The URL can be used to link to this page

Agenda 10-12-04COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Tuesday, October 12, 2004 Commission Chambers Boynton Beach 6:30 P.M. I. Call to Order. II. Roll Call. III. Agenda Approval. A. Additions, Deletions, Corrections to the Agenda. B. Adoption of Agenda. IV. Consent Agenda. Pg. 6252 A. Approval of Minutes of September 14~h Meeting. Pg. 6254 B. Financial Report. Pg. 6272 C. Consideration of Fagade Grant Extension for Delray Boynton Academy. Pg. 6273 D. Consideration of Fagade Grant Payment for Provident Missionary Baptist Church. Pg. 6274 E. Consideration of Police Contract for the 2005/2006 year. Pg. 6294 F. Consideration of Lease with Purchase Option for CPA Office. Pg. 6311 V. Public Audience. Pg. 6316 VI. Public Hearing. Pg. 6317 Old Business 6245 · Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Community Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting 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 includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The CRA shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal oppommity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchinson at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. None New Business A. Conditional Use 1. PROJECT: Gateway Shell (COUS 03-007) Pg. 6318 AGENT: Beril Kruger, Planning & Zoning Consultants OWNER: Suau Enterprises, Incorporated LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: 2360 North Federal Highway Request for conditional use / D~or site plan modification approval for a.O~l square foot building addition to an existing gas station / convenience store on a 0.48-acre parcel in the C-3 zoning district. B. Zonin.q Code Variance 1. PROJECT: Gateway Shell (ZNCV 03-010 to 03-012) Pg. 6341 AGENT: Beril Kruger of Beril Krdger Planning & Zoning Consultants OWNER: Suau Enterprises, Incorporated LOCATION: 2360 North Federal Highway DESCRIPTION: Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.d.(1) requiring parking lot driveways to be located 120 feet from the intersection of the right-of-way lines along streets of higher classification to allow a 97- foot variance, resulting in a distance of 23 feet, and to allow an 88-foot variance for a second 6246 Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Community Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting 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 includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The CRA shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportma/ty to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchinson at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. PROJECT: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: driveway, resulting in a distance of 32 feet from the intersection of Federal Highway and Las Palmas Avenue for an existing gas station business; Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.d.(3) requiring that driveways shall not be located less than thirty (30) feet from any interior property line to allow a 10-foot variance, resulting in a distance of 20 feet for an existing gas station business; Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.d.(4) requiring that driveways will be limited to one (1) per street frontage to allow two (2) driveways along the street frontage for an existing gas station business. Gateway Shell (ZNCV 03-013) Pg. 6358 Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants Suau Enterprises, Incorporated 2360 North Federal Highway Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.e.(3) requiring a twenty (20) foot rear setback to allow a 10-foot variance, resulting in a rear setback of 10 feet for an addition to an existing gas station. 3. PROJECT: Gateway Shell (ZNCV 03-014 and ZNCV 03-015) Pg. 7374 AGENT: Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants 6247 Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Community Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting 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 includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The CRA shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchimon at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: Suau Enterprises, Incorporated 2360 North Federal Highway Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.e. (a) requiring that no canopy shall be located less than twenty (20) feet from any property line to allow a 10.5-foot variance, resulting in a distance of nine (9) feet - six (6) inches for an existing canopy for a gas station business; and Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.e. (b) requiring that no gasoline pump island shall be located less than thirty (30) feet from any property line to allow a 10.2-foot variance, resulting in a distance of 19.8 feet for an existing gasoline pump island for a gas station business. 4. PROJECT: Gateway Shell (ZNCV 03-016 and ZNCV 03-017) Pg. 6390 AGENT: Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants OWNER: Suau Enterprises, Incorporated LOCATION: 2360 North Federal Highway DESCRIPTION: Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.F.(1) requiring a ten (10) foot wide landscape buffer along the street frontage to include one tree ten (10) to fifteen (15) feet in height with a minimum three-inch caliper every forty (40) feet, a continuous hedge 6248 Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Community Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting 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 includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The CRA shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal oppormmty to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchinson at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. twenty-four (24)inches high, twenty-four (24) inches on center at time of planting with flowering groundcover to allow a variance of 10 feet, resulting in a zero (0)landscape buffer along the street frontage for an existing gas station building; and Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.f.(2)(a) requiring a ten (10) foot wide landscape buffer on all interior property lines to allow a variance of eight (8) feet - six (6) inches, resulting in a one (1) foot-six (6) inch landscape buffer for an existing gas station business. 5. PROJECT: Gateway Shell (ZNCV 03-023) Pg. 6405 AGENT: Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants OWNER: Suau Enterprises, Incorporated LOCATION: 2360 North Federal Highway DESCRIPTION: Request for relief from .'(.he City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 21, Signs, Article II1. Section 5 requiring that all signs must meet a minimum ten (10) foot setback from the property line to the closest surface of the sign to allow a five (5) foot variance from the property line, resulting in a five (5) foot setback for an existing gas station business. C. Site Plan Time Extension 1. PROJECT: Sunbelt Hydraulics (SPTE 04-008) Pg. 6406 AGENT: Joseph Houston, Kerns Construction, Inc. OWNER: C & C Realty Investments 6249 Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Community Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting 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 includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The CRA shall fumish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opporttmity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchinson at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: PROJECT: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: Lot 9 West Industrial Avenue Request for a second one (1) year time extension of the site plan approval originally granted on August 6, 2003, from August 6, 2004 to August 6, 2005. Boynton Beach Marina Townhomes (SPTE 04- 007) Pg. 6413 Bonnie Miskel, Ruden McClosky TRG - Boynton Beach Ltd 743 NE lStAvenue Request for a one (1) year time extension of the site plan approval granted on July 15, 2003, from July 15, 2004 to July 15, 2005. IX. Director's Report. Pg, 6419 Old Business. Pg, 6440 A. Consideration of Direct Incentive Application for the Promenade at Boynton Project. (Tabled 9/14/04) Pg, 6441 New Business, Pg, 6446 A. Consideration of Review and Approval of Promenade 90% Drawings and Authorization to submit same for SFWMD Approval. Pg. 6447 B. Consideration of Burkhart Construction Work Authorization Number Seven for Off Site Water Main Improvement Pass-Through Contract for the City of Boynton Beach. Pg. 6448 C. Consideration of Items Regarding CRA Bond Issue. Pg. 6454 6250 Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Community Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at tiffs meeting 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 includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The CRA shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchin.qon at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or act/vity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. ×1 Board Member Comments. ×11. Legal. Pg. 6496 XIII. Other Items. Pg. 6497 ×IV. Future Agenda Items. A. D. Consideration of Assembly and Redevelopment Incentive Grant Program. Pg. 6474 E. Consideration of Single Family Residential Fagade Grant Program. Pg.6484 F. Consideration of Recommendations of Legal Selection Committee. Pg. 6493 Commission Action. Pg. 6494 Pg. 6495 XV. Adjournment. Pg. 6498 Consideration of Interlocal Agreement with the City of Boynton Beach for the Boynton Beach Boulevard Extension Promenade and Riverwalk. (November). B. Consideration of Interlocal Agreement for the MLK Phase I Project. (November). C. Consideration of CRA Workshop (November). D. Consideration of Executive Director's Employmeht Contract (November). E. Interview and Selection of New Legal Representation for the CRA (November). F. Consideration of CRA Amended 2004/2005 Budget (November). G. Consideration of amendment to CRA Procurement Policy (November). H. Consideration of Modification to the Direct Incentive Program to include Arts Commission Elements for Incentive Scoring (December). I. Consideration of Arches Project Site Plan and Incentive Amendment (TBD). Pg. 9499 6251 Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Community Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting 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 includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The CRA shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal oppormrfity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchinson at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. IV. Consent Agenda Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Commun/ty Redevelopmem Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting 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 includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. 6252 The CRA shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas HutchLnson at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. MINUTES OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY REGULAR MEETING HELD IN THE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE CONFERENCE ROOM, 639 E. OCEAN AVENUE, SUITE 108, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA ON TUESDAY SEPTEMBER '14, 2004 AT 6:30 P.M. Present: Jeanne Heavilin, Chairperson Henderson Tillman, Vice Chair James Barretta Alexander DeMarco Don Fenton Marie Horenburger Steve Myott I. Call to Order Douglas Hutchinson, CRA Director Lindsey Payne, Board Attorney Susan Vielhauer, Controller Chairperson Heavilin called the meeting to order at 6:30 p.m. II, Roll Call The Recording Secretary called the roll and declared a quorum was present. II1. Agenda Approval A. Additions, Deletions, Corrections to the Agenda Mr. Hutchinson requested that the items for the individual projects under Public Hearings be grouped together and heard at the same time. There are two in this category--Edward Medical Office Building and Gulfstream Gardens. Mr. Hutchinson noted that item A. under New Business (Consideration of Direct Incentive Application for the Promenade at Boynton Project) would be tabled. The application is not complete and will be heard at the next Board meeting. B. Adoption of Agenda Motion Mr. DeMarco moved to approve the Agenda, as amended. Motion seconded by Vice Chair Tillman and unanimously carried. IV. Consent Agenda 5254 A. Approval of Minutes of August 10, 2004 Regular Meeting B. Financial Report Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida September 14, 2004 C. Consideration of Payment of Fagade Grant for Scully Burgers Do Consideration of a Motion to Extend the Time on Work Order #1 of Financial Advisory Contract Consideration of Approval of Community Redevelopment Agency Pay Plan for 2004/2005 F. Consideration of Budget Transfer Request in 2003/2004 G. Consideration of Fagade Grant for Sailfish Realty Ho Consideration of Property Acquisition Contracts in HOB Phase 1 Project Area Mr. Fenton removed Item H. for discussion. Consideration of Phase II of the Financial Advisory Contract, Work Order #2 Consideration of Letter of Engagement of Mark Raymond for CRA Bond Counsel Motion Vice Chair Tillman moved for approval. Motion seconded by Ms. Horenburger and unanimously carried. Mr. Fenton inquired if the letter distributed by Bond Counsel Mark Raymond had anything to do with the engagement of that firm. Mr. Hutchinson stated that there is a correction in the letter that changes the bond issue from $17 million to $19,575 million. This does not affect the fee structure, but is a housekeeping issue and was corrected in the agenda packet as well. This does not require any action. IV.H. Consideration of Property Acquisition Contracts in HOB Phase 1 Project Area Mr. Hutchinson reported that there are two properties that the Board is being asked to consider purchasing in the Heart of Boynton Phase 1. One is a vacant lot and the other is a dwelling on North Seacrest Boulevard. 6255 Mr. Fenton stated that he has no questions regarding the vacant lot. He does have questions concerning the appraisal for the dwelling owned by Denise Scott. The property was appraised on June 15, 2004 and he questioned why it took three months to come to the Board for approval. Mr. Hutchinson responded that this was proper procedure. ~2 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida September 14, 2004 Mr. Fenton noted that the appraisal was $84,000 and the CRA is offering $112,000. Mr. Hutchinson explained that the $112,000 is the total package price and the actual offer on the house was $84,000. Mr. Fenton noted that the contract amount is actually $92,200 and inquired why the CRA is paying the seller "lost rent" of $3,400. Mr. Hutchinson explained that when the offer was made, the seller was in the process of renting the house. As a result of the offer, they did not rent the house out. In order for the seller to cover the mortgage payments without receiving any income, this amount is part of the settlement package to cover these costs. Mr. Hutchinson explained that if the property had been rented out only for one month, the relocation costs could have been $18,000 under HUD rules that the CRA must follow. The analysis showed that the seller was due this amount and the seller actually saved the CRA money by not renting the property out. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that this put a burden on the seller by carrying the property without any income coming in. Mr. Fenton stated that it appeared the seller was receiving $200 per square foot for her · property, which he considered very high. Mr. Hutchinson responded that if the CRA took the property by condemnation, it would cost a lot more money, plus they would be responsible for all costs incurred by both sides. Mr. Hutchinson felt that the appraisals were a little behind the market and that this was a reasonable price. Mr. Fenton inquired why the seller was being paid relocation costs since there was no renter on the property. Mr. Hutchinson explained that under HUD regulations, a landlord is entitled up to $10,000 to find a new property. The seller is only reimbursed for money actually spent up to $10,000. This is tracked and verified and then is reviewed by HUD before the seller receives reimbursement funds. Chairperson Heavilin explained that the Board approved following HUD Guidelines for these acquisitions. Mr. Fenton noted by using these guidelines the seller actually is receiving $101,700 for the property, plus up to a possible $11,000 for locating another property. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that they are costing this at $112,700 and the actual cost would be this figure or less. Motion Mr, DeMarco moved to approve purchasing both properties, Motion seconded by Ms, Horenburger and unanimously carried, Mr. Hutchinson noted that the Board approved two faCade grants under the Consent Agenda. At future meetings, the recipients would be awarded their checks at the meeting so that photos could be taken of the people accepting their checks. The photos would be used for the newsletter and on the website. ¥. Public Audience None 6256 VI. Public Hearing .3 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida September 14, 2004 Old Business None New Business A. Annexation Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Edward Medical Office Building (ANEX 04-004) Hany Edward Hany Edward 3908 North Federal Highway Delray Beach (unincorporated) Request for annexation of a 0.72-acre partially developed lot located in unincorporated Palm Beach County (ADDRESSED LA TER IN THE AGENDA) Chairperson Heavilin noted that the annexation, land use amendment and rezoning, and new site plan approval would be heard simultaneouSly. Ed Breese, Senior Planner noted that the applicant was not present and requested that they move to the next item. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved to approve the reorder of the Agenda:: to hear the Gulfstream Gardens' Items, which is Item No. 2, before Item No. 1, which is Edward Medical Office Building. Motion seconded by Mr. Fenton and unanimously carried. A.. Annexation Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Gulfstream Gardens (ANEX 04-003) Bradley Miller, Miller Land Planning Consultants, Inc. Multiple Ownership West side of Federal Highway, approximately ¼ mile north of Gulfstream Boulevard Request for annexation of 9.99 acres of partially developed parcels located in unincorporated Palm Beach County (Addressed Out of Order) Land Use Plan Amendment/Rezoning Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Gulfstream Gardens (LUAR 04-004) Bradley Miller, Miller Land Planning Consultants, Inc. Multiple Ownership West side of Federal Highway, approximately ¼ mile north of Gulfstream Boulevard 6257 Request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use map from Commercial High/5 (Palm Beach 4 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida September 14, 2004 County), General Commercial and Local Retail Commercial (Boynton Beach)to Special High Density Residential; and Request to rezone from Commercial General (CG) (Palm Beach County), C-4 General Commercial and C-3 Community Commercial (Boynton Beach) to Planned Unit DeVelopment (PUD). Proposed use: Multi-family residential development. (Addressed Out of Order) Chairperson Heavilin pointed out that there was no location map in her agenda package and Mr. Hudson displayed the map on the screen. Mr. Hutchinson explained that staff had to put the agenda packets together under very trying circumstances considering there was no electricity and the City was in the midsts of a Hurricane. Chairperson Heavilin commended staff for doing an excellent job. Dick Hudson, Senior Planner, presented the item on behalf of staff. This is a three-part request by the applicant. The request consists of annexation of approximately 9.99 acres and amendment of the land use designation from a variety of designations since part of the property is in the City and part in the County. The third request is to rezone to a PUD for the purpose of developing a multi-family residential development with 199 units. Mr. Hudson pointed out the location on the location map.-- Staff is recommending approval of all three requests. The land use amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the annexation of enclaves. The project would benefit the City economically and aesthetically. Mr. Hudson noted that as part of a PUD development, staff requires that a master plan be submitted and he did not get a copy into the packets. He displayed a copy of the master plan on the screen. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that site plan approval would come back the Board. Mr. Hudson explained that a Master Plan gives general information about the proposed development, but is not specific as to the placement of buildings, architectural elements, colors and landscaping. All this information will be furnished at site plan approval. The applicant has satisfied the requirements that must be submitted with a Master Plan that includes density, unit types, setbacks, access, circulation and infrastructure. Mr. Barretta requested that Mr. Hudson review the tabular data, which he did. The total site consists of 9.99 acres. Building type 1 consists of 16 buildings with 11 units per building; one building has 10 units and the four type 2 buildings contain 6 units in each building. 6258 Mr. Barretta noted that the Board is being asked to approve a Master Plan that contains inaccurate data. Ms. Horenburger stated that the Board would be approving the site 5 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida September 14, 2004 plan at a future date that would contain accurate information. Mr. Hutchinson explained that the Master Plan presents an idea of how the development would look. Mr. Hudson noted that a Master Plan must show the ingress and egress, which this Plan does. Mr. Barretta pointed out that the Code requires that the Board review a Master Plan, and he felt it was incumbent upon the Board to understand the Master Plan. Mr. Hudson confirmed that a Master Plan or site plan must be submitted with a PUD request and the Plan being displayed is the Master Plan for the PUD, but is not the site plan. Attorney Payne administered the oath to all persons who would be testifying. Mr. Barretta requested that Mr. Hudson present what the Master Plan contains because it may be different from what the applicant would be presenting. Mr. Hudson responded that access to the development would be from Federal Highway with Dixie Highway as a secondary access. The locations, size, setback, height and garages were reviewed. The building types are two and three stories high and provide for a mix of fee simple townhomes and residential condominium units. Maximum height would be 45'. Proposed recreation amenities include two swimming pools and a passive recreation area, which is a landscaped courtyard with a central water feature. Chairperson Heavilin pointed out that this information was contained in the Board's backup material. Ms. Horenburger inquired if staff was recommending approval and Mr. Hudson responded that staff is recommending approval of all three items. Mr. DeMarco asked Attorney Payne if he had a conflict of interest because at one time he had sold 3½ acres of property involved in the development to the Peters Corporation. Attorney Payne inquired if Mr. DeMarco sold it to the current owner and he stated that the Peters Corporation is the current owner. Mr. DeMarco was informed that the Peters Corporation was not involved with this application in any way and that the applicants had the Peters' property under contract to purchase the property. Under these circumstances, it was determined that Mr. DeMarco did not have a conflict. Chairperson Heavilin requested that the applicant give a brief presentation. Bradley Miller, of Miller Land Planning Consultants, Inc., was present on behalf of the applicant, Gulfstream Gardens. He explained that the parcel is located on the south end of the City and presented an aerial photo of the property location. Part of the property is a mobile home park and scattered businesses throughout some of the other parcels. Since they made application, Gulfstream owns all the property except for the Peters property. They will be closing on this property in November at the request of the seller for capital gains purposes. Once they take ownership of all of the property, the billboard will be taken down. 6259 -I-hey are proposing to build a condominium project consisting of 199 units. The design is unique and is not a typical townhouse design. The buildings will be mixed and units would consist of fiats and townhomes. Most units would have attached garages and those without a garage would have assigned parking. The plan is being refined and Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida September 14, 2004 when it comes back for approval it would have the same general layout as the Master Plan presented tonight. Mr. Miller pointed out the importance of this development since it is located at the southern boundary of the City and would give an impression of the City as you enter it. He feels that the development would be a great asset to the City and requested that the Board approve their application. Chairperson Heavilin opened the public hearing. Since no one wished to speak, the public hearing was closed. Motion Mr. Barretta moved to approve the annexation. Motion seconded by Ms. Horenburger and unanimously carried. Motion Mr. Barretta moved to approve the rezoning. Motion seconded by Mr. Myott and unanimously carried. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved to approve the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use designation to special high density residential. Motion seconded by Mr. Myott and unanimously carried. A. Annexation Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Edward Medical Office Building (ANEX 04-004) Hany Edward Hany Edward 3908 North Federal Highway Delray Beach (unincorporated) Request for annexation of a 0.72-acre partially developed lot located in unincorporated Palm Beach County (ADDRESSED OUT OF ORDER) Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: 6260 Edward Medical Office (LUAR 04-008) Hany Edward Hany Edward 3908 North Federal Highway (Delray Beach (unincorporated) Request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map from Commercial High Intensity (CH- 5) (Palm Beach County) to Local Retail Commercial (LRC); and Request to rezone from General 7 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida September 14, 2004 Commercial (CC) (Palm Beach County) to Community Commercial (C~3). Proposed use: 11,957 square foot medical building. (ADDRESSED OUT OF ORDER) D. New Site Plan Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Edward Medical Office (NWSP 04-012) Hany Edward Hany Edward 3908 North Federal Highway Delray Beach (unincorporated) Description: Request for new site plan approval for a 11,957 square foot medical office building in a proposed C-3 zoning district (ADDRESSED OUT OF ORDER) Eric Johnson, Planner, presented the items on behalf of staff and noted that the Board would be considering three items. The applicant is requesting that the City annex 0.72 acres and reclassify the land use to local retail commercial in order to construct an 11,957 square foot medical office building. The property is currently located in unincorporated Palm Beach County. Staff has reviewed the requests and is recommending approval. Ms. Horenburger inquired if the Board would be approving the site plan and was informed that a site plan is part of the approval. Chairperson Heavilin requested that Mr. Johnson give a brief overview of the site plan. Ms. Horenburger inquired what was presently on the property and was informed that it is currently vacant, but had been a nursery. Mr. Barretta asked what properties surrounded the subject property and was informed that there was a small shopping plaza to the north, to the south was the Kent Way Trailer and Storage business, as well as other licensed businesses. Further south is the new Victoria Storage business. Annexing the property would change the City boundary. Mr. Johnson next presented the site plan for review. The building is a two-story structure consisting of 11,957 square feet. Ingress and egress would be along Federal Highway. The project requires 60 parking spaces that the applicant is providing. The parking requirements were based upon a medical office use. Since the applicant is also requesting to rezone to a C-3 zoning district, retail use would be allowed. 6261 The project was reviewed for traffic concurrency by Palm Beach County that found it met concurrency requirements. Staff reviewed the plans for drainage. No school concurrency is required and there is sufficient potable water pressure to provide domestic and fire-flow needs. The project would connect to the existing 4' main for sanitary sewer. Police and Fire have reviewed the plan and found it acceptable. There 8 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida September 14, 2004 are 35 staff conditions of approval and the applicant agrees with all of them. Staff is recommending approval of all three applications. Attorney Payne administered the oath to Hany Edward, the applicant. Mr. Edward presented an artist's rendering of the building. There will be parking under the second floor of the building. All handicap parking spaces will be located in front of the building and would be covered by the second stow. Mr. Edward presented swatches of the colors of the buildings. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that the color is a condition of approval. Mr. Barretta inquired how the air conditioning units would be screened. Mr. Barretta pointed out that the parapet, according to the drawings, is only 2'. Mr. Edward responded that the parapet was 4'. Mr. Barretta stated that if the applicant changed the design to screen the air conditioning, this would not be what the Board would be approving. Mr. Fenton recommended adding a condition #36 requiring that the parapet be raised to cover the air conditioning. Chairperson Heavilin asked for staff's opinion. Mr. Johnson responded that the parapet would have to be made larger to screen the air conditioning since Code requires that the equipment cannot be visible from 600'. He pointed out that there would be sufficient room to increase the height of the parapet. '~ Mike Rumpf, Planning and Zoning Director, stated that staff would recommend including a condition to support the project if a parapet were added sufficient to screen the equipment in accordance with the Code. This was an oversight by staff. The applicant stated that the top height of the building was 35'. He would have sufficient room to extend the parapet and was agreeable to extending the parapet. Mr. Barretta pointed out that if the height of the building were increased, this would affect how the building looked. Mr. DeMarco recommended that the applicant go back to the drawing board and get together with staff to resolve this issue. Mr. Barretta was not in favor of approving something that he did not know how it would look. Vice Chair Tillman recommended that the air conditioning units be placed behind the towers on the building. Mr. Myott recommended that there could be two separate enclosures set back on the roof to hide the equipment, rather than raising the parapet. Mr. Barretta did not approve the elevations and felt they did not include any of the Board's criteria. The south elevation has no relief except for the stucco bands. He also pointed out that the entryway to the building that is 3-stories high does not meet the ground and presents a poor appearance. He could not support the project as presented. Mr. Edward agreed with Mr. Barretta and stated that he would be willing to extend the walls to the ground floor. Mr. Barretta pointed out that if these changes were made, it would change the site plan. 6262 9 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida September 14, 2004 Discussion ensued about the design of the building and members felt that it needed to be enhanced. Mr. Hutchinson noted that there was no landscaping in front of the building, and Mr. Barretta stated there was no landscaping along the south side of the building. Mr. Edward responded that he intended to plant three palm trees along the south side of the building. Chairperson Heavilin pointed out that it was important that the buildings at the north and south entryway of the City are aesthetically pleasing and that certain standards need to be met. Various design ideas were offered to the applicant. Mr. Johnson pointed out that the staff recommended the breezeway effect in order for the site to comply with the parking requirements. Vice Chair Tillman suggested that the Board approve the annexation, land use and rezoning and to table the site plan approval to allow the applicant to come back with an improved site plan. Motion Ms. Horenburger moved for approval of the request for annexation of a 0.72-acre partially developed lot located in unincorporated Palm Beach County on the west side of South Federal Highway, approximately 350' south of the intersection of Old Dixie Highway and South Federal Highway as described on the Location Map (Exhibit A). Motion seconded by Mr. DeMarco and unanimously carried. Motion Mr. Myott moved to approve the request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map from Commercial High Intensity (CH-5) (Palm Beach County) to Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and the request to rezone from General Commercial (CG) (Palm Beach County) to Community Commercial (C-3). Proposed use: 11,957 square foot medical building. Motion seconded by Ms. Horenburger and unanimously carried. Motion Mr. Barretta moved to table the site plan. Motion seconded by Mr. Fenton. Mr. Hutchinson inquired if the motion to table was to the next meeting. Discussion ensued to table to a date certain. Board members felt that this might not be sufficient time for the applicant to go through a new review process. Mr. Rumpf pointed out that if it were tabled to the next meeting, the current legal ad would still apply, as well as the notifications. Mr. Fenton requested that the motion be amended to table for 30 days. Mr. Barretta did not wish to amend his motion. 