.parking. space per dwelling unit was sufficient, Mr, Hudson staled ti~at;this wa,~ ~e ,dO~0wn area and~ they i~robably would not want a lot of cars ia :that area. M$.,Hqy!,a~.d: th~o-Ught if ~is were ~hanged ~o 1-I/2 parking spaces per dwe i!ng un t~ or someth fig, clo~ ~0 that, thai there w~u d st be some room for guest parking. Chair Finkelstein referred to comment #3 on, the bottom of page 7 which stated, "Elements projecting over a pedestrian walkway sba, II allow a minimum 9-foot vertical clearance and 5 foot hodzonta pedestrAn cleamnca: He thought that at one time they had tried, to get an 8:-foot: clearance. Ms.i Hoyland ~thought that the 5-foot requirement was part of the AmeriCans ,with Disabilities Act. Mr. Aguita was not in favor of, the ~comment about having to ha~e flower containers planted with blooming annuals Or pe~enniais aloRg facades of new buildings fronting on arterial roadways in the MU-H District.. He be~lieved this was too much ke te ling people "what tie to w~ar.'. There we~-e a I°t of ether wa~s toadd color and soften sidewalk paving without having to re,s. ort to thi, s..Mr. RumPf.~sked what he woul,d suggest. They compromised on str~k ng sha be~ and S~bsttuting language ke recommend" or "encourage." This was satisfactory to staff and the Board. Ms. Hoyland :commented that the m!nimum frontage for multiple-family residential was 100 feet and {hat this wastoo much. She also Ihought that 50 feet for residential single family detached was too much in a distdct, like .the Federal Highway Corridor. Ms. Hoyland asked why a minimum frontage, was requ red Vice Chair Heavilin stated that the restaurants that were only open for breakfast and lunch would change the percentages for shared parking. Mr. Rumpf stated that they would look at this. Mr. Aguila left the meeting at 9:50 p.m. 15 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida May 14, 2002 Mr. Rumpf returned to Ms. Hoyland's concern about frontage and indicated that there woul~ not be any harm done'if they reduced the areas for tot width and minimum lot frog(age. Ms. Hoytand was thinking of infill Mr. Rum )f said there might be some odd- shaped ret~erties like the Marina that ~yould probably ~xceed these~req,u~7~ments. Ho;l~n(J ;a~l~ed! Mr. ~F(~npf t'0 ~mk-ab~u~'what wO~ld h a~en:.i~'t~e on: oCe~h;we~ ~Ul~i:fa~ily, M& ;Huds0~, acked Cb~t t~e poiOt the Shipwreck ¢Kamg[¢, SayiRg ~h~[..~P~e.eig~,~a, ~t, to gome ,r. Fenton left ,h¢.mee~,g ,, 10,0~ ~:m. 6inny Foot,,o~er :of The A~' of Fr~Bi~g, East: osean Avenue, spoke on behalf Of BOPA, Boynton .O~an Distd~ AssSC at dn ~be president. ~stin Con~ was out of t~. but on behalf',of the rest ¢¢ the~.assoc~!oa,,s~e want~ t~ 0fie suppo~ for ~e C~'s'eff0ds. ,",They Core ,codcer~ed~ i~ the Beginning ;ehe~ ~thb~ woul¢ be::b!~ket reZ°~ines;';bdt wer~ ~mfo~b~*wth t~b ~a9 .~;~ gobg now f0~ ~eir ~a~ They sa ~e the C~nd arevew mu~ 'n favor of ~ x~ ~e anU oek~ng, fO~ard-to,~e;Rew do,toWn. " "~ ' ~ again." She did not stated; ere hum pa ~ ~ze.ane ~ni~Qm Iot'froh~g~. ~. ..... ~¢tejgo y i~'~;'bigger lot ah~ that ~e~ the p [~B ~ S~;e w~ net;~b~ ~le to u~;~ parcel that Mr. Rumpf stated ~t these :pro~i~ion~,~e(~ ¢.~i,p~ ~h;:~ ~C0de;'s° What~ will happen s' that a :de~ oCe~w as~6 ¢¢4~ ~8(~: th~ ~o~igs that are in this package and go a~r it. They are;n~ ge~ ~' gb~'~t~s'~ho~!~'t~¢ ~t '~s ~t going to work n the r s tuat on They wou d 0n y ~:.a~er,and ;spec¢~[~y.~leot this reining or zon ng d s~ct for their development ;ptoj¢~w~'[~ey ~e~t i~, ~Oi~ to WOrk. Ms. HoCand s~t~ ~at Ms. Law ~;,~[~e~ a~ut .~nie~: i~ fron~ge that she may not need under this C~e bu(.,td~ ~[d ~b~ ~p~!?t~e(.~;~h~.Finkelstein Stated that t was mpo~ant to ndte that .t~ ~;.~et ~i~g a~lled,~n' t~e;~land, b~ 'on the books. It would not change any zohih~¢ o~'~e ;land.:" ' Ms. Law ~ lot across the street from her offi~. Her lot Was 0nly zoning would not apply ~ those prope~ies. M to someone who specifl~lly rezones his or her district. Aisc. there would be a period when this ~ was normal. Ms. Law sta~d ~ir Finkelstein said that this does not ha~e any~ [tt was being put in the books so someone could use it o 'being plaid on the prope~ itself. 16 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Ftorida May 14. 2002 For the record, Mr. Rumpf stated that he had specifically stated a zoning district n responding to Ms. Law's request. He wanted to retract that since he did not know the specific parcel of land tc which she was referring, He knew that her real estate practice was zoned C-3. but would not want to state what she could do with other land that he had r~t looked up on a zoning map. Louise Dacamara, 836 East Drive, Harbor Estates, stated that she understood 'what was taking place from an .ad that was in'the newspaper. She read the May 5, 2002 memo regarding the Code Review for these items and there was no mention of excluding Harbor Estates, which lies within the geographica! location described in the project description. She distributed a copy of an ex~pt from a City Commission meeting of December 18, 20Q1; ~vhen the City Commission granted Harbor Estates an exemption that allowed them ~ta retain R~lr-,AA zoning. ~ On behalf, of .the residents Of Harbor Estates, she requested that some provision~ be made .to exclude their group from the restrictions and provisions'Of th® Code I~view change.. Chair.Finkelstein stated that they were nOt,doing rezoning and Were not affecting the Harbor Estates properties in any way. Motion Ms. Hoyland moved that the subject text amendments, as the proposed.amendments to the zoning code, following the directions of the Cibj Commissionand' the requirements for implementation of the Federal Highway Corridor:Comm~Jnity Redevelopment Plan, be approved, subject to the documented recommendations made by the Community Redevelopment Agency throughout the preceding discussion, and ~at staff's discretion. Staff to revisit the parking requirements and the issue or an; antique mall and flea market. This motion covers agenda items VII (A) and (B). Vice chair Heavilin ,seconded the motion that carried unanimously. Project Name: Agent: Description: Federal Highway Corridor Community Redevelopment Plan Inflll Planned Unit Development District (IPUD) City of Boynton Beach Request for an amendment to Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 5, to establish the Infill Planned Unit Development (IPUD) zoning district for the purposes of implementing the Federal Highway Corridor Redevelopment Plan and accommodating redevelopment within its planning areas #1 and #5. Dick Hudson explained that for some time staff has realized a Code shortcoming in that the smallest size PUD that is permissible under the Code is five acres. Staff sees a real opportunity for small parcel infill and redevelopment in the Corridor, particularly in areas #1 and ¢k5. There has a been a lot of interest shown in small, two to three acre parcels. by people who want to develop townhouses or single family and there is no provision for it. Ms. Hoyland liked it but did not understand the minimum usable open space per dwelling unit criteda and wanted to know if this was an aggregate of the entire property. 17 Meeting ~inutes Commumty Redevelopment Agency E~yntonBeach Forda -May 14, 2002 Mr, Hudson replied that it was usable common open space as a minimum. Ms. Hoyland be Zero Lot Line developments. Is there a m~ for The response was no. and Ms. on or thati having spaces the they. wanted, to haVe - Ms. Hoyland's concern was that zero lot lines could be applied to this requirement. Motion Mr. DeMarco moved that, without object on, the Board approve staff's recommendations, subject to the modifications as discussed. Vice,Chair Heavilin seconded the motion. Mr. Rumpf stated that he favered replacing the "minimum usable open space per dwelling unit" standard, with a perf0m3anc~ standard. He also stated that these requirements were subject to fu~re rev ew, prob~ em so v ng, and debugging. The motion carded 3-1, Ms. Hoyland dissenting. Ms. Hoyland wished to add a change to the motion but the vote had already been taken. VIII. New Business - None IX. Other A. Changes to CRA Legislation There was an article in the Board members' packets that was for information only. 18 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Flodda May 14, 2002 X. Adjournment As there was no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was duly adjourned at 10:30 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Susan Collins Recording Secretary (three tapes) (051502) 19 o ~ ¥. I)ir~ctor's !~ orr '~ June 5,2002 Mr. Quintus L. Greene, AIA, AICP Director of Development The City of Boynton Beach 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard Post OffiCe Box 310 Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310 Task Authorization No. CRA-02 Transmittal of Appraisal Price Proposals VIA FACSIMILE ~.ARD COPY TO FOLLOW Dear Mr. Green e; At the direction of the Board of the Community Redevelopment Agency, The Urban Group, Inc. has secured three bids for appraisals needed in conjunction with Task #CRA-02. Enclosed please find responses from three separate appraisal firms. The following provides a summary of the quotes. The figures are grand total inclusive fees for the completion of three individual self-contained appraisal reports within thirty days. Anderson and Carr, Inc. $9,700.00 Callaway & Price Inc. $7,000.00 Real Property Analysts $6,500.00 The Urban Group recommends the issuan ce of a notice to proceed to Real Property Analysts for a not to exceed amount of $6,500.00. Should you wish to discuss this assignment further you may reach me at (888) 522- 6226, extension 127. Sincerely, ~ 'THE URBA~R)Ip' INC. Vice President cc: Dale S. Sugerman, The City of Boynton Beach Howard Steinholz, The Urban Group, Inc. The Urban Group, Inc. · I424 South Andrews Avenue · Suite 200 · Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33316 TELEPHONE 954-522-6226 · FAX 954-522~6422 FROM S~ 1 +833+023~i ASI FI $CN' CAUI , ISC. E. M,~iI'.n~i{ @andar.qonearr.com T~l,~phoa~ ~'5~1 ~ 833-1661 Fax (561) 833-0234 TO: DATE: CLIENT: PROPERTIES: TYPE REPORT: APPRAISAL QUOTE VIA FAX 954-522-6422 Jim Nard/, Vice President The Urban Group Inc. June 4, 2002 The Urban Group Inc. (1~ EZ Market, 1005 N. Seacrest Blvd. PCN #08-43-45-21-07-004-1300 (2) Jesus House of Worship, 1000 N. Seacrest Blvd. PCN #08-43-45-21-10-004-0010 (3) Roberts Property, 1010 N. Seacrest Blvd. PCN #08-43-45-21-10-005-0010 Self Contained Narrative APPRAISER: NUMBER OF COPIES: TIME TO COMPLETE: FEE: APPROVED BY CLIENT: l:/eompaoylbid.¥prOpO.~t[rbblx, rdi Robert B. Banting, MAI, SPA 2 30 days from authorization $9,700.00 DATE: JUM 03 2002 I:21PM t639 Forum Place Suite 5 West Pakn Beach. FL 33401 Phone: (561) 686-0333 Fac (561) 6&5-3705 c~cow,~b.com CALLR~RY & PRICE 5616863?05 po 1 Fax Fee Quote To: Jim Nardi Fron'. Stephan D. Shaw, MAI Comlmrt3,: The Urban Group Date: June 3. 2002 Address: Phone #: 954-522-5226 Fax #: 954-522-5422 Property Descripflan: Three properties at or near lhe comer of Maffin Luther King Bl',,'d and Seacreast Blvd In Boynton Beach Fee: $7000 - Three separate Complete Self-Contained Appraisals. 13me.' 3-4 weeks Sig.ed By ~] Urgent ~1 For Rarity I-I Please Comment f-~ Please Reply FI Please Recycle Stme 3, 2002 Mr. James Nardi Vice President The Urban ~oup, Inc. 1424 South Andrews Avenue - Suite 200 Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33316 REAL PROPERTY ANALYSTS ,..~,w,, Re: Appraisal Reports 2 Commercial Properties and Church Dear Mr. Nardi: Thank you for the opportunity to submit a price proposaI to prepare appraisal reports for the above referenced project. The project encompasses three properties. The a~signment calls for a Limited Appraisal due ~o the fact that we will not contact ~he propert7 owner, which will require the use of pubic records for buildiag and other data. 'We propose to provide Self-Contahaed appraisals subject to this underlying limiting condition. Our fee assumes that all three contemporaneously and is not to be construed as a "per sssignmen~s ate awarded parcel fee". We propose to provide individual appraisal reports for a total fee of $6,500. The reports can be delivered within 30 days from notice to proceed. Thank you for the opporturfity to assist you. Sincerely, RPA ~f South Florida, Inc. (_~ta~e Cc~fied General Real Estate Appraiser No. 0001402 1000 $, ¢'edoral Highway. Suite 202 · Oe®rfleld Sea¢h, FI. 33441 V. B. 6. a. June 5,2002 Mr. Quintus L. Greene. AIA. AICP Director of Development The City of Boynton Beach 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard Post Office Box 310 Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310 FACSIMILE RD COPY TO FOLLOW RE: Task Authorization No. CRA-01 Due'Diligence Proposal - Boynton Lodge, Inc. a/ida Relax Inn Dear Mr. Greene; Based on the Option Contract entered into on May 23, 2002 with the Boynton Lodge, Inc. a/Ida Relax inn, the Community Redevelopment Agency has 120 days to perform it's due diligence on the property. Accordingly, The Urban Group, (TUG) has obtained a proposal for a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment and Asbestos Survey. The firm of Evans Environmental & Geosciences (EE&G), with offices throughout Florida, was solicited for the proposals. TUG has worked with EE&G in the past and has come to know the firm as possessing a level of professionalism, accuracy and timeliness that the CRA will require on this assignment. The following provides a summary of the quote. The figures are grand total inclusive fees for the completion of an individual Phase I Environmemal Site Assessment and Asbestos Survey within twenty, (20) days. o Phase I Environmental Site Assessment $1,500.00 o Asbestos Survey Repor~ $1,000.00 The Urban Group recommends the issuance of a notice to proceed to Evans Environmental & Geosciences for a not to exceed amount of $2,500.00. Should you wish to discuss this any further you may reach me at (888) 522-6226 extension "27. Sincerely, Jim Na/rdi Project Manager cc: Dale S. Sugerman, The City of Boynton Beach Howard Steinholz, The Urban Group, Inc. t~The Urban Group, inc. · 1424 South Andrews Avenue · Suite 200 · Fort Lauderdale. Florida 33316 TELEPHONE 954-522-6226 · FAX 954-522-6422 EE G Evans EnvironmeNtal & Oe0sciences 14505 CommerCe Way, Su;te 400 Miami Lakes. F[crrida 33{316 (305J 374-8300 (3051 374-9004 Fax March 27, 2002 EE&G Proposal No. 0203003990 Mr, Jim Nardi The Urban Group 1424 South Andrews Avenue Suite 200 Ft, Lauderdale, FL 33316 Subject: Proposal for a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment with Asbestos of the motel building Ioc. ated at 222 N. Federal Highway, Boynton Beach, FL Deer Mr. Nardi: Evans Environmental & Geosciences (EE&G). Inc. is pleased to submit the following proposal to perform a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) with asbestos at'~he above-referenced property. The proposed Phase I ESA will be performed in accordance with the Amedcan Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) guidelines, Practice E-1527 (2000), The guidelines set forth by [he ASTM in this practice are widely regarded by most major lending institutions as the industry standard for performing ESA's on commercial real estate and address the appropfiaFe inquiry provisions of CERCLA's innocent landowner defense. PROPOSED SCOPE OF SERVICES r accordance with the ASTM Designation E 1527-00 guidelines, the Phase I ESA will ~nclude the following scope of services. · EE&G will interview the Client or Client's designated representative to assess knowledge of site-specific conditions or uncover available information, which may help to identify recognized environmental conditions. The attached User Information Form should be completed and returned To EE&G pdor to site reconnaissance activities. EE&G will conduct site reconnaissance to obtain information indicating the likelihood of identifying recognized environmental conditions in connection with the Properb/. FE&G will assess the uses ano conditions of the Property. to the extent visually and/or physically observed dudng the site inspection of accessible areas, including: Current uses on the Property likely to involve the use. treatment, storage, disposal or generation of hazardous substances or petroleum produCts, Intedor and extedor inspection of the Property to assess for sewage, storm water and wastewater disposal system(s), potable water supply, and evidence of storage tanks, drums, PCB;containing equipment, pools of liquid, odors, pits/ponds/lagoons, stained soil or pavement, stressed Miami. FL Fort Lauderdale. FL Melboumo, FL Tampa. FL Jacksonville. FL Orlando. FL JUNLO4-2GO2 I~:20~ FROM-EEC MIAMI +3053?49004 T-Q2? P.DO3/G08 F-480 Mr. Jim NaZi June 4. 