6263 10 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida September 14, 2004 Vote The motion carried unanimously. Mr. Myott inquired if the guidelines were available to the applicant and the applicant was referred to the CRA office. C. Abandonment Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: 306 Boynton Beach Boulevard L.C. (NE 2nd Street) (ABAN 04-005) Roger B. DeCapito/Jim Knight N/A South side of Boynton Beach Boulevard between NE 1st Street. and NE 3r~ Streets Request for abandonment of a 40-foot wide unimproved right-of-way (Northeast 2nd Street) Eric Johnson, Planner presented the item on behalf of staff. A survey of the right-of-way was displayed. Mr. Hutchinson pointed out that there was a very large oak tree in the right of way, along with dumpsters and it would almost be impossible to use the easement. Mr. Johnson stated that the right-of-way is 5,059 square feet. Staff reviewed the request and did not find any problems. However, Bell South indicated that they might have some underground lines. If this were the case and the abandonment was improved, the applicant would be required to provide an easement. The City's Engineering Division would oversee the dedication of the easement. All other service providers have reviewed the request and are recommending approval. Bell' South is recommending approval with the caveat that an easement be granted. Staff has determined that the subject alley serves no public purpose and is recommending approval. Mr. Johnson also noted that the CRA has no objections to the request because the right-of-way is not in any of the CRA plans for linkage or connection. Staff is recommending approval, subject to staff conditions. Mr. Barretta inquired if each adjacent owner would receive one-half of the abandonment and Mr. Johnson stated that would be the case. Jim Knight, one of the applicants, was present. Mr. Barretta inquired why they were requesting the abandonment. Mr. Knight stated that the property would be used for additional parking. Dr. Herman, a chiropractor located to the west of the property, got together with Mr. Knight and Mr. DeCapito, the other applicant, and they agreed to seek the abandonment. Dr. Herman would like to use the property for additional parking. 6264 11 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida September 14, 2004 Mr. Fenton requested clarification on the fact that Bell South may have lines under the property. Mr. Johnson spoke with two Bell South representatives who think that there are lines, but they do not show up on the survey. Mr. Knight stated that they would like to have proof from Bell South that there are lines underground before they grant them an easement. Chairperson Heavilin noted that this was a condition of approval and staff has indicated that Engineering would follow through on this. Mr. Johnson stated that if there were no Bell South lines, the applicant would not be required to dedicate anything. Mr. Rumpf pointed out that the second reading of the Ordinance would not take place until this was confirmed and completion of the easement document. Mr. Fenton asked Legal if this was all right and Attorney Payne stated that it was. Chairperson Heavilin opened the public audience. Since no one wished to speak, the public audience was closed. Motion Mr. Barretta moved for approval of the abandonment with the change in the condition regarding the easement not be mandated if Bell South is willing to relocate the line if one should be found. Motion seconded by Ms. Horenburger. Vice Chair Tillman disagreed with the motion. If Bell South has a line in the property, they would be grandfathered. He did not feel it was proper for the City to dictate the relocation of the line. He would recommend that the motion be:-amended to state that if there is no line, then the applicant is free to move forward. If there were a line, then Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida September 14, 2004 for the Board, not staff. She also felt that having a staff member on a committee could place that staff member in a precarious situation. Chairperson Heavilin inquired if the Board wanted to make a motion that would add Ms. Horenburger to the selection committee. Mr. Fenton inquired about the progress of the search committee. Chairperson Heavilin responded that the responses have been reviewed and ranked and will be presented to the Board. Mr. Fenton inquired if the top two selected would be making a presentation at the October meeting. Mr. Hutchinson responded that at that meeting they would be making recommendations. Members stated they would like to have the opportunity to interview the top selections from the seven received. Chairperson Heavilin stated that once the top two or three are selected, they would be interviewed. X. Commission Action Xl. Board Member Comments Chairperson Heavilin reported that she attended the Chamber of Commerce Luncheon and complimented the CRA for making a wonderful PowerPoint presentation. Mr. Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida September 14, 2004 Currently when a site plan is approved, if the applicant wants to change the color originally submitted, this would be considered a site plan change. Staff would be in favor of changing the Code that if a color change were requested, it would have to undergo some kind of review for minor modification. He did point out, however, that a permit is not required to change colors. Chairperson Heavilin inquired if it could be made a condition of the original site plan application that if the colors were changed, it would be a minor site plan modification. Mr. Rumpf recommended that if this were to be a requirement, it would be best to place it in the Code. The City could put it in the conditions of approval, but if it is not supported by the LDR, it may not be enforceable. Mr. Rumpf noted that many older site plans do not include a color pallet where this requirement could be applied. Mr. Barretta recommended that the Code be amended to require a permit to paint your building. Ms. Horenburger noted that there are municipalities that currently require a permit. Mr. Fenton questioned if it would be feasible to require every property, including residences, to obtain a permit to paint their property. Mr. Barretta stated that single- family residences would be excluded. Mr. Barretta did not feel that this should be treated as a minor site plan amendment with staff having the burden of approving colors. He would like this to be a Board decision. Chairperson Heavilin inquired if a City required permits for colors, who would be the issuing authority. Mr. Barretta stated that some cities have Community Appearance Boards that do this, or the CRA or Planning and Development Board could do it. He did not think it would be necessary to have a separate board for this function. Mr. Fenton was not in favor of regulating colors. Mr. Myott pointed out that cities that have Community Appearance Boards have a tremendous agenda that lasts well into the night that simply deal with paint, signage, equipment screening, etc. Mr. Barretta inquired if the Board agreed by consensus to have staff review colors as minor modifications or the request come to a Board. Mr. Myott recommended requiring a permit and if it the request was a significant request, it would be referred to a Board. Ms. Horenburger noted that staff was asking this Board if the City should regulate building colors and she felt that it should be regulated by some method. Chairperson Heavilin was not in favor of regulating colors. Commissioner Ensler addressed the Board. He stated that he was the one who raised the question originally. When he first learned that changing colors was a minor modification, he had concerns about Federal Highway, Boynton Beach Boulevard, Congress Avenue, Woolbright Road and other main thoroughfares. Commissioner Ensler did not think that the City should select colors, but he would like a requirement that if a project changes colors sometime in the future, it would be a requirement to come back to the City for approval. He did not feel that this should apply to single-family residences. 6270 ~7 Meeting Minutes Community Redevelopment Agency Boynton Beach, Florida September 14, 2004 There was a consensus among the Board that this was an issue that needed to be addressed. XlV. Future Agenda Items A. Consideration of Interlocal Agreement with the City of Boynton Beach for the Boynton Beach Boulevard Extension Promenade and Riverwalk (October) B. Consideration of Interlocal Agreement for the MLK Phase I Project (October) C. Consideration of Assembly and Redevelopment Incentive Grant Program (October) D. Consideration of Residential Facade Grant Program (October) E. Consideration of Modification to the Direct Incentive Program to include Arts Commission Elements for Incentive Scoring (November) XV. Adjournment There being no further business, the meeting properly adjourned at 8:50 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Barbara M. Madden Recording Secretary (September 15, 2004) 6271 18 MEMO TO: CRA Board FROM: Susan Vielhauer SUBJECT: Financials DATE: September 28, 2004 Staff is working with the City's IT Department to replace the Controller's computer, which had a hard drive failure after Hurricane Jeanne. September 2004 financials will be presented to the CRA Board meeting on November 9, 2004 meeting. 6272 MEMO TO: CRA Board FROM: Susan Vielhauer SUBJECT: Consideration of Fagade Grant Extension for Delray Boynton Academy DATE: October 4, 2004 According to the Facade Grant Program, the applicant must request a six-month extension if they will not be completed within the original grant period of six months. This six-month extension period shall begin on October 12, 2004, which is the termination date the original grant. Delray-Boynton Academy project has been delayed due to numerous unexpected events, which include; two hurricanes, relocating the buildings .from Georgia to Boynton Beach as well as electrical and roofing issues. They are expected to complete their project by November 2004. Staff is recommending the extension for Delray-Boynton Academy. 6273 Evelyn Clay Wtcl~man Delray..Boyn~n Academy AP~Ira Beach Count~ Charter Sehoo~ l'~th A Difference 2030 South Congress Ave, Bldg. A (561) 965,1644 fox (56i) 96&1646 August 25, 2004 Ms. Susan Vielhauer Boynton Beach CRA 639 E. Ocean Ave. Suite 107 Boyaton Beach, FL 33435 Fagade Grant Application 495 Martin Luther King Blvd. Dear Susan: I am writing this letter regarding the Fagade Grant Application filed regardi~ tho property at the address above ("Property"), i.e. the future site of Dekay~Boynton Academy Charter School. The completion of the project has been delayed due to numerous unexpc~ed events. There were complications concerning roloc~d-g the stnmtlu~ from Georgia back to Boynton Beach. Delays with electrical issues occurred due to the hurricane this month when many Florida Power and Light technicians were sent to the west coast of the state, Also, we are having issues with permit approval delays regarding the metal roofing of the Property. We expect to have a Certificate of Occupancy by November.of this year. If you have any questions regarding these matters, please do not hesitate to contact me, MEMO TO: CRA Board FROM: Susan Vielhauer SUBJECT: Consideration of Payment of Fa§ade Grant Extension for Provident Missionary Baptist Church DATE: October 4, 2004 Provident Missionary Baptist Church, located at 1015 NW 4th street, Boynton Beach, FI., has submitted a request for payment for the Fagade Grant Application, which was approved on July 8th, 2004 in the amount of $12,440. The Provident Missionary Baptist Church project for the Fagade Grant Program was obtained for the paving of the parking lot at a cost of $22,000.- Attached are the copies of payments, checks, final lien and payment release form Arnold Construction Pavement Corporation, as well as pictures of the completed project. Staff is recommending the approval of the request for payment of $11,000 for the Provident Missionary Baptist Church Fa(;ade Grant. The Budget Line item Fa(;;ade Grants has funds to pay the grant request. 6274 Provident Missionary Baptist Church 1015 N W 4~ Street Boynton Beach, Flor/da 33435 Minister Willie R Singleton, Pastor Church Phone (561) 734-9283 Home (561) 848-0737 Cell (561) 373-2357 Susan Vielhauer August 23, 2004 Enclosed is the documentation of the Reimbursement Request of the C R A board for approval to receive a grant from the Facade Improvement Grant Program for $11,000.00 Documentation Enclosed: (1) Paid invoices, receipts, waivers, release of liens, cancelled checks (2) These cancelled checks are our guarantee or warrant that all bills related to the paving of this parking lot are paid in full. (3) Also included are several photos of the parking, lot before, during and after completion. '¥ (4) A total of $ 22,000.00 has been paid for the completion of this parking lot. We hope that this will satisfy the committee's requirements. (5) The Provident Baptist Church thank you for your consideration and favor in granting us the privilege of using the Fagade Improvement Grant Program to help us develop and beautify the sight on the corner of tenth avenue and fourth street. (6) Also included is the Waiver and Release of Lien from Arnold Construction Services acknowledging that all liens and bills have been satisfied. Thank you very much, Willie R. Singleton Pastor Provident MissiOnary Baptist Church 6275 WAIVER AiD RELEASE O'F LIEN KNOW ALL MIB',I BY THESE PRE$~IT$, tl'~' the undersign~,~~'~Y~ in consideration of pad'iai peyment in the sum of $ ~:C~O.c~D, reoeJpt whereof ~ hm~y a~wJedg~, and m~r vd~e ~~m a~ b~eF~s ~ the ~~ ~, ~ I'.~r~ w~ive, ~ ~ q~ daim~!! ~e~, Jlen dg~s, d~ ~ ~s of eve~ ~ w~lsoe~r ~ the ~ig~ ~w ~, or may her~ have, a~ ~ ~rtain r~ ~f~e ~d t~ ~ove~ 1~, ~m~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . Caun~, ~H~ J~ I~ de~ /%. on ,c¢ounl of work and ~:~or performed, ~,nd/or melerids turn~,heal in, to, or shout the co.'~rucfion of eny building or building, ~uued t~ereon, or in improving s~id property al)ore desc~_.bed, or Ny ~r~ t~ored. It being the under~d~ding of the undersigned the! Ibis is a Pm~! W~ive~ and Rdelsl ~f Uen wh.~:h the undersigned hu agllnzt the prembes descrbed herein, only to the exlent of the I>~.yment$ specified end c~ for meteials furnished a~' wor~ done up unti~__.~/)LV ?~: 'Z~A~_ ___(hue not re;e~dflg or wtivh~g charges for dmnges, m~l/lions, or extras), the undersigned warrants flint no usignment of mid tens or dakin, nor the right to perfect a lien ageinst slid red estate, by virtue of the Kcru~l of ~ I~yment, ~m or will Ix. made, and Ihst the undersigned has the ~ to execute I~s Pmtbl Waiver ~ Release, nmi fha: alt leborers ~:mpio~,ed by the undersign4d, ~ ~. bills for muerbh ..nd supplies furrdshed by others tolhe u.'ch~grmd in cammclion with the ccmsh-udi~ of improvenmflts upon the aforeslid prem~es, to the eaden~ of I'~.'., paymenl he.-ein referred to, here been Idly p d.' IN' WITNESS WHEREOF l/we h~ve executed this instrument under sed th~ \ ----c~y ol WITNESSI!~ 4SEAL) 6276 PARTIAL WAIVER AN- RELEASE OF LIEN ot~r valise ~rallo~ .~ ~ne~s to t~ u~i~ ~ ~ hr~y waive, release ~d ~n account of work end labor performed, end/or m,.teri,b furr~shed in, to, or Iboul the construclion of any building or butlding~ s'~unled 1~4reon, or in improving said property ibove described, or eny pir~ tlc'eof. It being the unde~lnding of the u~:lm, signed thnt this is · Pnrflll Waiver m~d Releiie of Lien which the undersigned b ~ I~e premb~ described her~in, only to the extent of the peymenls ~)ecified md ody for meteriels fumldmd or work dane up until L - / (bul n~l rele&sing or waiving c~rgel for chenge~, ~ ~r ex.e,), ~he under, lined wer,~t, ~het no .~signmerd of .,id liem or de,l,m, .or the r~gl~ to perfect ,, lien .geimS seid. r~d estese, by vi~ue d the .ca'md of sNd I~yment. Im or wiJ! be mm:b, ~nd tim here been fully peicL IN WITNESS WHElK'OF l/we hive executed the undersigned his the rigM to execme t~i~ Pirtlll WiL~ver end Releue, end. ~ iii laborers empbyed by the under~ignecl, end ill Mils for mileLdeb ~ ~)pilee furnished by olhers to ~ unclmiigrdd in cannec~on with the cor~tru~on of imp~vm upon the efares~ premLsei, to the extent of the peymen~ herein rdermcl to, WITNESSES: · .~y cd 6277 AmilOl. g eOIISTggel~ll ~1~ i#e. m,mmm~ sl'mee6 Mare mmmlm 314 LEGARE COURT JUPITER, FL 3.1458 PHONE (561) 262-1306 FAX (561) 627-9269 INVOICE TO: Provident Baptist Church DATE:July 29, 2003 /OB:Parking Lot Installation of N'ew Parking Lot_ Contract Amount ............................................................ $19,500.00 Initial Payment Due ........................................................ $ 6,500.00 Thank You. 6278 Amount I Posting Date I Seq Number $6,500.~0_0 I 08/22/2003 I 000000000018067877 6279 PARTIAL WAIVER AND RELEASE OF LIEN KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, tl~t the un~ersigned,~/j~,4?-J~/'~ ~'~ .T/~(/~"lq'~2/.~/ . in ~er~i~ of p~at ~y~ in t~ sum of $~, r~pt w~f ~ her~y a~e~ed, and ot~r valuate ~~ ~ ~s t~ ~ ~er~gned I~, ~ ~ w&ve, ~ase Kd quit on account of work and labor performed, and/or materiels furnLshed in, ~o~ or about the c;em~ru~on of any b~lding or bu~d'u~g~ ~tu~ed thereon, or in improving zmid property above der~ibed, or eny pert thereof. It being the underttandL,~g of the undersigned that thi, Ls a Partt~ Waiver and Rdeem of Lien which the undersigned ha~ ~g~ntt the iwembe~ de~a. tbed herein, ody to the exten~ of the payments ~a~edffed and only for materials furnished or work dcsrm up unti~~~Ld~Cbut not rel~sMg or waiving charges for d~nges, ndditi~n~, or extr~), the undersigned ~rrema ~t no ~ig~ o~ ~ ~ ~ ~, ~r ~ r~ to ~rf~ a ~ e~ m~ ~1 e~me, by vt~ of t~ a~ud d ~d ~, ~ m ~ ~ ~, ~ the unders~ ~$ t~ r~ to ~e t~s Pe~ W~m ~ Rd~, ~M ~ Jl~ ~oyed by the been JN ~ITNESS 6280' AIINOLll eON,S'l'Blle'fiOII SF, ggleF. S, PINKNEY STUCCO AND BUILDING 314 LEGARE COURT JUPITER, FL 33458 PHONE (561) 252-1305 FAX (561) 627-9269 INVOICE TO: Provident Baptist Church DATE:June 28, 2004 lOB:Parking Lot Architectural and Engineering to draw new plans for Permit. Total Aw, aunt Due ............................................................. $ 3,800.00 Tt~nk You, 6-281. ~,~,0 ~,00 ? ? 1,0,'0-~, ,"O00O ~BOO00," 6282'~ PARTIAL WAIVER AND RELEASE OF LIEN KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the ~',ders~gned, o~ vaZu,bie ~r~ ~ ~, to the ~er~gn~ itl Jle~ lien ~hts, ~ ~ ~ of ev~ ~d wh~s~v~ w~ t~ und~si~ ~w ~, or ~y herel~er ~v~ e~in~ l~ ~n r~ e~ate e~ f~ ~prove~ms ~er~, Count, FlorJ~ ~ ~y ~~ N~ C~y /4 /'~ on account of work and labor performed, amd/or mmerJals furnLshed in, 1~, ~ ~ the ~ion of ~y materiels ~h~ ~ w~k ~ ~ um~ ~LY ~ ,~g~. ~ ~ ~g ~ wa~ ~r~ ~ ~ a lien eg~ Ntd ~1 ~me, ~ vi~ ~ t~ mi of ~ld ~ym~, ~ m ~ ~ ~e, ~ ~t tb ~r~ of ~ove~ ~n t~ af~mid pr~, to ~ ~ of t~ ~ h~ m~ to, have ~ ~y ~ :~ wr~HESs WHt~,EOF i/we haYe ,x,c~ed th~ ~rument u~d,r Nat t~, ~'/ ..... d,y at Wtl~IESSIS, 6283 JUlllm tliillitl~li'fllglES, ill~. PmKNEY $1'lell Aim ImUlllI6 314 LEGARE COURT JUPITER, FL 33458 PHONE ($61.) 262.1306 FAX (,661) 627-9269 INVOICE TO: Providem Baptist Church DATE:July 26, 2004 _JOB: Parking Lot Installation of New Parking Lot. Contract Amount ............................................................... $19,500.00 Addifimml - Architectural and Engineering .......................... Increase in cost of materials ............................ Electrical - Site Lighting .................................. Revised Contract .Amount ................................................. $ Completed To Date .......................................................... $ Less Paid ........................................................................ Total ,~oum Due ............................................................ $ 3,800.00 1,800.00 1,400.00 24,880100 22,000.00 10,300.00 11,700.00 Thank You. 6284 6285 ARNOLD CONSTRUCTION SERVICES, INC. PINKNEY STUIII~O AND BUILDING 314 LEGARE COURT JUPITER, FL 33458 PHONE (561) 252-1305 FAX (561) 627-9269 INVOICE TO: Provident Baptist Church DATE:July 26, 2004 _JOB:, Parking Lot Installation of New Parking Lot. Contract Amount ............................................................... $19,500.00 Additional - Architectural and Engineering .......................... Increase in cost of materials ............................ Electrical - Site Lighting .................................. Revised Contract Amount ................................................. $ Completed To Date .......................................................... $ Less Paid ......................................................................... Total Amount Due ............................................................ $ Thank You. 3,800.00 1,800.00 1,400.00 24,880,.00 22,000.00 10,300.00 11,700.00 l-t:l t O O o O 6286 6287 AIIIILI eONS11111eTiON S[IIVIIt[t lit pHIl:NH meel~ AN! Iglllllll 314 LEGARE COURT JUPITER~ FL 334S8 PHONE. (~61) 262-130S FAX (661) 627-9269 INVOICE TO: Provident Baptist Church DATE:$tfly 26, 2004 .JOB: Parking Lot InStallation of New Parking Lot. Contract Amount ............................................................... $19,500.00 Additional - Architectural and Engineering .......................... Increase in eom of materials ............................ Electrical- Site Lighting .................................. 3,800.00 1,800.00 1,400.00 Revieed Contract Amount ................................................. $ Complet, ed To Date .......................................................... $ 24,880.00 22,000.00 Loss Paid ......................................................................... 10,300.00 Total Amount Due ............................................................ $ 11,700.00 0o~.,a o Thank You. 6288 PtNKNEY STUCCO & BUILDING, INC. :[4I 7 WeSt 23rd Street RJVJEP, A BEACH; FLORIDA 33404 O. (561) 848-2036 H. (561) 842-8306 FAX (561) 842-5164 TERMS: PLEASE DETACH ANp .R, ETURN:WIT~ YOUR REMI'I-TANCE BALANCE FORWARD PIt~KNEY STUCCO & BUILDING, INC. THANK YOU PA*~,s~A~ou,T IN THIS COLUMN 6289_ Before - Parking Lot Area Front After - Parking Lot Area Front 6290 Before - Side Parking Lot After - Side Parking Lot 6291 Before - Side Parking Lot After - Side Parking Lot .6292 Before - Side Parking Lot After - Side Parking Lot 6293 MEMO TO: CRA Board FROM: Douglas C HutchinSon SUBJECT: Consideration of Police Contract for the 2005/2006 Year DATE: September 28, 2004 CRA Staff has worked with Legal Staff for the CRA and City to bring forth a contract extension for the CRA Police Contract. This contract extension would extend the existing contract with the City until September 30, 2005. Staff is recommending approval of the Police Contract for the 2005/2006 Contract. 6294 AHENDIqENT Supplemental Police Services THIS IS A FIRST AMENDMENT TO AGREEMENT, dated the ., 2004, between: day of THE BOYNTON BEACH COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, hereinafter referred to as "CRA", and THI*~ CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, hereinafter referred to as the "City", In consideration of the mutual terms and conditions, promises, covenants and payments hereinafter set forth, "CRA" and "City" agree as follows: The Original Agreement entered into on August 3, 2004, shall remain in full force and effect except as specifically amended hereinbelow. Section 7.0 Term of Contract The PARTIES hereto agree to amend Contract Term as follows: The term of this Contract shall begin on October 1, 2004 and end on September 30, 2005, Subject to annual renewal upon the mutual agreement of the parties. IN WITNESS OF TI-IE FOREGOING, the parties have set their hands and seal the day and year £~rst written above. Signed and Seal and Witnessed in the presence of: CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FL. Witness City Manager Witness ATTEST: City Clerk City Attorney 6295 Signed and Seal and Witnessed in the presence of: CRA Wimess Chair Wimess 6296 Page 2 of 2 LAP/ia C:~Documents and Settings\vielhauers~Desktop\POLICE SERVPolice Services Contract(Amendment Revised 09-24-201M.doc AGREEMENT FOR THE PROVISION OF SUPPLEMENTAL POLICE SERVICES Heart of Boynton District and Central Business District THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this ~ day of tq~/:~U,~T ,2004, by and between the BOYNTON BEACH COMA47JNITY REDEVELOI~MENT AGENCY (hereinafter "CRA") and the CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, Florida (hereinafter "City") is for the provision of specific police services associated with the special conditions within the Heart of Boynton District and the Central Business Disthct, both areas being located within the City's Commurfity Redevelopment Area; WHEREAS, the CRA desires to contract with the City for additional police/law enforcement services within the areas of the City known as the Heart of Boynton District and the Central Business District for the safety and protection of the residents of and visitors to these areas of the City of Boynton Beach; and WHEREAS, the City, by and through its Police Department, desires to assist in the effort by providing supplemental police services within the Heart of Boynton and Central Business Districts in the Community Redevelopment Area. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and adequacy of which are acknowledged, the CRA and the City agree as follows: ~ ~, 1.0 Recitals. The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are hereby incorporated into this Agreement. 2.0 Services provided by the City. 2.1 The City agrees to provide supplemental police services within the areas of the City of Boynton Beach known as the Heart of Boynton District and the Central Business District ("Districts"), said areas being more particularly depicted in Composite Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein. 2.2 The City agrees the services to be provided by assigned personnel (police and civilian) under the Contract are supplemental and in addition to baseline police services. The City agrees that it will not reduce its current ievel of police services within the Heart of Boynton and Central Business Districts, particularly in the areas of community policing, patrol, criminal investigations, records dispatch, and special operations. The manner and method of performance of services is specified in this Agreement and in the Index Codes and Plan of Operations specifically referred to in Section 6.0 of this Agreement. 2.3 The duties and extent of services of the assigned personnel shall include, but shall not be limited to: Page 1 6297 H :\ 1990\900182.BB\AGMT\3olice Supplemental Services to CRA. doc Rex'. 07-08-04 (a) Cb) (c) (d) (f) (g) (h) (i) (J) The City, by and through its police department, will provide a minimum of four (4) sworn officers, as assigned by City, with two (2) marked squad cars and four (4) patrol bikes to perform specialized patrols to enforce all state and local laws with the Districts. Sworn Officers shall at all times remain part of, subject to and in direct relationship with the police department's chain of command and under police department rules, regulations, and standard operating procedures. All officers and equipment will be outfitted with distinguishable uniforms and the logo of the CRA to visually identify the enforcement teams as CRA Special Units. Uniforms, logos and other identifying materials, equipment, or features shall be subject to the final approval of the Chief of Police of City. While the CRA Special Units are within the CRA boundaries performing under the terms of this Agreement, said units shall be separate from general rotation and non-emergency calls in other parts of the City. The City agrees to collect and provide workload data in the Districts. It is further agreed that, to the extent necessary, the assigned personnel will appear as witness in civil dispositions, or other civil or court proceedings where the issue includes criminal or quasi-criminal conduct within the Districts. Without limiting any of the foregoing, the City akrees that, with respect to services to be performed by any police personnel in accordance with this .Agreement, the appropriate City police department supervisor will meet with CRA leadership and management representatives on a routine basis to review enforcement and prevention efforts. The City acknowledges that a Book of Index Codes ("Manual") exists to regulate police officers' conduct and activities; all police officers have been provided a copy of the Manual; the department has a signed receipt from each officer that he/she has received and understands the contents of the Manual; and personnel have been trained on the regulations and orders within the Manual. The City agrees it will provide the assigned personnel with such basic equipment, at CRA's cost and expense, as may be necessary and reasonable in order to allow the police officers to carry out the duties anticipated under this Agreement. Any bicycles or other equipment requested by the CRA, if.approved by the Chief of Police of City, or determined to be necessary by the Chief of Police of City shall be furnished at the expense of the CRA, as reflected in and in accordance with section 3.1 (c) of this Agreement. Page 2 6298 FI:\1990\900182.BB~&GMTLPolice Supplemental Services to CRA. doc Rev. 07-08-04 (k) The City police department shall designate a command officer as the Administration Liaison Officer, who will work in concert with the CRA Executive Director or designate. The Administrative Liaison Officer will perform the following duties: Coordinate the dissemination and processing of police and security reports, provide supervisory assistance, coordinate problem resolution and in carrying out the provisions of this Agreement. (2) Establish and maintain an ongoing line of communication with City police personnel. Prepare monthly reports in accordance with section 5.2 of this Agreement for review by the CRA Executive Director, City Police Chief, approPriate police department staff, community representatives, and political leadership, e.g. mayor, city commission members, members of the CRA Board. (4) Initiate and monitor an ongoing line of communication with resident leaders to effectively employ the community policing cOncept and to address concerns raised by community leaders in a timely manner. (5) Assist or advise the planning and implementation of other grant-funded security programs within the CRA. (6) Establish a clearly defined process for report{rig non-emergency criminal activities. 2.4 The City will, at all times, provide supervision, control and direction of work activities and assignments of police personnel, including disciplinary actions. It is expressly understood the police department shall be responsible for the compensation of the officers and all employee benefits, as well as any injury to officer, their property, or the City's property while on the CRA's property and acting within the course and scope of their employment. 3.0 Services provided by the CRA. 3.1 equipment: The CRA will provide the following in-kind accommodations, services, and (a) Accommodations. When suitable space becomes available or the structure housing CRA offices is built, CRA shall provide a satellite office to be used by the City officers assigned to the CRA. (b) Services. Utilities, routine and extraordinary maintenance by CRA personnel. Page 3 6299 H :\ 1990\900182.BB"~GMT~Police Supplemental Services to CRA. doc Rev. 07-08-04 (c) Equipment. Equipment shall be mutually agreed upon equipment in connection with the performance of this Agreement, as reflected in the attached Exhibit "B" and supplemented from time to time upon the agreement of the Chief of Police of City and the CRA. All such Equipment, unless specifically provided herein, shall be purchased by the CRA for and on behalf of the City. All Equipment set forth in Exhibit "B" and as provided for in this Agreement, other than the bicycles and patrol vehicles, shall be purchased by and be owned by the City, and the City shall be reimbursed for the cost of such Equipment. The CRA shall purchase the bicycles and patrol vehicles using technical specifications provided by City, and agrees to the lease the bicycles and patrol vehicles to the City for the annual sum orS1.00 per year, to be paid at the beginning of each lease term. Equipment shall be operated and maintained by the City, at the cost and expense of the CRA, in accordance with Police Department procedures and policies. (d) Modification/Damage. The CRA will make reasonable modifications to the Equipment provided in order to meet the City's operational needs..Any damages to the unit or equipment which are in excess of normal wear for the particular item or Equipment, and which damage is caused by the City or its employees shall be repaired or replaced by the City. (e) Equipment Budget. Starting in July 2004, on an annual basis in July, the parties, through the Chief of Police or his designee and the CRA Executive Director, agree to discuss a proposed Equipment budget for the upcoming budget year. This Equipment budget shall include new Equipment, replacement Equipment, maintenance costs for Equipment, and operation costs for Equipment (including gasoline). The Projected Equipment costs, including maintenance and operation may be reflected in a mutually agreed upon extension to this Agreement. The parties acknowledge and understand that throughout the term of this Agreement and any extension thereof, Equipment may be in need of replacement. In addition to the projected Equipment costs for the Equipment set forth in Exhibit "B", subject to the prior approval of the CRA Executive Director, City may purchase up to $20,000 in necessary new or replacement Equipment. 3.2 The CITY shall provide a semi-annual assessment of the results achieved as measured against the performance objectives-specified in the Plan of Operations as provided in the Index Codes referenced in Section 6.0 of this Agreement. 4.0 Enforcement of Rules and Regulations. The authorization of the City's police officers to enforce the laws of the United States, the State of Florida, Palm Beach County, and the City of Boynton Beach are unaffected by the terms of this Agreement. Nothing contained herein shall be construed as permitting or authorizing City police officers to use any method or to act in any manner in violation of law or of their sworn obligation as police officers. 5.0 Communications, Reporting and Evaluation. Page 4 63OO H:\1990\900182.BB\AGMT'(Police Supplemental Services to CRA.doc Rev. 07-08-04 5.1 Communications. The City agrees that the CRA will have access to all public information not exempt from disclosure under Chapter 119, Florida Statutes, which in any way deals with criminal activity in any of the CRA's communities covered by this Agreement. It is further agreed that, upon request and at the statutory rate, the City police department will provide to the CRA copies of such incident reports, arrest reports, or other public documents which document or substantiate actual or potential criminal activity in or connected with the Districts. 