2002 Page 2 vegetation, drains, heating/cooling system and wells. A general descdpfion of the current on-site structures wiIl be noted. - Current uses of adjoining properties, as limited to the extent visually and/or physically observed from property boundaries, - Current uses of surrounding area, as limited to extent visually and/or physically observed during a drive-through of the area. EE&G will obtain and review reasonably ascertainable records from stanaar~ · ' -00 which are ublicly sources (as refined lr~ ASTM Designation E !,,5..27 available, prec~cally revfewable, and obtainable wim~n reasonable time aha cos[ constraints. These records will include; Applical21e regulatory files held by Federal, state and Local agencies which pertain to the use and handling of hazardous waste, hazardous substances and petroleum products for the Property, adjoining properties. and su~Teunding properties (within the designated search distance, per ASTM Designation E 1527-00). - Physic~d setting soumes, including a current USGS 7.5 Minute Topographic Map, and current technical documentation on the regions! surficia soil type and distribution, and regional geologic and nydrogeologic environmental setting. Standard [listodcal sources, used to develop an understanding of the previous uses or occupantS of the Property and adjoining properties. which r~ay indicate potential recognized environmental conditions. These sources wilt include (at a minimum} city directories, aerial photographs. and fire insurance maps, whiCh will be reviewed at approximately 5-year intervals. Additianalty, if warranted, EE&G also will attempt to review reasonably ascertainable property tax files. Review of building department plans will not be conducted as part of the standard Phase I ESA, as these typically are not able to be reviewed and copies obtained within "reasonable time and cost constraints". EE&G will conduct interviews with individuals knowledgeable of the Properb/to assess for information indicating potential recognized environmental conditions in connection w~th the Property. These individuats may inctude owner(s), occupant(s), and appropriate local regulatory authorities. Additionally, upon authorization to proceed, EE&G requests that the Client provide the name and telephone number of a Key Site Manager. an individual who has good knowledge of the uses and physical characteristics of the Property, for this interview process. EE&G will rrb-care a final report, which summarized the methodology ane findings of the Phase I ESA. The report will include a summary of the Client/User Information, Site Reconnaissance. Interview(s), and Record Review Findings. As required by ASTM Designation E 1527-00. the final report will include a Findings/Opinion Section and Conclusions Section, which will clearly state if recognized environmental conditions were identified in connection with the +30~3~49004 T-027 P.004/~06 F-480 Mr. Jim Nardi June 4, 2002 Page 3 Property. Documentation of pertinent resources, references and key exhibits will De included to support the report findings, when appropriate. Client will be provided a draf: report for review and comment, following which two cop~s of the fine report, signed by EE&G's environmental pr~essionats condu~ng the work, will be submitted as the final deliverable; Additionally, an asbestos survey for the purposes of demolition perm ts will be performed. The report on the presence or absence of asbestos at th~s property will be prepared including up to 30 samcles from building and roofing materials. FEE & TIME FRAME EE&G's lump sum fee for con'~pletion of the proposed Phase I ESA scope of services is $t,500. Fees for the asbestos demolition survey and certification repor~ are $I,000. Please note that the proposed scope of services does not cover ~on-ASTM Designation E 1527-00 issues which also may be considered potential environmental concerns with respect to business risk during commercial property transactions and finandng. ~ EE&G can complete the pro[:osed scope of services within 15 business days from receipt of authorization to proceed. Furthermore, EE&G can provide the Client with a verbal summary of the assessment findings, (pending completion of a regulato~' file review) within 10 business days from receipt of authodzalion ts proceed. AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED If this proposal is satisfactory, please sign the attached Professional Services Agreement, and return to EE&G with the required professional retainer. EE&G will execute the contract and return a copy for your records. Additionally, in accordance with ASTM Designation E 1527-00, EE&G also requires that the attached Phase / £,SA UserForm be completed and returned prior to initiating the Phase I ESAs. Please do net hesitate to ~.ontac~ us ~fyou have any questions concerning this proposal. Sincerely, Pauta H. Church Senior Technical Advisor EE&G PHC/CCC:phc A~tachments PROFES~;IONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT BE'rWEEN THE URBAN GROUP, INC. AND EVA~[~S ENVIROMENTAL & GEOSCIENCES This Agreement is made on the 4~ day of June 2002, by and between The Urban Group, Inc, ("Client") and Evans Envi[~nmental & Geosciences CEE&G"). WITNiESSETH That for the consideratior,s set forth below, the parties hereto do agree as follows: 1_ Description of Services: EE&G's proposal No. 0203003990, dated June 4, 2002 (attached) 2. Period of Performance: 15 days from Execution of this Agreement and receipt of Professional Retainer. 3. Basis of Compensation: Lump Sum - $1,500: - Phase I ESA $1,000 - Asbestos Demolition Survey and Certification Report 4. Method of Invoicin.q: Invoice will be generated upon completion of the Phase I ESA and is due upon delivery of the report. 5. Professional Retainer.; Waived General Conditions: a. Payments for invoices prepared by EE&G are due and payable upon delivery of the final written oeliverable/raport. EE&G shall apply a 1.5% monthly finance charge on all balances over 30 days outstanding. This Agreemen[ may be terminated by either party hereto upon 15 days notice in writing to the other party. Upon termination, EE&G shall prepare and submit a final invoice for services rendered to the date of termination together with any termination expenses, incurred. c. The parties hereto shall maintain in full force and effect comprehensive public liability insurance with coverage limits which are reasonable in light of the work to be und,~rtaKen, and worKmen's compensation insurance as required by law. d. Any drawings ano specifications developed pursuant to this Agreement are instruments of ~,etvice, and as such the original documents, tracings, ann field notes are and remain the property of EE&G regardless of whether the work for which they were prepared is executed. e, In the event that legal action s instituted to enforce any of the terms of this Agreement, the Party which does not pt.?ail shall pay the legal expenses of the prevailing o~rty; ncluding attorney s fees - pr~-su[t, through Hal and appeal f. The parties hereto each binds itself, its successors, exeCutors, administrators and assigns to the other party to this Agreement and to the successors, executors, administratom and assigns of such other party in respect of all covenants of th~s Agreeme~it. g. EE&G's liability for services m be rendered under this Agreement shall be limited to $50,000, unless Client pays for the assumption of additional liability by EE&G as a .~ieparete line item in ArUcie 3, Basis of Compensation. h. applicable, Client agrees that EE&G shall ~ot be responsible for liability ~used by the presence ?r release of hazardous substances or petroleum products at the Site. The Client will either make others responsible fo~- liabilities due to such conditions, or will indemnify and save harmless EE&G from such liability. The provisions of this Article I6,h} shall survive any termination of this Agreement. Client agrees to complete and return the at~ached Phase I ESA User Form pdor to E~E&G, ;~erforming the Phase I ESA site reconnaissance. EE&G wili not be responsible for delays caused, as a result of not being provided that required information. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused the Agreement to be executed by their duly authorized officers on the date first written above. Evans Environmental & Geosciences Sign: Name: Paula H. Church Title: Senior' Technical Advisor Date: Client: The Urban Group, lnc. Sign: Name: Title: Date: June 5,2002 Mr. Quintus L. Greene, AIA, AICP Director of Development The City of Boynton Beach 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard Post Office Box 310 Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310 RE: Task Authorization No. CRA-02 The Urban Group/Price Proposal VIA FACSIMILE L~ARD COPY TO FOLLOW Dear Mr. Greene; As you are aware, the Board of the Community Redevelopment Agency has asked The Urban Group, Inc. to secure three bids for appraisals needed in conjunction with Task #CRA-02. Under separate cover TUG has forwarded those quotes and made a recommendation to accept and award the most responsive bid. In the event the Board wou Id like to review the revisions made to the Price Proposal submitted at the May 14, 2002 meeting, have enclosed the revised proposal for your records. Should you wish to discuss this any further you may reach me at (888) 522-6226, extension 127. Sincerely, U.~RBAN GROUP, INC. / Jim Nardi Project Manager CC: Dale S. Sugerman, The City of Boynton Beach Howard Steinholz, The Urban Group, Inc. The Urban Group, Inc. · 1424 South Andrews Avenue · Suite 200 · Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33316 TELEPHONE 954-522-6226 · FAX 954-522-6422 VII. PUBI.~¢ HEAliNgS DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM #02-103 Staff Repod Community Redevelopment Agency Board and City Commission Meeting Date: June 11, 2002 File No: ZNCV 02-006 - Lot area and lot frontage, Location: Hatliaway Park, Block "E", Lot 19. Owner: Robert Richardson Project: Richardson Duelex on a parcel zoned C-3. Variance Request: Request for relief from Chapter 2. Zoning, Section 6. C. 3. requiring a minimum lot frontage of 75 feet, to allow for a variance of 15 feet, and ot frontage of 60 feet; and requiring a minimum lot area of 9,000 square feet, to allow for a variance of 1,80Q square feet, and a lot area of 7,200 square foot for a duplex on a parcel zoned C-3. VII,B. BACKGROUND The subject property consists of a single lot located at 306 SE 10TM Avenue and is currently zoned C-3, Community Commercial zoning district (see Exhibit "A" - location, map). The [and use designation of the proper~y is Local Retail Commercial. It should be noted that C~3 regulations along with the Local Retail Commercial land use desiqnation do not permit single- family residences. The Hathaway Park Subdivision was platted in 1~925 with typical lot frontages varying between 50 feet to 60 feet with lot area varying between 4,500 to 7,500 square feet (see Exhibit "B" -Hathaway Park Subdivision Plat). City records show that the property was rezoned from R-2 to C-3 ir: 1975; however, it was originally improved with a single-family home. Staff canno[ confirm the previous zoning of the proper~y prior to the 1975 rezoning. The applicant's intention is to use the subject property as a duplex, which is a permitted use in the C-3 zoning distric'L Relief is requested frorrf'the City code to allow a single-family dwelling to be used as duplex on a substandard lot within the C-3 zoning district {see Exhibit "C" - Survey and Site PIan). The following is a description of the zoning districts and land uses of surrounding properties: North: Commercial property with a land use designation of Local Retail Commercial. zoned C-3; South: SE 10'" Avenue right-of-way, and a vacant parcel with a land use designation of Medium density Residential, zoned R-2; East: Single-family and duplex dwellings with a and use designation of Medium density Residential, zoned R-2; and West: A warehouse building with a land use designation of Local Retail CommerciaL, zoned Page 2 Richardson Duplex File No. ZNCV 02-006 C-3. and farther west the FEC Railway right-of-way. Staff surveyed the area and :it was observed that sing e,fam y and two-family dwellings surround the subject property w th the except oi~ of the property abutting [he north and west ~roperty lines of the subject site. ANALYSIS The code states that the zoning code variance can not be approved unless the board finds the following: a. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure; or building inVOlved and which are not applicable to other ~a'nd's;: structures or buildi/~gs i~ the same zoning districL b. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this ordinance to other lands, buildings, or structures in the~ same zoning district. That literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of the ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. e. That the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure. f. That the grant of the variance will be in harmony with the ge/~eral intent and purpose of this chapter[ordinance] and that such variance will not be injurious to the area/nvolved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Staff reviewed the requested variances focusing on the applicant's response to the above criteria contained in: Exhibit "D". Staff concurs with the applicant's response to criteria "b"above that there'exists special conditions peculiar to the subject parcel namely lot area and frontage. Staff acknowledges that the C b/has kely .caused the non-conformity by v rtue of the prev ous rezon!og action, therefore satisfying criterion "b"abcve. Furthermore, regardless of what use is ever proposed for the subject prolJerty, wth n the scope of the allowable uses of the C,3 zoning district;-'~he Subject variance ,~,0uld be required, unless assembled with adjacent properties as the minimum variance needed to make possible the reasonable use of the land. It should be noted that if this site were to be converted into a commercial use. additional investment would be necessary in order to satisfy the new code requirements applicable to commercial properties and necessary to bring the sit~ up current code. With respect to the other criteria "c'throug h '~'above, staff realizes, contrary to other properties in the same district, only the subject ProPerty had retained its residentiai character and occupation since the rezoning action of 1975. Staff feels that the applicant has proven hardship. The structure s legally non-conforming by virtue of the City's rezoning action, which now limits the applicant's use:option to single-family. Such option (single-family use) is inconsistent with Page 3 Richardson Duplex File No. ZNCV 02-006 [he Local Retail Commercial designation of the Comprehensive Plan. However. duplex residences are permitted within the Local Retail Commercial land use designation. The need for the subject variance is the result of the a licant'S de ' PP s, res to use the property as a duplex. The applicant states: the interior of the residence has been used as a dup ex for over 30 years" St~ff can;riOt confirm this because no occupat ona cerise records ex st for th s proper~y, nor permit records for inte¢ior renOvations. With respect ~:o impacts on the area, ann satsfying criterion f' above, due to the sim arity betwee~;t~ P'rOP~ed u~b (duplex); nearby ~jn ~ and two-fam · .,: ;- ..,:,,,, ,, : ~:, ~ _ ,: . g yuses, andg~venthephysica cond~to~s ~f adjacent pommerca, re - ;p per[es.the mpacls upontheabuttn arces man ~- - ,, gP , yto the eas~:,,, ar, e,m~ti ate, The su ,..., .¢, ,-g -- bj_edt~ request would:,hkey ~qenerate no neaatv~- imn~r,f¢ aajacent properties. - dui: conforr~ini allocatil district) City's and and / claiming the existence of the ood faith effort [o rectify [he' non- ~quare feet, inimum living ar~:a requii-ed by )lo× dwefling (allowed in the C-3 zonirig ulations and complying with tt~e property and nitude of variances Based on a hardship ~ ap~ Land that the applicant has proven +.hat bring the subject staff concludes that the Comprehensive Plan and the Therefore, staff: F frontage of 60 sq property being Used as: applicant should be that criterion "- Building Divisions ~ negative ~mpacts to .~ approved, thereby granting a ~f the 75 foot frontage and 9~ 000 is conditioned upon the converted to a commercial use, the ~ing to commercial properties and sense and be required to mitigate any ,t~ough proper s~te design and buffering, and limitations involving sound mitigafio~ end operation. It should be noted that support of the subject var[an-ce does not represent support for any work done without [he necessary ~erm t. All improvements are sub.'ect to the permitting and inspection requirements. This condition and any other condition of approva recommended by the Community Redevelopment Agency Board or City CommissiOn will be placed in Exhibit "E"-Conditions of Approval. MDA/ Location Map Richardson Du31ex EXHIBIT "A" 200 EXHIBIT "B" N 0YNi0N F hA. ~-e_RT2~tUR El. CRANE-OY~NER AND IDEVEhOP~R BEING A SUB}IYlSlOH 0F ANO~TICM DF TMB NONTH-EAST T~N ~S S.N.{8 EAST LYING ~AST 0F AND ADGAOENT T0 SCALE: l"-tOO PALH BEACH THE RIDDLE CO. dULY 19ES COUNTY ENG'~ SE~VIC E. S TREE T. ~ ~-~! EXHIBIT "C''~ LOT 18 Commercio (C-5) LOT 5 '~ ~ ~ 60.00 Found 2x2 Conc ]/2" IRF ,~ 89'3'45' -- 90'56'15' Monument 4.13' -" ~ ~ 31.86'~ ~_____ ~./24.0o'  ~ LOT 19 EO ~ o CBS ~ ~ q GARAGE o 51.20' ,, ~ ~d LOT 2 ' q ~x~ i __ 4.09' 24.00' ~ 20" 5'x5' Met~I ~ ~1 - ~ 45' Orbs & Utility Shed , 20' ' P~king ~ ; 2 ' Onopy '~ LOT 20 ~ - ~ ~ 18.10' E o_ ExisUng ' S ~ One Sto~ CBS ~ ~ Duplex Residence Ch~inlink Finish Floor EL 1~.55 ~ LOT ~ 6.00' ?.06' Fence ~ ~ ~ 4' Ch~fnklin~ 4.8~' 27.10" ~ ~ ~p~e~ Fence ~ ~ ~ 45' Drive a 89'03'45' ~ 9' 20' P~rking ~ %~ 60.00' S.[. ~Oth Ave (50' ~/W) SCALE: 1" =20" L;.L S.E. 2nd Street Y 20' Aspnol~ Povement~ SITE PLAN for DUPLEX RESIDENCE & PARKING AREAS LEGEND: R/W indicstes Right-of-wsy I.R.S. indicates iron rod set P.P. indicotes Power Pole -vA- indicotes not To sco~e LR.F. indicetes ton roc ¢ound (~ Number of Perking Stolls LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot 19, Block "E", Hothowoy Pork, A Subdivision os RecorDeD in Plot Book 15, poge t7, in me Public RecorDs of Pelto Beech County. Ftorido. GENTRY ENGINEERING & LAND SURVEYING, INC. P.O. BOX 243 OELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 (561) 272-1924 ¢ ~,,~¢ 2°= N SCALE: 1" = 20" LOT 18 1/2" ¢.13' EXHIBIT "C" Commercial(C-5) LOT 5 90'56't5' Utilit Found 2x2 Conc Monument 4.09' CBS GARAGE - 51.20' LOT 2 24.00' 31.91' I_9 (0.165 Ac. '~.84' _ 24.85' ~ LOT 20 18.10' L~ One Story CBS ~ Resider :e Finish Floor El. 14.35 ChalnlinK Fence ~. 1 6.00' 4' Choinklink Fence 4.84' 27.10' 05 -,j 66.9' ' ~. Conc. Drive 89°03'45, o~ 60.00' Cone. Drive blsnhole --8" SS 25.00' S.E. Ol:h Ave (50' R /S'E 2nc,_Street'~'e¢ 20' Asphalt vemen~r 4 / .2'~+~ Ex. 6" W ~._ Ex. 6" W~terline ~'90°56'i5· 5/8" IRC 8" SS- LEGEND: R/W indicates Right-of-way I.R.S. indicates 'ran 'oa set P.P. indicates =ower Pale ~ indicates no~ to scale ,R.F. indidotes 'roe rod founc D & M indicates Deed Gna Meosurec NOTE~$: 1. Unless it Dears the signo(ure aha the original raised sea, of o Florida Licensed Surveyor Gna Mopper, this sketch is ~or informot[ono ourooses amy ano is not valid. LEGAL D SCRIPTION: LO~ 19, Block "E", Hathaway Park. A Subdivision as Recorded :~ Plat Book page 17. ir the Public Recoras of Palm 8each Countz, Florida. CERTIF 3ATION; I hereby certify [his sketch ~s shown hereon represents ~ survey maae un.er my direction and ~o be ~rue ~nc 2ccurate ~o me best of my knowledge and belief, subject ~o easements ~nd right-of--ways of recoro ~nd mee~s the minimum technica standards Gr..rede 61G1/~--6 of the Fl~d~ Administr~Uve Code. / GENTRY ENGINEERING & ~ Mopp~; No. 2~8~ LANDSURVEYING,INC. L.B. No.2322 Dote of Survey: Nov 12. 2001 P.O. BOX243 BELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 (561) 272-1924 EXHIBIT "D" ZONING CODE VARIANCE APPLICATION: ROBERT RICHARDSON ( 306 SE 10th AVENUE ) ITEM 5. STATEMENT OF SPECIAL CONDITIONS, HARDSHIPS OR REASONS JUSTIFING THE REQUESTED VARIANCE. A. The existing building was ~ilt more than ~Q years ago, and the interior of the residenee has been used as a duplex for over 30 yrs. ( based on witnesses from the local are). THE LOT IS PLATTED WITH THE FRON%AGE2A~MD AREA AS REQUESTED FOR APPROVAL. 8. The requeste area and frontage ~nd as platn'~d in the plat of. Hathaway Park. C. The owner purchased the property as a duplex I copy of sales~ad attached ) and the grand fathered rights would not be considered as a special privilege. D.,The proper~y has been used as a duplex and the currenn code ( C-3 ) allows for a iduplex, but the owner needs the .variance no,continue the grand-fathar rights. E. The granting of this variance wil! a!$ow the 0~er to conni~ue t~ grand-father rights and use the property as adverti~e,~when he pu~chas'ed it. F. ~his variance will 'allow th~ owne~ tO eontinu~ using the property as in the past and improve the building to meet current building: c~des to protect the public. EXHIBIT "E" Conditions of Approval Project name: Richardson Duplex File number: ZNCV 02-006 Reference: DEPARTMENTS ~ INCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS- General Comments: None PUBLIC woRKs- Traffic Comments: None UTILf 1'/15S Comments: None F17P, E Comments: None POLICE Comments: None ENGINEERING DMSION Comments: None BUILDING DMSION Comments: None " PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST I Comments: None PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 1. S~tn, a-lfthe subject property~v~re te be converted commercial in the C-3 zoning district, the applicant shall be required Conditions of Approval DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT to satisfy all code requirements pertaining to commercial properties (i.e. prope~: site design and buffering involving sound mitigation and hours of operations shall be required to mitigate any impacts on adjacent properties). ADDITIONAL coMMUN £i kr REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD CONDITIONS Comments: ~ i. To be determined. ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS Cormments: 1. To be determined. S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Richardson DumeAZNCV~Condition of Al~proval.doc DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME & ADDRESS: Richardson Duplex APPLICANT'S AGENT: Burl Gentry APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: P.O. Box 243 Detray Beach, FL. 33444 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: June 18, 2002 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Request for re ief from Chapter 2, Zoning Section 6.C.3. requiring: 1 ) a minimum tot frontage of 75 feet to allow for a variance of 15 feet and a lot frontage of 60 feet. 2) a minimum lot area of 9,000 sc uare feet to allow for a variance of 1.800 square feet and a lot area of 7,200 square feet. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: 306 S.E. 10thAvenue, Boynton Beach, FL DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO. THIS MATTER came before the City Commission of the City of Boyn~on Beach, Florida appearing on the Consent Agenda on the date above. The City Commission hereby adopts the findings and recommendation of the Plannin~c and Development Board, which Board found as follows: OR THIS MATTER came on to be heard before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida on the date of hearing stated above. The City Commission having considered the relief sought by the applicant and heard testimony from the applicant, members of city administrative staff and the public finds as follows: Application for the relief sought was made by the Applicant in a manner consistent with the requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations. The Applicant HAS HAS NOT established by substantial competent evidence a basis for the relief requested. -3. The conditions for development requested by the Applicant, administrative staff, or suggested by the public and supported by substantial competent evidence are as set forth on Exhibit "C" with notation "IncIuded". The Applicant's application for relief is hereby GRANTED subject to the conditions referenced in paragraph 3 hereof. DENIED 5. This Order shall take effect immediately upon issuance by the City Clerk. Ali further development on the property shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of this order. 7. Other DATED: City Clerk DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 02-109 SITE PLAN KEVIEW STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COMMISSION June 11, 2002 VII. F. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Project Name/No.: Kensington Place / NWSP 02- 006 Property Owner: Vince Zabik, Showcase Contractors. Inc. Applicant/Agent: Vince Zabik. Showcase Contractors, Inc. Location: S.E. 23~ Avenue, east of the F.E.C. Railroad Current Land Use/ Zoning: Local Retail Commercial (LRC) / Neighborhood Commercial (C-2) Proposed Land Use/ Zoning: High Density Residential (HDR) / Planned Unit Development (PUD) Type of Use: Multi-family Residential Projects~e: Site Area: No. of Units: Lot Coverage: Density:. 1.615 acres/70,340 square feet) 17 0.39 acres (16,687 square feet) 10.53 du/ac Adjacent Uses: (see Exhibit "A" - Location Map) No~h Developed multi-family residential, zoned C-2; South Los Mangos Patio Villas / Townhomes zoned R-3; East Developed single-family homes, zoned C-2; West F.E.C. Railroad right-of-way, farther west is a medical office building under construction, zoned C-2. Proposal: Vince Zabik, applicant and developer for Kensington Place, proposes to conswact 17 townhouse units in two (2) separate buildings on a 1.62-acre parcel (see Exhibit "B" - Proposed Site Plan). The first building to be located immediately at the end of the entrance drive al°ng the south property line is composed of eleven (11) units. A second building, located along the eastern property line, would contain six (6) units. Each building would be two (2) stories high and contain three-bedroom, two and a half (2 1/2) bathroom units. In addition, since the existing zoning (C-2) or land use does not allow multi-family units, a land-use amendment / rezoning application (LUAR 02-003) is being processed concurrently with this site plan. Page 3 Kensington Place - Site Plan Staff Repor~ Memorandum No. PZ 02-109 Ixora planted at each tree base. Extensive foundation plantings are proposed for both townhouse buildings. Building and Site: Building and site regulations will be fully met when staff comments are incorporated into the permit drawings. Only one (1) type of unit layout is proposed for both buildings. The unit will be 1,526 square feet in area. The first floor will include the living room, dining room, kitchen with breakfast area and a master bedroom suite, while the second floor provides the remaining two bedrooms with a loft. Community Design: The proposed two-story buildings will have a maximum height of 25 feet measured to peak of roof, The proposed buildings are traditional design. They wilt have stucco facades painted Custard (Behr 1BH-2) as the predominant base color. The accent color, which includes the trim fascia, will be paintedMoondrop (Behr IBll-1). The roof will be constructed of xvhke three-dimensional Fiberglass shingles. Staff recommends incorporation of architectural elements such as those found in the other recent residential projects along Federal Highway including the use of a tile roof. Due to the lack of establish architectural character, th~ proposed project will offer an oppommity to create an architectural style, which will be beneficial and preferable for this redevelopment area of the city. Signage: No project signs are proposed. Any future signage will require separate review and approval. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that this site plan request be approved contingent upon the approval of the concurrent land use/rezoumg requests and all other comrnems included in Exhibit "C" - Conditions of Approval. The Technical Review Committee (TRC) recommends that the deficiencies identified in this exhibit be corrected on the set of plans submitted for building permit, xc: Central File EXHIBIT "B" EXHIBIT "B" _[ EXHIBIT "B" lil Iii EXHIBIT "B" Conditions of Approval DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE ILEJECT ENGINEERING DIVISION Comments: 7. Per the LDR, Chapter 4, Section 7.A., show north arrow, written and graphic scale, zoning, land use, and all easements on the site survey. Also depict ail existing natttral and man-made features. 8. A five (5) foot wide sidewalk is required, and shall be placed one (1) foot north of the north property line (LDtL Chapter 6, Article IV, Section 10.T, and Chapter 22, Article t, Section 5). Provide detail(s) for the sidewalk crossing at the raikoad. 9. Show on the site and preliminary site engineering plans the proposed site lighting ~LDR, Chapter 4, Section 7.B.4.). On the lightirtg plan, specify that the light poles shall withstand a 110 MPH wind load. Add anote that the fixtures shall be operated byphoto-electrical control and are to remain on until 2:00 a.m. (LDR, Chapter 23, Article tl). Add a note that the lighting design shall provide a minimum average of one foot-candle lumen at ground level. 10. A lighting plan including photo metrics, pole wind loading, and pole details in conformance with the LDR, Chapter 6, Article IV, Section 11, Chapter 23, Article I, Section 5.B.7 and Chapter 23, Article 11, Section A will be required at the time of permitting. If possible please provide this information as part of your TRC plan submittals - it is much easier to identify and correct any deficiencies now than while you are waiting on a perrmtl t 1. The grading plan provided does not consider the flow pattern generated by the existing terrain. The proposed grading plan would direct ail overflow off the south side of the property. Existing patterns direct flow about equally to the north and the south. To correct the given plan Staff recommends: a) construction of a swaie on the north side of the parking lot; b) move exfiltration system to the east, disconnecting Catch Basin "C"; c) place a new catch basin, connected to the relocated ex_filtration system, in the north swale; and direct the west building downspouts to the west retention pond and the east building downspouts to the north retention pond. These steps should allow overflow to the north and south in accordance with the historic pattern. 12. Provide a typical section for the drainage swale. BUDDING DMSION Comments: ;onditions of Approval DEPARTMENTS NCLUDE REJECT 21. Provide a note on the standard parking space detail showing all dimensions in accordance with drawin~ No. B-90012. 22. The site plan as proposed does not set forth any provisions in regard to the ~ location, size, limitation for accessory structures. Provide this information on the site plan. 23. Provide a typical drawing that includes the height and color / material of all proposed freestanding lighting poles. 24. Site lighting must satisfy the minimum average light level of one (i) foot candle (Chapter 23, Article II A.l.a.). 25. Dimension the entrance drive on the landscape plan. 26. Revise the project name to "Kensington Place" on sheet 2 of 2. Project name should match on all pages. 27. Include a 24" x 36" color (clipped, not permanently mounted) rendering of all elevationsprior to the Community Redevelopment Board meeting. 28. On the elevation sheet label all major exterior finishes to include the manufacturer's name and color code. 29. Revise the elevation drawings to show all four (4) building sides of each proposed building. 30. Revise the plant materials tabular data to show that shrubs shall be planted at a minimum twenty-four (24) inches in height and twenty-four (24) inches in spread. Tree species (excluding signature trees) shall be a minimum of twelve (12) feet overall in height with a minimum caliper of three (3) inches. 31. On the landscape plan label the ten (10) foot site triangles at the entranceway (Chapter 7.5, Article II, Section 5.H. 1 .). 32. Label and dimension required landscape buffer on the site plan and landscape plan. 33. Show the proposed off-street parking area on the landscape plan to match site plan. 34. Landscaping at project entrance shall contain a minimum of two (2) colorful shrub species on both sides of the entrance and a signature tree (Chapter 7.5, Article II, Section 5.N.). Include these on the landscape plan. Note that signature trees do not contribute toward the total number of required perimeter trees. 35. The build[ua desien shall be comnatible with the surroundim, built DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME & ADDRESS: Kensington Place APPLICANT'S AGENT: Vince Zabek, Showcase Contractors. Inc. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: 505 NE 3~° Street Delray Beach, FL. 33483 DATE C F HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: June 11. 2002 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: New site plan approval for 17 townhouses on a 1.82 acre parcel. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: SE 23 Avenue, east of F,E.C Railroad DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "B'~ ATTACHED HERETO. X THIS MATTER came before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida appeanng on the Consent Agenda on the date above. The City Commission hereby adopts the findings and recommendation of the Planning and Development Board, which Board found as follows: OR THIS MATTER came on to be heard before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida on the date of hearing stated above. The City Commission having considered the relief sought by the applicant and heard testimony from the a0plicant, members of city administrative staff and the public finds as follows: Application for the relief sought was made by the Applicant in a manner consistent with the requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations. The Applicant ._ HAS HAS NOT established by substantial competent evidence a basis for the relief requested. The conditions for development requested by the Applicant, administrative staff, or suggested by the public and supported by substantial competent evid.ence are as set forth on Exhibit "C" with notation "Included". The Applicant's application for relief is hereby GRANTED subject to the conditions referenced in paragraph 3 hereof. DEN ED 5. This Order shall take effect immediately upon ~ssuance by the City Clerk. All further development on the property shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions or this order. 7. Other DATED: City Clerk DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING & ZONING DMSION MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 02-111 ¥1L ^. TO: FROM: THROUGH: DATE: Chairman and Members Community Redevelopment Agency Board Dick Hudson, Senior Planner Michael W. Rumpf Director of Planning and Zoning June 3, 2002 PROJECT DESCRIPTION Project/Applicant: Kensington Place f..k.a.. Showcase Townhomes/Showcase Contracting, Inc. Agent: Vince Zabik Owner: Showcase Realty and Contracting, Inc. Location: South side of SE 23~d Ave. (Golf Road) between Federal Highway and the Florida East Coast Railroad right-of-way File No: Land Use Amendment/Rezoning (LUAR 02-003) Property Description: Vacant property consisting of 1.64 acres, classified Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and zoned C-2, Neighborhood Commercial Proposed change/use: To reclassify the subject property from Local Retail Commercial (LRC) to High Density Residential (10.8 alu/ac), and rezone from C-2, Neighborhood Commercial to Planned Unit Development (PUD). Adjacent Land Uses and Zoning: North: Right-of-way of: SE 23r~ Ave. (Golf Road) then property designated Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and zoned C-2, Neighborhood Commemial. The property is developed with a mixture of office, commercial and residential uses. Farther north, ~s property designated High Density Residential (HDR) and zoned R-3, Multi-family Residential and developed with a mixture of one and two-story single family, duplex and multi-family dwelling units. South: Developed residential proper~y (Los Mangos) designated High Density Residential (HDR} and zoned R-3, Multi-family Residential. The property nearest the subjectparcel is developed with four-plex/townhome units; other property within the development conuains a combination of townhomes and duplexes. East: Developed property designated Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and zoned C-2, Neighborhood Commercial. A dental lab occupies the adjacent parcel and farther east are single-family homes. West: Florida East Coast Railway right-of-way, then the right-of-way of SE 2~ Street, then developed property) classified Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and zoned C-2. Neighborhood Commercial. A medical office is under construction on the property. Page 2 File Number: LUAR 02-003 Kcmsington Place Townhomes PROJECT ANALYSIS The subject parcel totals +1.62 acre. Because of the size of the property under consideration, the Florida · ties this amendment as a "small scale ' amendment. A "sma/l-scale" DepartmentofComrmm~tyAffan:s class~ i ~ :.,~ amendment is adopted prior to forwarding to the Florida pepartment of Commtm~ty Atla~rs and is not reviewed for compliance with the state and regional plans prior to adoption. The criteria used to review Comprehensive Plan amendments and rezonings are listed in Article 2. Section 9. Administration and Enforcement, Item C. Comprehensive Plan Amendments: Rezonmgs. These criteria are required to be parr of~ staff ana/ysis when the proposed change includes an amei~dment to the.Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map. ttrhether the proposed rezoning would be consistent with applicable comprehensive plan policies including but not limited to, a prohibition~against any increase in, dwelling unit density exceeding 50 in the hurricane evacuation z, on~ wi~hb'~ w~tteh appi:oval of the Palm Beach County Emergency Plarming D~,ision and the City s n'Sk manager: The planning, ddPabtment-~halLals° recommend limitations or requirements, which would have to be imposed o~ ~ubXequent development of the property', in order to comply with policies contained in the comPre:h~veplan. Policy 1.19.7 of the Furore Land Use Element reads: "The City-shall continue to change the land use and zoning to permit only residential or other non-con~mercial uses tn areas where the demand for commercial uses will not increase, particularly in the Coastal Area." The subject property is located west of South Federal Highway and therefore is not in the hurricane evacuation area. Itis, however, inthe City,designated Coastal Planning Area and in the City's Community Redevelopment Area. The adopted "FederalHighway Corridor CommunityRedevelopmem Plan"includes goals for the redevelopment of each of five planning areas in the corridor. The subject property is in Planning Area V. A specific goal for that area reads: "Encourage a variety of housing. Develop intensity standards that allow for a variety of housing s~. les and types at intensities that will assist in supporting the downtown area and general economic expansion." The proposed land use amendment and rezoning are compatible with policies in the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan and with goals in the Federal Highway Corridor Community Redevelopment Plan. b. Whether the proposed rezoning would be contrary to the established land use pattern, or would create an isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts, or would constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual property owner as contrasted with the protection of the public The proposed rezoning would not create an isolated district, but would relate to the adjacent lands to the south occupied by the Los Mangos residential development. Although other surrounding property is designated and zoned for neighborhood-serving commercial development, *.he conversion from the older residential development m commercial uses has occurred only in spots along the portion of SE 23~ Avenue east of the raikoad. c. Whether changed or changing conditions make the proposed rezoning desirable. The South Florida housing market has experienced a growing popularity oftownhouse developments as a residential umt of choice. Developments similar to the proposed, with a small number of units, provide excellent opportumties for infill development and redevelopment in the Coastal Area of the City. Page 3 File Number: LUAR 02-003 Kensington Place Townhomes d. Whether the pr~p~sed use w~uld be c~mpatible with uti~ity systerns~ r~adways~ and ~ther public f'acilities. The combined increase in demand for water and sewer services by the proposed development would be Iess than 300 gallons per day above the potential-demand under the present land use designation and zoning. The Palm Beach County Traffic Engineenng Division has reviewed the application and has deterrmned that the project will generate no more the 200 additional trips per day, and therefore meets the County's Traffic Performance Standards. With respect to solid waste, the SWA has stated within a letter dated December 18, 2001 that adequate capacity exists to accommodate the County's municipalities throughout the 10-year planning period. Lastly, drainage will also be reviewed in detail as part ~)f the review of the site plan use application, and must satisfy all requirements of the city and local drainage permitting authorities. e, W4~ether the proposed rezoning would be compatible with the current and future use of adjacem and nearby properties, or would affect the, property values of adjacent or nearby properties. As stated above, the proposed use of the properw would b9 a continuation of ex/sting uses to the south, and because a majority of the adjacent property fronting on-SE 23ra Avenue rema/ns th residential use, it would not be incompatible with those uses. f. Whether the property is phys(cally and econornically developable under the existing zoning. The property is physically developable under the existing zoning. Given the location, s~ze and configuration of the parcel, it would possibly develop as a small strip center or medical offices. g. Whether the proposed rezoning is of a scale which is reasonably related to the needs of the neighborhood and the city as a whole. The proposed development is an excellent example of the types of redevelopment and in_fill projects that will help to underpin the redevelopment efforts in the Federal H/ghway Corridor and will also increase the variety of types and styles to support general economic expansion. h. Whether there are adequate sites elsewhere in the city for the proposed use, in districts where such use is already allowed. There are very few residentially designated sites in the City that would provide opportunities for a small to medium-sized developer to build a project of this size. CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS As indicated herein, this request ~s consistent with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan; will not create additional impacts on infrastructure that have not been anticipated in the Comprehensive Plan; will be compatible with adjacent land uses and will contribute to the overall economic development of the City. Therefore, smffrecommends that the subject request be approved. If conditions of approval are recommended by the Community Redevelopment Agency Board or required by the City Commission, they will be included as Exhibit "B". ATTACHMENTS Location Map SHOWCASE TOWNHOMES R3 Cl/ C3 400 0 400 800 1200 Feet DEVELOPbIENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMOR_A~DUM NO. PZ 02-107 STAFF REPORT FOR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT BOARD AGENCY AND CITY COMMISSION June 4. 2002 VII. E. Meeting Date: June 11. 2002 File No: ZNCV 02-012 Buffer wall Location: South side of Woolbright Road, just east of the Riverwalk Plaza and west of the tntracoastal Waterway. Agent/ Owner: loe Peterson of Slattery & Associates/Pdverwalk Plaza Joint Venmre Project Name: Woolbright Grill Variance Request: Request relief fi:om Chapter 2 -Zoning, Section 4.L requiring a six (6) foot high stucco masonry buffer wall to separate a commercial district from the abutting residential district, to allow a six. (6) foot high chain linked fence with landscaping along the southernmost property line. NATURE OF REQUEST Joe Peterson of Slattery & Associates, agent for Restaurant Holdings, Inc., is requesting a zoning code variance to seek relief fi:om constructing a solid masonry buffer wall along the south property line that is abutting a residentially-zoned property. The site is located on the south side of Woolbright Road, just east of the Riverwalk Plaza and west of the Intracoastal Waterway (see Exhibit "A"-Location Map). Construction of the wall became a requirement in connection with an application for site plan approval for a restaurant. The restaurant will be constructed on a property comprised of two irregularly-shaped parcels (Parcel 1-north and Parcel 2-south), which will be combined in order to plan for a 210-seat restaurant. Parcel 1 will be the area where the restaurant will be built and Parcel 2 will be used as a parking area (see Exhibit "B"-Proposed Site Plan). This request is a prerequisite to placing along the south property line of Parcel 2, a six (6) foot high chain link fence, with landscaping, in place of the six (6) foot high buffer walt that is required by the City's Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2 - Zoning, Section 4.L.. BACKGROUND The subject site is located between the Riverwalk plaza and the Intracoastal Waterway. The subject property, totaling 0.69 acres, is currently zoned C-3, Community Commercial district with a Local Retail Commercial land use designation. The subject site (specifically Parcel 2) abuts to the south a parcel zoned R-3, Residential Multixfamily. The code requires a solid masonry buffer wail, six (6) foot high, between commercial and residential zoning districts. The following is a description of the land uses and zoning designation of the properties that surround this site: Page 2 Woolbright Grill Buffer Wall File No. ZNCV 02-012 North: Woolbright Road right-of-way; farther north is developed with multi~family apartments (Gulfstream Apartments) with a High Density Residential (HDR) land use designation and zoned Multi-family Residential (R-3); South: Vacant property with a High Density Residential (HDR) / Conservation Overlay District land use designation and zoned Multi-family Residential (R-3); East: Intracoastat Waterway right-of-way, farther east are developed townhouses (Ocean Ridge Yatch Club) in the Town of Ocean Ridge zoned Medium Density Multi-family Residential (RMM); and West: Riverwalk Shopping Plaza with a Local Retail Commercial (LRC) land use and zoned Community Commercial (C-3). A~NALYSIS The code states that zoning code variances cannot be approved unless the board finds the following: a. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. b. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. c. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this ordinance to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. d. That literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of the ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. e. That the variance granted is the mznimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land building, or structure. f. That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this chapter [ordinance_] and that such variance will not be injurious to the area revolved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. As part of analyzing this request against the above criteria, staff evaluated the impact upon the character of the existing neighborhood, alternatives to avoid the variance request, and consistency of the construction of a fence versus the required buffer wall. The city's land development regulations require the erection of a masonry wall between commercially-zoned and residentially-zoned properties. The location of the proposed fence is between properties with both designations, hence the requirement for the masonry wall. The applicant states that: "The property in question abuts an existing "Mangrove" habitat. The purpose of tiffs ordinance is m provide a visual and noise barrier between the residential and commercial propernes." A six (6) foot high chain link fence supplemented with required landscaping should serve as a reasonable alternative to create the required separation fi-om subject property and the adjacent wetland (see Exhibit "C" - Statement of special conditions, hardships and reasons for variance request). In addition, the applicant' also indicates that the construction of this wall and foundation could disturb and damage a sensitive eco-system. With respect to ownership and use potential, the Florida Inland Navigational District (FIND) owns and uses the residentially-zoned property m the south as a spoils site. Furthermore, based on previous staff -~Page 3 Woolbright Grill Buffer Wall File No. ZNCV 02-012 findings, it has been confirmed that the adjacent property will most likely not be developed, and that there is insufficient room for a wall. It should be noted that the city's comprehensive plan designates this site as High Density Residential (10.8 dwelling-units-per-acre) with a conservation overlay, due to the presence mangroves. As shown on the proposed site plan, the width of the parking area on Parcel 2 totals 65 feet. Within that width the applicant is proposing parking stalls on both sides (parking stall dimensions are 9 feet by 18 feet) with a rain/mum required driveway width ( :, leaving f along the south property line of Parcel 2. The code require~a five an off-street parking area when a c six (6)-foot kigh masonry wall width of five (5~ a common tot line and remaining buffer that approval of this.~ Lastly, it should, be noted- ~ Plaza project, previous application included similar property. Riverwalk wall. This The spoils site, and the e affecting the requirement for ~ thereby reducing the need fo proximity to the waterfront, land should not be totally disregarded. of the plaza, staff recommends as a and when the adjacent property of the stucco masonry wall could be noted that the Cit) the adjacent challenge ~FIND) the close of the >offer wall if erection It should Therefore, staff recommends a Land (6) foot high chain link fence ~ line, in lieu of the required six (6) foot high concrete block buffer wall to separate from' the abutting residential district to the south. Tc maintain consistency along the ~uthern property line, it is recommended that. the proposed fence be supplemented with the same native l~dge mamrial ;as approved for the Riverwalk Shopping Plaza ZNCV 00-021. Staff conditions and any other condition(s) recommended by the Community Redevelopment Agency Board or the Commission will be included in the Exhibit "D" - Conditions of Approval. Location Map Woolbdght Grill EXHIBIT "ATM ) I-X-© RA-W2¢f B 400 Feet w-~ $ ~L~TTEKh' AND =$~OCIRTES -~ 7.561742S259 NO.~5 G03 ~ STATEMENT OF SPECIAL CONDITIONS EXHIBIT "C" 5: A.THE NORTH SIDE SETBACK FOR THIS PRO.IF, CT 14AS BEEN INCR3.ASED DUE TO IT'S R£LATIVE ADJACENCY TO A RESIDE~fL~L ZONING D[$TR~CT. HO~'EV~]C IN THIS CAS~, ) TFrEBRiDG E ?lqE, ADLOfNIN(3 SI40PP1NO CENTEK A IAL SHIFTED T~N FE~T IN EXHIBIT '!D" Conditions of Approval Project name: Woolbright Grill File number: ZNCV 02-011 (Setback) REJECT DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE I PUBLIC WORKS C~mment~s: NONE ' UTILITJEs Comments: NONE Cunllnellts: NONE POLICE Comments: NONE . ENGINEERING DIVISION Cmmuents: NONE BUILDING DMSION Comments: NONE PARKS AND RECREATION FORESTERfENVIRONMENTALIST Cu~la:a~lltS: NONE PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: NONE ADDITIONAL COMMUNIIY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD CONDITIONS C, -,,,,,ents: Conditions of Approval 2 Woolbright Grill ZNCV 02-011 (Buildin$ Setback~ DEPAKTMENTS . INCLUDE REJECT 1 To be determined A~DITIONAL CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS COmments: 2~ To be determined. DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF TH E CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: APPLICANT'S AGENT: APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: DATE OF HEARINGRATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: Wootbdght Grill (ZNCV 02-012) Joe Peterson of Slatter~ & Associates/Restauram Holdings, Inc. 2060 NW Boca Raton Boulevard, Boca Raton, FL 33431 June 18, 2002 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Variance requested on a buffer wall. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: South side of Woolbright Road, just east of the Riverwalk Plaza and west of the Intracoastal Waterway. DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO. X THIS MATTER came before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida appearing on the Consent Agenda on the date above. The City Commission hereby adopts the findings and recommendation of the Planning and Development Board, which Board found as follows: OR THIS MATTER came on to be heard before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Flodda on the date of hearing stated above. The City Commission having considered the relief sought by the applicant and heard testimony from the applicant, members of city administrative staff and the public finds as follows: Application for the relief sought was made by the Applicant in a manner consistent with the requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations. The Applicant HAS HAS NOT established by substantial competent evidence a basis for the relief requested. The conditions for development requested by the Applicant, administrative staff, or suggested by the public and supported by substantial competent evidence are as set forth on Exhibit "C" with notation "Included". The Applicant's application for relief is hereby .. GRANTED subject to the conditions referenced in paragraph 3 hereof. DENIED This Order shall take effect immediately upon issuance by the City Clerk. Ail further devetooment on the property shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of this order. 