5.2 Reporting. The City police department will require all assigned police officers complete a monthly log at the conclusion of each shift and forward the original report to the CRA with the monthly report to the CRA's designee. This report will include, but not be limited to, the following data: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (g) (h) (i) (J) (k) (1) Hours worked Calls/requests for service Referrals to City/CRA/other agencies Suspicious persons/name/description/vehicle license number Vehicles abandoned/towed/stolen Drug paraphernalia confiscated/found Arrests/citations Property stolen/recovered Assistance to residents and visitors Broken lights/sidewalks/Graffiti Conflict resolution of apparent or actual conflict between two or more persons Weapons violations/seized The City police department will be responsible for media cb0rdination. The City police department will relay to the CRA Executive Director or designate, information related to any major crime or incident that occurs within the Districts, preferable before the media is informed, or as soon as possible. 5.3 Evaluation. The City and CRA agree that evaluations shall include: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) (g) (h) (i) (J) (k) (1) hours worked as reported on monthly report response time to emergency and non-emergency calls targeted to communities by City-paid officers comparison of crime and workload in the targeted communities for the past years arrests including drug violations vehicles towed positive contacts referrals trespassers removed calls for service weapons seized property stolen/recovered community feedback. Page 5 6301 H:\1990\900182.BBkAGMT\?olice Supplemental Services to CRA. doc Rev. 07-08-04 It is further agreed, to facilitate the evaluation, the City will provide comparable crime /_nformation for the City as a whole to facilitate the evaluation to include what proportion of activities City-wide occur on or near CRA property. 6.0 Plan of Operation. The Plan of Operation for supplemental police services within the District shall be as set forth in the Index Codes for the City Police Department which are incorporated herein and in the document entitled, "Plan of Operations for CRA Special District Officers", is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "C". If, during the term of the Agreement, either party desires to amend the scope of the Plan of Operation, either party may request, for consideration by the other party, an amendment in writing. 7.0 Term of Contract. The term of this Contract shall begin on July __, 2004, and end September 30, 2004, subject to annual renewal upon the mutual agreement of the parties. The parties understand that on an annual basis the contract amount under this Agreement ma3' vary based on the negotiation and agreement of the costs to the City to provide services under this Agreement and the costs of new and replacement Equipment. 8.0 Compensation to the City. For services provided, CRA shall compensate the City as follows: 8.1 CRA shall pay City on a monthly basis for services provided at the rate equal to the costs to the City for four (4) officers plus an additional ten (10%) percent for administrative costs. Any overtime costs shall also be billed a the rate cost plus ten (10%) percent. Costs as referenced in this section include all wages, sa!aw, overtime, FICA, Life Insurance, Disability Insurance, Health Insurance, Dental Insurance, Pension, Workers Compensation, and any other benefit paid or provided by City. For the balance of the 2003/2004 Fiscal Year (October 1, 2003-September 30, 2004), the CRA shall pay the City an amount not- to-exceed $65,000.00. For the 2004/2005 Fiscal Year, (October I, 2004-September 30, 2005), if this Agreement is renewed by the CRA and City, the CRA shall pay the City an amount not-to- exceed $325,000.00. The not-to-exceed amounts shall be negotiated between the parties for any renewal of extension of this Agreement. Not-to-exceed amounts, as referred to in this Agreement, do not include overtime costs arising out of special events and activities within the Community Redevelopment Areas, and such costs for services requested by the CRA shall be reimbursed to the City by the CRA. 8.2 On a monthly basis throughout the term of this Agreement, City shall provide CRA with an invoice displaying the City's cost to provide officer services as referenced in Section 8.1 and any Equipment reimbursement costs incurred by the City- in accordance with this Agreement. CRA shall pay each invoice and any balance due City within fifteen (15) days of receipt thereof. 8.3 Upon request of the CRA, the City shall provide copies of certified payroll time reports documenting name, employee identification, hours worked under this Agreement, supervisory approval and verification of necessity for any overtime worked for the officers assigned to this detail. Page 6 6302 H:\1990\900182.BB\AGMTX~Police Supplemental Services to CRA.doc Rev. 07-08-04 9.0 Termination. 9. i The CRA may terminate this Agreement upon ninety (90) days 'written notice to the City. Such notice shall be delivered by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, to the address specified in section 10.0 9.2 The City may terminate this Agreement upon ninety (90) days written notice to the CRA. Such notice shall be delivered Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested to the address specified in section 10.0. 10.0 Notices. Any notices required pursuant to the terms of this Agreement shall be sent by Certified Mail, Return Receipt Requested, to the principal place of business of each of the parties hereto, as specified below: CRA Executive Director Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency 639 East Ocean Avenue, Suite 207 Boynton Beach, Florida 33435 CITY: City Manager City of Boynton Beach 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard Boynton Beach, Florida 33435 And to: Police Chief City of Boynton Beach Police Department 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard Boynton Beach, Florida 33435 l 1.0 Construction of Laws. The Agreement shall consist this Agreement and any subsequent written addenda agreed upon by both parties. 12.0 Severability. Zf any provision of this Agreement or application thereof to any person or situation shall to any extent, be held invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement, and the application of such provisions to persons or situations other than those as to which it shall have been held invalid or unenforceable shall not be affected thereby, and shall continue in full force and effect, and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. 13.0 Modification of Agreement. This Agreement may be modified upon mutual consent of the parties only in writing, and executed with the same dignity herewith, 14.0 Binding Authority. Each person sign/rig this Agreement on behalf of either party individually warrants that he or she has full legal power to execute this Agreement on Page 7 6303 I-I :\ 1990\900182.BBkAGMTkPolice Supplemental Services to CRA. doc P~e'~. 07-08-04 behalf of the party for whom he or she is signing, and to bind and obligate such pa~ty with respect to all provisions contained in this Agreement. 15.0 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Florida, with venue lying in Palm Beach County, Florida. IN WITNESS OF THE FOREGOING, the parties have set their hands and seals the day and year first written above. Signed and Seal and Wimessed in the presence of: CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FL City Manager KURi' BRESSNER CiTY N~ANAGER BOYNTON BEACH, FL ATTEST: Signed, sealed and witnessed in the Presence of: Witness ~itrt'es s /' Approved as. to Form ~ Attorney CRA //~hair Page 8 6304 HA1990\900182.BBX~4-GMT~Police Supplemental Services to CRA.doc Rev. 07-08-04 Heart of Boynton Area 1 in. = 664.5 feet 6306 :6307 6308 o cO 0 0 0 63O9 Plan of Operations for CR.A Special District Officer Exhibit C The Special District Officer will fulfill duties consistent with that of a crime prevention officer, high pro',_ community policing officer, directed patrol officer and the traditional neighborhood patrol officer. The Special District Officer may walk a beat, ride a bike or operate a marked vehicle; however, they are charged with forming a partnersh/p with our community therefore, extensive biking and foot patrol are highly recommended. Frequent and direct interaction with children, adults, business owners, community leaders, etc. is a necessity. Officers are responsible for developing strategic plans to fulfill their objectives and follow through, using a significant amount of operational latitude. Problem solving for all issues, not just "police related" issues is a requirement. Hours of operation will be 11.5 hours a day with flexible start and end times based on community's input for need, crime statistics, and officer evaluation of the situational circumstances. Officers will wear the designated CRA uniforms, utilize the CRA funded equipment, and operate within the set CRA boundaries as set forth in the contract. Officers will comply with the CRA reporting procedures and forward the information to their supervisor who will then forward the information through the chain of command, to the Chief of Police, and then to the CRA. 6310 MEMO TO: CRA Board FROM: Douglas Hutchinson SUBJECT: Consideration of Lease with Purchase Option for CRA Office DATE: October 5, 2004 The Lease Proposal being presented to the CRA Board is not binding nor should it be construed as a lease; however it will serve as a basis for preparation, acceptance and execution of a lease between the Landlord, MPLF Investments, Inc. and the Tenant, Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency. The Community Plaza will be a 6,000 square foot building, which is to be built at North Seacrest Boulevard. The CRA would lease 3,000 square feet:for 60 months; with an option to purchase. Staff is recommending that the CRA Board approve Jeanne Fleavilin, Chair and Douglas Hutchinson, CRA Executive Director to move forward with negotiations with MPLF Investment Inc. to enter into a lease agreement with purchase option. Second staff is recommending that the CRA Board approve Jeanne Heavilin, Chair and Douglas Hutchinson, CRA Executive Director to sign a Lease Agreement with Purchase Option contract. 6311 MPLF Investments, Inc. 114 N. Federal Highway, Suite 202 Boynton Beach, FI. 33435 Phone (561) 736-9790 * Fax (561) 736-6290 LEASE PROPOSAL Subject ProperW: Tenant: Principals: Brokers: Move in Date: Subject Space: Lease Term: Base Rent: Operating Expenses: Utilities, Janitorial, HVAC: Parking: Community Plaza (Proposed) N. Seacrest Boynton Beach, Florida 33434 Boynton Beach CRA 439 E. Ocean Ave. Boynton Beach, Fl. 33435 Jeanne Heavilin, Chair Douglas Hutchinson, Executive Director None To be determined, 2005. This will be new construction. Approximately 3000 square feet. Any common area loss factor will be computed using B.O.M.A. standards 2' 60 months, commencing upon receipt of C.O. for Tenant space. $25.00 RSF NNN, plus tax, with 4% annual increases. Commonly referred to as CAM (Common Area Maintenance), which includes items such as taxes, insurance, landscaping, parking lot maintenance, common area lighting, etc. This would be reimbursed to Landlord based on your pro-rata share. CAM is currently estimated for the year 2005 at $5.00 per RSF plus sales tax. This is a NNN (Triple Net) lease and therefore tenant shall be responsible for its own janitorial, water, HVAC, electric and maintenance of Tenant space. The property has a parking ratio of approximately 1/300SF. 6312 Lease Proposal Boynton Beach CRA Page two: Options: Access: Space Improvements: Signage: Security Deposit: Personal Guaranty: Purchase Option: Two five-year options with the first year of each option term at an increase of 4% over the last year of the previous term, each option period containing 4% annual increases. Tenant will have 24/7 access to the building. Landlord shall contribute a finish out allowance of $25.00 per sq fl, based on useable square feet. Landlord reserves the right to approve all finish out plans and materials, which shall conform to building standards. Any finish out requirements over and above the Landlord's allowance must be paid for, or approved by Landlord, prior to commencement of construction. Any finish out requirements necessary prior to completion of building shell and specific to tenant must be paid for in advance of construction and shall be non-refundable. Tenant shall have space on the monument sign, subject to Landlord's approval and the approval of any governmental authority having jurisdiction over the property. Tenant shall place in escrow with Landlord's attorney $75,000.00 as security that Tenant will occupy the 15~'emises upon completion. Upon receipt of C.O and occupancy by Tenant, this amount shall begin reducing in an amount equal to $10,000 per lease year completed. Should Tenant not occupy the premises upon receipt of C.O., this amount shall be forfeited to Landlord as Liquidated Damages and neither Landlord nor Tenant shall have any further responsibilities to one another. Not Required. During the first year of the Lease, Tenant shall have the first option to purchase the Subject Space. Should Tenant decide to exercise its option, Tenant shall give Landlord 30 days advance notice and deposit with Landlord's attorney a $75,000 non-refundable option fee. This fee shall be credited to Tenant at closing, should closing occur. Tenant shall then have 30 days to close on the transaction. The Purchase Price shall be $250.00 per square foot for the first year and thereafter shall escalate at 10% per year on each anniversary of the receipt of the C.O., should the unit be available. 6313 Lease Proposal Boynton Beach CRA Page three: Approvals: This Proposal and any subsequent lease are expressly subject to and contingent upon CRA Board approval. Should Landlord not receive Site Plan Approval for the proposed improvements, this Lease Proposal and any subsequent Lease shall become null and void and any deposits made by Tenant shall be refunded immediately. Disclosure: This proposal is not binding nor should it be construed as a lease and only serves as a basis for the preparation, acceptance, and execution by both Landlord and Tenant of a satisfactou and comprehensive lease instrument. This non-binding proposal is subject to withdrawal, errors, omissions, change or prior rental or sale. It is also understood that Tenant shall provide information of financial conditions, i.e. financial statements, credit reports, etc., as may be required by the Landlord prior to execution of the lease agreement. Agreed to and Accepted: MPLF INVESTMENTS, INC. BOYNTON BEACH COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Name: Name: Title: Title: Date: Date: 6314 W g NAOHS W3_-I-IFI8 ,0 L ~-- W W w w LU LU O-- LU X X X V, Public Audience Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Community Redevelopment Board w/th respect to any matter considered at this meeting 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 includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. 6316 The CRA shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchinson at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. : VI. Public Hearing 6317 Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Commun/ty Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at tbs meeting 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 includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The CRA shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchinson at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. TO: TH RU: FROM: DATE: PROJECT: REQUEST: DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZON~'NG DI'VZSION MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 04-237 Chair and Members Community Redevelopment Agency Board Michael Rumpf Director of Planning and Zoning Eric Lee .lohnson, AICP Planner October 5, 2004 Gateway Shell (fka Gateway Texaco) / COUS 3-007 (revised) Conditional Use approval for a 68! square foot addiUon to an existing gasoline dispensing establishment Property Owner: Applicant/Agent: Location: Existing Land Use/Zoning: Proposed Land Use/Zoning: Proposed Use: Acreage: Adjacent Uses: North: South: East: PRO)ECT DESCRZPT/ON SUAU Enterprises, Incorporated Mr. Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Consultants 2360 North Federal Highway (see Exhibit "A" - Location Map) Local Retail Commercial (LRC) / Community Commercial (C-3) No change proposed 681 square foot addition to an existing gasoline dispensing establishment 0.48 acres (20,830 square feet) A multi-family residential property zoned Community Commercial (C-3); Right-of-way for Las Palmas Road, and farther south are single-family attached townhouses (The Harbors), zoned Infill Planned Unit Development (]:PUD); Vacant commercial lot, zoned Community Commercial (C-3), and farther east is a single-family residential dwelling (part of Las Palmas development), zoned Single-family residential (R-1AA); and 6318 Gateway T;xaco - COUS 03-007 Page 2 Memorandum No. PZ 03-228 West: Rights-of-way of U.S. [ and the Florida East Coast Railroad, farther west developed commercial property classified Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and zoned C-2 Neighborhood Commercial. PROPERTY OWNER NOTZFZCATZON Owners of properties within 400 feet of the subject conditional use were mailed a notice of this request and its respective hearing dates. The applicant certifies that they posted signage and mailed notices in accordance with Ordinance No. 04-007. BACKGROUND Hr. Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants, agent for SUAU Enterprises, Incorporated is requesting conditional use / major site plan modification approval in order to construct a 681 square foot building addition to an existing gasoline dispensing establishment. The applicant is also proposing new parking spaces, new landscaping, and a general "make-over" of the exterior facades of the existing building and canopy. However, the number of gasoline pump islands and fueling positions would remain unaltered. The proposed building expansion is being considered for conditional use approval because gasoline dispensing establishments are only allowed as conditional uses in the C-3 zoning district. Also, it should be noted that this particular gas station is a legal non-conforming use because it is currently licensed as a fully functional, operating gas station, but does not meet the location criteria for gas stations as outlined by Chapter 2, Section 11.L.3,a.(2) of the Land Development Regulations. The aforementioned code requires gas stations to be located only on parcels at intersections "consisting of roads of four (4) lanes or wider"; Las Palmas is only two (2) lanes wide. In 2002, Mr. Beril Kruger, acting on behalf of Mr. Zuhair Marouf, expressed a desire to construct a building addition (for storage) to the existing gas station building, in part, to satisfy outstanding code enforcement violations. At the' time, a drive aisle (direct access) was proposed between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east, which was previously earmarked for a mechanical car wash. The direct access was proposed in order to minimize vehicular traffic spilling onto Las Palmas Avenue. Hr. Kruger's inquiries were based on the presumption that the proposed 681 square foot expansion would be permitted (by right) and that direct access to the abutting lot (to the east) would only require site plan review. However, after careful consideration, staff determined that the building addition would not be permitted (by-right) because it would represent an unlawful expansion of a legal non-conforming use (a gasoline dispensing establishment). Furthermore, in response to Mr. Kruger's inquiries, on July 16, 2002, the Director of Planning & Zoning issued an administrative determination letter that basically prohibited the applicant from increasing the size of the gas station building because by doing so, would constitute a violation of Chapter 2, Sections D and G of the Land Development Regulations. Regarding the direct access between lots, the Director determined that the proposed driveway connection between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east would be permitted subsequent to site plan review. However, the direct access would only be allowed contingent upon the recordation of a legally binding cross-access agreement between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east. On .luly 31, 2002, Mr. Kruger submitted a formal appeal of the staff's aforementioned administrative 6319 Gateway Texaco - COUS 03-007 Page 3 Memorandum No. PZ 03-228 determination. According to the applicant, "in summary, the appeal justifies the proposed expansion by the position that retail sales at this business is a separate component from the non-conforming aspect- gasoline sales, which component can therefore be altered / expanded independent of the gasoline sales element of the business". Again, staff disagreed with the applicant's position. However, the City Commission approved the applicant's appeal with the condiUon that the expansion would be limited to 600 square feet. On June 17, 2003, Hr. Kruger submitted a request for conditional use / major site plan modification approval and its accompanying nine (9) variances for the construction of the building addition. Both staff and the CRA reviewed the site plan and the variances and recommended approval contingent upon 43 conditions of approval, one of which, limited the building addition to 600 square feet. On October 21, 2003, the City Commission approved their request for conditional use / major site plan modification and the accompanying variances. However, on November 18, 2003, the City Commission rescinded their previous approvals. Therefore, this submittal for major site plan modification and accompanying nine (9) variance requests represent the applicant's continuing effort to construct the building addition. Staff. provides both an analysis and recommendation for each variance request in their respective staff report. If approved, the construction of the addition, parking lot, and facade improvements would occur in one (1) phase. It should be noted that the difference between this submittal and the original submittal as described above, is that the proposed car wash on the abutting lot (to the east) has been abandoned. As such, the drive aisle that was to connect to the lot to the east has also been eliminated from the design. The existing building in conjunction with the proposed expansion would equal 2,319 square feet (1,719 square feet plus 600 square feet). .~TANDARDS FOR EVALUA'T/NG CONDI'n:ONAL USE~AND ANALY$1'$ Section 11.2.D of the Land Development Regulations contains the following standards to which conditional uses are required to conform. Following each of these standards is the Planning and Zoning Division's evaluation of the application as it pertains to standards. The Community Redevelopment Agency and City Commission shall consider on. ly such conditional uses as are authorized under the terms of these zoning regulations and, in connection therewith, may grant conditional uses absolutely or conditioned upon the conditions including, but not limited to, the dedication of property for streets, alleys, recreation space and sidewalks, as shall be determined necessary for the protection of the surrounding area and the citizens' general welfare, or deny conditional uses when not in harmony with the intent and purpose of this section. In evaluating an application for conditional use approval, the Board and Commission shall consider the effect of the proposed use on the general health, safety and welfare of the community and make written findings certifying that satisfactory provisions have been made concerning the following standards, where applicable: Ingress and egress to the subject property and proposed structures thereon, with particular reference to automobile and pedestrian safety and convenience, traffic flow and control, and access in case of fire or catastrophe. No driveway openings are being altered as a result of this major site plan modification. The site plan (sheet 1 of 4) shows that there are two ex/sting (2) "curb drops" on North Federal Highway. 632O Gateway Texaco - COUS 03-007 Page 4 Memorandum No. PZ 03-228 According to Chapter 2, Section 1LL.3. d. (1), driveway openings for gas-stations are required to be located at/east 120 feet from the intersection of the right-of-way lines along streets of higher classification (North Federal Highway). According to the site p/an, the northern "curb-drop"is located 102 feet from the intersect/on of North Federal Highway and Las Pa/mas Avenue. The southern "curb-drop" on North Federal Highway is located only 23 feet from the intersection of L/.$. J and Las Pa/mas Avenue. The proposed building addition is a major site p/an modification and therefore, the entire site would have to comply with today's code. However, the applicant is not proposing to alter the driveway opening and is requesting a gT-foot variance (ZNCV 03-OJO) from the 120-foot requirement (see Exhibit "C"- Conditions of Approval). This single variance request would be app#ed to both non-conforming driveway openings. Staff supports this variance request ('see Staff Report ZNCV 03-OJO). According to Chapter 2, Section JJ.L.3.d. (3) of the Land 'Development Regulations, driveway openings shall not be located/ess than 30 feet from any interior property line. The northern driveway on North Federal Highway does not comply with this requirement because it is located only 2J feet away from the interior north s/de property//ne. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a JO-foot variance from this restriction (ZNCV 03-0Jl). Staff supports this variance request (see Staff Report ZNCV 03-0Jl). A/so, the supplemental regu/aEons for gas staEons limit the number of driveway openings to one (J) per street frontage. The subject site has two (2) driveway openings on North Federal Highway. The applicant is request'rig a variance (ZNCV 03-0J2) from Chapter 2, Sect,'on JL3. d(4) to a#ow for these two driveway openings. The Engineering Division reviewed the site p/an and recommended that no closures should occur to any of the openings due to the proposed on-site traMc circulation and the comp/eEon of the Harbors townhouse project. Therefore, staff is recommending approval of this variance request to a/Iow two (2) driveway openings (see Staff Report ZNCV 03-012). In any event, ail three vatCance requests regarding the e~'st/ng driveways would require review and approval by: the City Commission. The site plan (sheet J of ~t) shows an ex/sting driveway opening is located on Las Pa/mas Avenue. This opening is currently located 32 feet from the intersection of the right-of-way lines and compiles with the Land Development Regulations. No change is proposed to this opening. The survey shows that there is no sidewalk along Las Pa/mas Avenue. However, according to Chapter ~, Article IV, Section 10. T of the Land Development Regulations, a sidewalk is required within this right-of-way. A sidewalk would a/so be required within the right-of-way (of Las Pa/mas Avenue) in front of the abutting property to the east where the car wash is proposed (NWSP 03- OJ1). The site p/an (sheet J of ,t) shows the sidewalk but the civil engineering drawing does not. At the time of permitting, the cml engineering p/an shall show the sidewalk so that it matches the site p/an (see Exhibit "C"- Conditions of Approval). Off-street parking and loading areas where required, with particular attention to the items in subsection above, and the economic, glare, noise, and odor effects the conditional use will have on adjacent and nearby properties, and the city as a whole. The required parldng has been tabulated based on a gasoline dispensing establishment use. The ratio uO'#zed is one (J) space for each 250 square feet of the gross floor area. Based on this methodology, the proposed expansion, coup/ed with the floor area of the existing building would require JO park~'ng spaces. The required number of parking spaces needs to be accurately shown on the site plan (sheet 1 of 4) tabu/ar data (see Exhibit "C"- CondiO'ons of Approval). The site plan 6321 Gateway Texaco - COUS 03-007 Page 5 Memorandum No. PZ 03-228 shows that J2 par/ring spaces would be provided. The applicant intends to re-stripe the existing spaces and create three (3) more spaces at the northeast corner of the property. The backup distance behind the newly created parking spaces would adhere to current dimension standards. However, one (1) of the exi~t/'ng parking spaces would encroach into the required JO-foot wide perimeter landscape buffer along the north property line and would therefore, require the approval of the accompanying variance reque~ (ZNCV 3. Refuse and service areas, with particular reference to the items in subsection I and 2 above. The survey shows that the dumpster is currently located one foot from the south property line at the southeast corner of the property. The site plan (sheet 1 of 4) shows that the dumpster would be moved live (5) feet away from the south property line and one (1) foot- eight (8) inches from the east property line. It would be located within a dumpster enclosure as per code. It should be noted that staff would prefer to have the location of the dumpster enclosure be away from highly visible areas such as near adjacent Hghts-of-way. However, staff acknowledges that the current site layout (i.e. building, parking space, driveway openings) limits the number of choices for its relocatT'on. The present location facilitates the efficient removal of. trash and that this efficiency could be jeopardized if located elsewhere on the site. 4. Utilities, with reference to locations, availability, and compatibility. Consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies and city regula~'ons, all UlT'lities, including potable water and sanitary sewer are available for this project. Screening, buffering and landscaping with reference to type, dimensions, and character. The subject site had been previously developed as a gas station with related paridng areas under former, less stringent standards for gas stations. Therefore, the ex/sb'ng landscape buffer areas are non-comp#ant. According to Chapter 2, Sect/on 11.3.1(1) of the Land Development Regulations, a ten (JO) foot w/de landscape buffer., is required along both North Federal Highway and Las Palmas Avenue. The buffer/s required to 'contain a tree every $0 feet. A conzYnuous row of hedges and flowering groundcover are also required. The intent is to screen the vehicular use areas from the pub/lc rights-of-way. The landscape plan ('sheet L-l) shows that no change is proposed to the driveways or parking areas. BasicallY, there/s no landscape buffer along North Federal Highway. Since lO-foot w/de landscape buffers are required along rights-of-way, the applicant is requesting a variance (ZNCV 03-016) from the code to have no landscape buffer along North Federal Highway and a live (5) foot w/de landscape buffer along Las Pa/mas Avenue (see Exhibit "C"- Conditions of Approval). As/n the case w/th the driveway openings, since both landscape buffers are less than JO feet/n width, one (1) variance request would apply to both buffers. The just/licat~bn //es /n the fact that ifa lO-foot variance were approved to allow for a zero (0) foot w/de landscape buffer, then that same variance approval would null/fy the need for a live (5) foot w/de buffer. Staff is recommending approval of the variance request due to the unavoidable site constraints (see Staff Report ZNCV 03- 016). However, staff/s recommending approval w/th the stipulation that/n the southern landscape buffer (along Las Palrnas Avenue), the proposed row of Ixora 'Nora Grant' shrubs be 36/nches/n height at the t/me of /nsta#at/bn. A/so, staff/s recommending, where possible, additional screening be provided (/.e. planters) along North Federal Highway (see Exhibit "C"- Cond/~bns of Approva/). 6322 Gateway Texaco - COUS 03-007 Page 6 Memorandum No. PZ 03-228 As a/ways, the variance request would have to be reviewed and approved by the City Commission in order to allow for a deviation from the Land Development Regulations. According to Chapter 2, Sect/on ll.L.3.f.