7. Other DATED: City Clerk S:\Planning,,SHARED\WP~PROJECTS\WOOlbdg~t GdlEZNCV~02-012\Develoo. Order Woolbdght GHll 02-012.doc VII, DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 02-112 STAFF REPORT FOR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT BOARD AGENCY AND CITY COMMISSION June 3, 2002 Meeting Date: June 11, 2002 File No: ZNCV 02-011 - Building setback. Location: South side of Woolbright Road, just east of the Riverwatk Plaza and west of the Intracoastal Waterway. Agent/ Owner: Joe Peterson of Slattery & Associates ~Restaurant Holdings, [nc. Project: Woolbright Grill. Variance Request: Request relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations Chapter 2- Zoning, Section 6.C.3., requiring a thirty (30) foot side setback to allow for a variance of 1 O feet, and a side setback of twenty (20) feet. BACKGROUND The subject site is located on the south side of Woolbright Road, northeast of the Riverwatk Plaza and bounded on the east by the Intracoastal Waterway. The subject property, totaling 0.69 acres, is currently zoned C-3, Community Commercial district with a Local Retail Commercial land use designation (see Exhibit "A" - Location Map). The property is also subject of an application for new site plan approval. Restaurant Holdings, Incorporated, proposes to consu-uct a two-story 7,829 square foot "High Quality - Sit Down restaurant" with 1,033 square feet of out-door seating area for a total of 8,852 square feet. The subject property is comprised of two in-egularly-shaped and shallow parcels {parcel 1-north and Parcel 2-south), which will be combined in order to accommodate the 210-seat restaurant. Parcel 1-north with a triangular shape, is the area where the restaurant will be built and the subject of this variance application (see Exhibit "B" - Site Plan). The location of the project presents a unique situation since it is sun'ounded by a major road, the Riverwalk Shopping Plaza and the Intracoastal Waterway, and dissected by a storm water utility line. The following is a description of the land uses and zoning designation of the properties that surround this site: North: Wootbright Road fight-of-way; farther north is developed with multi-family apartments (Gulfstream Apartments) with a High Density, Residential (HDK) land use designation Page 2 Woolbdght Grill-Building Setback File No. ZNC¥ 02-011 and zoned Multi-family Residential (R-3); South: Vacant property with a High Density Residential (HDR) / Conservation Overlay District land use designation a~d zoned Multi-family Residential (R,3); East: lntracoastal ~aterway right-of-way, fartlSer east are developed townhouses (Ocean Ridge Yacht Club) in the Town of Ocean Ridge zoned Medium Density Multi-family Residential (P,_M3/!); and West: Riverwalk Shopping Plaza with a Local Retail Commercial (LRC) land Use and zoned Community, Commercial (C-3). ANALYSIS The code states that the zoning code variance can not be approved unless the board finds the following: a. That special conditions and c~rcumsrances exist which are peculiar ro the land. structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. b. That the special conditions and circumstances do nor result ,from the actions of the applicant. c. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this ordinance ro other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. d. That literal interpretation of the prowsions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zomng district under the terms of the ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. e. That the variance granted is the mimmum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure. f. That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this chapter [ordinanceJ and that such variance will not be inJurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Staff reviewed the requested variance focusing on the applicant's response to the above criteria contained in Exhibit "C". Staff concurs with the apphcant's response To criteria "a "and "b" above that there exist special conditions peculiar ~o the subject parcel, namely location qfthe lot. Staff acknowledges the unique "enclosed" characteristics of the parcel. The site configuration does not leave sufficient room to design a building offering both an acceptable footprint (to be economically feasible) and to minimize the need for a variance. Furthermore, a storm water utility line exists, which is proposed tO be relocated so as to not further limit the use of this parcel. Page 3 Woolbright Grill*Building Setback File No. ZNCV 02-011 Staff also acknowledges the existence of a bridge ramp abutting the north property line of the subject parcel. The ramp, comb/ned with the Woolbright Road right-of-way measures approximately 125 feet in width. Staff believes that the bridge and road right-of-way has presented special conditions mad circumstances, therefoie sa-tiSf~Y'/ng criterion "b" above. Furthermore, regardless of what use is ever proposed for:the subject prop~,-within the scope of the all0wabte uses of the Ci3 zoning district, ~e subject, vadanc; W~ld:likely be requ~ed, as the minimum variance needed to make. possible the reasonable use of th~ land. With the i challeng/ng. Val'Iance, yard of ramp. The City c shallow lot nortl~,ern portion of the properB rear ~efbaCk~ to be m~t.' ' Alternatively, a fifte~ (15) foot s the mediate vicinity side setback, the least design impacts With respect stringent side setback is Woolbrighr Road between the adequate to meet the: to the north, would be immeasurable: CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis contained herein, staff acknowledges that the applicant has proven that a hardsh/p condition exits. Therefore, staff recommends that the requested variance be approved, thereby granting a side setback of 20 feet in lieu of the 30 foo~ side setback required by code. No conditions of approval are recommended; however, any conditions of approval recommended by the Commmfity Redevelopment Agency Board or City Commission will be placed in Exhibit "D"- Conditions of Approval. MDAJ Location Map Woolbright Grill EXH I:B IT "Al' 05x %7 ~2 07, :5 SL~-TERY AND ~SSOCIRTED · ~56174~2=-9 STATE ME NT OF SPECIAL CON[]] ITIONS EXHIBIT "C" ~: A: TME PROPERTY ~N QUESTION A~I~ EXI~'M~a~NOROYE' MAMITAT. THE PURPOSE OF ~ OB,_DINAI~CE IS TO Pt~/,ID~.~q,.~I.I'.~.,~,.'iO NOISE BARF.lEX BETWEI~N . IR .~ANY ~ BI~VACY '~ALL '.Fi A EXHIBIT "D" Conditions of Approval Project name: Woolbright Grill File number: ZNCV 02-012 (Buffer wall) Reference: DEPARTMENTS ' INCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS Comments: NONE UTILITIES Comments: NONE FIRE Comments: NONE POLICE Comments: NONE ENGINEERING DIVISION Comments: NONE BU1LDING DIVISION Comments: NONE PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: NONE t FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST Comments: NONE PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 1. Replacement of the six (6) foot high fence with a six (6) foot masonry buffer wall to take place when resident/al development occurs on the adjacent property. 2. With respect to consistency with a previous similar approved variance for the Riverwalk Shopping Plaza, the use ora similar native hedge material shall be Conditions of Approval 2 Woolbright Grill ZNCV 02-012 DEPARTMENTS required, preferably Cocoplttm. ADDITIONAL CONIMIYNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD 3. To be determined. DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON.BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: APPLICANT'S AGENT: APPLICANTS ADDRESS: Woolbright Grill (ZNCV 02-011 ) Joe Peterson of Slattery & Associates/Restaurant Holdings, Inc. 2060 NW Boca Raton Boulevard, Boca Raton, FL 33431 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: June 18, 2002 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Vadance requesting relief on a building setback. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: South side of Woolbright Road, just east of the Riverwalk Plaza and west of the Intracoastal Waterway. DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "B" A'i-rACHED HERETO. X THIS MATTER came before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida appearing on the Consent Agenda on the date above. The City Commission hereby adopts the findings and recommendation of the Planning and Development Board, which Board found as follows: OR THIS MATTER came on to be heard before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida on the date of hearing stated above. The City Commission having considered the relief sought by the applicant and heard testimony from the applicant, members of city administrative staff and the public finds as follows: Application for the relief sought was made by the Applicant in a manner consistent with the requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations. The Applicant HAS HAS NOT established by substantial competent evidence a basis for the relief requested. The conditions for development requested by the Applicant, administrative staff, or suggested by the public and supported by substantial competent evidence are as set forth on Exhibit "C" with notation "Included". The Applicant's application for relief is hereby GRANTED subject to the conditions referenced in paragraph 3 hereof. DENIED This Order shall take effect immediately upon issuance by the City Clerk. All further development on the property shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of this order. 7. Other DATED: City Clerk S:\Planning\SHARE D\WP\PROJECTS\Wooibdght Gdli~ZNCV~02-01 l\Oeve~op.O~er Woolocght Gdll 02-011.doc VII, O. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 02-113 STAFF REPORT FOR COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD AND CITY COMMISSION June 5, 2002 Meeting Date: File No: Location: June 11, 2002 ZNCV 02-010 - Awnings. South side of Woolbright Road, just east of the River, valk Plaza and west of the Intracoastal Waterway. Agent/ Owner: Project: Variance Request: Joe Peterson of Slattery & Associates/Restaurant Holdings, I~c. Woolbright Grille Restaurant Request relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations Chapter 2- Zoning, Section 4. J. 8: 1. to allow a cantilevered awning on a building wall projecting ten (10) feet in the required twenty (20)-foot rear setback in lieu of the 2.5 feet permitted by code, allowing an additional overhang of 7.5 feet for a restaurant in a C-3 zoning district; and 2. to allow a cantilevered:awning on a building wall projecting eight (8) feet in the required thirty (30)-foot side setback in lieu of the 2.5 feet permitted by code, allowing an additional overhang of 5.5 feet for a restaurant in a C-3 zoning district. BACKGROUND The site is located on the south side of Woolbright Road between the Riverwalk Plaza and the Inrracoastal Waterway. The subject property, totaling 0.69 acres, is currently zoned C-3, Community Commercial district with a Local Retail Commercial land use designation (see Exhibit "A" - Location Map). The property is also subject of an application for new site plan. Restaurant Holdings, Incorporated proposes to construct a two-story 7,829 square foot "High Quality - Sit Down restaurant" with 1,033 square feet of out-door seating area for a total of 8,852 square feet. The subject property is comprised of two irregularly-shaped and shallow parcels (Parcel 1-north and Parcel 2-south), which will be combined in order to accommodate the 210- seat restaurant. Parcel I-north has triangular shape, it is the area where the restaurant will be built and the subject of these variance applications (see Exhibit "B" - Site Plan). These variance applications are for two (2) awnings; one located on the east side and the other on the north side Page 2 Wooibright Grill-Awnings File No. ZNCV 02~010 of the restaurant building. The east awning would be used to cover an outdoor seating area while the north awmng would cover an open servicing area for the proposed restaurant. The location of the project presents a unique situation since it is surroUnded by'a mai Or i-oad, the :Riverwalk Shopping Plaza and the Intracoastal Waterway, and dissected by an existing storm water: utility line. The following is a description of the land uses and zoning designation 6f the properties that surround this site: North: Woolbright Road right-of-way; farther north is developed with mul?family aparunents (GUi~tr~ Apartr~ents) wi~ a mgh D~nsit~ Residential (I-IDR) i~nd us~ [te~g/iati0n and Zoned Multi-family Residential (P--3); South: Vacant property with a High Density Residential (HDR) / Conservation Overlay District land use designation and zoned Mult!:family Residential (R-3); East: lntracoastat Wate~/y ~ght~.0 f-¢~: ~arther east are 'developed toWnhouses (Ocean Ric[ge Yacht Club) in the Town of Ocean Ridge zoned Medium .Density Multi-family Residential ~; and West: Riverwalk ShoPping Plaza with a Local Retail Commercial (LRC) land use and zoned Community corrm)~, ercial (c-3). . ANALYSIS The code states that the zoning code variance can not be approved unless the board finds the following: That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land. structure. or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district, b. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result .&om the actions of the applicant, Thar granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this ordinance to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. That literal interpretation of the proviszons of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of the ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. e. That the variance granted is the minimum vartance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land. building, or structure. Page 3 Woolbright Grill-Awnings File No ZNCV 02-010 That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and pur]~ose of this chal~ter [ordinance] and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the l~ublic welfare. Staff reviewed the requested variance focusing on the applicant's response to the above criteria contained in Exhibit "C". Staff concurs with the apphcant's response to criteria "a" above that there exist special conditions peculiar to the subject parcel, namely location of the lot and site constraints. Staff acknowledges the unique "enclosed" characteristics of the parcel: The site configuration does not leave sufficient room to design a building offering both, an acceptable footprint with an adequate floor plan (to be economically feasible) and to minimize the need of a variance. Furthermore, an existing storm water utility line that dissects the property is proposed to be relocated, and the building_ shit~ed Sot~thward.. The-exiStence of the utility line, and the configuration of the lot prevent full use of the subject parcel. Staff also acknowledges the existence of a bridge ramp abutting the north property line of the N~o .';t~,., subject Parcel that separates the parcel from the :adjacent multi-family residences to the The ramp combined With Woolbdght Road right2of-way measures ~pproximately 125 feet in width. With respect to the other criteria "e" above, wkich relates to the magnitude and necessity of the variance. The subject property has a "triangular" configuration. Irhe east and west property lines mn south (along the .rear of the Wirm Dixie Supermarket): to form the edge of the triangular- shaped parcel. The building is designed to maximize the fiont (west) and rear (east) setbacks, both measuring twenty (20) feet. The side yard of this property located along the north property line abuts Woolbright Road and the bridge ramp., Furthermore, approximately 12 feet of the eastern portion of the subject property is within the Intracoastal Waterway resulting in a very shallow width. The applicant's proposal includes an open service area (measuring 15 feet by 36 feet) along the north property line abutting the bridge ramp. The ramp combined with the Woolbright Road right-of-way measures approximately 125 feet in Width. The City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Section 5.J.2 requires a 30-foot side setback for buildings located on properties zoned commercial and which abut residential districts, and Section 5. J. 2. limits the encroachment of awnings into the building setback to no more than 2.5 feet. These site limitations along with code requiremems represents special conditions and cimumstances that limit the typical design flexibility allowed under normal circumstances. These constraints and circumstances also dictate the design of the structure on this irregular-shaped and shallow lot by placing the building at the deepest and northernmost point of the lot which ensures compliance With f~ont and rear setbacks but minimizes design alternatives and full use of the parcel. Options for meeting the overhang limitation for both awnings with the least design impacts appears to be limited to reducing the size of both the east and north awnings to the 2.5 feet overhang required by code, or by reducing building size accordingly. The proposed awnings will be made out of canvas with a Hunter Green color. The proposed north awning over the service area, will provide a visual screening fi'om the line of sight of vehicles traveling on the Page 4 Woolbright Grill-Awnings File No, ZNCV 02-010 Woolbright Road bridge, while the east awning is to provide shade and protection from the elements for the outdoor seating area. With respect to impacts on the area, and criterion "f' above, the project is separated from nearby properties by significant distances and barriers (e.g, the Intracoastal Waterway and Woolbfight Road bridge ramp), and there is not a streetscape with a continuous and consisten[ building setback pattern against which the ~proposed setback deviation ~ou!~ 9~n. flict; oS!affs~ncurs,t~at the proposed awnings will not impede on any;views nor je0pardize'tlae~ safety ~ot ~iae.puOnc. Therefore; the impaCts ~pozr~aburting:prope~rfies are immeasurable. ~ ,CON~USION~$/RECOMMENDATIO~ In the absence of special hardship ch~teria used for reviewing simple building appurtenances such as awnings, the general and tmd~:dOnal criteria has been used herein. Staff generally concludes that based on the;sarape lo[ ~amn'.aints and £ea.tures that have jgstified the variance reouest for the accommmving building~s~tbaek, variances fgr,;,the awnings k~e also justified. Staff ~is~--~.~ncludes that ~he pr~-'~p0se~d' a-wnings would have no ~egav,ve impacts upon adjacent properties, would not protrude beyottd any other improvement allowed within the setback (i.e. outdoor deck and fenced-storage ar~e~)~ii and: would serve more ,than. ,a cgsm ~etic purpose. Placement of these awnings in, the propq~d locations -~wll not ~p,ed, e wews nor creole a~a~y o~er~ adverse impacts upon adjacent prpPe~{ ~h,e~efore, staff recommends thgt ~s request mr reltex from Chapter 2. Zoning. Se ioh 4.J.:~, ¢ i~ll0w two awning~ t6 eltend farther into the buil ,d/ng ~,~th~,~k than the maxir~um: allowed- ~ ~6de-2.5 feet-~e'ap~r0ve~ ~ ,Any conditions of apPrdval ~ec~;nd'~'~d by the Board!or Ci~ ~'~o~iSSion ~vil~ be plkced,in Exhibit "D::- Conditions of Approval. Location Map Woolbright Grill EXHIBIT "A" -[ I~XOaA~VA~ I~RiDGE 400 0 400 Feet I t SITE PLaN !. z '":i~li'l'tt:TI WOOLBRIGHT GRILLE ~ SLATTERY ANDAS~3C~'TE;$~ ~n9:25 EXHIBIT "C" EAST AWNING S: A. ~ PH'YSICAL COt~I?.~U~. TiON OF THE PRO~RTY ON WHICH ~S ~A~ ~ ~cA~ ts ~Y ~s~ ~NA~. ~T T~S ~O~ NOR~ TO ~ ~Y qm~Y, ~6 A ~RY S~OW ~ST ~ ~%ST D~S~ON. ~ DESIGN OF A B~D~6 ON ~ $1~'~WS FOR NO~'~ ~D1TtON~ ROOMFOK A ~UC~ · .s sr~ ~, ~ s~o~s.