(2), a landscape buffer 10 feet/n width/s required on along all inter/or property lines. The landscape p/an (L-l) shows ex/sting landscape buffers along the north and east property lines. However, the ex/sting landscape buffer along the north property I/ne/s approximately one (1) feet- slx (6) inches/n width at/ts narrowest point (due to the ex/sting parking spaces) and does not comply w/th the 10-foot w/de buffer requirement. Therefore, the applicant/s requesting a variance (ZNCV 03-017) from the aforementioned Land Development £egu/at/ons to reduce the landscape buffer by eight (8) feet- slx (6) inches/n order to allow a one (I) foot - slx (6) inch w/de landscape buffer in lieu of the required lO-foot w/de landscape buffer. The var/ance's just/ticab'on and analysis/s provided/n the respective staff report. Staff supports this encroachment into the required north landscape buffer, /n part, because the parking lot already exists. However, staff opposes allowing any new spaces / areas of vehicular encroachment. Again, the variance request would have to be reviewed and approved by the City Commission. The north landscape buffer would contain Silver Buttonwood shade trees and Cabbage (booted) palm trees. A/so, a row of Redt/p Cocop/um hedges would be instal/ed at the base of the trees. The east landscape buffer would contain Green Buttonwood and Pigeon Plum shade trees and Cabbage palm trees. Again, a row of Redb'p Cocop/um hedges at the base and on the/ns/de of the existing six (6) foot high concrete wa//. Signs, and proposed exterior lighting, with reference to glare, traffic safety, economic effect, and compatibility and harmony with adjacent and nearby properties, This conditional use application proposes wall signs on multiple facades. The elevation pages (sheets 3 and 4 of 4) show the ex/sting wall signs w/th the proposed wall s/gnage. The max/mum allowable wa//s/gnage area would be based on the length of the front building fagade facing North Federal Highway. According to Chapter 21, Arb'cie IV, Sect/on 2. C of the Land Development Regulations, the max/mum area for all wall signs shall be one and one half (1 ~) square feet of sign area for each one (1) foot of linear building frontage. The elevations do not/nd/cate the proposed cumu/aEve wall s/gnage area. As proposed,/t appears that the wall s/gnage area would not comply w/th the max/mum allowable s/gnage area. Stal~s goal/s not to regulate the content of the sign but rather to ensure compliance w/th code and to maximize sign aestheb'cs thereby preventing project s/gnage from degrading the development's appearance. In order to reduce the wall sign area and upgrade the overall appearance, staff recommends eliminating all non-word depictions (ShelFs corporate logo which/s a ye#ow and red seashell) that do not directly correspond w/th wording (see Exhibit "C" - Conditions of Approval). Chapter 21, Art/cie III, Sect/on 5 requires all freestanding signs to be located at/east 10 feet from the property lines. Also,/n this location, the freestanding sign/s I/m/ted to eight (8) feet/n height. The ex/sting pylon sign, which/s no longer allowed by code,/s currently located only Eve (5) feet from the property I/ne and stands over 33 feet tall. Its on-site location/s shown on the survey and site plan and/ts elevation /s shown on the attached 8 ~ by 11-inch sheet. The applicant/s proposing to change the sign copy area to this non-conforming structure. The pole sign is non- conforming because/t/s not a "monument"style;/t exceeds the height I/m/tat/on and does not meet m/n/mum setback requirements. The structure must be setback at least 10 feet from the property 6323 Gateway Texaco - COUS 03-007 Page 7 Memorandum No. PZ 03-228 //ne(s). However, no ex/sting sign area/s shown on the attached sheet. Therefore, lC/s unclear/f the proposed signage area would comply with Chapter 21, Art/cie IV, Section 2.B of the Land Development Regulations. The code allows for a max/mum of 64 square feet of sign area (see Exhibit "C"- Conditions o/Approval). Since the structure/s non-conform/nE due to/t currently being located w/thin the required setbacks, the applicant/s requesting a live (5) foot variance (ZNCV 03- 023) to d/ow the den to be located five (5) feet from the property//ne rather than 10 feet as normally required by code. In this instance, staff is recommending den/a/of the applicant's variance request (see Staff Report ZNCV 03-023). The structure can be removed, reduced/n height, and relocated on the property so that it would still be highly visible from the rights-of-way while complying with today's setback, height, and cross-v/dbi//ty restr/cb'ons (see Exhibit "C"- Conditions of Approval). This improvement could be made without interfering with the operation of the business. The variance request would require City Commission review and approval. 7. Required setbacks and other open spaces. The ex/sting building meets the setback requirements of the C-$ zoning d/strict. However, the proposed build/nE addition would not meet the rear setback requirements. The required rear setback /s 20 feet. The proposed building add/Eon would encroach into the setback by 10 feet. Therefore, the applicant/s requesting a lO-foot variance {ZNCV 03-013) from Chapter 2, Sect/on 11.L.3. e.(3) to d/ow the add/t/on to encroach into the required 20-foot rear setback. As previously mentioned/n the Background sect/on of this staff report, the City Corem/salon approved the applicant's Administrative Appeal (ADAP 03-00I) to allow a 600 square foot add/t/on. The size of the proposed building add/t/on (681 square feet)/s not cons/stent w/th the previous City Commission approval (600 square feet). Staff/s recommending den/a/of this variance request (see St~ff Report ZNCV 05-015). The proposed add/t/on should be configured or reduced to meet the setback requirements of the C-3 zoning d/strict and therefore, avoid the need for a variance. Since this is a major site plan modification, ali structures (including the canopy and fueling pumps) are required to meet setback requirements. The ex/sting canopy over the gas pump/s/ands does not meet the 20-foot setback requirement. The ex/sting pump/s/ands do not-meet the 30-foot setback requirement. The applicant/s not proposing any changes to the canopy structure other than cosmetic enhancements. Therefore, the applicant/s requesting a 1 O-~ foot variance (ZNCV 03-14) to d/ow the ex/sting canopy to be located n/ne and one-half (9 -~) feet from the west property//ne instead of 20 feet as required by code (see Staff Report ZNCV 03-014). A/so, the ex/sting pump is/ands are located only 19 feet- 10 inches from the west property line. Therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance (ZNCV 03-015) to also allow the gas pump/s/ands to be located closer to the west property line rather than the 30 feet required by code (see Exhibit "C"- Conditions of Approval). Aga/n, staff is recommend/nE approval of both variance requests. As a/ways, they would require City Commission review and approval. 8. General compatibility with adjacent property and other property in the zoning district. The proposed use is a conditional use in the C-3 zoning d/strict. A/though auto-intensive in nature, the use/s generally compatible w/th the use of the abutting property to the north. The property directly to the east/s vacant and zoned C-3. This vacant lot was previously earmarked for a mechanical car wash (a/so originally rescinded dm#ar to the subject request). The property south of 6324 Gateway Texaco - COUS 03-007 Page 8 Memorandum No. PZ 03-228 Las Pa/mas Avenue was previously zoned C-3, the same as the subject property. However, it was rezoned from C-3 to Znfili Planned Unit Development (ZPUD) for the construction of over 50 fee- simple townhouses. Un/ess properly buffered, a gas station use could be incompa~'b/e with a resident/a/use. Buffering would include extra landscaping or a buffer wall. Las Pa/mas Avenue and a proposed five (5) foot wide landscape buffer separate the existing gas station from the Harbors townhouse project. A gas station is a compatible use with other uses in the C-3 zoning district. The proposed bu#ding expansion (for extra storage area) would be compatible with both commercial and resldenO'al uses. The proposed building co/ors would be compatible with the ex/sting and proposed buildings w/thin the immediate area. The elevations indicate the proposed colors to be dark green (Benjamin Moore - Chrome Green), white (Benjamin Moore - Brilliant White), and gray (Benjamin Moore - San Antonio Gray). These are the corporate colors and are recognized nationwide. 9. Height of building and structures, with reference to compatibility and harmony to adjacent and nearby properties, and the city as a whole. The maximum allowable height for the C-3 zoning district is ~t5 feet. The existing building was designed as a one (1)-story structure. The top of the existing canopy is 16 feet - nine (g) inches in height. The elevations show that a "custom clad metal framed decorative element"is proposed at 20 feet- six (6) inches in height. The building and canopy are well below the maximum height limitation and are compatible with the surrounding properS'es. However, the non-conforming freestanding pole sign would be incompaEb/e with all signs in the C-3 zoning district and neighboring properties. ~ 10. Economic effects on adjacent and nearby properties, and the city as a whole. The ex/sting gas stat/on represents one (1) of three (3) licensed She//staEons throughout the City Of Boynton Beach. The "She//Branded Store"/s located at 301 North Congress Avenue and the other She//is located at 111 East Woo/bright Road. The nearest gas station to the subject property would either be the Mob//gas station, located on the southwest corner of Gateway Boulevard and High Ridge Road or the Citgo gas station, located at the southwest corner of Boynton Beach Boulevard and ?edera/ Highway. Therefore, the subject gas staEon represents additional convenience and choice for the City res/dents, which is not offered elsewhere in this area of the city. The applicant states that '~here are no detrimental economic effects on adjacent and nearby properties and the city as a whole". 11. Conformance to the standards and requirements which apply to site plans, as set forth in Chapter 19, Article II of the City of Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances. (Part III Chapter 4 Site Plan Review]). The existing use and site is non-conforming in many ways. Zf all requested variances are approved and ali staff comments are addressed, the proposed project would comp/y with ali requirements of applicable sections of the city code. However, staff is recommending denial of two (2) of the nine (g) requested variances and that these aspects of the site be retrofitted to comply with city regulations. 6325 Gateway Texaco - COUS 03-007 Page 9 Memorandum No. PZ 03-228 12. Compliance with, and abatement of nuisances and hazards in accordance with the performance standards within Section 4.N. of the Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2; also, conformance to the City of Boynton Beach noise Control Ordinance. With incorporation of ail conditions and staff recommendations contained herein, the proposed storage addition to the existing gas-station would operate in a manner that is in comp/lance with the above-referenced codes and ordinances of the City of Boynton Beach. RECOMMENDATZON The City Commission approved the applicant's AdministraUve Appeal (ADAP 03-001) to allow a 600 square foot storage addition to the existing gas station. The existing use (gas sales) and site is non- conforming. The building addition represents a major site plan modification, which requires that the entire site be brought into compliance with current code. However, the applicant is only proposing to expand the building area to accommodate the extra storage area and has no intention of improving the remaining portion of the site to bring it into compliance with today's standards, which would also be cost prohibitive or even impossible due to site constraints. To remedy the situation, the applicant is requesting 9 variances that address the non-conforming aspects of the subject site. However, the proposed area of the addition is not consistent with the area that was conceptually approved by the City Commission. Furthermore, the proposed expansion itself does not comply with the setback requirements of the C-3 zoning district. This is a situaUon where staff concurs with the applicant's justification for seven (7) of the nine (9) variances requested that are directly related to existing non-conforming aspects of the site. However, staff is recommending denial of two (2) of the nine (9) requested variances that specifically pertain to the new or proposed improvements (i.e. building addition, new sign area) that could, in staffs' opinion, be built to comply with the current code. Also, staff is recommending specific conditions be applied to two (2) of the other variance requests that specifically regard buffering the subject site from the adjacent properties (i.e. potted plants, if possible, along North Federal Highway). Therefore, based on the discussion herein, staff recommends approval of the project contingent upon satisfying all the conditions of approval. Any additional conditions by the Community Redevelopment Agency or the City Commission would be placed in Exhibit "C"- Conditions of Approval. Pursuant to Chapter 2 - Zoning, Section 11.2 Conditional Uses, a time limit would be required for project development. Staff recommends a period of one (1) year be allowed to obtain a building permit (excluding permits for land clearing). EL] S:~PlanningLg I-IARED\WPLPRO JECTS\C. rat eway Shell []ca TcxacoLNew ShelI~COUS 03-007 (t~-~sed 2004)LStaff RClX)rt. doc 6326 SITE ' R3 R3 "Location Map Gateway Shell IPUD REC REC EXHIBIT "A': 6327 EXHIBIT "B" l' ~ Iq~[~.,~ ~i~hi _~ , ~.:.;,,,.._, ' "" "'!~I ~'~! I h,!Jj--~.llll! ' ~o= ~:~i. ~ 6328 I--~ILSl I lift ljlfi Jill 6329 GATEWAY SHELL 2~80 NORTH FEDERAL HIOHWAY BOYNTON ~,F_J,,CH, FLO~tDA 3~?~5. EXHIBIT "B" ml~l I!~J!' GATEWAY SHELL 2360 NORTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY BOYNTON BEACH. FLORIDA 33435 EXHIBIT "B" 6331 GATEWAY SHELL 2360 NORTH FEDERAJ.. HIGHWAY BOY'NTON BEACH. FLOP. IDA it EXHIBIT "B" 6332 EXHIBIT ',?7 N O R 'F H ~3 0 U N D ADDITION AN{) ALTERATIONS TO: 6333 2560 NOETH FEDERAL HIOHWA¥ BOYTON BEACH, FLORIDA 53455 Land,scape Plan EXHBIT "C" Conditions of Ap. proval Project name: Gateway Shell (fka Gateway Texaco) File number: COUS 03-007 Reference: 5t~ review plans identified as a Conditional Use with a September 21, 2004 Planning and Zoning Department date stamp marking. DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS - General Comments: None [ PUBLIC WORKS - Traffic Comments: None ENGINEERING DMSION Comments: 1. Full drainage plans, including drainage calculations, in accordance with the LDR, Chapter 6, Article IV, Section 5 will be required at the time of permitting .... 2. Paving, Drainage and site details will not be reviewed for construction acceptability at this time. All engineering construction details shall be in accordance with the applicable City of Boynton Beach Standard Drawings and the "Engineering Design Handbook and Construction Standards" and will be reviewed at the time of construction permit application. UTILITIES Comments: 3. Utility construction details will not be reviewed for construction acceptability at this time. All utility construction details shall be in accordance with the Utilities Department's "Utilities Engineering Design Handbook and Construction Standards" manual (including any updates); they will be reviewed at the time of construction permit application. FIRE Comments: None POLICE 6334 COA 09/30/04 2 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT Comments: None BUILDING DMSION Comments: 4. Buildings, structures and parts thereof shall be designed to withstand the minimum wind loads of 140 mph. Wind forces on every building or structure shall be determined by the provisions of ASCE 7, Chapter 6, and the provisions of 2001 FBC, Section 1606 (Wind Loads). Calculations that are signed and sealed by a design professional registered in the state of Florida shall be submitted for review at the time of permit application. 5. At time of perrmt review, submit signed and sealed working drawings of the proposed construction. 6. A water-use permit from SFWMD is required for an irrigation system that utilizes water from a well or body of water as its source. A copy of the permit shall be submitted at the time of permit application, F.S. 373.216. 7. If capital facility fees (water and sewer) arc paid in advance to the City,of Boynton Beach Utilities Department, the following information shall 'be provided at the time of building permit application: a. The full name of the project as it appears on thc Development Order and the Commission-approved site plan. b. The total amount paid and itemized into how much is for water and how much is for sewer. (CBBCO, Chapter 26, Article II, Sections 26-34) 8. At time of permit review, submit separate surveys of each lot, parcel or tract. For purposes of setting up property and ownership in the City computer, provide a copy of the recorded deed for each lot, parcel or tract. The recorded deed shall be submitted at time of permit review. 9. Pursuant to approval by the City Commission and all other outside agencies, the plans for this project must be submitted to the Building Division for review at the time of permit application submittal. The plans must incorporate all the conditions of approval as hsted in the development order and approved b7 the City Commission. 10. The full address of the project shall be submitted with the construction documents at the time of permit application submittal. If the project is multi- family, then all addresses for the particular building type shall be submitted. The name of the project as it appears on the Development Order must be noted on the building permit application at the time of apphcation submittal. 6335 COA 09/30/04 3 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST Comments: None PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 11. This project requires conditional use approval. If approved, pursuant to Chapter 2 - Zoning, Sectionl 1.2 Conditional Uses, staff recommends a one (1) Year time limit for project dev. elopment. 12. If approved, the proposed building addition would be limited to 600 square feet in order to be consistent with the previous City Commission approval of the Administrative Appeal (AD.Ap 03-001). 13. A traffic impact statement was 'sent to the Palm Beach County Traffic Division to ensure that the building addition meets the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County. The Traffic Division must approve the stateme, nt prior to the issuance of any building permits. 14. No driveway shall be located less than 120 feet from the intersecting right-Of- way lines of public streets (Chapter 2, Section ll.L.3.d.(1). Driveway shall be located no less than 30 feet from any interior property line from the intersection of the right-of-way lines along local streets and 180 feet along streets of higher classification such a U.S. 1 (Chapter 23, Article II.H.3). The existing driveway opening on U.S. 1 is 23 feet from the intersection of fight- of-way lines and therefore, a variance of 97 feet would be required. Approval of the proposed building addition is contingent upon the granting of the requested driveway variance (ZNCV 03-010). If approved, this variance must be indicated in the site plan's tabular data. 15. Driveways shall be located no less than 30 feet from the any interior property line (Chapter 2, Section l l.L.3.d(3)). The site plan shows the existing driveway opening is 20 feet from the north property line. Therefore, a variance of 10 feet would be required. In summary, approval of the proposed building addition is contingent upon the granting of the requested driveway variance (ZNCV 03-011). If approved, this variance must be indicated in the site plan's tabular data. 6330 COA 09/30/04 4 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT 16. Only one (1) driveway is allowed per street frontage (Chapter 2, Section 11.L3.d.(4)). The site plan shows that there are two (2) existing driveway openings on U.S. 1. Therefore, a variance would be required to allow two (2) driveways along the street frontage for an existing gas station business. Approval of the proposed building addition is contingent upon the granting of the requested driveway variance (ZNCV 03-012). If approved, this variance must be indicated in the site plan's tabular data. 1 ?. The proposed building addition encroaches 10 feet into the required 20-foot rear setback. Therefore, a variance of 10 feet would be required for an addition to an existing gas station. Approval of the proposed building addition is contingent upon the granting of the requested building setback variance (ZNCV 03-013). If approved, this variance must be indicated in the site plan's tabular data. 18. Canopies for gas stations require a 20-foot setback. The site plan shows the existing canopy is nine (9) feet - six (6) inches from the west property line. Therefore, a variance of 10 feet - six (6) inches is required for the existing canopy of the gas station. Approval of the proposed building addition is contingent upon the granting of the requested canopy setback variance (ZNCV 03-014). If approved, this note must be indicated in the site plan's tabular data. :_ 19. Gasoline pump islands shall be setback 30 feet from the property line. The site plan shows an existing gas pump island is located 19.8 feet from the west property line. Therefore, a variance of 10.2 feet is required for the gasoline pump island to an existing gas station. Approval of the proposed building addition is contingent upon the granting of the requested canopy setback variance (ZNCV 03-015). If approved, this note must be indicated in the site plan's tabular data. 20. Gas stations require a 10-foot wide perimeter landscape buffer adjacent to fights-of-way (Chapter 2, Section 11.L3.f.(1)). The site plan shows that no landscape buffer at the northwest comer of the property of the existing parking lot. Therefore, a variance .of 10 feet is required for the parking lot of the existing gas station. Approval of the proposed building addition is contingent upon the granting of the requested buffer variance (ZNCV 03- 016). If approved, this note must be indicated in the site plan's tabular data. Also, staff recommends that the Ixora "Nora Grant" shrubs be 36 inches in height at the time of installation within the landscape buffer along Las Palmas Avenue and where possible, additional screening (such as planter pots or box planters) shall be provided along North Federal Highway. 21. Gas stations require a 10-foot wide landscape buffer along interior property lines. The site plan shows a landscape buffer of one (1) foot - six (6) inches along the north property line. Therefore, a variance of eight (8) feet - six (6) 6337 COA 09/30/04 5 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT inches is required for the parking lot of an existing gas station. ApproCal of the proposed building addition is contingent upon the granting of the requested buffer variance (ZNCV 03-017). If approved, this note must be indicated in the site plan's.tabular data. 22. The survey shows the existing monument sign is setback only five (5) feet from the west property line. Ail outdoor freestanding monument signs must be setback at least 10 feet from the property line. Therefore, a variance of five (5) feet is required for the pylon sign of an existing gas station. Approval of the proposed building addition is contingent upon the granting of the requested sign variance (ZNCV 03-023). If approved, this variance must be indicated in the site plan's tabular data. 23. At the time of permitting, show the sidewalk on the civil engineering plans so that it matches the site plan. 24. The detail of the monument sign should indicate the exterior finish, signage area (expressed in square feet), and colors (Chapter 21, Article IV, Section 2.B.). The code allows for a maximum of 64 square feet of sign area. 25. All project signage is subject to review and approval of the Community Kedevelopment Agency and City Commission. As proposed, it appears that the wall signage area would not comply with the maximum allowable sigr/~tge area pursuant to Chapter 21, Article 4, Section C.3. In order to reduce the wall sign area and upgrade the overall appearance, staff recommends eliminating all non-word depictions (Shell's corporate logo which is a yellow / red seashell) on the wall signs that do not directly correspond with wording. Non-word depictions on signs shall be limited to 20% of the area of the sign erected. Color limitation shall not apply to non-word depictions on signs (Chapter 9, Section 10.1.4.). 26. This project requires a total of 10 parking spaces (1,719 square feet + 681 square feet ~ 1/250 = 10 spaces) and should be indicated as such on the site plan tabular data. 27. The existing wall must be refurbished (in those areas of its decay) and repainted to match the color(s) of the Gateway Shell building. 28. ?rovide paint swatches for the elevations (Chapter 4, Section 7.D.). 29. Ensure that all the proposed plant quantities correspond between what is shown on the graphic illustration and its corresponding plan list on sheet "L-1 30. Fifty percent (50%) of site landscape materials must be native species. Indicate the mount of native material in the plant list of the landscape plan (Chapter 7.5, Article II, Section 5.P). Please indicate by asterisk, the native 6338 COA 09/30/04 6 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT species and ensure that at least 50% of landscape material is native. The categories shall be as follows: Shade trees, palm trees, shrubs & groundcover. 31. The base of the existing pylon sign must be enhanced with colorful groundcover plans and a minimum of two (2) shrub species all selected for entrance compatibility (Chapter 7.5, Article II, Section 5.O.}. 32. P, ooftops will be treated as part of the building elevation. All rooftop equipment must be completely screened from view at a minimum distance of 600 feet (Chapter 9, Section 11 .E.). 33. On the elevations (sheet 3 of~;), eliminate thc Benjamin Moore color "Rubino Red" because it will not be used on the building or signs. Also, substitute "Chrome Green Lt" with "Kmmebunkport Green" and correctly identify "Chrome Green Dk" as "Chrome Oreen'. Finally, eliminate "Chrome Yellow Brt" and provide a color swatch of Shell's yellow color. ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY COMMENTS: Comments: 34. To be determined. ADDITIONAL CITY COMMMISSION COMMENTS: Comments: 35. To be determined. MWl elj S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Gateway Shell fka Texaco\New ShelI\COUS 03-007 (revised 2004)\COA.doc 6339 DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON_~EACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME · Gateway Shell APPLICANT'S AGENT: Mr. Beril Kruger / Planning & Zoning Consultants APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: 9 Northeast 6th Street Delray Beach, FL 33444 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: October 19, 2004 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Request conditional use / major site plan modification approval to construct a 681 square foot building addition to an existing 1,719 square foot gasoline-dispensing establishment for a total of 2,400 square feet on a 0.48-acre lot in the C-3 zoning district. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: 2360 North Federal Highway Boynton Beach, FL 33435 DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO. 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 Community Redevelopment Agency 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: 1. 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 5. 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:\Plannlng\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Gateway Shell fka Texaco\New ShelI\COUS 03-007 (revised 2004)\DO.doc TO: THRU: FROM: DATF: PRO.1FCT NAME/NO: REQUEST: DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANN1'NG AND ZON'rNG DZVZSZON MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 04-225 STAFF REPORT Chair and Members Community Redevelopment Agency and City Commission Michael W. Rumpf Director of Planning and Zoning Eric Lee .lohnson, AICP ~::~/- Planner October 6, 2004 Gateway Shell Variances (fka Gateway Texaco) Driveway variances ZNCV 03-010, 03-011 and 03-012 Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development RegulaUons, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental RegulaUons L.3.d. (1) requiring parking lot driveways to be located 120 feet from the intersection of the right-of-way lines along streets of higher classification to allow a 97-foot variance, resulting in a distance of 23 feet, and to allow a 88-foot variance for a second driveway, resulting in a distance of 32 feet from the intersection of Federal Highway and Las Palmas Avenue for an existing gasoline dispensing establishment; Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Deqelopment Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.d. (3) requiting that driveways shall not be located less than thirty (30) feet from any interior property line to allow a :~0-foot variance, resulting in a distance of 20 feet for an existing gasoline dispensing establishment; Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L3.d. (4) requiring that driveways will be limited to one (1) per street frontage to allow two (2) driveways along the street frontage for an existing gasoline dispensing establishment. Property Owner: Applicant/Agent: Location: Existing Land Use/Zoning: Proposed Land Use/Zoning: Proposed Use: PRO3ECT DESCR2PT~ON SUAU Enterprises, Incorporated Mr. Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Consultants 2360 North Federal Highway Boynton Beach, FL Local Retail Commercial (LRC) / Community Commercial (C-3) No change proposed 6341 681 square foot addition to gasoline dispensing establishment (limited to a Staff Report Driveway variances ZNCV 03-010, 03-01.1 and 03-012 Memorandum No PZ-04-225 Page 2 maximum of 600 square feet by Condition of Approval for appeal - ADAP 02-001). Acreage: 0.48 Acre (20,830 square feet) Adjacent Uses: (see Exhibit "A" - Location Map) No~h: Multi-family residential property, zoned Community Commercial (C-3); South: Right-of-way for Las Palmas Avenue, and farther south are single-family attached townhouses under construction CThe Harbors), zoned Thrill Planned Unit Development (IPUD); East: Vacant commercial lot zoned Community Commercial (C-3) and farther east is a single-family residential dwelling (part of Las Palmas development), zoned Single- family residential, (R-l-AA); and West: Rights-of-way of U.S. 1 and the Florida East Coast Railroad, and farther west developed commercial property classified Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-2). PROPERTY OWNER NO'I'ZFZCA'I~ON Owners of properties within 400 feet of the subject conditional use were mailed a notice of this request and its respective hearing dateS. The applicant certifies that they posted signage and mailed notices in accordance with Ordinance No. 04-007. BACKGROUND Mr. Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants, agent for SUAU Enterprises, Incorporated is requesting conditional use / major site plan modification approval involving a series of variance requests in order to construct a 681 square foot building addition to an existing gasoline dispensing establishment. The applicant is also proposing new parking spaces, additional landscaping, and a general "make-over" of the exterior facades of the existing building and canopy. However, the number of gasoline pump islands and fueling positions would remain unaltered. The proposed building expansion is being considered for conditional use approval because gasoline dispensing establishments are only allowed as conditional uses in the C-3 zoning district. Also, it should be noted that this particular gas-station is a legal non-conforming use because it is currently a fully functional, operating, and licensed gas station but does meet the Iocati0nal criteria for gas stations as outlined by Chapter 2, Section 11.L.3.a.