~ ~ st~ DOES ~0~ ~W ~00M ~0~ ~A~D A soc~o~ SOT ~q~a ~ s~Cc~ ~s ~ ~ ~S A~G ~LL NOT ~ECT O~E ~ ~W~ FROM N~tG~O~ D. AI DO~ OF EXHIBIT "C" NORTH AWNING THE NO~T~.~ SI~DE SETBACKFOR l]~q$ ?RO3BCT I-lAS ME]~N INCRBASED DUB TO RSLA,'D,r~ ADJACENCY TO A P. ESIDENTIAL ZON~NO DISTPJCT, HOWEVER. IN S TO EXHIBIT Conditions of Approval Project name: Woolbright Grill File number: ZNCV 02-012 (Buffer wall) DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE ILEJECT PUBLIC }/V OP,_KS Comments: NONE LrTILtTIES · Comments: NONE FIRE .Comments: NONE POLICE Comments: NONE ENGINEERING DIVISION Cnmmenta' NONE BUILDING DIVISION Comments: NONE PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: NONE F ORESTE1UENVIRONMENTALIST Corem ~er~lts: NONE , PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: I. Replacement of the six (6) foot high fence with a six (6) foot masonry buffer wall to take place when residential development occurs on the adjacent property. 2. With respect to consistency with a previous similar approved variance for the Riverwalk Shopping Plaza, the use of a similar native hedge material shall be Conditions of Approval 2 Woolbrigb:t Grill ZNCV 02-012 DEPARTMENTS ' I INCLUDE, REJECT .. required, preferably Cocoplum ADDITIONAL DEVE OPM CONDITIONS COMMUNITY RE L ENT AGENCY BOARD ADD!TIONAL CITY. CQMM!sSION CONDITIONS Comments: 3- To be determined. DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: Woolbdght Grill (ZNCV 02-010) APPLICANT'S AGENT: Joe Peterson of Slattery & Associates/Restaurant Holdings, Inc. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: 2060 NW Boca Raton Boulevard, Boca Raton, FL 33431 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: June 18, 2002 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Variance requestee on awnings. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: South side of Woolbright Road, just east of the Riverwalk Plaza and west of the Intracoastal Waterway. DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO. X THIS MATTER came before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida appearing on the Consent Agenda on the date above. The City Commission hereby adopts the findings and recommendation of the Planning and Development Boarc~, which Board found as follows: OR THIS MATTER came on to be heard before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida on the date of hearing stated above. The City Commission having considered the relief sought by the applicant and heard testimony from the applicant, members of city administrative staff and the public finds as follows: Application for the relief sought was made by the Applicant in a manner consistent with the requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations. The Applicant HAS HAS NOT established by substantial competent evidence a basis for the relief requested. The conditions for development requested by the Applicant, administrative staff, or suggested by the public and supported by substantial competent evidence are as set forth on Exhibit "C" with notation ~lncluded". The Applicant's application for relief is hereby G RANTED subject to the conditions referenced in paragraph 3 hereof. DENIED This Order shall take effect immediately upon ~ssuance by the City Clerk. All further development on the property shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of this order. 7. Other DATED: City Clerk S:~Planning~,SHARED\WFAPROJECTS\Woolbdght Gdll~7.NCV~02-010\DeveloD.Order Woolbnght Gdl[ 02-010.doc DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 02-102 SITE PLAN REVIEW STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COMMISSION June 4.2002 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Project Name/No.: Wtoolbright Grille Restaurant / NWSP 02-004 Property Owner: Agent: Location: Restaurant Holdings, Inc. Joe Peterson / Slattery & Associates South side of Woolbright Road, just east of Riverwalk Plaza anc west of the Intracoastal Waterway Land Use: Local Retail Commercial (LRC) Zoning: Pro~ect size: Community Commercial (C-3) Site Area: Parcel 1: Parcel 2: Lot Coverage: Building (1sT floor): Buildinq (2"d floor): Total buitding area: Outdoor seating: 0.69 acres / 30,109 square feet 0.4623 acres / 20,137 square feet 0.2289 acres / 9,970 square feet 6,285 square feet (20.8%) 5,252 square feet 2.577 square feet 7,829 square feet 1,033 square feet Adjacent Uses: North: South: East: West: (see Exhibit "A" - Location Map) Woolbright Road right-of-way; farther north is developed multi-family apartments (Gulfstream Apartments) with a High Density Residential (HDR) land use designation and zoned Multi-family Residential (R-3); Vacant property with a High Density Residential (HDR) / Conservation Overlay District land use designation and zoned Multi-family Residential (R-3); Intracoastal Waterway right-of-way, farther east are developed townhouses (Ocean Ridge Yacht Club) in the Town of Ocean Ridge zoned Medium Density Multi-family Residential (RUM); Riverwalk Shopping Plaza classified Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and zoned Community Commercial (C-3). Proposal: Restaurant Holdings, Incorporated proposes to construct a two-story 7.829 square foot "High Quality - Sit Down restaurant" with 1,033 square feet of outdoor seating area for a total of 8,852 square feet. The subject property is comprised of two parcels (Parcel 1-north and Parcel 2-south), which will be combined in order to accommodate the 210-seat restaurant. Parcel 1 will be the area where the restaurant will be built while Parcel 2 will be used as a parking area. Built in the 1960's the Riverwalk Shopping. Plaza abuts the subject properties directly to the Page 2 Woolbright Grille Restaurant - Site Plan Review staff Repbrt Memorandum No. PZ 02-102 west. The project will be required to make improvements to the Riverwalk Shopping Plaza including the relocation of the dS'~,~er(s)and the shared use of drive aisles ~nd park n~ SPaces~ In addiii0nl ihiS req~i ~br ~e~ ~i!,e Pian aPPrOval Will be contng~nt U~on the a~Pr0val of four (4) variahre~ (~e EXhibit iC ~ C0ndit ohs 6~ AP~r0vai)te~sts for Variances (zNcv 02;~1© ~Nc~i,02;o~ ZNcv 02,012) w be e~a Uated n SeParate Staff rep°rts. B°th~he b~idi~'~l~t~l~b~g bt~iii',bed~v~)0pedi~ephase A restaurant is a per~tted a~e h the~3 ~0nih~ district, Site CharaCteristics: The corn p;i~e tree, permit ( were: f~ Concurrency: a, Traffic- b. Drainage- Driveways: A traffic ~mpact statement for this project was submitt, ed and sent to the Palm Beach County Traffic Division for the r,rev e,,~ and ~l~pr&~aJ~i~e~ Palm Beach Cou n~ Traffic Division had determine~'th~at th~ project.~ '~ ¢. the pmvi°Usly al~preved Riverwalk Shopping Plaza and thecefore, no ~rel~¢i~¢~ted trips could ,be claimed. As: a consequence, prior,'t~ the:,isSuance O~:~::~';~i~P~rmit, ar~ acc, el~table traffic impact study will be req~iied ~.n~l !it;~ust ~ ~oject Will me~t ihe Traffic Performanc~ Standard~' ~f' Pairn Beach ~ ~i'l~(h~bt "C"- Condtor;s (~f Approval). Conceptual drainage information was pr0vi~l?..d ,f(~( rhe;CitCs review. The City's concurrency ordinance requires drainage ce~fiCati~at time of site plan approval. The Engineering Division is recommending th~,t th~ reView of specific drainage solution~ be deferred Until'time of perm t re~, rWl ~h ~ore comp ete eng neet ng documents ate required, Comparable to out-parcels located in Planned Comme~ial'~Districts this project will utilize existing access drives of the RiverWalk Shopping Plaza,::¢,~rit~dtiy, the shopping plaza has three (3) main points of ingress / egress. ~WO (2)i of;~Ce ~s~ drives are located alo_n,g Woolbright Road and the third is located along I.d.S. 1~ ~ne of the shopping centers access drives Will be a tered as: a resu t of th s project, i~ iPr0[ect does n(~t ~r(~pose any Page 3 Woolbright Grille Restaurant - Site Plan Review Staff Report Memorandum No. PZ 02-102 Parking Facility: direct connection onto Wooibright Road. The project will share and utilize the drive aisle located behind the Winn Dixie. Parking required for a restaurant use is based on either the total number of seats or gross floor area whichever is more restrictive. For this project, the..r, equired parking is based on the ratio of one (1) space per 100 square feet .of the restaurant's gross floor area, which includes the Planned outdoor seating area. Since 8,852 square feet are proposed (7,829 square feet of :building area plus 1,033 square feet .of outdoor dining area), a total of 89 parking spaces are required. Parcel 2 will provide 21 new parking spaces. The )arking spaces at the rear of Winn Dixie (on Riverwalk Plaza's spaces bY total of 26 new parking ¢ the 1980 and ~ rant spaces. Of use. All new and feet in width by 1.8 (with 5 feet of ~ Redevelopment may be reduce~t from connect and property fine of and ) -way Landscaping: currently ( be at least g exotic trees and be 8,170 square feet or to the Intracoastal feet or 22.9°/° of the code. The north (7) feet in width. The (see Exhibit "C" - currently western pro the ~ Dixie b intact. functions as a ~ Plaza's consists of Ficus tc reduce communities east of applicant and the City commercial and approval that this r will require ' - Conditions of the existing plants may ~lthougb ,the landscaped or pervous area for the two lots. is limited, the andscape material ropoS~ed;~ithin the~ ~ extensive. TwO (2) Gumbo Limb° trees are proposed to the north Page 4 Woolbdght Grille Restaurant - Site Plan Review Staff Reoort Memorandum No. PZ 02-102 of the loading area along the northern landscape buffer. Also. nine (9) Sabal palm and three (3) Geiger trees 'are proposed within this buffer area. -The proposed shrubs will consist of 37 ~ire BUsh. 30 Green Buttonwood. and three (3) Copper Leaf Landscaping along the front o~ the buiMit~g .(facing: RiverwalE, Plaza) would include five (5) Cob~ndt' palms,~ three (3)-H0ng ~Kong' Or'.c~id~tre~; and;~thr~e (3)' Foxtail palms trees. AS Pre~ie~jSly mentioned the 'Ficus'~nd'.Quebn palm trees w II remain.: The front of the bud ng Will ~_t~S0 receive a 'eopi0us' SUpply of Crbwn of Thbms,~.-C0Pper .Leaf, Green Buttonwood, Gralnd.Crinum Lily, and Scheffl~m Arbombla. - , 'r ' on I 1 and then extend pathway will receive an Xanadu, Grand .~ tree. The t of Xanadu and a Riverwalk The l~r~.~?t~,F~i¢~pe~¢l ~ i~:2; {,~. ~e~ ~pa~k~l~ ar, ea~)i ~/~t? be typ ca n appearance t8 ~ ~8~,~ ~ ~q~:~l~ ¢ ;~ws of Redt p Cocop u m Sp~t~e~ ~m~~ a~i ~u~e~od trees Building / Site: f incorporated into the The first variance Jired ~en~ (20) overhang of feet from for a r~uest is to red thi~ (30)-foot side of 5.5 feet. required six abusing is.site plan is contingent The ). first floor of the contain bathrooms, s proposed on Ls~a~ Waterway. The g areas, a pen to the first 9ments. Also, Both stories of the 210 seats, however, the The ma~amum he~igh¢ a [,o.;Wgd [~ Jg~ .b. ui ~ qg~ ether, ~3 zen ng d str ct s 45 feet or 4 stones. [ACCor~ig~tb fl~e,~$te~i!~{n,~ei~ ~f the, pmpOS~ed sloped roof of the second Page 5 Woolbrigh:l Grille Restaurant - Site Plan Review Staff Report Memoranaum No. PZ 02-102 stow will be 30 feet in height. The top of the faux chimney will be 34 feet - eight (8) inches in height. According to the west elevation, the mean height level of the standing seam metal roof will be appreximately 25 feet. Community Design:The proposed architectural building style will be a cross between "Ftoribbean" and Northeastern Seaside. Although the ,~te-of the proposed building does not match the style of the adjacent buildings, the design is compatible with the surrounding built environment and will generally enhance the overall commercial area. The exterior of the first floor of the building will be made of a blue horizontal (Benjamin Moore #1658) "Hardi-Plank Siding". The greater portion of the exterior of the second story, however, will be a textured spray s.,,.,-~ .,,~.r.~ ~nn ream ~'Beniamin Moore ¢1108 with white colored tdm, fascia, ~, .... u-,= ..... t_red c , shutters, and.window, frames (Benjamin Mooore #870). The banding around-the windows will be a smooth stucco finish. The principle building and tdm colors (cream / white) are compatible with the colors of the buildings found in the Riverwalk Shopping Plaza. The elevations do not indicate the make or style regarding the material of the windows. Although the windows will be made of double pane impact resistant glass, staff recommends every attempt should be made to install wihdows that will reduce the noise levels that can be heard outs de of the building.(see Exhibit "C" -Condit[ons of Approval). White decorative railings are proposed below some of the windows to give the appearance of outside porch areas on the second floor. The faux chimneys will be made of wood frames with an exterior surface painted the same color as the building. The roof will be a blue standing seam metal. The west elevation illustrate that a wood trellis ~s proposed at the front door. The trellis structure brackets and timber Will be brown in color A so, wrought tons gates~will:.enclose the front "patio" area. No seating is proposed in this front "patio" area. Hunter G~een canvas awnings are proposed above windc~vs on the west and east elevations. A C.B.S. wa will generally screen .most of the service area at ground level on the north side of the building. However, due to the rise in the ground level of Woolbdght Road at the. drawbridge, an awning is proposed above the service court to conceal its contents from the ne o~ sight of vehicles traveling of~ Wooibright~Road. This is one of the awnings th~.t will require a v~riance for the side se(baCk. According to the floor plan, audio speakers for music will be strategically placed on the outside deck area to enhance the dining experience of the restaurant's patrons. Staff recommends that the direction of the sound from 'the speakers be pointed towards the restaurant and focused away from the residential properties to the north and east of the subject site (see Exhibit "C" - Conditions of Approval). The purpose of the outdoor lighting (attached to the building and on the outdoor deck~ is more for their decorative value rather than for their performance in enhancing lighting ,levels. According to the applicant, the relatively low footcandle levels of all lighting fixtures, excluding the outdoor freestanding lighting fixtures in the parking lot, are to enhance the restaurant's ambiance. Signage: No freestanding monument signs are proposed. Since the subject property is considered separate from the Riverwalk Shopping Center, no additional signage for the restaurant is allowed on the shopping plaza's monument signs. The maximum allowable wall signage area is based upon the linear frontage of the restaurant. A "VVoolbright Grille" wail sign is proposed on the west faCade. The elevations indicate that the sign will be 96 square feet in area. The wall sign area, location, and lettering are approved as submitted, however, no sign material or sign colors were submitted with this application. Since this is unknown, staff recommends that the future sign style and color will be compatible with the existing wall signage in the Riverwalk Shopping Plaza (see Exhibit "C" - Conditions of Approval). All signage must meet the requiraments of Chapter 21 of the Land Development Regulations. Page 6 Woolbright Grille Restaurant - Site Plan Review Staff Report Memorandum No. PZ 02-102 ,RECOMM EN DATION~ Staff recommends that this site plan request be approved contingent upon the ,a. ppr,,ova of the correspond ng requests for four (4;) variances and also subject to the comments included fn Exhibit "C' - Conditions of Approval. The Technical Review Committee (TRC) recommends that the deficiencies identiffed in this exhibit be corrected on the set of plans submitted for building permit. xc: Central. File . S:~Planning~ HA R E D~ RO~r~CTS\V¢.o o lb fight GdII~NWSP 0Z-004\Smff R~por t doc Location Map Woolbright G rill EXHIBIT"A" 400 0 400 Feet EXHIBIT "B" .WOOLBRIGHT GRILLE EXHIBIT "B" EXHIBIT "B" EXHIBIT";B" EXHIBIT "B" WOOLBRIGHT GRILLE SECOND FLOOR WOOLBRIGHT GRI~ ~ ~ 7gO WOOI. BRIGt, iT ROAD EXHIBIT "B" EXHIBIT'"B" ' WOOl.BRIGHT GRILLE EXHIBIT "B" WOOLBRIGHT GRILLE i EXHIBIT "B"I EXHI-BIT /..,,, / / / EXHIBIT "B" EXHIBIT "C" Conditions of Approval Project name: Woolbright Grille Restaurant File number: NWSP 02-004 Reference: 3~ review revised plans identified as NWSP 02-004 a May I0, 2002 Plannin~ and Zonin~ Department date stamp marking. DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS - General Comments: None PUBLIC WORKS - Traffic Comments: None UTILITIES Comments: None Comments: 1. Design documents where underground water mains and hydrants are to be provided, must demonstrate that they will be installed, completed, and in service prior to construction work per the Florida Fire Prevention Code, (2000) Section 29-2.3.2. POLICE Comments: None ENGINEERING DMSION Comments: 2. At the time of permitting, specify storm sewer diameters, inlets types, etc. on drainage plan. Indicate grate, dm and invert elevations for all structures. Indicate grade of storm sewer and exfiltrafion systems. Indicate material specifications for storm sewer (LDR, Chapter 4, Section 7.F.I.). 3. At the time of permitting, provide verification that there are no laterals tying into the storm sewer noted to be abandoned, preferably by video. If laterals exist the storm sewer must either be sleeved under the building or relocated. If there are no laterals, the storm sewer may be abandoned in place, however, it shall be bulldaeaded at each end and grouted, the storm sewer under the restaurant shall be removed. Con 06/04/02 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT 4 Provide an engineer's certification 6n th~ Drainage Plan as specilqed in LDR, Chap{er 4, Section 7.F.2. 5. At permitting, indicate by note that the catch basin and manhole covers shall be bicycle proof (LDR Chapter 6 Article IV Section 5.A.2.f.). 