(2) of the Land Development Regulations. The aforementioned code requires gas stations to be located only on parcels of land located at intersections "consisting of roads of four (4) lanes or wider"; Las Palmas is only two (2) lanes wide. In 2002, Hr. Beril Kruger, acting on behalf of Hr. Zuhair Marouf, expressed a desire to construct a building addition to the existing gas station, in part, to satisfy outstanding code enforcement violations. He also proposed direct access between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east (which was previously earmarked for a mechanical car wash). The direct access was proposed in order to minimize vehicular traffic spilling onto Las Palmas Avenue. Hr. Kruger's inquiries were based on the presumption that the proposed 68! square foot expansion would be perm~ (by right) and that direct access to the abutting lot (to the Staff Report Driveway variances ZNCV 03-010, 03-011 and 03-012 Memorandum No PZ-04-225 Page 3 east) would only require site plan review. However, after careful consideration, staff determined that the building addition would not be permitted (by-right) because It would represent an unlawful expansion of a legal non-conforming use (a gasoline-dispensing establishment). Furthermore, in response to Hr. Kruger's inquiries, on July 16, 2002, the Director of Planning & Zoning issued an administrative determination letter that basically prohibited the applicant from increasing the size of the gas-station building because by doing so, would constitute a violation of Chapter 2, Sections D and G of the Land Development Regulations. Regarding the direct access between lots, the Director determined that the proposed driveway connection between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east would be permitted subsequent to site plan review. However, the direct access would only be allowed contingent upon the recordation of a legally binding cross- access agreement between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east. On July 31, 2002, Hr. Kruger submitted a formal appeal of the staff's aforemenUoned administrative determination. According to the applicant, "in summary, the appeal justifies the proposed expansion by the position that retail sales at this business is a separate component from the non-conforming aspect-gasoline sales, which component can therefore be altered / expanded independent of the gasoline sales element of the business". Again, staff disagreed with the applicant's position. However, the City Commission approved the applicant's appeal but with the condition that the expansion would be limited to 600 square feet. On June 17, 2003, Hr. Kruger submitted a request for conditional use / major site plan modification approval and its accompanying variances for the construction of the building addition. Both staff and the CRA reviewed the site plan and the variances and recommended approval contingent upon 43 conditions of approval, one of which, limited the buidling addiUon to 600 square feet. On October 21, 2003, the City Commission approved their request for conditional use / major site plan modification and the accompanying variances. However, on November 18, 2003, the City Commission rescinded their previous approvals. Host recently, on August 11, 2004, Hr. Kruger re-submitted a revised request for'it3ajor site plan modification and accompanying variances (see Exhibit "B" - Site Plan and Survey). ]~f approved, the construction of the addition, parking lot, and fa(;ade improvements would occur in one (1) phase. It should be noted that the difference between this submittal and the original submittal as described above, is that the proposed car wash on the abutting lot (to the east) has been abandoned. As such, the drive aisle that was to connect to the lot to the east has also been eliminated from the design. As part of the major site plan modificaUon process, the site has to meet all the requirements of the Land Development Regulations or obtain relief if necessary. Hr. Befil Kruger is requesting relief from the above- referenced Land Development Regulations, which requires that parking lot driveways be constructed at least one hundred twenty (120) feet from streets of higher classifications. The existing gas station business includes two (2), existing driveway entrances measuring 30 feet wide providing ingress and egress along North Federal Highway and one (:[) existing driveway entrance measuring 30 feet wide along Las Palmas Avenue. The southernmost entrance driveway on North Federal Highway is located approximately 23 feet from Las Palmas Avenue, while the second driveway is located 103 feet from Las Palmas and 20 feet from the interior property line (north property line). The existing driveway is located on a major artedal (Federal Highway), therefore, the 120 foot separation from the intersection and interior property line is required. As indicated on the site plan associated with the proposed addiUon, the applicant is proposing to construct a 681 square foot addition located at the rear (east side) of the existing gas staUon building along the east property line. The subject parcel is approximately 0.48 acres in size with approximately 153 feet of frontage along North Federal Highway, and 136 feet of frontage along Las Palmas Avenue (see Exhibit "B"- Survey). The special lot conditions that exist are the short frontage distance along the North Federal Highway fight-of- way and, that the driveways are exisUng and necessary for fueling tanker circulaUon. Therefore, it is not -63'43 · Staff Report Odveway variances ZNCV 03-010, 03-011 and 03-012 Memorandum No PZ-04-225 Page 4 feasbile to limit the site to one driveway access point on North Federal Highway at the minimum driveway separation of 120 feet and simultaneously meet minimum site circulation needs of the existing business. If such redesign could meet this standard and operational needs, it is likely that other deficiencies, and the need for other variances would be generated. ANALYSTS The code states that the zoning code variance cannot be approved unless the board finds the following: a. That spec/a/conditions and circumstances ex/st which are peculiar to the/and, structure, or bu#d/ng involved and which are not applicable to other/ands, structures or buildings in the same zoning d/strict. b. That the spec/a/conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. c. That granting the variance requested w/II not confer on the applicant any spec/a/pn'v//ege that is denied by this ordinance to other/ands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning d/strict. That literal interpretation of the prov/'s/ons of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning d/strict under the terms of the ordinance and would work unnecessary' and undue hardship on the applicant. e. That the variance granted is the m/n/mum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the /and, building, or structure. That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the genera/intent and purpose of this chapter [ordinance] and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Staff has conducted this review with the assumption that, based on the city's prior approval of the administrative appeal acknowledging the increase in intensity of this non-conforming use, that the city is aware of the potential of certain hardships and non-conformities associated with the site. Staff also reviewed the requested variances focusing on the applicant's response to the above criteria contained in Exhibit "C"- Harouf Shell Variances, as well as existing site restrictions, and proposed design requirements. Staff has determined that site constraints at this location are a partial justification for granting this variance. Zn order to satisfy the Land Development Regulations, the driveways along North Federal Highway would have to be placed :t20 feet from the intersection of Las Palmas Avenue. This scenario would not leave the additional linear footage necessary to provide the 30-foot minimum driveway width and the 30- foot minimum distance from the interior property line, as required by code. Further complying with code would result in the elimination of both existing driveways on North Federal Highway. This would create inefficient internal and external vehicular traffic circulation and undue hardship, which could force the closing of the business. Also, the driveways on Federal Highway minimize the traffic impact of this existing business onto Las Palmas Avenue. If there was only one project entrance (the Las Palmas Avenue entrance), traffic exiting from the site including refueling trucks would have insufficient stacking length at the adjacent traffic signal/intersection. This situation would not comply with on-site circulation standards and would congest the secondary roadway and adjacent residential neighborhood. Leaving the existing driveways on North Federal Highway lessens this potential traffic problem. :It should be noted that granting a variance for the southernmost driveway distance would also cover the distance variance requested for the northern driveway. 6344 Staff Report Driveway variances ZNCV 03-010, 03-011 and 03-012 Memorandum No PZ-04-225 Page 5 In keeping with the City's Land Development Regulations, the applicant's response to the above criteria is included within Exhibit "C" Statement of Special Conditions justifying the requested variance. In summary, granting this variance may be supported for the following reasons: A special condition exists which is peculiar to the subject property; The literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties similarly zoned; The variance requested represents the minimum variance needed to utilize the property for access (the existing driveways are located along the western extent of the property); and That the granting of the variance would be in harmony with the general intent of the regulation to promote safe and adequate traffic circulation. RECOMMENDATI:QN Based on the analysis contained herein, Staff recommends that the requested variances be approved. No conditions of approval are recommended; however, any conditions of approval added by the Community Redevelopment Agency Board or the City Commission will be placed in the Exhibit "D"- Conditions of Approval. MWR/elj S:',Planning\SHARED~WFAPROJECTS\Gateway Shell fka Texaco~New ShellWafiances (revised 2004)\03-010 to 03-012 Ddvewa)AStaff Repot[ ZNCV 03-010 to 03-012 Ddveway Variances.doc 6345 SITE ' R3 R3 ~ Location_Map Gateway Shell IPUD REC. REC 6346 EXHIBIT "A': EXHIBIT "B" : I , ! I I t EXHIBIT "B" 171 ii! 6349 GATEWAY SHELL ~ """~""~ -...- ~i GATEWAY SHELL . ~ ~ ~E~ HIQ~AY BO~ B~CH. ~0~ ~5 6350 N O F~ TH B 0 U ND Il' NO. ? JJ i ADDIllON AND A~.TE~ATION$ TO:. ~ NO~ll'l F'E~E:RAL HIOHWA¥ L~dscape PI~ 6351 EXHIBIT "C" iViAROUF SHELL VARIANCES §/26/04 Chapter 2, Sec. II Supplemental Regulations L.3. d.(l), (3), (4), Driveways (1) No driveway shall be located less than One Hundred Ten (I10') feet from the intersecting right-of-way lines of public streets. (3) Driveways shall be located less than thirty (30) feet from any interior property line. (4) Driveways will be limited to one per street frontage. (1) Request a variance from this section of the code as the site has only 140 LF of frontage along N. Federal Highway and 123 LF of frontage on Las Palmas. Therefore it would be impossible for any driveways to be 110' to meet this current code. (3) Due to the fact that this is an existing Gas Station and is only being upgraded for looks, the driveways must stay in their current locations because the traffic patterns ihave already been set and cannot be changed. Gasoline Tankers must be able to enter and leave the premises from the existing · driveways. (4) Due to the Gasoline Tankers entering and leaving and the location of the fillers for the tanks, these driveways must remain in their cur'rent locations. L. 3. e. (3), Rear Setbacks Rear Setbacks are required to be 20' and we are proposing only a 10' rear setback. L. 3. e. (a). No Canopy shall be located less than 20' from the property line The Canopy is 9.5 feet from the front (west) property line. We are requesting a 10.5 foot variance to allow a 9.5 foot front setback for the existing canopy. L,3. e. (b). No gasoline pump island shall be located less than 30' from any property line. The existing gasoline pump island is 19.8 feet from the front (west) property line. The required front gasoline pump island setback is 30 feet so we are requesting a variance of 10.2 feet from the front property line to allow the 19.8 foot gasoline pump island setback. 6352 MAROUF SHELL VARIANC Page 2 EXHIBIT "C" Lo3. f. (1) BUFFERS A 10' w/de landscape buffer shaft be located along the street frontage. This buffer shall contain one tree 10' to 15' in height with a minimum 3" caliper every 30', a continuous hedge 24" high, 24" o/c at time of planting with rio wering ground co ver. We do not have a landscape buffer along the westerly street frontage (N. Federal Hwy.) so we are requesting a variance of 10 feet from the required 10 foot landscape buffer. The Landscape buffer we are proposing along the south street frontage (Las Palmas) is only 5 feet with a requirement of 10 feet. We are therefore requesting a variance of 5 feet for the 10 foot landscape buffer. We are requesting from the Engineering Department to be allowed to landscape the area between property line and the street. L.4. b Buffers (Interior Property Lines) (a) lines. When the buffer separates the property from property, the buffer shall not be required to contain Landscaping shall be continuously maintained. Part III Land Development Regulations ~~ SIGNS Chapter 21, Article Ill, A 5' wide landscaped buffer shall be located on all interior property other commercial a concrete wall. Sec. 5. Setbacks. All signs must meet a minimum ten (10) foot setback measured from the property line to the closest surface of the sign. The existing sign is currently 8.5 feet from the south property line and 5 feet from the west property line. Therefore we are requesting a 1,5 foot variance for the south setback and a 5 foot variance for the west property lines 6353 EXHIBIT "D" Conditions of Approval Project name: Gateway Shell (f.k.a. Gateway Texaco) File number: ZNCV 03-010, ZNCV 03-011, and ZNCV 03-012 Reference: DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS- General Comments: None PUBLIC WORKS- Traffic Comments: None UTILITIES Comments: None FIRE Comments: None POLICE Comments: None ENGINEERING DMSION Comments: None BUILD/NG DIVISION Comments: None PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST Comments: None PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: None ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD COMMENTS 6354 Conditions of Approval 2 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT Comments: 1. To be determined. ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS Comments: 2. To be determined. S:WlanningKSHARED\WPkPROJECTS\Gateway Shell fica Texaco'uNew Shell\Variances (revised 2004)\03-010 to 03-012 Driveway~COA 03-010 to 03- 012.doc S:\Planning\Planning Templates\Condition of Approval 2 page -P&D ORA 2003 form.doc 6355 DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON B_EACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: Gateway Shell (fka Gateway Texaco) APPLICANT'S AGENT: Mr. Beril Kruger / Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: 9 Northeast 6th Street Delray Beach, FL 33444 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: October 19, 2004 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Variances ZNCV 03-010, ZNCV 03-011, and ZNCV 03-012 Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.d.(1) requiring parking lot driveways to be located 120 feet from the intersection of the right-of-way lines along streets of higher classification to allow a 97-foot variance, resulting in a distance of 23 feet, and to allow an 88-foot variance for a second driveway, resulting in a distance of 32 feet from the intersection of Federal Highway and Las Palmas Avenue for an existing gasoline dispensing establishment; Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.d.(3) requiring that driveways shall not be located less than thirty (30) feet from any interior property line to allow a 10-foot variance, resulting in a distance of 20 feet for an existing gasoline dispensing establishment; and Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.d.(4) requiring that driveways will be limited to one (2) per street frontage to allow two (2) driveways along the street frontage for an existing gasoline dispensing establishment. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: 2360 North Federal Highway Boynton Beach, FL 33435 DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO. 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 Community Redevelopment Agency 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. 6356 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_h_ereby __ 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. Other DATED: City Clerk S:~Planning\SHARED\WP~PROJECTS\Gateway Shell fka Texaco\New Shell\Variances (revised 2004)\03-010 to 03-012 Driveway\DO 03- 010 to 03-012.doc 6357 TO: THRU: FROM: DATE: PRO3ECT NAME/NO: REQUEST: DEVELOPMENT-DEPARTMENT PLANNZNG AND ZONZNG DZVZSZON MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 04-226 STAFF REPORT Chair and Members Community Redevelopment Agency and City Commission Michael W. Rumpf Director of Planning and Zoning Eric Lee Johnson, AICP ~y~. Planner October 6, 2004 Gateway Shell Variances (fka Gateway Texaco) Building setback variance ZNCV 03-013 Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section :11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.e. (3) requiring a twenty (20) foot rear setback to allow a 10-foot variance, resulting in a rear setback of 10 feet for an addition to an existing gasoline dispensing establishment. Property Owner: Applicant/Agent: Location: ExisUng Land Use/Zoning: Proposed Land Use/Zoning: Proposed Use: Acreage: Adjacent Uses: North: South: East: West: PROJECT DE$CI~pTZON SUAU Enterprises, Incorporated Mr. Bedl Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Consultants 2360 N. Federal Highway Boynton Beach, FL Local Retail Commercial (LRC) / Community Commercial (C-3) No change proposed 68:1 square foot addition to gasoline dispensing establishment (limited to a maximum of 600 square feet by Condition of Approval for appeal - ADAP 02- 00:1). 0.48 Acre (20,830 square feet) (see Exhibit "A" - Location Map) Multi-family residential property, zoned Community Commercial (C-3); Right-of-way for Las Palmas Avenue, and farther south are single-family attached townhouses under construction (The Harbors), zoned Infill Planned Unit Development (IPUD); Vacant commercial lot zoned Community Commercial (C-3) currently under review for a proposed car wash, and farther east is a single-family residential dwelling (part of Las Palmas development), zoned Single-family residential, (R-l-AA); and 6358 Rights-of-way of U.S. 1 and the Florida East Coast Railroad, and farther west developed Staff Report Memorandum No PZ-04-226 Page 2 commercial property classified Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-2). PROPERTY OWNER NO'I'ZFZCA'I'ZON Owners of properties within 400 feet of the subject conditional use were mailed a notice of this request and its respective hearing dates. The applicant certifies that they posted signage and mailed notices in accordance with Ordinance No. 04-007. BACKGROUND Mr. Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants, agent for SUAU Enterprises, incorporated is requesting conditional use / major site plan modification approval involving a series of vadance requests in order to construct a 681 square foot building addition to an existing gasoline dispensing establishment. The applicant is also proposing new parking spaces, additional landscaping, and a general "make-over" of the exterior facades of the existing building building and canopy. However, the number of gasoline pump islands and fueling positions would remain unaltered. The proposed building expansion is being considered for conditional use approval because gasoline dispensing establishments are only allowed as conditional uses in the C-3 zoning district. Also, it should be noted that this particular gas-station is a legal non-conforming use because it is currently a fully functional, operating, and licensed gas station but does meet the Iocational criteria for gas stations as outlined by Chapter 2, Section 11. L.3.a.(2) of the Land Development Regulations. The aforementioned code requires gas stations to be located only on parcels of land located at intersections "consisting of roads of four (4) lanes or wider"; Las Palmas is only two (2) lanes wide. in 2002, Mr. Beril Kruger, acting on behalf of Mr. Zuhair Marouf, expressed a desire to construct a building addition to the existing gas station, in part, to satisfy outstanding code enforcement violations. He also proposed direct access between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east (which was previously earmarked for a mechanical car wash). The direct access was proposed in order to minimize vehicular traffic spilling onto Las Palmas Avenue. Mr. Kruger's inquiries were based on the presumption that the proposed 681 square foot expansion would be permitted (by right) and that direct access to the abutting lot (to the east) would only require site plan review. However, after careful consideration, staff determined that the building addition would not be permitted (by-right) because it would represent an unlawful expansion of a legal non-conforming use (a gasoline-dispensing establishment). Furthermore, in response to Mr. Kruger's inquiries, on 3uly 16, 2002, the Director of Planning & Zoning issued an administrative determination letter that basically prohibited the applicant from increasing the size of the gas-station building because by doing so, would constitute a violation of Chapter 2, Sections D and G of the Land Development RegulaUons. Regarding the direct access between lots, the Director determined that the proposed driveway connection between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east would be permitted subsequent to site plan review. However, the direct access would only be allowed contingent upon the recordation of a legally binding cross-access agreement between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east. On .luly 31, 2002, Mr. Kruger submitted a formal appeal of the staff's aforementioned administrative determination. According to the applicant, "in summary, the appeal justifies the proposed expansion by the position that retail sales at this business is a separate component from the non-conforming aspect-gasoline sales, which component can therefore be altered / expanded independent of the gasoline sales element of the business". Again, staff disagreed with the applicant's position. However, the City Commission approved the applicant's appeal but with the condition that the expansion would be limited to 600 square feet. 6359 On .]une 17, 2003, Mr. Kruger submitted a request for conditional use / major site plan modification approval and its accompanying variances for the construction of the building addition. Both staff and the CRA reviewed the site plan and the variances and recommended approval contingent upon 43 conditions of approval, one of which, Staff Report Memorandum No PZ-04-226 Page 3 limited the buidling addition to 600 square feet. On October 21, 2003, the City Commission approved their request for conditional use / major site plan modification and the accompanying variances. However, on November 18, 2003, the City Commission rescinded their previous approvals. Most recently, on August 11, 2004, Mr. Kruger re-submitted a revised request for major site plan modification and the accompanying variances. If approved, the construction of the addition, parking lot, and fa~de improvements would occur in one (1) phase. It should be noted that the difference between this submittal and the original submittal as described above, is that the proposed car wash on the abutting property (to the east) has been abandoned. As such, the drive aisle that was to connect to the lot to the east has also been eliminated from the design. As part of the major site plan modification process, the site has to meet all the requirments of the Land Development Regulations or obtain relief if necessary. Nr. Bedl Kruger is requesting relief from the above- referenced Land Development Regulations, which requires a twenty (20) foot rear setback for builidngs in the the C-3 zoning district. However, the proposed addition would encroach into the setback by 10 feet. Therefore, a variance of 10 feet would be required for the proposed building addition. ANALYSZS The code states that the zoning code variance cannot be approved unless the board finds the following: a. That spec/a/conditions and circumstances ex/st which are peculiar to the/and, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other/ands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district, b. That the spec/a/conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. c. That granting the variance requested w/Il not confer on the applicant any spec/al privilege that is den/ed by this or~'nance to other/ands, bu#d/ngs, or structures in the same,zoning district. That Iitera/ interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning d/strict under the terms of the ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. e. That the variance granted is the m/n/mum variance that will make possible the reasonable~ use of the /and, building, or structure. That the granting of the variance wi//be//7 harmony w/th the general intent and purpose of this chapter [ordinance] and that such variance will not be injurious to the area invo/ved or otherwise detrimental to the publ/c welfare. Staff conducted the analysis focusing on the applicant's response to the above criteria contained in Exhibit "C"- Marouf Shell Variances, which requires the request be initiated because of special conditions and circumstances that are peculiar to the subject land, structure, or building, which are not the result of the actions of the applicant, and that the request is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure. The subject request has been initiated in preparation for the construction of an addition to the existing gas station business. The applicant desires to build along the rear of the odginal building leaving all mechanical equipment in their existing location, which forces the encroachment into the rear seatback. The stepping back of the addition from the rear of the existing structure to accommodate the mechanical equipment has generated the circumstances. The subject property has been improved with a gas station business, and occupied since 1965. The fact that the applicant has the ability to construct at the appropriate setback line clearly demonstrates that, criteria items "a" and"c" are not met. Further, since the necessity for the variance has been caused by the proposed addition, condition "b" above is also not satisfied. 6360 Staff Report Memorandum No PZ-04-226 Page 4 The overall objective of the Land Development Regulations is to ensure the safety and welfare of the public by providing regulations and standards in which to achieve consistent equitable developments. The proposed addition would be setback approximately ten (:1.0) fee~ from the rear property line, half of the distance required by code. Furthermore, notwithstanding interior layout and design objectives, there currently exists nearly 34 feet of depth to the rear property line when measured from the deepest dimension from the existing rear fac, ade. The expansion could be as deep as 14 feet, and extend over 50 feet in length without encroaching into the rear setback, if the mechanical equipment was relocated. To further support the potential for the expansion to be designed to comply with setbacks, is the existing requirement that it (the proposed addition) be reduced in size in order to comply with the City Commission's condition of approval from the administraUve appeal. The granting of this variance would be an acknowledgement that there exists no alternative in either the structure size or location. CONCLUSI'0NS/RECOHH ENDA'DJON Based on a strict interpretation of the variance criteria, staff recommends that the request for relief from Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.e. (3), requiring a minimum rear yard setback of 20 feet for a gasoline dispensing establishment within the C-3 zoning district, to allow for a variance of 10 feet, and a rear yard setback of 10 feet be denied, due to the lack of hardship, and due to the circumstance being created by the actions of the applicant. Should the subject request be approved, staff is recommending that the addition be limited to a maximum of 600 square feet as prescibed by condiUon of approval for appeal ADAP 02-001. Also, staff recommends that the minimum height of new trees shall be 1,~ feet at the time of installation in order to provide the necessary buffedng along the north, south, and east sides of the project. Any addiUonal conditions of approval added by the Community Redevelopment Agency Board or the City Commission will be placed in the Exhibit "D" - Conditions of Approval. :~ HWP,/elj S:\Planning\$HARED\WP\PP, OJECTS\Gateway Shell fka Texaco\New Shell\Variances (revised 2004)\03-013 8ulld[ng Setback\Staff Report ZNCv' 03-013 Building Setback.doc 6361 Location_Map Gateway EXHIBIT "A" SITE R3 R3 IPUD REC REC 6362 EXHIBIT :'"~': t lhlj~l~'jfl~'i ~JJJJJlJllJJJill ij!lljJjlilJil Iii Iii , 'liili'E'lll! "'"-",",,'"'"'"'"' '"" L.'!,,,., -I I J"'ll.~ 6365 GATEWAY SHELL 23~) N~ ~ H~AY ~ON ~H. ~DA ~ EXHIBIT "B" 6366 ii 6367 il'Il , OATE"VVAY SHI=LL ~ ~ j EXHIBIT "B" NORTHBOUND HIgHwAy NO.~ II 6368 ADDt'tION AND AL'1'J:RA'IION$ 'tO:. BOYTO~ B£AC~'I, F1..O~IDA ~5 Landscape Plan I I EXHIBIT "('" MAROUF SHELL VARIANCES 5126104 Chapter 2, Sec. II Supplemental Regulations L.3. d.(1), (3), (4), Driveways (1/ No driveway shaft be located /ess than One Hundred Ten (110') feet from the intersecting right-of-way lines of public streets. (3) Driveways shaft be located less than thirty (30) feet from any interior property line. (4) Driveways will be limited to one per street frontage. (1) Request a variance from this section of the code as the site has only 140 LF of frontage along N. Federal Highway and 123 LF of frontage on Las Palmas. Therefore it would be impossible for any driveways to be 110' to meet this current code. (3) Due to the fact that this is an existing Gas Station and is onl~ being upgraded for looks, the driveways must stay in their current locations because the traffic patterns i have already been set and cannot be changed. Gasoline Tankers must be able to enter and leave the premises from the existing · driveways. {4) Due to the Gasoline Tankers entering and leaving and the location of the fillers for the tanks, these driveways must remain in their current locations, L.3. e. (3), Rear Setbacks Rear Setbacks are required to be 20' and we are proposing only a 10' rear setback. L.3. e. (a). No Canopy shall be located leSs than 20' from the property line The Canopy is 9.5 feet from the front {west) property line. We are requesting a 10.5 foot variance to allow a 9.5 foot front setback for the existing canopy. L.3. e. (bi. No gasoline pump island shaft be located less than 30' from any property line. 6369 The existing gasoline pump island is 19,8 feet from the front (west) property line. The required front gasoline pump island setback is 30 feet so we are requesting a variance of 10,2 feet from the front property line to allow the 19.8 foot gasoline pump island setback. MAROUF SHELL VARIANC Page 2 EXHIBIT "C" L.3. f. (1) BUFFERS · --A 10' wide landscape buffer shall be located along the street frontage. This buffer shall contain one tree 10' to 15' in height with a minimum 3~ caliper every 30; a continuous hedge 24' high, 24" o/c at time of planting with ilo wering ground co ver. We do not have a landscape buffer along the westerly street frontage (N. Federal Hwy.) so we are requesting a variance of 10 feet from the required 10 foot landscape buffer. The Landscape buffer we are proposing along the south street frontage (Las Palmas) is only 5 feet with a requirement of 10 feet. We are therefore requesting a variance of 5 feet for the 10 foot landscape buffer. We are requesting from the Engineering Department to be allowed to landscape the area between property line and the street. L. 4. b Buffers (Interior Property Lines) (a) A 5' wide landscaped buffer shall be located on all interior property lines. When the buffer separates the property from other commercial property, the buffer shall not be required to contain a concrete wall. Landscaping shall be continuously maintained. ~ la~t~ Land Development Regulations ~~:~ Chapter 21, Article III, Sec. 5. Setbacks. All signs must meet a m/n/mum ten (10) foot setback measured from the property line to the closest surface of the sign. The existing sign is currently 8.5 feet frOm the south property line and 5 feet from the west property line, Therefore we are requesting a 1,5 foot variance for the south setback and a 5 foot variance for the west property lines 6370 EXHIBIT "D" Conditions of Approval Project name: Gateway Shell (fka Gateway Texaco) File number: ZNCV 03-013 Building Setback Reference: DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS- General Comments: None PUBLIC WORKS- Traffic Comments: None UTILITIES Comments: None FIRE Comments: None POLICE Comments: None ENGINEERING DIVISION Comments: None BUILDING DMSION Comments: None PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST Comments: None PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 637 1. If approved, the minimum height of new trees shall be 14 feet at the time of installation in order to provide the necessary buffering along the north, south, Conditions of Approval 2 DEPARTMENTS and east sides of the project. ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD COMMENTS Comments: 2. To be determined. ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION COMMENTS Comments: 3. To be de~rmined. INCLUDE REfECT S:~Plann/ngkSHARED\WPkPROJ'ECTS\Gateway Shell fica TexacokNew Shell\Variances (revised 2004)\034313 Building Setbacl6COA Building setback ZNCV 034313.doc 6372 DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON _BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECTNAME: Gateway Shell APPLICANT'S AGENT: Mr. Beril Kruger / Planning & Zoning Consultants APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: 9 Northeast 6th Street Delray Beach, FL 33444 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: October 19, 2004 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Building Setback - ZNCV 03-013: Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.d.(3) requiring a twenty (20) foot rear setback to allow a 10-foot variance, resulting in a rear setback of 10 feet for a building addition to an existing gasoline dispensing establishment. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: 2360 North Federal Highway Boynton Beach, FL 33435 DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO. 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 Community Redevelopment Agency 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 5. 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. Other 6373 DATED: City Clerk S:~Plannlng\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Gateway Shell ~ka Texaco\New ShelI~ZNCV's Revised\03-013 Building Setback\DO 03-013.doc TO: THRU: FROM: DATE: PRO.1ECT NAME/NO: REQUEST: DEVELOPHENT-BEPARTMENT PLANNI'NG AND ZONI'NG DZVZS1'ON HEMORANDUH NO. PZ 04-227 STAFF REPORT Chairman and Members Community Redevelopment Agency and City Commission Michael W. Rumpf Director of Planning and Zoning Eric Lee Johnson, AICP Planner October 6, 2004 Gateway Shell Variances (fka Gateway Texaco) Canopy and Gasoline pump islands setback variances ZNCV 03-014 and 03-015 Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L. 3.e. (a) requiring that no canopy shall be located less than twenty (20) feet from any property line to allow a 10.5-foot variance, resulting in a distance of 9.5 feet for an existing canopy for a gasoline dispensing establishment; Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, SupplementaFRegulations L.3.e. (b) requiring that no gasoline pump island shall be located less than thirty (30) feet from any property line to allow a 10.2-foot variance, resulting in a distance of 19.8 feet for an existing gasoline pump island for a gasoline dispensing establishment. Property Owner: Applicant/Agent: Location: Existing Land Use/Zoning: Proposed Land Use/Zoning: Proposed Use: Acreage: Adjacent Uses: PROJECT DESCRZP'I'~0N SUAU Enterprises, Incorporated Mr. Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Consultants 2360 N. Federal Highway Boynton Beach, FL Local Retail Commercial (LRC) / Community Commercial (C-3) No change proposed 681 square foot addition to gasoline dispensing establishment (limited to a maximum of 600 square feet by Condition of Approval for appeal - ADAP 02-001% 0.48 Acre (20,830 square feet) 6374 (see Exhibit "A" - Location Map) Staff Report Memorandum No PZ-04-227 Page 2 North: A multi-family residential property, zoned Community Commercial (C-3); South: Right-of-way for Las Palmas Avenue, and farther south are single-family attached townhouses under construction (The Harbors), zoned Infill Planned Unit Development (IPUD); East: Vacant commercial lot zoned Community Commercial (C-3) currently under review for a proposed car wash, and farther east is a single-family residential dwelling (part of Las Palmas development), zoned Single-family residential, (R-l-AA); and West: Rights-of-way of U.S. I and the Florida East Coast Railroad, and farther west developed commercial property classified Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-2). PROPERTY OWNER NOT]:Ft'CA'rZON Owners of properties within 400 feet of the subject conditional use were mailed a notice of this request and its respective hearing dates. The applicant certifies that they posted signage and mailed notices in accordance with Ordinance No. 04-007. BACKGROUND Mr. Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants, agent for SUAU Enterprises, Incorporated is requesting conditional use / major site plan modification approval involving:a series of variance requests in order to construct a 681 square foot building addJUon to an existing gasoline dispensing establishment. The applicant is also proposing new parking spaces, additional landscaping, and a general "make-over" of the exterior facades of the existing building and canopy. However, the number of gasoline pump islands and fueling positions would remain unaltered. The proposed building expansion is being considered for conditional use approval because gasoline dispensing establishments are only allowed as conditional uses in the C-3 zoning district. Also,' it should be noted that this particular gas-station is a legal non-conforming use because it is currently a fully functional, operating, and licensed gas station but does meet the IocaUonal criteria for gas stations as outlined by Chapter 2, Section 11.L.3.a.(2) of the Land Development Regulations. The aforementioned code requires gas stations to be located only on parcels of land located at intersections "consisting of roads of four (4) lanes or wider"; Las Palmas is only two (2) lanes wide. In 2002, Hr. Beril Kruger, acting on behalf of Mr. Zuhair Marouf, expressed a desire to construct a building addition to the existing gas station, in part, to satisfy outstanding code enforcement violations. He also proposed direct access between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east (which was previously earmarked for a mechanical car wash). The direct access was proposed in order to minimize vehicular traffic spilling onto Las Palmas Avenue. Mr. Kruger's Inquiries were based on the presumption that the proposed 681 square foot expansion would be permitted (by right) and that direct access to the abutting lot (to the east) would only require site plan review. However, after careful consideration, staff determined that the building addition would not be permitted (by-right) because it would represent an unlawful expansion of a legal non-conforming use (a gasoline-dispensing establishment). Furthermore, in response to Mr. Kruger's inquiries, on July 16, 2002, the Director of Planning & Zoning issued an administrative determination letter that basically prohibited the applicant from increasing the size of the gas-station building because by doing so, would constitute a violation of Chapter 2, Sections D and G of the Land 6375 Staff Report Memorandum No PZ-04-227 Page 3 Development Regulations. Regarding the direct access between lots, the Director determined that the proposed driveway connection between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east would be permitted subsequent to site plan review. However, the direct access would only be allowed contingent upon the recordation of a legally binding cross-access agreement between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east. On July 31, 2002, Mr. Kruger submitted a formal appeal of the staff's aforementioned administrative determination. According to the applicant, "in summary, the appeal justifies the proposed expansion by the position that retail sales at this business is a separate component from the non-conforming aspect-gasoline sales, which component can therefore be altered / expanded independent of the gasoline sales element of the business". Again, staff disagreed with the applicant's position. However, the City Commission approved the applicant's appeal but with the condiUon that the expansion would be limited to 600 square feet. On June 17, 2003, Mr. Kruger submitted a request for conditional use / major site plan modification approval and its accompanying variances for the construction of the building addition. Both staff and the CRA reviewed the site plan and the variances and recommended approval contingent upon 43 conditions of approval, one of which, limited the building addition to 600 square feet. On October 21, 2003, the City Commission approved their request for conditional use / major site plan modification and the accompanying variances. However, on November 18, 2003, the City Commission rescinded their previous approvals. Most recently, on August 11, 2004, Mr. Kruger re-submitted a revised request for major site plan modification and the accompanying variances. If approved, the construction of the addition, parking lot, and fa(;ade improvements would occur in one (1) phase. It should be noted that the difference between this submittal and the original submittal as described above, is that the proposed car wash on the abutting property (to the east) has been abandoned. As such, the drive aisle that was to connect to the lot to the east has also been eliminated from the design. -'- As part of the major site plan modification process, the site has to meet all the requirements of the Land Development Regulations or obtain relief if necessary. Hr. Bedl Kruger is requesting relief from the above- referenced Land Development Regulations, which directly relate to setbacks of existing structures. The first component of the variance request relates to the existing canopy. The code requires canopies (of gasoline dispensing establishments) to be located no less than twenty (20) feet from any property line. The canopy is only 9.5 feet from the property line so therefore, a 10.5-foot variance would be required. The second component of the variance request deals with the existing gasoline pump islands. The code requires gasoline pump islands be located no less than thirty (30) feet from any property line. The gasoline pump island is only 19.8 feet from the property line so therefore, a 10.2-foot variance would be required as a result of the major site plan modification request. ANALYSZS The code states that the zoning code variance cannot be approved unless the board finds the following: a. That spec/a/conditions and circumstances ex/st which are peculiar to the/and, structure, or bu//ding involved and which are not applicable to other/ands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. b. That the spec/a/conditions and drcumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. That granting the variance requested w/ii not confer on the applicant any spec/a/privilege that den/ed by this ordinance to other/ands, bu//d(ng$, or structures in the same zoning d/strict. 6376 d. That literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights Staff Report Memorandum No PZ-04-227 Page 4 commonly enjoyed by other properties/n 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 /and, building, or structure. That the granting of the variance will be/n harmony with the genera/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 conducted the analysis focusing on the applicant's response to the above criteria contained in Exhibit "C" - Marouf Shell Variances, which requires the request be initiated because of special conditions and circumstances that are peculiar to the subject land, structure, or building, which are not the result of the actions of the applicant, and that the request is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure. The subject request has been initiated in preparation for the construction of an addition to the existing gas station business, The applicant desires to maintain the existing canopy and gasoline pump islands at their current location, which do not conform to current setback requirements. The subject property has been improved with a gas station business, and occupied since 1965. In order to meet minimum setbacks, the canopy and gasoline pump islands would have to be relocated, which may be cost prohibltive or slgnlficanUy impact the business operaUon due to site constraints. Understanding that the structures exist and the subject requests represent the minimum variances that will make reasonable use of an exisUng gasoline dispensing establishment, and will not be injurious to the area, criteria items "e" and "f" appear to be supported by the variance request. : The overall objective of the Land Development Regulations is to insure the welfare and safety of the public by providing regulations and standards in which to achieve consistel~t equitable developments. Staff understands that the proposed requests represent a modest distance to sustain existence of components necessary and integral to the functions of the applicant's business. Although the pump island setback is in part related to life safety, with physical barriers between the pumps and adjacent right-of-way, and modern shut-off equipment/staff cannot measure the decrease, if any, in safety as a result of the pumps beidg approximately 10 feet closer to the right-of-waY than allowed by code. CO NCLUS1'ONS / RECOM MEN DATI'O N Based on the analysis contained herein, Staff recommends that the requested variances be approved. No conditions of approval are recommended; however, any conditions of approval added by the Community Redevelopment Agency Board or the City Commission will be placed in the Exhibit "D" - Conditions of Approval. MWR/MD 6377 S:\Plannlng\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Gateway Shell fka Texaco\New Shell\Variances (revised 2004)\03-014 to 03-015 Canopy & Gasoline\Staff Report ZNCV 03~014 and 03-015 Canopy and gasoline pump Setback,doc 'Locati Gateway ~1~!1 EXHIBIT "A" ¸TE ' R3 IPUD REC. R3 REC 6378 11d I..~1 E)(HIBI I I 6379 I. llll:l~ 1.i11,!:,,:1,,[.,: I.l: -,i I, !u !,' !l~--:.! ii[!I i ':: :' ~J : J~ , , I I I il 6381 GATEYVAY SHELL ~ ".-...~"'0 " BEACH. I:LORIDA 33435 ~..'I~'~--.,~.--..~"'- ~1,~.-- ~ll=~ll~l "~l EXHIBIT "B" JJ!lJjjlJ~JhJj JJ', g J J 6382 ~AMID?: NORTHboUND ADDITION AND ALTERATIONS TO:. 2360 NO~TH F'ED~RAL HIGHWAY ;)OYTOfl BIF. A.C~H, FLORIDA .334~35 Landscape Plan 6383 IVIAROUF SHELL VARIANCES 5/26/04 EXHIBIT Chapter' 2, Sec. II Supplemental Regulations L.3. d. (1), (3), (4), Driveways (~) No driveway shall be located less than One Hundred Ten (110') feet from the intersecting right-of-way lines of public streets. (3) Driveways shaft be located/ess than thirty (30) feet from any interior property I/ne. (4) Driveways will be limited to one per street frontage. (1) Request a variance from this section of the code as the site has only 140 LF of frontage along N. Federal Highway and 123 LF of frontage on Las Palmas. Therefore it would be impossible for any driveways to be 110' to meet this current code. (3) Due to the fact that this is an existing Gas Station and is only/being upgraded for looks, the driveways must stay in their current locations because the traffic patterns ihave already been set and cannot be changed. Gasoline Tankers must be able to enter and leave the premises from the existing driveways. (4) Due to the Gasoline Tankers entering and leaving and the location of the fillers for the tanks, these driveways must remain in their cu,'rent locations. L.3. e. (3), Rear Setbacks Rear Setbacks are required to be 20' and we are proposing only a 10' rear setback. L.3. e. (a). No Canopy shaft be located less than 20' from the property line The Canopy is 9.5 feet from the front (west) property line. We are requesting a 10.5 foot variance to allow a 9.5 foot front setback for the existing canopy. L.3. e. (b). No gasoline pump island shall be located less than 30' frOm any property line. The existing gasoline pump island is 19.8 feet from the front (west) property line. The required front gasoline pump island setback is 30 feet so we are requesting a variance of 10.2 feet from the front property line to allow the 19.8 foot gasoline pump island setback. 6384 MAROUF SHELL VARIANC Page 2 EXHIBIT "C" f. (1) BUFFERS A ~0' w/de landscape buffer shall be located along the street frontage. This buffer shall contain one tree 10' to 15' in height with a minimum 3" caliper every 30', a continuous hedge 24" high, 24' o/c at time of planting with flowering ground cover. We do not have a landscape buffer along the westerly street frontage (N. Federal Hwy.) so we are requesting a variance of 10 feet from the required 10 foot landscape buffer. The Landscape buffer we are proposing along the south street frontage (Las Palmas) is only 5 feet with a requirement of 10 feet. We are therefore requesting a variance of 5 feet for the 10 foot landscape buffer. We are requesting from the Engineering Department to be allowed to landscape the area between property line and the street. L. 4. b Buffers (inter/or Property Lines) (a) lines. When the buffer separates the property from property, the buffer shaft not be required to contain Landscaping shall be continuously maintained. Part III Land Development Regulations ~~ SIGNS Chapter 21, Article III, A 5' wide landscaped buffer shall be located on all interior property other commercial a concrete wall. Sec. 5. Setbacks. All signs must meet a minimum ten (10) foot setback measured from the property line to the closest surface of the sign. The existing sign is currently 8.5 feet from the south property line and 5 feet from the west property line. Therefore We are requesting a 1,5 foot variance for the south setback and a § foot variance for the west property lines 6385 EXHIBIT "D" Conditions of Approval Project name: Gateway Shell (fica Gateway Texaco) File number: Canopy and gasoline pump islands setback ZNCV 03-014 and 03-015 Reference: DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS- General Comments: None PUBLIC WORKS- Traffic Comments: None UTILITIES Comments: None FIRE Comments: None POLICE ,'~ Comments: None ENGINEERING DMSION Comments: None BUILDING DMSION Comments: None PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None FORESTERfENVIRONMENTALIST Comments: None PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: None 6386 ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD COMMENTS Conditions of Approval 2 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT Comments: 1. To be determined. ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION COMMENTS Comments: 2. To be determined. S:~Ianning~SHARED\WP~PROJECTS\Gateway Shell fica Texaco\New Shell\Variances (revised 2004)\03-014 to 03-015 Canopy & Gasoline\COA Canopy and gasoline pump islands setback ZNCV 03-014 and 03-015.doc 6387 O DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: Gateway Shell APPLICANT'S AGENT: Mr. Beril Kruger/Planning & Zoning Consultants APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: 9 Northeast 6th Street Delray Beach, FL 33444 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: October 19, 2004 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Canopy and gasoline pump islands ZNCV 03-014 and ZNCV 03-015 Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.e.(a) requiring that no canopy shall be located less than twenty (20) feet from any property line to allow a 10.5-foot variance, resulting in a distance of 9.5 feet for an existing canopy for a gasoline dispensing establishment; and Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.e.(b) requiring that no gasoline pump island shall be located less than thirty (30) feet from any property line to allow a 10.2-foot variance, resulting in a distance of 19.8 feet for an existing gasoline pump island for a gasoline dispensing establishment. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: 2360 North Federal Highway Boynton Beach, FL 33435 DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO. THIS MATTER came before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Flodda appearing on the Consent Agenda on the date above. The City Commission hereby adopts the findings and recommendation of the Community Redevelopment Agency 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 6388 5. 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. Other -- DATED: City Clerk S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Gateway Shell fka Texaco\New ShelI~.NOV'$ Revlsed\03-0'14 to 03-015 Canopy & Gasoline\DO 03- 014 and 03-0'15.do¢ 6389 TO: THRU: FROM: DATE: PROJECT NAME/NO: REQUEST: DEVELOPM ENTD'EPARTHENT PLANNZNG AND ZONZNG DZVZSZON t4EHORANDUH NO. PZ 04-228 STAFF REPORT Chair and Members Community Redevelopment Agency and City Commission Michael W. Rumpf Director of Planning and Zoning Eric Lee Johnson, AICP Planner October 6, 2004 Gateway Shell Variances (fka Gateway Texaco) Landscape buffers ZNCV 03-016 and 03-017 Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.f. (:L) requiring a ten (10) foot wide landscape buffer along the street frontage and to include one tree ten (10) to fifteen (15) feet in height with a minimum three- inch caliper every forty (40) feet, a conUnuous hedge twenty-four (24) inches high, twenty-four (24) inches on center at time of planUng with flowering groundcover to allow a variance of 10 feet, resulting in a zero (0) landscape buffer along the street frontage for an .. existing gasoline dispensing establishment; Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental RegulaUons L.3.f. (2)(a) requiring a ten (10) foot wide landscape buffer on all interior property lines to allow a variance of eight (8) feet - six (6) inches, resulting in a one (1) foot - six (6) inch buffer for an existing gas dispensing establishment. Property Owner: Applicant/Agent: Location: Existing Land Use/Zoning: Proposed Land Use/Zoning: Proposed Use: PRO.1ECT DESCRZP'I'ZON SUAU Enterprises, :Incorporated Mr. Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Consultants 2360 North Federal Highway Boynton Beach, FL Local Retail Commercial (LRC) / Community Commercial (C-3) No change proposed 6390 681 square foot addition to gasoline dispensing establishment (limited to a maximum of 600 square feet by Condition of Approval for appeal - ADAP 02-001). Staff Report Memorandum No PZ-04-228 Page 2 Acrea ge: 0.48 Acre (20,830 square feet) Adjacent Uses: (see Exhibit "A" - Location Map) North: A multi-family residential property, zoned Community Commercial (C-3); South: Right-of-way for Las Palmas Avenue, and farther south are single-family attached townhouses under construction (The Harbors), zoned Infill Planned Unit Development (IPUD); East: Vacant commercial lot zoned Community Commercial (C-3) currently under review for a proposed carwash, and farther east is a single-family residential dwelling (part of Las Palmas development), zoned Single-family residential, (R-l-AA); and West: Rights-of-way of U.S. :~ and the Florida East Coast Railroad, and farther west developed commercial property classified Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-2). PROPERTY OWNER No'rZFTCA'r'~ON Owners of properties within 400 feet of the subject conditional use were mailed a notice of this request and its respective hearing dates. The applicant certifies that they posted signage and mailed notices in accordance with Ordinance No. 04-007. BACKGROUND Mr. Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning IA Zoning Consultants, agent for SUAU Enterprises, Incorporated is requesting conditional use / major site plan modification approval involving a series of variance requests in order to construct a 681 square foot building addition to an existing gasoline dispensing establishment. The applicant is also proposing new parking spaces, additional landscaping, and a general "make-oVer" of the exterior facades of the existing building and canopy. However, the number of gasoline pump islands and fueling positions would remain unaltered. The proposed building expansion is being considered for conditional use approval because gasoline dispensing establishments are only allowed as conditional uses in the C-3 zoning district. Also, it should be noted that this particular gas-station is a legal non-conforming use because it is currently a fully functional, operating, and licensed gas station but does meet the Iocational criteria for gas stations as outlined by Chapter 2, Section ll.L.3.a.(2) of the Land Development Regulations. The aforementioned code requires gas stations to be located only on parcels of land located at intersections "consisting of roads of four (4) lanes or wider"; Las Palmas is only two (2) lanes wide. In 2002, Mr. Beril Kruger, acting on behalf of Mr. Zuhair Marouf, expressed a desire to construct a building addition to the existing gas station, in part, to satisfy outstanding code enforcement violations. He also proposed direct access between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east (which was previously earmarked for a mechanical car wash). The direct access was proposed in order to minimize vehicular traffic spilling onto Las Palmas Avenue. rvlr. Kruger's inquiries were based on the presumption that the proposed 681 square foot expansion would be permitted (by right) and that direct access to the abutting lot (to the east) would only require site plan review. However, after careful consideration, staff determined that the building addition would not be permitted (by-right) because it would represent an unlawful expansion of a legal non-conforming use (a gasolir~-~jspensing establishment). Furthermore, in response Staff Report Memorandum No PZ-04-228 Page 3 to Mr. Kruger's inquiries, on July 16, 2002, the. Director of Planning & Zoning issued an administrative determination letter that basically prohibited the applicant from Increasing the size of the gas-statJon building because by doing so, would constitute a violation of Chapter 2, Sections D and G of the Land Development Regulations. Regarding the direct access between lots, the Director determined that the proposed driveway connection between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east would be permitted subsequent to site plan review. However, the direct access would only be allowed contingent upon the recordation of a legally binding cross-access agreement between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east. On .luly 31, 2002, Hr. Kruger submitted a formal appeal of the staff's aforemenUoned administrative determinaUon. According to the applicant, "in summary, the appeal justifies the proposed expansion by the position that retail sales at this business is a separate component from the non-conforming aspect-gasoline sales, which component can therefore be altered / expanded independent of the gasoline sales element of the business". Again, staff disagreed with the applicant's position. However, the City Commission approved the applicant's appeal but with the condiUon that the expansion would be limited to 600 square feet. On .~une 17, 2003, Mr. Kruger submitted a request for condiUonal use / major site plan modificaUon approval and its accompanying variances for the construction of the building addition. Both staff and the CRA reviewed the site plan and the variances and recommended approval contingent upon 43 condiUons of approval, one of which, limited the building addition to 600 square feet. On October 21, 2003, the City Commission approved their request for conditional use / major site plan modificaUon and the accompanying variances. However, on November 18, 2003, the City Commission rescinded their previous approvals. Host recently, on August 11, 2004, Mr. Kruger re-submitted a revised request for major site plan modification and the accompanying variances. If approved, the construction of the addition, parking lot, and fa(;ade improvements would occur in one (1) phase, it should be noted that the difference between this submittal and the original submittal as described above, is that the proposed car wash on the abutting lot (to the east) has been abandoned. As such, the drive aisle that was to connect to the lot to the east has also been eliminated from the design. As part of the major site plan modification process, the site has to meet all the requirements of the Land Development Regulations or obtain relief if necessary. Mr. Beril Kruger is requesting r~lief from the above- referenced Land Development Regulations, which directly relate to the landscaping and buffering requirements of gasoline dispensing establishments. The first component of the variance request relates to the required landscape buffers adjacent to rights-of-way. The code requires 10-foot wide landscape buffer adjacent to the roadways for gasoline dispensing establishments. However, the existing site has no landscape buffer along North Federal Highway so therefore, a 10-foot variance would be required. If the 10-foot variance were approved, this would also cover the deficiency in the width of the existing landscape buffer along Las Palmas Avenue. The second component of this variance request deals with required landscape buffers along interior property lines. The code requires a 10-foot wide landscape buffer along the interior property lines. However, the site only provides for a one (1) foot - six (6) inch wide buffer along the north interior property line. Therefore, an eight (8) foot - six (6) inch variance would be required. ANALYS:~S The code states that the zoning code variance cannot be approved unless the board finds the following: a. That spec/a/conditions and circumstances ex/st which are peculiar to the/and, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other/and& structures or bu//d/n.qs in the same zoning district. 6392 b. That the spec/a/conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. Staff Report Memorandum No PZ-04-228 Page 4 c. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any spec/a/privilege that/s den/ed by this ordinance to other/ands, buildings, or structures/n the same zoning d/strict, That literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other propert/es /n the same zoning d/strict under the terms of the ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. e. That the variance granted/s the m/n/mum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the /and, building, or structure. f. That the granting of the variance will be/n harmony w/th the genera/intent and purpose of this chapter [ordinance] and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the pub/lc we/fare. Staff has conducted this analysis with the assumption that, based on the city's prior approval of the administrative appeal acknowledging the increase in intensity of this non-conforming use, that the city is aware of the potential of certain hardships and non-conformities associated with the site, Staff has focused this review based on the applicant's response to the above criteria contained in Exhibit"C" - Marouf Shell Variances, which requires the request be initiated because of special conditions and circumstances that are peculiar to the subject land, structure, or building, which are not the result of the actions of the applicant, and that the request is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure. The subject request has been iniUated in preparation for the construction of an addition to the existing gas station business. The applicant desires relief from the required landscape buffer along the front (North Federal Highway) and the interior (north) property lines of the subject property, since they do not exist on the already confined site. The subject property has been. improved with a gas station business, and occupied since 1965. In order to meet the landscape buffer as required by code, the applicant would need additional linear footage along North Federal Highway or to eliminate the existing first two (2) gasoline pump islands. This scenario would likely be cost prohibitive or significantly impact business operation. Understanding that site layout is existing and cannot easily be altered without significant impacts to the business operation, the requests represent the minimum variances that will make reasonable use of an existing gasoline dispensing establishment and will not be injurious to the area. Therefore, criteria items"e" and "f" appear to be supported by the variance request. The overall objective of the Land Development Regulations is to ensure the welfare and safety of the public by providing regulations and standards to achieve consistent equitable developments. The intent of the landscape buffer is to visually screen the vehicular use from the adjacent properties and right-of-way. 6392 Staff Report Memorandum No PZ-04-228 Page 5 CONCLUSZONS / RECOMMENDATZON Based on the analysis contained herein, Staff recommends that the requested variances be approved subject to the following conditions: :[. Provide a substitute form of screening of the site along North Federal Highway where possible such as planter pots or boxes; and 2. Staff recommends installing the Ixora "Nora" grant shrubs at 36 inches in height along Las Palmas Avenue at the time of installation. However, any additional conditions of approval added by the Community Redevelopment Agency Board or the City Commission will be placed in the Exhibit "D"- Conditions of Approval. MWR/EI_3 S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PRO3ECTS\Gateway Shell fka Texaco\New ShellWarlances (revised 2004)\03-016 to 03-017 Landscape\Staff Report ZNCV 03-016 and 03-017 Landscape buffers.doc 6394 ~ LoG~a~twi~O~ P EXHIBIT "A" SITE ' R3 R3 IPUD REC- REC 6395 IIi! q -- , Iii i ~ NOrTHbOuND Uo So HI(~HWA y EXHIBIT "B" NO. 1 IVIAROUF SHELL VARIANCES 5/26/04 Chapter 2, Sec, II Supplemental Regulations L.3. d.(l), (3/, (4), Driveways (1) No driveway shaft be located /ess than One Hundred Ten (~10') feet from the intersecting right-of-way lines of public streets. (3) Driveways shall be located less than thirty (30) feet from any interior property line. (4) Driveways will be limited to one per street frontage. (1) Request a variance from this section of the code as the site has only 140 LF of frontage along N. Federal Highway and 123 LF of frontage on Las Palmas. Therefore it would be impossible for any driveways to be 110' to meet this current code. (3) Due to the fact that this is an existing Gas Station and is only being upgraded for looks, the driveways must stay in their current locations because the traffic patterns lhave already been set and cannot be changed. Gasoline Tankers must be able to enter and leave the premises from the existing driveways. (4) Due to the Gasoline Tankers entering and leaving and the location of the fillers for the tanks, these driveways must remain in their current locations. L.3. e. (3), Rear Setbacks Rear Setbacks are required to be 20' and we are proposing only a 10' rear setback. L. 3. e. (al. No Canopy shall be located /ess than 20' from the property line The Canopy is 9.5 feet from the front (west) property line. We are requesting a 10.5 foot variance to allow a 9.5 foot front setback for the existing canopy. L.3. e. (b). No gasoline pump island shall be located less than 30' from any property fine. The existing gasoline pump island is 19.8 feet from the front (west} property line. The required front gasoline pump island setback is 30 feet so we are requesting a variance of 10.2 feet from the front property line to allow the 19.8 foot gasoline pump island setback. 6399 MAROUF SHELL VARIANC Page 2 EXHIBIT "C" L.3. f. (1) BUFFERS A 10' w/de landscape buffer shall be located along the street frontage. This buffer shall contain one tree 10' to 15' in height with a m/n/mum 3" caliper every 30', a continuous hedge 24" high, 24" o/c at time of planting with flowering ground cover. We do not have a landscape buffer along the westerly street frontage (N. Federal Hwy.) so we are requesting a variance of 10 feet from the required 10 foot landscape buffer. The Landscape buffer we are proposing along the south street frontage (Las Palmas) is only 5 feet with a requirement of 10 feet. We are therefore requesting a variance of 5 feet for the 10 foot landscape buffer. We are requesting from the Engineering Department to be allowed to landscape the area between property line and the street. L.4. b Buffers (Interior Property Lines) (a) lines. When the buffer separates the property from property, the buffer shall not be required to contain Landscaping shall be continuously maintained. Partlll LandDevelopmentRegulations SIGNS Chapter 21, Article III, Sec. 5. Setbacks. All signs must meet a m/n/mum ten (10) foot setback measured from the property//ne to the closest surface of the sign. A 5' wide landscaped buffer shall be located on all interior property other commercial a concrete wall. The existing sign is currently 8.5 feet from the south property line and 5 feet from the west property line. Therefore we are requesting a 1.5 foot variance for the south setback and a 5 foot variance for the west property lines 6400 EXHIBIT "D" Conditions of Approval Project name: Gateway Shell (fka Gateway Texaco) File number: Landscape buffers ZNCV 03-016 and 03-017 Reference: DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS- General Comments: None PUBLIC WORKS- Traffic Comments: None UTILITIES Comments: None FIRE Comments: None POLICE : Comments: None ENGINEERING DMSION Comments: None BUILDING DIVISION Comments: None PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST Comments: None PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 6401 1. Providing a substitute form of screening of the site along North Federal tlighwa7 where possible such as planter pots or boxes. Conditions of Approval 2 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT 2. Staff recommends installing the Ixora '~Nora" grant at 36 inches in height along Las Palmas Avenue at the time of installation. ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD COMMENTS Comments: 3. To be determined. ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS Comments: 4. To be determined. S:~PlanningXSHARED\WP~PROJECTS\Gateway Shell fka TexacohNew ShellWariances (revised 2004)\03-016 to 03-017 Landscape\COA Landscape buffers ZNCV 03-016 and 03-017.doc 6402 DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: Gateway Shell APPLICANT'S AGENT: Mr. Beril Kruger / Planning & Zoning Consultants APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: 9 Northeast 6th Street Delray Beach, FL 33444 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: October 19, 2004 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Landscape buffers ZNCV 03-016 and ZNCV 03-017 Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations L.3.f.(1) requiring a ten (10) foot wide landscape buffer along the street frontage and to include one tree ten (10) to fifteen (15) feet in height with a minimum three-inch caliper every forty (40) feet, a continuous hedge twenty-four (24) inches high, twenty-four (24) inches on center at time of planting with flowering groundcover to allow a variance of 10 feet, resulting in a zero (0) foot wide landscape buffer along the street frontage for an existing gasoline dispensing establishment; and Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 11, Supplemental Regulations b3.f.