6. An irrigation plan will be required a[ the time ,of permitting 7. Show: sight triangles graphically on the site plan and landscaping Plan. This should only be necessary ~tt the sonth parking a~ea, 'The site triangles shall.link with th¢ipr0perty tine, ~ho~ On sheet L-Z. 8. At the time of permittiog, ~ ~he [igk ,t!ng,pl,an, :Specify that- the light p°les shall withstand a 110 MPH wind lo,ad.. Add a note.that the fixtures shall be operated by photo-electriCal doat~ol and tO [emain on: until 2:00 a.m. (LDR! Chapter 23, Article I~, A~idia note that.the lighting design shall provide a minimum average 6f bn~ fo0t~candl~ luinen at ground level. Artificial lighting used to ilinm) _n~t.~ ~ ~.any Property shall b~e digected away from all residential districts.~ ~g~h~ing~sb-all not he ~used as a form 9f advertising (LDR', ChaPter. 2, gbefi0nlC[}~.7.8~ Ch~ter 9, Section 10.F.5..). The lighting ~lan Sh~l b~ide~ed ~pe~fi~ally to minimize light intm~ior[ onto residenfial:pmp?rfi~e~ion th.e east side of the ~r;~na ~tal' Waterway, : . : 9, A liglaing plan including pole wind loacling~m6:P01e clem!Is in confommnce with the LDR,-Chapter 6~ ~rti~l{ IV, Section ~11, Chapter 23, Article I, Section 5.B.7 and Ckapter 23, ArtielelI, Secnon A will be requ~ed at the time,of~pern~itfi3~ . 10. At the time ofpermitting, indicate m what,standard(s) ~ project is to be constructed; if the FDOT Standard Specifications f~r Road & Bridge Consh'ucfion and standard:Index areto be used v the 3000 Specifications are r~commended since they,,contain both ~n~li~h and~Metric units. 11. Sho~ signing and how traffic flow wilt. be handled (one-way tO two-way tmffi~). 12. Due to the requested (by variance) relocation of the restaurant to the north~ it is necessary to reconfigure [h~ proposed retention swale. The new swale shown on the 3~a review pl~ans appears to be smaller than that shown on the 1 and 2~ review plans. Additionally the Engineer did not make any changes or corrections to the "Drainage Calculations" shown on ll~s page. Please reflect the changes to the drainage calculations and provirte a detail Of the proposed retention swales. 13. Indicate how seawall will be repaired and/or replaced. Coa 06/04/02 3 DEPARTiVIENTS INCLUDE REJECT ' 14. Pro~ideproofofagreememfordumDsters~ting;/con~tmcfion. :~' ,. BUILDING DIVISION Comments: ~:~ - 15. Add. a labeled syrnb01 to the.siteplan dra~ving, that identi~es, the to~ation ~ of the liandi~ap accessible parld~g spaces. Tl~e. quantity Of the spaces ~ shail ~e Consistent with th~ regUtli/tibii~ ,pefil~i6c[ih ,the Elb~da '~ ! Accessibility Code ,fgr Building C~ns, ~tyCCfi~n::The a~¢e,sSibte ~a~k~.~ ::: : :~ spaces ,~h~[ serve a U~e stiall be,located 0n3he. ~1~.~ ~mst safely accessible ; mute :of travel'from adjacent parI~ing to an ;~cc~isibte entrance The i Florida Accessibili~y &de ~0~i l~ii~g:~ti~tfis?liat t~uildings with mlt/ple acces~l~ ~ali~s ; dispersed and,iocatea clq~s~r6 i~e~'acc~ihie ~,~ ~Ia ~/: I , Accessibility C. ode;for B.~:flttmg~cmme~Oa, $~:,~n g,~t;,~)~:4,3, 4~6. 16. Add a~ labeled symbbl to tt sit~pian:~'wm~,~c!~ Seaig ~and delmeatesthepathqftra~e ~o~'~fl~e,c/c~¢J,tle~t~ i~itire~ ' betweentheaccessil~lepgr ag~g,a,~¢5}~i~;.~¢~!~ ~!~gg~ce~d.oors to the~bmldmg. The symbc s~-sf ~a~.'~at!~ac ~ii~51~ ~ ggpaces andte~nmnateatthe!acce~,s ieee ~¢t¥~j ~gc~lle-symbol shall iepresent the l~afion ft!l~:pg~.: ~,~gl~r.~ ~.o£ the ~ detecliable ~ammg or othe ~v~_e~'~'l~igg~t ~ ~,i:l~ m be msmlted along the path T,t Ili ~,ot compel th~ User to traveI.~ ~ ~ ,re~fl~a~it~ ~$~'~ rniiit parked vehig,l?s.I ~,d~.~,on~e~' " ': ~' -'": L~"'~'~ ~'~'"'~'-~}~:~ ~:~"~ i!~ ~¢ ~7:,~ ~',~.¢~ot~,' The rmn~mwiitthrequirexLb rh~l,$~rr2~) tcit~},~text to th~;draw, mg that v~ordc[ ~ l~}the ~ym,~lxem acces~ble route andm~ ro .Z,~?~ ~,~ ~ ~ ~&taon 4 3 (Accessible Roate) and 4.15 ~ g~:~. ~.~, g~ <f~i es) of the Flond,~Accessibil~ty~2~ ~-~,~ ~ ~ii~ ~e..~e,thatat ume°gperrmtlre'am~ ~ ~,{!~:~4 ~ ration on rhe ptam, ~at wftl,;~ ~{¢ ~t~ ,!,. 's~ :i~t' '"!~ce with the regu~lal~ms spec!fi~l ~ ~ ~ ~ 17. Place a note on the e~khil 'i ~ gl ~ ~ a~a nmi ttrat tli~ wall opem,ngs:and wall cOn~, ~ ;C~ m~ ~,~ ~ ~.~¢6 ~997 etht~on o~ the Stand~r&~ ~'~!~. ! ~ f~*~[ '' : 18. Idenofy on,the s~te l~lan dr~mg~the gq~il ~tt~¢e that th~!lSmldmg(s) 0s/arej set back frown the rl~tth~ ~Si~ $9b~ ~i,~,est prOpe~y~lmes Pleas{ note that ove}hangs,}~oV~0i~0=d,~W~yS; ~,0pies,:aW~nings or other appurtenances?that ~ atta~l~ ,~iltE th~u!~tng ~hall be Considered when identifying building,~tb~¢~.,)~etre~ithi ~iath of the proposed oyerhangs~ Cov~ y/~ig/g~ g~pt~_.;sI a~ygmgs,,i~cl/or other Coa 06/04/02 INCLUDE REJECT DEPARTMENTS roofed areas that eXtend,out beYond the main walls of the building. The building setbacks shall comply with setback regulations'specified in the Zoning Code or be reduced through variance approval Identify whether the areas located on the north, east and west sides of the building are-' · covered Also indicate the use of the arem 19. At time of permit review, submit signed and sealed working drawings of the proposed cOnstmcfiom ' 20. Add to the drawing the calculations that were used to identify the minimum number of required ~andicap ,aS:cessible parking spaces. Also, state the code section that is app!iciible to the computations, 21. Add to all plan view dravAngs ,.of the site a labeled symbol that represents the location and perim6te~ of.the limits of Construction pi,oposed witl/the subject request. 22. At the time of permit review, submit an addressing plan for the Froject. PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST Comments: 23. The adjoining property immediately South oF the proposed parking lot area contains State protected mature Mangrove trees. There are limbs of some of these trees that overhang the proposed parking area and may be damaged during site construction. The owner should take the approptiate actions to properly trim these Mangrove trees by an authorized Mangrove tree trimmer. This activity should be completed prior to clearing and grubbing the site. 24. The applicant must meet with the City Forester to coordinate the removal of any existing Ficus trees and / or Queen Palm trees East of the River walk Plaza, as noted to occur on the landscape plan. This would be under the guidelines of providing the same quantity of orig!nally approved trees for replacements along the landscape buffer. PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 25. Approval of this site plan is contingent upon the granting of the four (4) requests for variances. Those requests are as follows: Coa 06/04/02 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT~ · Relief from Chapter 2~ Zoning Section 4,J 8~ to place ~ ! cantilevered a~ning on a building wall projecting ten. (!.0) feet in- the required twent~ (20)foot re~ Setb~ck in lieu of ~he' ~,5· .feet permitted by code, allowing an additional overhang of 7.5 feet for a restaurant in a C-3 zoning district . · Relief from, Chapter:g~Zo~i~g;S~ecfioa6;G.~4~req~g:a.' ,- . . · RelieffromCt~apter 2,,ZoOg';S~tign:4..i,,a,t~;plaeea} cantilevered i~g ~0n ~ ~m,~i~a4i~ ·~r0j~cfi!i~ }ight' ~8) feet in the required:~ ~39). fo~t;,~id~.$~[b~.~·lieu 6f ~ 2 5 feet a restaurant in a C:3 · Relief from Chapter 2, Zon~g~ Section 4.L - Buffer. Walls, to allow~a slxi(6)'f(}~t l~i~kC~fii~'l~ fence wiih .landsdaping along the southernmost property;line in lieu of the required six (6) fo(~t high ~tu¢c6 m~oury buff?wall to'separate a commercial district from the abmtifig;residentlal 2istrict. 26. This project vdtl reClUire evidence of a cross access agreement with the property to the Wcs~t~(Rwerwatk Plaza). 27. The applicant mus~ obtain;authorization from all applicable governing bodies (including But not limited t9 the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) prior to the issuanc~ of, an~, ~ernfi~s for the con~tmctioi of a dock and boardwalk that promldes beyond the seawall. 28. A traffic impact study,is. !eq~irexi a~ must be approved by Palm Beach County Traffic Division p/lot to tii~'i~suance .of a building permit. 29. All improvements Ouch as the construction of a 5-foot wide boardwalk, the relocation of dumpster~nclosur:e, .the installation of new terminal landscape islands, and the in~tallati0n.ofo, ne (1) new handicap parking stall) proposed outside the subject parcels property line must have consent from Ri~erwalk Pla~a. Provide documentation that these improvements are acceptai~l{ toRNe .r2'Y, alk Plaza. Staff will review these through the minor site pla~; ~odificatiSn review process after this'project (NWSP 02-004~) i~ approv~dlby the City Commission. The owne~ of Riverwalk Plaza shall inJt[at~ the minor site plan modification and it must be approved prioi to the is~uhnce of a:Buildi~g pe~t. ' 30. Include a color rendering of :a. ll four (4) elevations prior to the Community Redevelopment ~gency Bpard meeting (Chapter 4, Section 7.D.2.). The north elevationishould sho~, the CBs wall that hides the loading area. Con 06/04102 INCLUDE REJECT DEPg,_RTMENTS 31. All above ground mechanical equipment such as exterior utility boxes, meters, and transformers, shall be visually screened (Chapter 9, Section 10.C.4.). Equipment placed on the walls of the building shall be painted tO match the bllilclinv color. 32. The tNree (3) Geignr,trees proposed in the north landscape buffer are required to be,installed at minimum 12 feet overall, height.: In addition, the Fire Bash proposed outside the north property btundary cannot be counted towarc~ meeting minimum, landscape requirements on,site and mas~ obtaln authoi-ization fi;om the appiicabie regnlatoE¢ body to install said plants. ~ :' ' 33. Staff recommends that the applicant utilize the most effective method to ensure that lighting will not face or "spill" onto the residential properties (to the east). ShQw the location of the hghting fixtures on the site plan or andsaa' lan ' ~ pep . 34. Staffxecommends locating ttie outdoor speakers and directing the sound in such a waySo that it does not create a nuisance to the residential pr,o~ies~m,the north }md m the east. 35. Staff recommends tha[the glass / windows used in the design of the building be of a variety thaf reduces the likelihood of outside noise at a volume that could potentially be heard by the adjacent residential commnnities. 36. Stuff recommends a sign style and sign color that wili be compatible with the existing signage in the Riverwalk Shopping Plaza, 37. A landscape buffer five (5) feet in width shall be required along the south side of the proposed parkin[ tot on Parcel 2. ADDITIONAL COMMUNITy REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CONDITIONS: Comments: 38. To be determined. ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS: Cnmments: 39. To be determined. MWP,/elj SSPianning\SHARED\W P\PROJECTS\Wooibright GrilI~NWSP 02-004\COA.doc DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOyNToN BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: Woolbright Gdlle Restaurant APPLICANT'S AGENT: Joe Peterson / Slattery & Associates APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: 2060 NW Boca Raton Blvd. Suite 2 Boca P. aton, FL 33431 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: June 18, 2002 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: NewSita Plan LOCATION OF PROPERTY: South side of Woolbright Road. just east of Riverwalk Plaza and west of the lntracoastal Waterway DRAW NG(S) SEE EXHIB T "B" AqF-FACHED HERETO. THiS MATTER came before the City Comm ss on of ~he City of BoyntOn Beach, EIodda appearing on the Consent Agenda On the date abo;/e. The City CommiSsion hi~re:6y a. dop~s the findings ahd recommendation of the Community Redevelopment Agency, which ~Agenc~ fOu~id'as' ~olloW~: OR THIS MATTER came on to be heard before the City Commission of the City of B0ynton B,~ach, FIodda on the date of hearing stated above. The City Commission hav ng considered thb. relief sought by the applicant and heard testimony from the applicant, members of city administrative staff and tee public finds as follows: Application for the relief sough~ was made by the ADp cant in a manner consistent with the requirements of the City's Land DeVelopment Regulations. 2. The Applicant HAS HAS NOT established by substantial competent evidence a basis for the relief requested. The conditions for development requested by the Applicant, administrative staff, or suggested by the public and supported by substantial competent evidence are as set forth on Exhibit "C" with notation 'Included". The Applicant's application for relief is hereby GRANTED subject to the conditions referenced in paragraph 3 hereof. DENIED This Order shall take effect immediately upon issuance by the City Clerk. All further development on the property shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of this order. 7. Other DATED: City Clerk S:\Plannmg\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\WOolbright GdlI~NWSP 02-004~DO.doc DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 02-105 SITE PLAN REVIEW STAFF REPORT COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COMMISSION May 30, 2002 DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Project Name/No.: M&L Roofing / MSPM 02-003 Property Owner: Mel Lowe Agent: Riza N. Altan, P.E. / Turouoise Incorporated Location: 630 Industrial Avenue Land Use: Industrial Zoning: Light Industrial (M-1) Project size: Site Area: Let Coverage: Existing building: Proposed buildinq: Total building area: 27,930 square feet (0.64 acres~ 10,558 square feet (37.8%) 2,275 square feet 8.283 square feet 10.558 square feet Adjacent Uses: (see Exhibit "A" - Location Map) North: Developed property (Ridgeway Plumbing) with a Industrial (I) land use designation and zoned Light Industrial (M-l); South: Developed property (Migano Landscaping) with' a IndusTrial (~) and use designation and zoned Light Industrial (M-1); East: C.S.X. Railroad right-of-way, farther east is Interstate 95 right-of-way; West: Industrial Avenue right-of-way, farther west is developed proper~y (Warehouse) with a industrial (11 land use designation and zoned Light Industrial (I). Proposal: Mel Lowe proposes to construct a one-story 8,283 square foot addition to an existing 2.275 square foot one-story warehouse building for a total of 10.558 square feet. The new addition will be used for warehouse area. Warehouses are permitted uses in the M- : zoning district. Site Characteristics:The subject property is a rectangular shaped lot located on the east side of Industrial Avenue. Currently, the western third (1/3) of the subject lot is developed with a building and its respective parking area. The original building is 2.275 square feet in area and was built in 1984. According to City records, the business is currently licensed as a contractor. The eastern two-third (2/3) of the lot is undeveloped and contains overgrown vegetation. The exterior portions of the property are used for the storage of large amounts of mechanical equipment (strewn across the lot), work trucks, and miscellaneous debris. According to the survey, the highest elevation is 17.2 feet above sea level, located towards the rear (east) of the vacant portion of the lot. Concurrency: a. Traffic- A traffic impact study for this project was submitted and sent to the Palm Beach Page 2 M&L Roofing - Major Site Plan Modification Staff Repor~ Memorandum No. PZ 02-105 b. Drainage- Driveways: Parking Facility: Landscaping: County Trail c Division for ~heir r~view and approva The Palm Beach County Traffic Division has not yet determ ned that the project meets the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County Tbi~ de~erm!naton Wilt ,,b,e,, requ red prior te the issuance of a building permit for the addition (see Exh bit C - Conditions of-Approval). Conceptual drainage information was 3rovided for the C~v's revew The incorporate the use of a French Drain system. The requires drainage ,CodifiCation ~ time of s~e. plan. ~;~'~ D~v~sron ~s recommending that the review of spec fic draaage, soJ~ehs be deferred until time of 0er~it review, when more .compie~e~engihe~ng docume~. are required. This project wiIl use the existin§ main access point off of Industrial Avenue. This ooint of ingress / egress will remain intact at 25 feet in width. Aisc. all ~i¢~ing andscape mate~rial will remain in its current condition. Where necessary al landscape matera located within the safe-sight triangles w be ceared, removed, or ~;ri~med:aCcording to .City standards s~ tha~' the triangles provide unobstructed cross-v~s ~ ]!ty. Any addi~i0n~.l or required signage or atdp cg:-iist~p ba~r / arrows) at this ~n~ra~e~a~ will be prepared according to code requirements. According to the plan, seven (7) parking spaces currently exist, at t~e western port on of the property near Industrial A~e~i~e. ParMng required ~or.the project is based on a ratio of one (1) park ng space per 500 square fe~t of gross floor acea~ which is the minimum required for manufacturing uses. Since 10 558 square feet.are ~oposed (2 275 square feet of existing space pl~ the 81283' Square 'foot buildihg a;d~i~i~); a total of 22 pa~-kin spaces are required. Of the 22 parking, spaces that ~ill be p~'~ideaj one (1) space isg designated fqr handicap use. Ali exist ng and proposed p~k ng spaces w. be 90 degrees. Th'ey will; be dimer~sioned nih& (9) feet in widih be ~ 8"i~¢t i~ ;length, except for the handicap spaces, which will be 12 feet:in width (w~h 5 feet pi'Striping) by 18 feet in length. Since the project is within ,the Commun ty Redevel~me~lt Agency (CRA) boundaries the backup dstancef0r the new parking spaces ~¥ be reduced fr(~m 2¢ feet to 24 feet in width (over 41 feet ~yill be provided). The pt,a~ COuld have provided more spaces but instead,' p~'oposes two (2i more :intar or 'land.~aped is ands, n art because Publ C Works dete'i'~ined tha : ' ; ~"" ' ' ~ t no dumpster wou d be req,u red for the project as proposed. However,.a space within thelproposed row of par,k ng ~s ~e;e~ designated as reserved for the fire vehibJe turn-~tro~nd ~resL This elemei~ti'~f,t~e plan has been endorsed and approved by t~e City Fir~iDepartment. T, his space';i~as,n~t included in the proposed numbe¢'df parkings:spaces. 'A~chain link fence runs a~;~t~g ~'e [~br meter of the property. A security chain link gate ~s pr, oposed at the front ~ntranbe. Thi's gate will have an electronic key pad. The key pad willih,ave 4 or 5 numbers on y ?d the entry code Wi be appr. oved in~ advance b~/the Fire Marshall. tf ihe ip0w~'f~il~ the ~at~s will a.u~om~,at,c.a ly~op..en .a?d r,e,ma!n..o~,en. ~he roiling chain ;link gate ~d fence shall comply wilt L, nap~er z, ~ecd0n 4:J. 0¢ ~he Land Development Regua~ion¢. The width of the existing west landscap~e ibuffer adjacent tothe I~dustria Road rght-of- way complies with curren~ i~ndscape ~bCe ! This landscape bu.;f~er currently contains mature trees and overgro~vn!i~e,dges. T6elMahogany tre~e~ ~ c~Fint toward ~eeting the minimum number'of trees or~Lsite. As ,~r~vieus ~4 stated, the lana~ca~e material in ~his buffer w~ll be undisturbed unless the pro~0sed im¢rovembnts!require its alteration. - Page 3 M&L Roofing - Major Site Plan Modification Staff Repor[ Memorandum No. PZ 02-105 The north landscape buffer (abutting industria~ zoned property) will be two (2) feet - six (6) inches in width. This buffer will contain the existing shrubs at the western portion of the property but proposes Redtio Cocoplum hedges immediately where the improvements begin. Two (2) Dahoon Holly trees are proposed in the interior landscape islands and a duster of Sabal palm trees are proposed just north of the westernmost part of the buiMing expansion. The M-1 zoning district has no side setback. The existing building is currently two (2) feet from the side ¢outlqern) property line. The proposed building exl~ansion will extend from, the exi,sting building at the same setback along the soutt3ern property line No tandOcape buffer i~ proposed along the so. uthern p~o?erty line which 'is not required wher81here ismo vehicular use area. ,.The east buffe¢ (rear) prope~y line wilt contain only a row of Redtip Cocoplum hedges asit is not wide enough to accommodate shade trees. Building/Site: Simi!~¢ tothe existing building, the pro.posed ad¢ition ,W, ii! be one-story hgh, The ma_xrnu~ ~eight allowed for n~w buildin~:s or adidi~ons ir:5 .~h,~ M-i: zoning district is 45 feet Of'4 :~t~r~es. The top of the wall for,~he prop~ed ad~[qn ~ll be 19 feet m six.(6) inches in '~eght, which will match the existing buitd ng 15~ig~:~'; The north side of t~qe )n will have six (6) overhead bay doors. At this time,.tbe intent of the struct the b Jilding additien'as a sheli'Witb no provision forsubdivid~ng into or leasing out to indi,v[dqaI tena~n'~¢:' Th~ app, iidant understand~ that building to this type 8f faci!ity (~ndividu~l tenants)would necessit.ate 'evie~v, During that review,, pro6ess~¢the site weald:need to be up,leaded ly with all applicable codes (Land,. De~prp,~nt Regulations, Elodida American with Disabilities Act,, etc.;); ¢~c,h~ a~ :rgquiringI ~,:,traSh : the installation of firewalls; designa~n ¢ ~ppr0pri~te, easemerYt~, ~od possil Community Design: The ¢¢~,Tsting building and proposed additie~ will app,earJike; .t'yp!.;c¢ !warehouse :bui Cfr}gs wi(h l~?:Si~Pte design and ittle architec(~:a! enhancement i~eatt~es. ,The c¢ler, and surfa~e:,6f ithe exterior walls of the building additi0n,,wil'll ~atc. h i(he existing.bbildin.g. AccC;(djr~g to the elevations, the walis wili be. painted sof~ br~dbe?y7 (Benjamin MoOre #2094~¢0) On the stucco finish. The majority of new overhead t,~ay doors will face north and not tlqe Industrial Avenue right-of-way. Signage: No monument s~gn ornew wall signs are proposed. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that this.site plan request be approved subiect [o the comments included in Exhibit "C" - Conditions of Approval The Technical Review Committee (TRC) recommends that the deficiencies identified in this exhibit be corrected on the set of plans submitted for building permit. xc: Central File S:~Planning~S HARED\WP\PRO JECTS~.'vI&L Roofing\Staff Report.doc Location Map M & L ROOFING EXH I B IT "A" 48O ~600 Feet EXHIBIT "B" TURQUOISE. Inc. EXHIBIT "B" ' TURQUOISE, In'c. J ~"'""'"L%~"~' ~? ?~2~ '"",_,."" JL EXHIBIT "B': EXHIBIT "C' Conditions of Approval Project name: M & L Roofing File number: MSPM 02-003 Re nd ..... ference: 2. re,new plans ~dent~fied as Mator Site Plan Modification file # 02-003 w/th a May 10. 200~ Plarmma and Zoning Departmerii date stamp markino~. ~ DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT P~IC WORKS- General Comments: I. City Ordinance (CODE, Chapter I 0) requires that arrangements be made with the Public Works D~partment for any waste disposal associated with this site plan. Please contact the Public Works Depamnent (561-742-6200) regarding the storage and handling of refuse. Roll-out a-ash pickup will be allowed in lieu ora dumpster and enclosure. The applicant represents that ] use of rolI-out pickup is adequate to meet the needs of this commercial establishment now and in th~ future No more than two (2) r011-outs will be allowed for this site, to co/nc/de with the one utility service provided. The applicant acknowledges that?changes to this s~te and building use, resulting an mcrease m ~'ash volume and/or bmldmg occupancy, w~ll require re- evaluation of the need for a dumpster and enciosur~. Should said changes occur in the future it will be the sole responsibility of the applicant to provide the needed facilities (i.e. dump, ster and enclosure). Multiple roll- outs for multiple tenants shall not be.allowed. PUBLIC WORKS - Traffic Comments: None lJ 'I'ILi I'LES Comments: 2. Fke flow calculations will be requ/red demonstrating the City Code requirement of 1,500 g,p.m, as stated in the LDR Chapter 6, Article IV, Section 16, or the requirement imposed by insurance underwhters, whichever is greater (see CODE section 26-16(a)). Comments: None POLICE Comments: None Coa 06/03/02 _. DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT ENGINEERING DIVISION Comments: 3. A lightin(,~,plan including photo metrics, pole wind loading and pole details in conformance with the LDR, Chapter 6, ~Ar?~te IV, Section 1 I, Chapter 23, Article l, Section 5.B.7 and Chapter 2J, Article II, Section A will be required at the time of permStting If possible please provide this information as part of your TRC plan submktals - it is much e~sier to identify and correct any deficiencies now than whit~ you are waiting on a permit. 4. At the time of permitting, specify inlet types, etc. on drainage plan. Indicate invert elevations for all structures. Indicated ~ede of storm sewer segTnents. Provide details for proposed inlets (LDR Chapter 6, Article IV, Section 5.A.2.f). BUILDING DIVISION Comments: 5. Add a labeled symbol to the site plan drawing that represents and delineates the path of travel for the accessible route that is required between the accessible parking spaces and the accessible entrance doors to each tenant space. The symbol that is requked to be installed along the path shall start at the accessible parking spaces and terminate at the accessible entranc~ doors to the building. The symbol shall represent the location of the path of travel, not the location of the detectable warning or other pavement markings. The location of the accessible path shall not compel the user to travel in a drive/lane area that is located behii~d parked vehicles. Identify on the plan the width of the accessible route. (Note: The minimum width required by the code is forty-four (44) inches). Add text.lo the drawing that would indicate -that the symbol represents the accessible route and the route is designed In compliance with Section 4.3 (Accessible Route) and 4.6 (Parking and Passenger Loading Zones) of the Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction. Please note that at time of permit review, the applicant shall provide detailed documentation on the plans that will verify that the accessible route is in compliance wkh the regulations specified in the Florida Accessibility Code for Building Construction. This documentation shah include, but not be limited to, providing f'mish grade elevations along the path of travel. 6. Identify within the site data the finish floor elevation (lowest floor elevation) that is proposed for the building. Verify that the proposed elevation is in compliance with regulations of the code by adding specifications to the site data that address the following issues [Section 3107.1.2, Chapter 31 of the . 2001 Florida Building Code]: a) The desie~n professional-of-record for the project shall add the following Coa 05/31/02 3 DEPARTNtENTS INCLUDE CT the ' dar "The ,finish ~ NG~ text to s~te, a.. proposed floo~elevafion: ,*~ is above the highest 100-year base flood elevation applicable to the bu/Idin,g site, as determ/ned by the South F/or/da Wa~er ~gem~nt D~stnct s surface water management construction development regulations." b) From the FI~M map, identify in the site data the tkle of the flood zone tha~ the bui. tdiug is. ilocg,tedwitl,Jn,:,Wh,em:~app!ic4b:!~,,,specify,~tl~,.hase : fl:ood elevation. If there/s no base flood ,ele~ioh~ ind/~kie' flxat~ ~ tlie plans. ' ' · ' . ' · ~ c) Identify the floor etevafiCrr ,that :the design: Pf~ofessionaphas'estab~t~shed,for the building within th~e);feo~t af:t~e~hi, id/~tg :,t~aiiis shoguns!on the drawings titled site pia~ ~o~)~:~lan and:p~via~,~,',age~ f~/~t~p~a~n~). :- , 7. Indic}re on the si~e plan,~thi~, the flaor~area o£~e:ne~ and existing buitmn~ the pr/mary kse of,~ stmcmr~2~cility. ,. _~, } :~ , ~ 8. At me of perrmt review, submit signed and, sealed working drawhags of the pr6i~6sed Construction/ 9. At time of permit review, submit for review an addressing plan i'or the pr°jest' 10. Add to all plan view drawings of the site a Iabeled symbol that represents the Iocationl and perimeter of the limits of constmcflon proposed With the subject request. , PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None FORESTER Comments: None PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 1 I. Prior to the issuance ora building perm/t, the project must receive approval fi-om the Palm Beach County Traffic Division that it meets the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County. I2. The designated Furore Land Use is Induslrial (1) and zon/ng district for the subject property is Light Industrial (M-I) and should be indicated as such in the site plan tabular data, Coa 05/31/02 DEPARTM:ENTS hNCLUDE REJECT 13. The survey (or site plan) must identify the Official Zoning Dis~4ct and Future Land Use designation for the adjacent properties (Chapter 4, Section A.3.). 14. Provide a detail of proposed outdoor lighting structure(s), including the dimensions color and material ' 15. Include a color rendering of all elevations prior to the Community Redevelopment Agency meeting (Chapter 4, Section 7 D.2.). 16. All above ground mechanical equipment such as exterior utility boxes, meters, and transformers shall be visually screened (Chapter 9 Section 10.C.4.). Equipment placed on the walls of the building shall be painted to match the building color. . ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CONDITIONS Comments: 17. To be determined. ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS: Comments: 18. To be determined. NrW'R/elj S:\Planning~SHARED\W P\PROJ ECTS\M&L Rooflng\COA.doc PROJECT NAME: APPLICANT'S AGENT: APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA M & L Roofing Riza N. Alton P.E. / Turquoise, Inc. 1253©keechobeeRoa~ SuiteA-2 West Palm Beach. FL 3~4pl DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: June :18. 2002 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Major Site Pla'n Modification LOCATION OF PROPERTY: 630 West Industrial Avenue DRAWING(S): SEE E~(HIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO. THIS MATTER 0ame before the C'ty Comm~ss on of ~he City or Boyr~ton Beach. Florida appearing on the Consent Agenda on the date above. 'Ehe City Commiss on hereby adopts the findings a~d recommendation of the Planning and Development Board, which Board found as follows: OR THIS MATTER came on to be heard before the C ty Commission of the C~y of-Boynton Beach, Florida on the date of hearing stated above. The City Commission having censidered'the relief sought by the app cant and heard test mony from the app__ cant, members of city administrative staff and the public f rids as fo ows: Appiic&tion for the relief sought was made by the Applicant n a manner consistent with the requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations. The Applicant HAS HAS NOT established by substantial competent evidence a oasis for the relief requested. The conditions for development requested by the Applicant, administrative staff, or suggested by the public and supported by substantial competent evidence are as set forth on Exhibit "C" with notation "Included". The Applicant's application for relief is hereby GRANTED subject to the conditions referenced in paragraph 3 hereof. DENIED This Order shall take effect immediately upon issuance by the City Clerk. All further development on the property shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of this order. 7. Other DATED: S:~Planning\SHARED\WP PROJECTS\M&L Roofing\DO.doc City Clerk VIII. NEW BUSINE55 VIII, CRA Director Priority List 1. Develop office Policies and Procedures Manual and set up for future conversion to employer. 2. Hire Assistant- hire temp then advertise for assistant. 3. Promenade & Riverwalk - start on design and construction drawings, bidding process (to ascertain cost of projects). 4. Property acquisition - in approved Core Area and corridor as previously approved. 5. Bank account and funds - move balance of funds to bank, open operating account, Chair and Director as dual signatories. 6. Budget and books -set up approved budget on accounting program, annual basis. 7. Locate, lease or purchase office space and furnishings. OTHER THE ~ ~ ~r~Spring 2002 IX. A. Board News Congratulations to our new Board Members, Commissioner Arthur E. Teele, Jr., City of ~ Southeast Overtown Park ~Vest and ~)02 Conference .HOst Chair; Dennis Ha~nes, and Kttrt Ea~t~n, partner with the RMPK Group~ active supporters ?f the FRA. Also, Congratulations to our new Treasurer Neff Fritz, 2002 Business Development Chair, BOard meniber and former ci/nference Chair (West Palm).~We very much look forward t~o their ~0~{tributions to the Board and the association. Special thanks to oUtgoin~ Board member Russell Mo0re,~ for . al/l~s ded/cation and serdce to the organization over th% !aS~ ten years. We wish him continged success, and the best wishes of the FRA Board and many members who 1/now'RUSsella~'an ambassador for redeveloPment in Florida. ' ~ ' set for the Support Board News Jeffrey L. Otis, Ec.D. Executive Director .The M~ga~e ~C,P~ . JoyceSellen ~.. · : ($0~0). ~842~.112 .(receptionist) ~"'~i~Si~t"Direc~' - ~800) 616-1513 ext 115 or .~ Aven5~, WEBSITE: LEGALCORNER LEGALCORNER and ~n' which two ~)r more of the f611owina factors are present: (a) Predominance of~defectiveor inad- However, th~ term '"bl~ghted area~ equate Street ~ayout, parldn~ ~aciliti~. wavs bridges, or ~ublic trans~ort~tion~fa~ili- - fac~dm identified ties; ~: '~.- (b) -Aggregate .aSsessed rallies ~/)f real LEGALCORNER ter county still mus~ obf~in' ~ity's bo~daries~ created as well as those in In a recent Carlson Report for Shopping Center Management. ~ ex- presses the opinion that Too Small For a Factory ~ makes the case that downtown sites are be- coming attractive. There are about 100 devel- opers of factory aver- age sales in exces,' $100,000 was appropriated for Florida's CLGs. Other benefits include technical and training,, as well as more or call Susan Harp at 850-2454333. The Florida Festival and Even,.t~~, Associa- tion is offerirg thc, ir merabei;rate t6 ~kny FRA member interested in attending their Ammal ~inly the FRA office. Winter Haven Main Street ar~l~als~o~n- sots such as y attract to town, tal access. Haines Cit~ Bluegrass Festival brought over 5,000 vlsi- tom to historic downtown, and enjoyed a 48% Increase in membership this year. gram is I-Iistonc tPres~rvafion Officer grant f histori~ preservation Calendar ~'~-' :~' Fl~'~!da Test ~i~ls;- a~ 'Events As~OC Ann~ua Cdnvention and Trade Sh6w, Sa?asota - August 15-17 .... Florida League of Cities Annual Conference, Boa rd g Assoc. IDA "Bu' Into City poslum, ? ice, TBA ~ ......... .~: ; Mites Batiogg Dear Florida Main Streets: , This is an open le~er to all the directors and people who are members of or wk~o ~artic_ip_~te m the mmiaa ~am Street'rrOgram..Wp. h~ ~ m~ ~9~d~ R~elgPrg~? ~a~on (Fi~_) v~ue FOur contribut~ons to Florida s' c~t~,~ ~0~ ~c~l~ -~gg, th~j~U~ Sour hard work and effoPts, and we lobk forward to continuei:l'associations. Street 'SPONSORS ~ Association and Florida Main ;Exhibitors EXHIBITORS ~- Miami- W Bu Florida P LC. ¸ ~Ce Inc, Inc. GE I GE FI ~lSavings Bank Hess Ameri¢a Hunter Interests, Inc. Lewis, Longman &Walker, P.A. Lumec, Inc. Paver Systems Spring City URG (U~ban Resource Group) The roup The ~pany and the VIII. B. Memorandum To: From: Date: Re: Honorable Mayor & City Commission Kurt Bressner, City Manager June 5, 2002 Meetings for June 2002 Date Time Meeting Location June 3 3:00 Executive Session - Roberts Settlement C/M Conference Room June 3 4:00 Agenda Preview C/M Conference June 4 6:30 City Commission Meeting Chambers June 10 7:30 Heart of Boynton (HOB) Leadership Training St, .lohn's Missionary Baptist June 11 6:30 CRA Chambers June 11 6:30 HOB Leadership Training First Baptist Church June 12 lZ:30 Chamber of Commerce Luncheon Benvenuto June 12 7:00 HOB Leadership Training Wilson Center June 13 7:00 HOB Leadership Training SL Paul AME Church June 14 6:00 Employee Party Benvenuto June 17 4:00 Agenda Preview C/M Conference Room June 17 6:30 City Service In~tute Chambers June 18 6:30 City Commission Meeting Chambers June ~-9 9:30 COBWRA The Cascades June 20 9:00 MPO Meeting Governmental Center June 26 10:30 PBC League of Cities Solid Waste Authority Building 3une 28 8:00 City/Chamber Dash the Difference Start @ City Hall July 1 4:00 Agenda Preview C/H Conference Room July 2 ~ 5:30 City Commission Meeting Chambers .lUly,4~ · CZI'Y HALL CLOSED 3uly 4= Big Blast - 5:00 to 9:00 p.m. @ Boynton Beach High School Oceanfront ConCert Series - 3une 21~t- 6:00 to 9:00 I~m. Vice Mayor Weiland - Vacation - July 34 through July 16~