(2)(a) requiring a ten (10) foot wide landscape buffer on all interior property lines to allow a variance of 8.5 feet, resulting in a 1.5 foot wide buffer for an existing gas dispensing establishment. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: 2360 North Federal Highway Boynton Beach, FL 33435 DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO. 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 Community Redevelopment Agency 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". 6403 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. Other DATED: City Clerk S:~Iannlng\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Gateway Shell t'ka Texaco\New ShelI~ZNCV's Revised\03-016 to 03-017 Landscape\DO 03-016 and 03-017.doc 6404 TO: TH RU: FRO M: DATE: PROJECT NAME/NO: REQUEST: DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNTNG AND ZON~'NG D[~VZSZON MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 04-229 STAFF REPORT Chair and Members Community Redevelopment Agency and City Commission Michael W. Rumpf Director of Planning and Zoning Eric Lee Johnson, AICP ~J/ Planner October 6, 2004 Gateway Shell Variances (fka Gateway Texaco) Sign setback ZNCV 03-023 Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 21, Signs, Article III. Section 5 requiring all signs must meet a minimum ten (10) foot setback from the property line to the closest surface of the sign to allow a five (5) foot variance from the property line, resulting in five (5) foot setback for an existing gasoline dispensing establishment. Property Owner: Applicant/Agent: Location: Existing Land Use/Zoning: Proposed Land Use/Zoning: Proposed Use: Acreage: Adjacent Uses: North: South: PROJECT DESCR,I:PT]:ON '" SUAU Enterprises, Incorporated Mr. Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Consultants 2360 North Federal Highway Boynton Beach, FL Local Retail CommerdaJ (LRC) / Community Commercial (C-3)/ No change proposed 681 square foot addition to gasoline dispensing establishment (limited to a maximum of 600 square feet by Condition of Approval for appeal -ADAP 02- OO1). 0.48 Acre (20,830 square feet) (see Exhibit "A" - Location Map) A multi-family residential property, zoned Community Commercial (C-3); Right-of-way for Las Palmas Avenue, and farther south are single-family attached townhouses under construction (The Harbors), zoned Infill Planned Unit Development Staff Report Memorandum No PZ-04-229 Page 2 (IPUD); East: Vacant commercial lot zoned Community Commercial (C-3) currently under review for a proposed car wash, and farther east is a single-family residential dwelling (part of Las Palmas development), zoned Single-family residential, (R-l-AA); and West: Rights-of-way of U.S. 1 and the Florida East Coast Railroad, and farther west developed commercial property classified Local Retail Commercial (LRC) and zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-2). PROPERTY OWNER NOTZF'rCATZON Owners of properties within 400 feet of the subject conditional use were mailed a notice of this request and its respective hearing dates. The applicant certifies that they posted signage and mailed notices in accordance with Ordinance No. 04-007. BACKGROUND Mr. Beril Kruger of Beril Kruger Planning & Zoning Consultants, agent for SUAU Enterprises, Incorporated is requesting conditional use / major site plan modification approval involving a series of variance requests in order to construct a 681 square foot building addition to an existing gasoline dispensing establishment. The applicant is also proposing new parking spaces, additional landscaping, and a general "make-over" of the exterior facades of the existing building and canopy. However, the number of gasoline pump islands and fueling positions would remain unaltered. ,: The proposed building expansion is being considered for cOnditional use approval because gasoline dispensing establishments are only allowed as conditional uses in the C-3 zoning district. Also, it should be noted that this particular gas-station is a legal non-conforming use because it is currently a fully functional, operating, and licensed gas station but does meet the Iocational criteria for gas stations as outlined by Chapter 2, Section 11. L.3.a.(2) of the Land Development Regulations. The aforementioned code requires gas stations to be located only on 'parcels of land located at intersections "consisting of roads of four (4) lanes or wider"; Las Palmas is only two (2) lanes wide. In 2002, Mr. Beril Kruger, acting on behalf of Mr. Zuhair Marouf, expressed a desire to construct a building addition to the existing gas station, in part, to satisfy outstanding code enforcement violations. He also proposed direct access between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east (which was previously earmarked for a mechanical car wash). The direct access was proposed in order to minimize vehicular traffic spilling onto Las Palmas Avenue. Mr. Kruger's inquiries were based on the presumption that the proposed 681 square foot expansion would be permitted (by right) and that direct access to the abutting lot (to the east) would only require site plan review. However, after careful consideration, staff determined that the building addition would not be permitted (by-right) because it would represent an unlawful expansion of a legal non-conforming use (a gasoline-dispensing establishment). Furthermore, in response to Mr. Kruger's inquiries, on ,luly :1.6, 2002, the Director of Planning & Zoning issued an administrative determination letter that basically prohibited the applicant from increasing the size of the gas-station building because by doing so, would constitute a violation of Chapter 2, Sections D and G of the Land Development Regulations. Regarding the direct access between lots, the Director determined that the proposed driveway connection between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east would be permitted subsequent to site plan review. However, the direct access would only be allowed contingent upon the recordation of a legally binding cross- Staff Report Memorandum No PZ-04-229 Page 3 access agreement between the subject lot and the lot directly to the east. On July 31, 2002, Mr. Kruger submitted a formal appeal of the staff's aforementioned administrative determination. According to the applicant, "in summary, the appeal justifies the proposed expansion by the position that retail sales at this business is a separate component from the non-conforming aspect-gasoline sales, which component can therefore be altered / expanded independent of the gasoline sales element of the business". Again, staff disagreed with the applicant's position. However, the City Commission approved the applicant's appeal but with the condition that the expansion would be limited to 600 square feet. On June 17, 2003, Mr. Kruger submitted a request for conditional use / major site plan modificaUon approval and its accompanying variances for the construction of the building addiUon. Both staff and the CRA reviewed the site plan and the variances and recommended approval contingent upon 43 conditions of approval, one of which, limited the building addition to 600 square feet. On October 2:[, 2003, the City Commission approved their request for conditional use / major site plan modification and the accompanying variances. However, on November 18, 2003, the City Commission rescinded their previous approvals. Host recently, on August 11, 2004, Mr. Kruger re-submitted a revised request for major site plan modification and the accompanying variances. :if approved, the construction of the addition, parking lot, and facade improvements would occur in one (1) phase. :it should be noted that the difference between this submittal and the original submittal as described above, is that the proposed car wash on the abutting lot (to the east) has been abandoned. As such, the drive aisle that was to connect to the lot to the east has also been eliminated from the design. As part of the major site plan modification process, the site has to meet all the requirements of the Land Development Regulations or obtain relief if necessary. Mr. Beril Kruger is requesUng relief from the above- referenced Land Development RegulaUOns, which requires all outdoor frees~nding signs be setback at least 10 feet from the property line. The existing pole sign is located five (5) feet from the property line (adjacent to the right-of-way) so therefore, a five (5) foot variance would be required. ANALYSTS The code states that the zoning code variance cannot be approved unless the board finds the following: That special conditions and circumstances ex/st which are peculiar to the/and, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. 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 d/st#ct. That literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properS'es in the same zoning d/strict under the terms of the ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. e, That the variance granted is the m/n/mum variance that will make poss/b/e the reasonable use of the /and, building, or structure. Staff Report Memorandum No PZ-04-229 Page 4. /. That the granting of the variance w/ii be/n harmony w/th the genera/intent and purpose of this chapter [ord/nance] and that such var/ance will not be/njur/ous to the area involved or otherwise detr/mental to the pub/lc welfare. Staff has conducted this analysis with the assumption that based on the city's prior approval of the administrative appeal regarding the increase in intensity of this non-conforming use, that the city has acknowledged the potential for revealing certain hardships and non-conformities to the site. Also, the analysis focused on the applicant's response to the above criteria contained in Exhlbit"C"- Marouf Shell Variances, which requires that the request is to be initiated because of special conditions and circumstances that are peculiar to the subject land, structure, or building, which are not the result of the actions of the applicant, and that the request is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the structure. The subject request has been initiated in preparation for the construction of an addition to the existing gas station business, which represents a major site plan modification. Through this process, every aspect of the project Is reviewed for compliance, and if a requirement cannot be met, relief from the code may be required. As such, the applicant desires to maintain the freestanding sign at its existing location. The subject property has been improved with a gas station business and occupied since 1965. Staff reviewed the site and determined that the request for a sign setback variance of five (5) feet may not represent the minimum variance necessary to maintain the site sign on the property. Staff acknowledged that the applicant could meet the sign setback as required by code. The sign can be moved an additional five (5) feet to the east and two (2) feet to the north while maintaining the same orientation without interfering with the vehicular use area for the station. This scenario would meet both the code and maintain the same visibility for the applicant's business. Understanding that the subject request does not repre~., nt the minimum variance that will make reasonable use of the structure, criteria item "e" is not met. it should be noted that if the sign were moved from its current location, then the entire structure would have to comply with current code. The code now requires that all outdoor freestanding signs be of the "monument" style as defined by the Land Development Regulations. This would translate to an eight (8) foot tall monument sign. The overall objective of the Land Development Regulations is to ensure the welfare and safety of the public by providing regulations and standards in which to achieve consistent equitable developments. The intent of the sign setback is to provide reasonable visibility for a sign without interfering with visibility along a right-of-way. CONCLUS'rONS/RECOMMENDAT]:ON Based on the analysis contained herein, staff recommends that the requested variance be denied, due to the lack of hardship, and due to the avoidable circumstance being created by the actions of the applicant. However, if approved any conditions of approval added by the Community Redevelopment Agency Board or the City Commission will be placed in the Exhibit "D" - Conditions of Approval. MD/EU S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PRO.1ECTS\Gateway SheJI fka Texaco\New Shell\Vaflances (revised 2004)\03-023 Sign Setback\Staff Report ZNCV 03- 023 Sign setback, doc ~' Locat~p "~ EXHIBIT "A" Ga~®way' ~- _SITE ' R3 ~% IPUD REC* R3 REC ~ ~3.76° EX:HIBIT "B" Shell'LoGo AND LE'T['ERING - EXISTING SIGN. AGE "Food Mart" IDENTIFICATION- EXISTING 81GNAGE "Gasoline" PRICE INDEX- EXISTING 81GNAGE PRICE INDEX- EXISTING 81GNAGE EXISTING GRADE EXISTING SiGNAGE WI PI~oPOSED ADDITION 114 $C. GATEWAY Shell 2360 NORTH FEDERAL HIGHWAY BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 33435 : l"/,~ll:ll I : I MAROUF SHELL VARIANCES 5/26/04 Chapter' 2, Sec. II Supplemental Regulations L.3. d.(l), (3/, (4), Driveways (1) No driveway shall be located less than One Hundred Ten (110') feet from the intersecting right-of-way lines of public streets. (3) Driveways shall be located less than thirty (30) feet from any interior property line. (4) Driveways wi//be limited to one per street frontage. (1) Request a variance from this section of the code as the site has only 140 LF of frontage along N. Federal Highway and 123 LF of frontage on Las Paimas, Therefore it would be impossible for any driveways to be 110' to meet this current code. (3) Due to the fact that this is an existing Gas Station and is only being upgraded for looks, the driveways must stay in their current locations because the traffic patterns [have already been set and cannot be changed. Gasoline Tankers must be able to enter and leave the premises from the existing driveways. (4) Due to the Gasoline Tankers entering and leaving and the location of the fillers for the tanks, these driVeways must remain in their cu~'~ent locations. L.3. e. (3), Rear Setbacks Rear Setbacks are required to be 20' and we are proposing only a 10' rear setback. L.3. e. (a). No Canopy shall be located less than 20' from the property line The Canopy is 9.5 feet from the front (west) property line. We are requesting a 10.5 foot variance to allow a 9.5 foot front setback for the existing canopy. L.3. e. (b). No gasoline 'pump is/and shall be located less than 30' from any property l/ne. The existing gasoline pump island is 19.8 feet from the front (west) property line. The required front gasoline pump island setback is 30 feet so we are requesting a variance of 10.2 feet from the front property line to allow the 19.8 foot gasoline pump island setback. MAROUF SHELL VARIANC Page 2 EXHIBIT "C" L.3. f. (1) BUFFERS .: A 10' wide landscape buffer shall be located along the street frontage. This buffer shall contain one tree 10' to 15' in height with a m/n/mum 3" cai/per every 30; a continuous hedge 24" high, 24" o/c at time of planting with flowering ground cover. We do not have a landscape buffer along the westerly street frontage (N, Federal Hwy.) so we are requesting a variance of 10 feet from the required 10. foot landscape buffer, The Landscape buffer we are proposing along the south street frontage (Las Palmas) is only 5 feet with a requirement of 10 feet, We are therefore requesting a variance of 5 feet for the 10 foot landscape buffer, We are requesting from the Engineering Department to be allowed to landscape the area between property line and the street, 1. 4.b Buffers (Interior Property Lines) lines. When the buffer separates the property from property, the buffer shall not be required to contain Landscaping shall be continuously maintained. Part III Land Development Regulations SIGNS Chapter 21, Article III, A 5' wide landscaped buffer shall be located on all interior property other commercial a concrete wall. Sec. 5. Setbacks. All signs must meet a minimum ten (I0) foot setback measured from the property line to the closest surface of the sign. The existing sign 'is currently 8,5 feet from the south property line and 5 feet from the west property line., Therefore we are requesting a 1,5 foot varianCe for the south setback and a 5 foot variance for the west property lines EXHIBIT "D" Conditions of Approval Project name: Gateway Shell (fica Gateway Texaco) File number: Sign setback ZNCV 03-023 Reference: DEPARTMENTS 12qCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS- General Comments: None PUBLIC WORKS- Traffic Comments: None UTILITIES Comments: None FIRE Comments: None POLICE ~ '- Comments: None ENGINEERING DMSION Comments: None BUILDING DMSION Comments: None PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST Comments: None PLANNING AND ZONING Coraraents: None ADDITIONAL COM34I~ITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD COMMENTS Conditions of Approval 2 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT Comments: 1. To be determined. ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION COMMENTS Comments: 2. To be determined. S:kPIanningkSHARED\WPkPKOJECTS\Gateway Shell fica Texacok.New Shell\Variances (revised 2004)\03-023 Sign Setback~COA Sign setback ZNCV 03- 023 ,doc DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON _BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: Gateway Shell APPLICANT'S AGENT: Mr. Beril Kruger / Planning & Zoning Consultants APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: 9 Northeast 6th Street Delray Beach, FL 33444 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: October 19, 2004 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Sign setback ZNCV 03-023: Relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 21, Signs, Article III, Section 5 requiring all signs must meet a minimum ten (10) foot setback from the property line to the closest surface of the sign to allow a five (5) foot variance from the property line, resulting in five (5) foot setback for an existing gasoline dispensing establishment. LOCATION OF PROPERTY: 2360 North Federal Highway Boynton Beach, FL 33435 DP, AWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO. 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 Community Redevelopment Agency 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. Other DATED: City Clerk S'.~Plannlng\SHARED\WP~PROJECTS\Gateway Shell fka Texaco\New ShelI~ZNCV's Revised\03-023 Sign Setback~DO 03-023.doc TO: TH RU: FROM: DATE: PROJECT: REQUEST: DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZOR1NG DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 04-234 Chair and Members Community Redevelopment Agency Michael Rumpf ~~-'~ Director of Planning and Zoning Ed Breese Principal Planner September 24, 2004 Sunbelt Hydraulics / SPTE 04-008 Site Plan Time Extension Property Owner: Applicant/Agent: Location: Existing Land Use / Zoning: Proposed Land Use/Zoning: Proposed Use: Acreage: Adjacent Uses: North: South: East: West:' PRO3ECT DESCI~I:P'II:ON C & C Realty Investments Mr. Joseph F. Houston with Kerns Construction, Inc. Lot 9 of Boynton Beach Industrial Park North (see Exhibit "A"- Location Map) Industrial (I) / Industrial (M-l) No change proposed A one (1)-story, 12,480 square foot industrial building with related parking for a business that services truck bodies 1.44 acres (62,730 square feet) Developed industrial property (Dock & Deck Lumber Company) with an Industrial (I) land use designation, zoned Industrial (M-l); Developed industrial property (Vermeer Southeast Sales) with an Industrial (I) land use designation, zoned Industrial (M-l) Right-of-way for C.S.X. Railroad, then farther east is right-of-way for Interstate 95; and Right-of-way for West Industrial Avenue, then farther west are single-family homes with a Low Density Residential (LDR) land use designation, zoned Single-family Residential (R-l-A). 6406 Page 2 Memorandum No. PZ 04-234 BACKGROUND Mr..]oseph Houston of Kerns Construction, agent for Sunbelt Hydraulics and C & C Realty Investments is requesting a second, one (::[)-year time extension on the new site plan approval (NWSP 02-008) originally granted on August 6, 2002. A previous one (1)-year site plan time extension was granted on October 21, 2003. According to the original site plan staff report (Memorandum PZ 02-:[28), the subject site was pre-cleared and predominately vegetated with a variety of overgrown grasses. There is no other vegetation of any significance on-site. The subject property is surrounded by other industrial uses, and zoned M-I. The north property line is partially screened by a chain link and wooden fence. The project was approved for a :[2,480 square foot building. The proposed business, Sunbelt Hydraulics, would be engaged in the installation and maintenance of (garbage) truck bodies and the repair of their seals, hoses, and hydraulic systems. The required parking was based on the ratio of one (1) space per 500 square feet of gross floor area. The site plan was approved for one (:L) point of ingress / egress off of West Industrial Avenue. This driveway was to be located at the southwest corner of the site. The intent was for Sunbelt Hydraulics to share this driveway with the property to the south. The property to the south, Vermeer Southeast Sales (NWSP 02-0:1.3), was approved on lots 6, 7, and 8 of Boynton Beach Industrial Park North for the construction of a 14,222 square foot building. Vermeer Southeast Sales is a business that services and sells construction machinery. Both Sunbelt Hydraulics and Vermeer Southeast Sales would share the driveway that is proposed on West Industrial Avenue. If this second request for site plan extension for Sunbelt Hydraulics were approved, the expiration date of Sunbelt Hydraulics' site plan would be extended to August 6, 2005. ANALYSTS On August 6, 2002, the City Commission granted site plan approval for the above referenced project. At that time, Palm Beach County Traffic Division's Traffic Performance Standards Review was approved with a build-out year of 2002. In conjunction with the review of-the first site' plan time extension (SPTE 03- 003), Palm Beach County Traffic Division extended the build-out date to 2004. The applicant would be required to submit a revised traffic impact statement as a condition of this request for site plan time extension, since the build-out date of 2004 would expire prior to project completion. Additionally, the 24 conditions of approval for the original project would still apply with this request for site plan time extension. According to Chapter 4, Section 5 of the Land Development Regulations, "the applicant shall have one year to secure a building permit from the Development Department". It states further that the City Commission may extend the approval for one (1) year provided that the applicant has filed a request for a time extension pdor to the expiration of the original approval. In this case, the applicant has met the requirement. The Planning & Zoning Division received the application for this site plan time extension on 3uly :[2, 2004, prior to the expiration date. On February 20, 2003, the applicant submitted drawings (Permit #03-0553) for the building and irrigation well {Permit #03-1452). Building Division staff reviewed the permit application and prepared comments to the applicant. A request for a time extension for the building permit application was submitted on August 6, 2003 and was set to expire on November 4, 2003, unless the site plan time extension was approved (which it was on October 21, 2003). 6407 Page 3 Memorandum No. PZ 04-234 In the initial site plan time extension request, the applicant stated in their site plan extension application that, "the budget for the project was reviewed and adjusted to reflect changes incorporated during the approval process and necessitated by existing site conditions. As a result of some of these changes, the adjustments to the budget impacted the project to the extent that the financial viability of the project became questionable. As a result, the owner found it necessary to suspend the project until he was able to work out the necessary financing". The request for a second site plan time extension was initiated due to the fact that a major customer of Sunbelt Hydraulics opted to re-bid their service contract. Without this client, the project became economically unfeasible. According to the applicant, once this issue was resolved, construction costs associated with the metal building had significantly increased. As a result, the building was re-engineered and was submitted into the permit review process on 3une 30m of this year. A permit was not issued by their deadline, thus necessltaUng the site plan time extension request and approval. The review did however indicate that a minor site plan modification would be required should the Ume extension be granted. RECOMMENDA'r~ON Staff recommends approval of this request for a one (1)-year time extension of the site plan approval (NWSP 04-008). This recommendation is based on the "good faith" effort shown to build the project (while in the permitting process), subject to the submission of an updated traffic impact statement approved by Palm Beach County and all previous conditions of approval. Furthermore, no changes have been made to the Land Development Regulations that would impact this project since it was approved in 2.002. Approval of this request for site plan extension would extend the project's expiration date to August 6, 2005. -- As previously noted, all conditions of approval included in the initial development order must sUII be satisfactorily addressed during the building permit process. Any new conditions of approval recommended by the Board or required by the City Commission will be placed in Exhibit "C" - Conditions of Approval. Staff would not support any further requests for site plan time extension, if so requested, due to the upcoming rewrite of the Land Development Regulations. The site plan would be required to meet all new regulations at that time. S:".Planning\Shared\WpWroJectsgSunbel! Hydraullcs\SPTE 04-O08\Staff Report.doc 6408 Location Map Sunbelt Hydraulics EXHIBIT "A" aw O 40Q 0 4~3Q 800 1200 1600 Feet PU 6409 CONSTRUCTION, INC. .,-*..'-~.~.--.~ ...... '.' · . · JUL I 2 200¢ F'i ' July 7, 2004 City of Boynton Beach Office of Planning and Zoning Attn: Ed Breese 100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd. Boynton Beach, FL 33425 ;~--/,~: /- .... 2004 ~i;t :i JU " I~F_:_[-'A ~,~ TM6,'~IT OF'- DEVELOPM~ Re: Sunbelt Hydraulics Th~ "si'te plan-a¢l~toval ~fer:;the above, referenced.pr, oject-i_.s, scheduled to expire on ,~'~'b~t.-'"~¢r2004. The plans for this project are currently being reviewed for i~-~of a':bdiEling permit. The project was delayed because a major customer of our client opted to re-bid contracts with all his suppliers and the loss of this customer would have made it irnFOssible 'to go'forward with the project. When this uncertainty was resolved and the decision was made to go forward, metal building costs had undergone t§~ staggering increases imposed at the beginning of the year. Because of this, it'-was opted to re'engineer the building for construction using tilt-up techniques. Because of designer backlogs, plans were not finalized until mid-June and were tl~'en submitted for reView. The review process had been put on an overtime basis. Should the permit not issue before the August 6 expiration date, a one-year extension of the site plan approval is requested. Enclosed, please find a check in the amount of $400.00 to cover the applicable tee. '~ t!uly yours, As'Agent for Sur~belt Hydraulics'(C&C Realty Investments) ' _,¢/~ 5 FI_OI:::II ~A 33407 · FAX 561-835-9485 P.O. BOX 81 46 2720 WINDSOR AVENUE · WEST PALM BEACH, 561 -835-0963 EXHIBIT "C" Conditions of Approval Project name: Sunbelt Hydraulics File number: SPTE 04-008 Reference: Application received July 12, 2004 PUBLIC WORKS Comments: None X UTILITIES Comments: None X FIRE Comments: None X POLICE Comments: None X ENGINEERING DIVISION Comments: None X BUILDING DMSlON Comments: None X PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None X FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST Comments: None X PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: X 1. Provide an approval letter from Palm Beach County Traffic Division for traffic concurrency, which extends the build-out date beTond 2004. ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Comments: 2. To be determined. ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION COMMENTS Comments: 3. To be determined. SAPhuminsLShare~WpkVrojects~unbelt Hydraulics~PT~ 04-008\COA.doc 6411 DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON B_EACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: Sunbelt Hydraulics APPLICANT'S AGENT: Joseph Houston, Kerns Construction, Inc. APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: 2720 Windsor Avenue, West Palm Beach, FL 33407 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: October 19, 2004 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Site Plan Time Extension LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Lot 9 West Industrial Avenue 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 Community Redevelopment Agency 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 headng 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 Applican_t 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 5. This Order shall take effect immediately upon issuance by the City Clerk. o All further development on the property shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of this order. 7. Other 6412 DATED: City Clerk J:\SHRDATA\Planning\SHARED\WP\FORMS\Blanks forms folder\Develop. Order Form-2001- Revised .doc TO: THRU: FRO M: DATE: PRO3ECT: REQUEST: DEVELOPMENT D_~EPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 04-235 Chair and Hembers Community Redevelopment Agency Michael Rumpf~~ Director of Planning and Zoning Ed Breese ~ Principal Planner September 29, 2004 Marina Townhomes / SPTE 04-007 Site Plan/Conditional Use '~me Extension Property Owner: Applicant/Agent: Location: Existing Land Use/Zoning: Proposed Land Use/Zoning: Proposed Use: Acreage: Adjacent Uses: North: South: East: PROJECT DESCR/PTZON TRG - Boynton Beach, Ltd. Bonnie Miskel of Ruden McClosky 743 NE :[st Avenue (see Exhibit "A" - Location Map) Mixed-Use (MU) / Mixed-Use High (MU-H) No change proposed Townhouses 26,076 square feet / (0.60-acre) Right-of-way for Boynton Beach Boulevard and farther north city lift station and undeveloped land occupied by mangroves zoned Central Business District (CBD); Right-of-way for Ocean Avenue and farther south is developed commercial (Ocean Plaza shopping center), zoned Central Business District (CBD); Right-of-way for Northeast 6th Street (aik, a Marina Drive) and the [ntracoastal Waterway; and West: Developed. commercial property (First Financial Plaza), zoned Central Business District (CBD). BACKGROUND 6413 Ms. Bonnie Miskel, agent for TRG - Boynton Beach, Ltd. is requesting a one (:[)-year time extension, for the site plan and conditional use approval (COUS 03-003) originally granted on July :[5, 2003. The property, zoned Mixed Use High (MU-H), is a part of the larger Marina Project, which is currently under Page 2 Memorandum No. PZ 04-235 construction. The intent of the project is to construct eleven (11) townhomes on a parcel approxlmatel: 0.60 acre in size. If this request for extension were approved, the expiration date of this site plan, including concurrency certification would be extended to ]uly 15, 2005. The eleven (11) townhomes would be contained in two (2) buildings, one containing (6) units and the other containing five (5) units, and would be located on the south edge of the north marina. The townhomes would be three (3) stories with garage parking. Each unit is a two-bedroom model, ranging in square footage from 1,542 to 1,658 square feet. ANALYS'rS On .luly 15, 2003, the City Commission granted conditional use approval for the above-referenced project, which was subject to 15 conditions. All project conditions of approval pertaining to the conditional use would still apply. Palm Beach County Traffic Division has previously approved the project for traffic concurrency with a build-out date of 2005. According to Chapter 4, Section 5 of the Land Development Regulations, "the applicant shall have one (1) year to secure a building permit from the Development Department". Tt states further that the City Commission may extend the approval for one (1) year provided that the applicant has filed a request for a time extension prior to the expiration of the original approval. Tn this case, the applicant has met the requirement. The Planning & Zoning Division received the application for a site plan time extension on July 6, 2004, prior to the expiration date. After Commission approval, the Related Group was concentrating their efforts on preparation of construction drawings for the larger portion of the project, the residentiaL, towers, retail component and parking garage. Due to the complexity of the project, it took nearly the entire year to complete the plans for the towers and garage, working with other agencies under the requirements of a mediation agreement. As a result, the townhome plans were not completed within the one-year timeframe and no permit issued. Since the permits have now been issued for the larger, more complex portion of the project, the townhomes have become the focus of The Related Group's efforts and they are confident they will secure a building permit within this extended period. RECOMMENDA'n:ON Staff recommends approval of this request for a one (1)-year time extension of the site plan and conditional use approval (COUS 03-003). This recommendation is based on the "good faith" effort shown to build the overall project, the fact that traffic concurrency has been maintained, and no changes have been made to the Land Development Regulations that would impact this project since it was approved in 2003. Approval of this request for site plan and conditional use time extension would extend the project's expiration date to .luly 15, 2005. All conditions of approval included in the initial development order must still be satisfactorily addressed during the building permit process. No new conditions of approval are recommended in conjunction with this extension at this time; however, any conditions of approval recommended by the Board or required by the City Commission will be placed in Exhibit "C" - Conditions of Approval. S:~°lannlng\Shared~Wp~ProJectstMadna Townhornes \SPTE 04-007\Staff Report.doc 6414 Location Map Marina EXHIBIT "A" RE II II 400 0 400 800 1700, Feet W~(~E 6415 EXHIBIT "B" McCIosky 200 EAST BROWARD BOULEVARD FORT LAU DERDALE, FLORIDA 33301 POST OFFICE BOX 1900 FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA 33302 (954) 527-2476 FAX: (954) 333-4076 BON NIE.MISKEL@RUDEN.COM Michael Rumpf, AICP Planning & Zoning Director 100 E. Broward Boulevard Boynton Beach, FL 33401 July 2, 2004 RE: Marina Townhomes - Request for One Year Time Extension Dear Mike: On behalf of The Related Group Boynton Beach, Ltd ("Related"), we respectfully request a one-year time extension on the Marina Townhomes site plan. As you know, Related has been busy preparing construction drawings for the residential towers and the parking garage. These plans have been submitted to the City for review and issuance of building permits. This has been the focus of effort for the past year, and Related is now able to direct its attention to the Marina Townhomes, which are a;minor part of the overall project. Due to the complexity of the project, we are confident that the City will understand the delay in obtaining building permits for the Marina Townhomes. We respectfully request a one- year time extension, until July 15, 2005, to s. ecure a building permit for this part of the project. This extension is still in keeping with the project's buildout date of December, 2005. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely, Bonnie L. Miskel BLM/kkg 6416 WPB:180912:l RUDEN, McCLOSKY, SMITH, SCHUSTER & RUSSELL, P.A. CARACAS · FT. I~UDERDALE · MIAMI · NAPLES · ORLANDO · PORT ST. LUCIE J SARASOTA · ST. PETERSBURG · TALLA, HASSEE · TAMPA · YVEST PALM BEACH EXHIBIT "C" Conditions of Approval Project name: Marina Townhomes File number: SPTE 04-007 Reference: Application received July 6, 2004 DEPARTMENTS [ INCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS Comments: None X UTILITIES Comments: None X FIRE Comments: None X POLICE Comments: None X ENGINEERING DIVISION Comments: None X BUILDING DIVISION Comments: None X PARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None X FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST Comments: None X PLANNING AxND ZONING Comments: X 1. Al, 1 previous Cond/tions of Ap, proval from COUS 03-003 are still in force. ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Comments: 2. To be determined. ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION COMMENTS Comments: 3. To be determined. $:~Planning~harc&WpkProjccts'~unb~lt HTdraulic~SPTE 04-008\COA.doc 6417 DEVELOPMENT ORDER OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BE_ACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: Marina Townhomes APPLICANT'S AGENT: Bonnie Miskel of Ruden McCIosky APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: 200 East Broward Blvd., Ft. Lauderdale, FI 33301 DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: October 19, 2004 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Site Plan Time Extension LOCATION OF PROPERTY: 743 NE 1st Avenue 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 Community Redevelopment Agency 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 Applica~ 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 5. 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 6418 DATED: City Clerk J:\SHRDATA\Planning\SHARED\WP\FORMS\Blanks forms folder\Develop. Order Form-2001- Revised,doc VII. Director's Report Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Community Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at th/s meeting 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/ncludes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. 6419 The CRA shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchinson at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. MEMO To: CRA Board From: Douglas Hutchinson Date: October 12, 2004 Subject: CRA Activities · Boynton Beach Blvd/Promenade/Riverwalk Design/Build - The Promenade revised Design Concepts and Riverwalk construction alternatives will be formalized. DH Way-Finding Signage Program - Staff has been workincl with Paul Kellner of Guidance Pathways, Inc., on the permitting issues. Paul has written an update, which I have attached. SV MLK Property Acquisition Phase I - TUG has begun property notifications and briefings with both the CDCs. Appraisals have been finished. We expect a steady am(~:bnt of contracts for purchase to be presented to the CRA over the next 60 days however; I have asked for a re-assessment of our appraisals in the Phase I area. This review will not un-duly delay any purchase or activity in the project. DH Design Guidelines Overlays - The document has been given back to RMPK Group for their next revision. Work has been delayed due to a conflict in LDR mixed-use re-writes not matching new LDR concepts, therefore no Design Guidelines can be written until this is resolved by the City in April. DH Museum Feasibility Study Team - Final study is not here. And an Executive Summar~ has been distributed the CRA Board Members and the City. DH Genesis Business Program - Fourteen Candidates were selected to. participate in the first year of the program. A Phase !1 Survey and a legal disclaimer (Hold Harmless A_clreement) have been distributed to each business; The Phase II Survey is a tool that will further identify the needs of the Businesses and assist the mentor in solution desiqn 6420 process. FAU has been contacted to provide a .qroup of Interns that will assist each business with implementation of the assi.qnments .qiven to business. A sponsorship packa.cle has been distributed. It is Staff's ,cioal to obtain sponsorship funds to finance the internship pro.qram and desi.qn an interactive web based system that the Mentors and Staff will use to monitor and measure the pro.qram. The list of selected businesses is attached AG. · Business Development Fair- This event has been rescheduled for October 28~ at the City Library and starts at 5:00 p.m. AG. "State-of-the-CRA" Recognition Event: The Event has been Rescheduled for November 12th AG. Land Development Regulation (LDR) - LDR re-write will be by the City of Boynton Beach Staff. The RMPK Group has been released from the City's LDR contract. DH. Grants Update Delray-Boynton Academy is requestin.q an extension on their Faqade Grant due to several problems ihcludin.q relocatin.q their structures, electrical issues and permit problems. They are expectin.q a Certificate of Occupancy by November 2004. St. Mark Church is progressing with their building. The parking and landscaping will be started soon. City Commission Actions - Ratification of CRA Action (none) Project: Gulfstream Gardens (ANEX 04-003) Description: Request for annexation of 9.99 acres of partially developed parcels located in unincorporated Palm Beach County (1st READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 04-080) Approved Project: Gulfstream Gardens (LUAR 04-004) Description:Request to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use map from Commercial Hi.qh/5 (Palm Beach County). General Commercial and Local Retail Commercial (Boynton Beach) to Special H~qh Density Residential; (1st READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 04-081) Approved 6421 And Request to rezone from Commercial General (CG) (Palm Beach County), C-4 General Commercial and C-3 Community' Commercial (Boynton Beach) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) (1st READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 04-082) Approved Proposed use: Multi-family residential development Project: Boynton Mango (LUAR 04-011) Description: Request to amend the Future Land Use designation from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Local Retail Commercial (LRC) (1st READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 04-083~; Approved And rezone from R. 1-A Single-Family Residential to C-2 Neighborhood Commercial (1st READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 04-084) Approved Project: Car Rental (CDRV 04-006) Description: Request to amend Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 6.C with the addition of supplemental regulations to include automobile rental as a conditional use on sites zoned C-3 and .qreater than 75 acres (1s~ READING OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 04-079) Approved Proposed Ordinance No. 04-085 Re: AnneXation of O. 72-acre partially developed lot located in unincorporated Palm Beach County (Edward Medical Office Buildin~ (ANEX 04-004) Approved. Proposed Ordinance No. 04-086 Re: Amendinq the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map for Commercial High Intensity (CH-5) (Palm Beach County) to Local Retail Commercial (LRC) (Edward Medical Office (LUAR 04-008) Approved. Proposed Ordinance No. 04-087 Re: Rezoninq from General Commercial (CG) (Palm Beach County) to Community Commercial (C-3) (Edward Medical Office (LUAR 04-008) Approved. Proposed Ordinance No. 04-088 Re: Abandoning of a 40-foot wide unimproved riqht-of-way (Northeast 2nd Street) (306 Boynton Beach Boulevard, L.C.) (ABAN 04-005)Approved. Request for approval from City Commission to grant the CRA the ability to secure debt up to the amount of $19~575,000 secured by the CRA Tax Increment Revenues (YIF) Approved. Trolley Update - Plans for the trolley are on the way. Staff has taken steps as outlined by the purchasing policy to identify and 6422 select a marketing firm that will spearhead the rollout of the program. SV Police Activity Report. Please find attached. SV. Web Site Activity Report- IVone this month, Jack of Arts our web desi.qner is on vacation this month. Aq. 6423 '~-~E ,- O EEE EEE ,-.Z~ ~ ~ E E E E O O o Jonathan T. Ricketts. IncT- 5708 Whirlaway Road, Palm Beach Gardens, FL 33418 Phone: (561) 630-6700 Fax: (561) 625-2770 October l, 2004 Mr. Douglas Hutchinson Executive Director Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency 639 East Ocean Avenue, Suite 107 Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Dear Mr. Hutchinson: Here is a written summary of our recent conversation on the status of the work by Burkhardt Construction. In general, the construction made to date on the boulevard extension and the funds requested are commensurate with the schedule submitted by Burkhart and budget authorized by the CRA Board. Boynton Beach Blvd Extension: Permit Status for the Roadway Construction - The South Florida Water Management District permit for the boulevard extension has been issued. Kimley-Horn has continued to pursue the remaining permit from the Army Corps of Engineers for that portion of the work (cul-de-sac) that has impacts to wetlands. Based on the previous history of the Corps, this permit may take some time to be issued. Burkhardt Construction continues to make steady progress on the drainage work within the right-of-way, and the start of the construction of the twelve-inch water main is imminent. FP&L conversion of power lines from overhead to underground - We have met With Burkhardt Construction and suggested several options to decrease the number of easements that the CRA will need to secure. These suggestions will ultimately require the approval of FP&L, but should result in only minor changes to the alignment of the underground facilities. As requested, we will attempt our first meeting with the property owners of the Exxon station later this month to inquire as to the possibility of securing the FP&L easement for this work. We will also confirm that the City Engineering Department has tee correct locations of the easements required for both FP&L, and the offsite water main. FP&L has been impacted by the two recent hurricanes and this will undoubtedly result in a delay in their finalizing the desig-n and releasing it for construction. Upon the release of the final design by FP&L, Burkhardt Construction would be free to proceed with the construction of the underground conduit system. We will continue to pursue a meeting with FP&L to obtain an updated schedule for the release of the design, and assist the agency in securing the required easements from the adjacent landowners. 6428 Mr. Douglas Hutchinson October 1, 2004 Page 2 of 2 Promenade: Permit Status for the Promenade - Kimley-Hom is in final discussions with the South Florida Water Management District concerning the Environmental Resource Permit. This state level permit is for the wetland impacts and drainage generated by the promenade portion of the work. An Army Corps of Engineers (federal permission for wetland impacts) permit will be required and the application has been submitted to the Corps. The final issues being discussed by the water management district and Kimley-Horn pertain to the amount of wetlands currently existing within the promenade and the required amount of mitigation. These issues were explained in detail in Kimley-Horn's letter of September 15, 2004. This permit will also be expected to take some time, but more detailed information should be forthcoming. The final construction plans of the promenade are nearing completion, but is dependant upon the final permit issues being resolved with the South Florida Water Management District. We anticipate Burkhardt and Kimley-Horn to bring the design back to the board for a final presentation next month. Riverwalk: Permit Status for the Riverwalk The board has authorized Burkhardt Construction to proceed with the final design plans for this portion of the project. Kimley-Hom reports that the design plans are a little past the thirty percent complete stage. They are waiting for the completion of the promenade permit with the water management district prior to submitting a permit application for the riverwalk. We anticipate that the permitting with South Florida Water Management District and the Army Corps of Engineers will be lengthy (at least a year). We will be working with Burkhardt Construction throughout this month to refine the design parameters assumed in their budget and will provide additional information next month. If you have any other questions, please feel free to contact our offices at (561) 630 6700. Sincerely, Jonathan Ricketts 6429 Sent By: 8PSj INC. 413 732 4178; Sap-2@-04 15:48; Page 2/4 September 29, 2004 r...GUIDANCE 11'lWAysT.E~$,.YiN.C. .. ~uidewe. y. 5ig'ns'" To: Susan From: Paul Kellner Re: Permitting Status Hi Susan, This is a copy of the list that ~ prepared based on discussions with city personnel, Based on this information, I submitted packages to each of the regulating authorities. Please note the adjustments that were made by the County reviewer. I have foxed and called Dennis Preite in the city and have not heard back from him. I am now talking with Laurinda Logan (in Boynton Beach) and she is looking into it for me. She has told me that the county is incorrect about at least one location. I still need confirmation on the own,.emhip of these mods, but it sounds like she is going to confirm for me, ~ - I am working on this today and plan to fax the same sheet to the state and ask them if they agree. I will try to get an update from them at that time on the other submissions. AS I mentioned to you in Hollywood, they have told me that they are way behind because of the hurricanes and aftermath. The only approval that we currently have is from the city. The county examiner is now telling us that the city doesn't even maintain that location (Laurinda says they do). As far as the county is concerned, they have replied with comments on the three locations that they claim to maintain. I disagree with two of the comments and have contacted Laura Yonkers to ask her how t contest them. They specifically state that we are not allowed to span a sidewalk and that the sidewalk cannot be reduced to less than 48" at any point. Because of the tight space we were planning to go to the minimum allowed by ADA which is 36". I have no idea where the comment about spanning comes from. I am asking for supporting documentation so that I can contest. We have very tittle room to work with here, Just to summarize, we have completed all of the permitting packages and sent them to the regulating authorities specified by the City, We are held up by the fact that the City and County do not agree who maintains certain roads, i have contacted both of them to determine who is correct. I will follow up with the State as soon as I finish sending you this update. If the City is correct about the location that they supplied approval on, I have a permit for that one location. If in 6430 Sent By: eHs~ Page 3/4 INC.; 413 732 4176; Sep-2g-04 15:48; fact the County is oorrect, I will need to create all new packages for the State and submit them. In addition I need to iron out two issues with the County. They did not contest two of the three signs submitted, so we know that they will approve them as submitted. As you know there is a possibility that the State is holding back on the permiffing because of the Wayfinding issue (in addition to the weather). I will continue to press forward until we get signs installed. 1 have been in contaot with the installer to keep him up to date on our progress so that he will be available to install when we have signed approvals. His backlog has been impacted by the storm damage as welt. That's all I know for now. I will call you as soon as I learn anything else. Thanks, 6431 Sent By: OPS, INC.; 413 732 4176; 8ep-29-04 15:48; Page 4/4 6432 BUSINESS GENESI_S APPLICANTS Owner 1. Audrey Banks 2. Rosetta Fave 3. Jeannette Mastroleo 4. Kristen Conti 5. Maria Occhipinti 6. Laura Eckert 7. Jeff Surgener 8. Greg Pientka 9. Kimberly Kelly 10. Gloria Welt 11. Irene Angeloplous 12. Patel Rajesh 13. Ellie Carol Hedndal 14. Patricia Vonkeil 15. Devon St. Patrick Bell 16. Dianne Williams 17. Barbara Lentz 18. Christiane Francois 19. Sandy Hedges 20. Garfield Hamilton 21. E. Carlene Elliott Jackson Business Name Hair Avante Rosetta's Hair Styling Seamist Enterprises, Inc Salefish Realty Inc Ria's Salon & Day Spa Inc. Dolphin Beach Wear The Ride Surf shop & Art Gallery Palm Beach Eyes of Boynton Hurricane Alley Restaurant Best Health & Home Care Margie's Restaurant A1A Discount Beverage Phone Number 561-736-2995 561-369-8194 561-732-9974 561-738-7911 561-364-2205 561-732-3838 561-414-1602 561-732-8088 561-364-4008 561-752-9888 561-737-5195 561-739-9278 Wellsspring Pat's Accents STP Bell Enerprise Communications Resource Mgt Art-Sea Living Dolphin Restaurant & Lounge Th'e Fancy Flamingo Asset Foundry, Inc Island Rhythms Patisserie Massage & Ammathempy 732-6764 561-731-3378 954-817-8477 561-734-7000 561-737-2600 561-732-8836 561-735-8848 561-733-9366 561-767-7924 SELECTED CANDIDATES FOR YEAR ONE Jeannette Mastroleo Kristen Conti Maria Occhipinti Jeff Surgener Kimberly Kelly Gloria Welt Eliie Carol Hedndal Devon St. Patrick Bell Dianne Williams Barbara Lentz Sandy Hedges Garfield Hamilton Carlene Elliott Jackson Patricia Vonkeil Seamist Enterprises, Inc :' 561-732-9974 Salefish Realty Inc 561-738-7911 Ria's Salon & Day Spa Inc. 561-364-2205 The Ride Surf shop & Art Gallery 561-414-1602 Hurricane Alley Restaurant 561-364-4008 Best Health & Home Care 561-752-9888 Wellsspring Massage & Aromatherapy 732-6764 STP Bell Enerprise Communications Resource Mgt Art-Sea Living The Fancy Flamingo Asset Foundry, Inc Island Rhythms Patisserie Pat's Accents 954-817-8477 561-734-7000 561-737-2600 561-735-8848 561-733-9366 561-767-7924 561-731-3378 (TBD) 6433 Business Genesis Mentor Team James Barr Financial Advisor/Turnaround Specialist 16906 Knightsbridge Lane Delray Beach, FI 33484 561-350-5919 wiselone@aol.com Julieann Dow Financial Advisor/Funding 720 S. Sapodilla Ave. Suite PH12 West Palm Beach, FI 33401 561-601-9424 juliedow@adelphia.net Allen Robinson First Trust Mortgage 6555 NW 9TH AVE Suite 311 Ft, Lauderdale, FL 33309 800-829-9758 ext 229 ajrftm@aol.com Glen P. Jergensen Financial Controls 2327 Newbury Drive Wellington, FI 33414 561-512-0362 glenn_jergensen@yahoo.com Malcolm Gropper Realestate Developer & CPA 7579 Mirabella Drive Boca Raton, FI 33433 561-654-8583 mgrop@bellsouth.net Angela F. Budano Mine Your Own Business Inc. Marketing 9609 Majestic Way Boynton Beach, FI 33437 561 733.3000 myob@bellsouth.net Ken Kaleel 6434 Kaleel and Associates (Attorney) 555 North Congress Ave Suite 301 Boynton Beach, FI 33426 (561) 738-1104 kmkaleel@bellsouth.net Edward Tucker Retail Consulting, Start-up & Financing 53 Godfrey road Mashpee, Ma. 02649 508-477-5379/561-997-8714 sratuck@aol.com 6435 CRA UNIT MONTHLY Date: 9-20-04 Completing Officer: R. DAVIS Vehicle # Wa Beginning Mileage: n/a Vehicle # n/a Beginning Mileage: n/a Total Hours Worked: 389 Total Hours (vac/comp/personal/auth leave): 28.5 Month/Year: AUGUST 2004 Mileage Total: 1316 Mileage Total: Total Arrests: 13 Reports: Burglary: 2 Alarms: 1 Suspicious Person: 3 Suspicious Vehicle: Stolen Vehicle: Assault: Narcotic Related: 1 Parking Citations: 1 Total Traffic Contacts: 106 Community Service: Business Owner Visits: 117 Citizen Interactions: 98 Referrals Total: 22 Other Departments: Other Information: Police Assists: Other: Civil Assist: Abandoned Vehicle: Recovered Vehicle: Vandalism: Citations: AAR's: Crashes: 4 1 39 1 Other Thefts: Other Recovered Property: Weapons Related: Vehicle Towed: B artery: Domestic Violence: Warnings: PAR's: Disturbance: 2 2 67 City: CRA: Other: 12 10 Total Community M .q~ings: Attended: 1 Organized: 0 Other Contacts: - Explain: N/A 6436 Date: 9-21-04 Officer: R. DAVIS PLI Completion Date: 8-15-04 115.5 CRA OFFICER MONTHLY Month/Year: ID#: 796 Call Sign: I.C. Test # 1: 8-7-04 I.C. Test #2: 8/04 C33 8-21-04 1 # Hours Worked: Total Reports Taken: 17 Case # MO 04-047147 PASZ # Hours Vacation/Comp/Personal/Auth Leave: Case # MO 04-046291 AGAB 04-047170 AGAI 04-046536 DDMA 04-047312 FIRA 04-046478 TREA 04-47369 RAWA 04 -046479 RAWA 04-045592 BERC 04-044357 TREW 04-045605 TRFZ Case # Citizen Contacts (no Case #) Business Owner Visits: Citizen Interactions: Referrals Total: Other Departments: Total Community Meetings: Attended: Organized: Other Comacts: Explain: 30 53 1 City: 1 CRA: Other: 1 1 PAR's AAR's Total Traffic Contacts: 5 Citations: 2 Warnings: 3 Parking Citations: MO Other Comments: MILEAGE: 264 6437 Dare: 9-16o04 Officer: DanTsh PLI Completion Date: 9-16-04 # Hours Worked: 111 Total Reports Taken: 103 Case # MO CRA OFFICER MONTHLY il/ Month/Year: Aug 04 ID#: 606 Call Sign: c31 I.C. Test #1: yes I.C. Test #2: yes # Hours Vacation/Comp/Personal/Auth Leave: 14 hrs Case # MO Case # MO Citizen Contacts (no Case #) Business Owner Visits: 30 Citizen Interactions: 60 Referrals Total: 0 Other Departments: City: 0 CRA: 0 Other: 0 Total Community Meetings: i Attended: 1 Organized: O Other Contacts: CRA Office Explain: PAWs AAR's Total Traffic Contacts: 32 Citations: 7 Warnings: 23 Parking Citations: 1 Other Comments: Completd emergency contact information update sheets for businesses Arranged classes for Art Center after school children. 6438 Date: AUGUST 31, 2004 Officer: REYNOLDS PLI Completion Date: 8-22-04 (AUG) # Hours Worked: 114 HOURS (10 SHIFTS CRA OFFICER MONTHLY Month/Year: ID#: 793 Call Sign: I.C. Test #1: 8-20-04 I.C. Test #2: Total Reports Taken: 3 Case # MO 04-045761 TRFZ 04-046165 AGAB 04-044123 PASB # Hours Vacation/Comp/Personal/Auth Leave: Case # MO Case # MO AUG-04 C32 8-30-04 12.5 Citizen Contacts (no Case #) Business Owner Visits: 45 Citizen Interactions: 20 Referrals Total: Other Departments: City: 10 CRA: 10 Other: Total Community Meetings: Attended: Other Contacts: Explain: PAWs AAR's Organized: 2 FIR, 5 MISD'S ARRESTS (TRAFFIC) TotaI Traffic Contacts: 52 Citations: 20 Warnings: 32, Parking Citations: Other Comments: MILES TRAVELED= 350 6438 CRA OFFICER MONTHLY Date: 09-01-04 Month/Year: AUGUST 2004 Officer: LAUTURE, RICK ID#: 797 Call Sign: C34 PLI Completion Date: I.C. Test #1: I.C. Test #2: # Hours Worked: # Hours Vacation/Comp/Personal/Auth Leave: 0 Total Reports Taken: 2 Case # MO Case # MO Case # MO 04-045931 DDMA 04-046775 DDMA 04-043994 DDMA 04-045933 DDMA 04-045146 NOMO 04-044888 ROB C 04-046726 DDMA 04-045172 AGAB 04-044941 NOMO 04-046740 NOMO 04-045786 AGAB 04-044942 NOMO 04-046723 NOMO 04-046100 TRFS 04-044946 NOMO 04-046768 DDMA 04-043998 WARB 04-043920 PASH Other Contacts: Explain: Citizen Contacts (no Case #) Business Owner Visits: 12 PAR's Citizen Interactions: 16 AAR's Referrals Total: 5 Other Departments: City: 0 CRA: 0 Total Traffic Contacts: 21 Other: 0 Citations: 10 Total Commurdty Meetings: 1 Warnings: 11 Attended: 1 Parking Citations: 0 Organ/zed: 1 0 MET WlTH HEAD CORJDINATOR (RAHIx,17ING) AND ORGANIZED AND MET WiTH CHJ~LDREN IN TI-I~E HEAD START PROGRAM ANrD TALKED ABOUT STRANGER DANGER AND THE USE OF THE 911 SYSTEM. Other Comments: 3 FIR CARD COMP. 6439 VIII. Old Business Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Commtmity Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting 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 includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. 15440 The CRJt shall furnish appropriate aux/liary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opporttmity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchinson at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. MEMO To: CRA Board From: Douglas Hutchinson Subject: Direct Incentive Request from the Promenade at Boynton Beach Date: October 12,2004 Project Applicants Analysis This is the Staff review and analysis of the Direct Incentive Program request from Boynton Waterways Investment Associates, LLC. for their Promenade at Boynton Beach project, located at Federal Highway and Boynton Beach Boulevard. This project has submitted for site plan approval to both the CRA and the City. The project has approval from each. Note that the CRA Direct Incentive Program is for eligible projects that score from 50 to 100 points under the program criteria. The maximum incentive is capped at 50% of the new tax increment the project creates. Therefore, the CRA retains a minimum of 50% of the project's tax revenue stream for our budget use. The incentive period runs up to 10 years. Also be aware that no incentives are granted until the project is completed is on the tax rolls and pays taxes. The applicant receives incentive funds after the CRA receives the full increment from the City and County through th~ County Tax Collector's Office. "1 am firmly opposed to the applicant's request for advanced funding of a $2,000,000 portion of their projected incentive. The CRA does not have funding available for this request, nor is there a future source available. The Direct Incentive Program is designed and intended to only be a performance based program. This means that the project is completed, COs issued, the project is listed on the tax rolls and the CRA receives revenues from its new value prior to incentive funding being released to the applicant. I do not support any direct incentive which does not comply with this process." Application: The application submitted by Boynton Waterways Investment Associates, LLC has been reviewed and found to be complete by Staff. The applicant had the option of providing a Feasibility Study or MAI Appraisal Summary. They have submitted the appraisal information. This information appraisal relates to the required Economic Impact Study and determines the applicant's investment impact on the community. The Applicant is the first to address the Affordable Access element and the calculations conform to the intent of the Incentive Program. I will give further analysis in the scoring review portion for this analysis. The applicant has highlighted and defined substantial public amenity features. Those have been indicated in the plan documents in their application. 6441 Scoring: The applicant is scored on six (6) issues. The points have been structured to create superior project elements. Many of the scoring criteria are evaluated through straight mathematical formulas; others, by design are subjective to allow the Board to impact the ultimate incentive outcome. It may be possible for a project to score over 100 points; however, the incentive participation runs from 50 to 100 points. This point score becomes a simple percentage (50% to 100%) to establish the applicant's portion of the potential incentive level. Note that anything under 50 points (50%) is not eligible for incentive through this program. Staff has scored the non-subjective elements, they are as follows: Project Size: The project size according to the MAI Appraisal is $136,000.000. Projects of $50,000,000 plus receive twenty (20) points. Type of Project: The applicant actually has two key uses for the CBD. There are "Mixed Use with Residential" and "Hotel/Conference Centers". The project scores twenty (20) points Project Location: The project location is in the CBD and on two major highways; Federal Highway and the Boynton Beach Boulevard and scores ten (10) points. Economic Impact: The economic impact measures the project's impacts on the entire city, not just the CPA's TIF. This is critical to evaluate if an incentive is warranted. The project generates $21,351,798 in total annual impact. The projected annual TIF to the CRA is $1,184,876. Assuming the project receives one hundre.d percent (100%) of the potential program incentives, the annual incentive is 100% (incentive scoring percentage) X 50% (incentive program percentage) X $1,184,876 = $592,438 potential annual incentive. Therefore, the impact multiplier is figured as $21,351,798/$592,438 = 36 times the CRA incentive. This scores five (5) points. Affordable Access: This is a new provision for the applicants to address. The project must score a minimum of two (2) points. The discounts for Affordable Access are for a minimum term of 10 years (for rental property). Property purchasers are limited to price increase of 3% annually plus unit improvements by the owner over the period of the incentive. The project has two (2) uses to qualify for affordable access. The applicant is placing one thousand nine hundred twenty (1,920) square feet of the project's total nineteen thousand two hundred (19,200) square feet of commercial retail space into the program or ten percent (10%) further the project will rent this space at a price fifty percent (50%) of the average rental rate of non-program space. The combination of the amount of space and rental rate scores ten (10) points on the Affordable Access scoring graph. The applicant is proposing sixteen (16) residential condominium units or five percent (5%) of the total three hundred seventeen (318) units as having a sale price of $268,000 or less. The price threshold is the maximum retail value a moderate wage earner (two person household) at one hundred and twenty (120%) of Palm Beach County's median income can qualify for a mortgage. The mortgage is defined as maximum of thirty-two percent (32%) of income set aside for housing with a ninety-five percent (95%) loan at a six percent (6%) interest rate with a thirty (._3.0.)_year term. The average unit sale prices at $214,500 is forty four percent (44%) below the average sale price $384,570 of the remaining units. This five percent (5%) of units at forty four percent (44%) below market scores the project three (3) po. ints. The total Affordable Access scoring for both Retail/Commercial (ten (10) points) and Condo sales three (3) points is thirteen (13) total Affordable Access points. The TCEA requires an average five percent (5%) of the CRA area's units to be workforce housing. This TCEA five percent (5%) affordable access figure is an average target percentage for all the CRA area. Note that while this project scores some~-s f~t-seer-e extra points on the incentive graph, they also meet the five percent (5%) target for Affordable Access. Given this project's location and caliber, the ~ /~o/_~ ~,, Affordable Access units havehas great merit. Project Quality: The final scoring element is project quality These 40 points reflect the projects architecture, landscape, public spaces and amenities, innovation, quality and overall contribution to the community. This scoring is designed to be subjective and solely at the CRA Board's discretion, therefore, Staff has no scoring. The project features are: · Over parked by 78 parking spaces, · Several sizable public areas, · Public improvements of site at the pond park entry, · Building massing and set backs from Federal Highway are very responsive to planning and Boynton's size and scale, · Architecture o Design/Styling/Details o Color · Public art commitment, Has the sought after first downtown hotel. Direct Incentive Application Analysis Summary: The application is complete and reviewed by staff. The project scoring in non-subjunctive elements is as follows: · Project Size · Type of Project · Project Location · Economic Impact · Affordable Access · Project Quality · Subtotal (before quality score) 20 points 20 points 10 points 5 points 13 points TDB (0-40 points) 68 points The CRA Board scores the Project Quality Elements and this will be added to the other scores. The Board can adjust any score and shall disapprove or approve and/or adjust the level of the applicants request for incentives. 6444 The Board is requested to set the project's final scoring; set the incentive, if any, the project will receive; and instruct Staff to prepare the Incentive Agreement documents for Board approval. 6445 IX. New Business Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Community Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting will need a record of the proceeding§ 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 appeal is to be based. 6446 The CRA shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchinson at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity /n order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. ~ MEMO TO: CRA Board FROM: Douglas Hutchinson SUBJECT: DATE: Consideration of Review and Approval of Promenade 90% Drawings and Authorization to Submit Same for SFWMD Approval. October 4, 2004 On March 9th the CRA Board was presented with 15% SchematiC Drawings for the Promenade and the consensus of the CRA Board was to complete the project using the original, "no-frills" design originally approved. The Promenade. Design, which is being presented to you, follows this direction from the CRA Board. Staff is recommending the approval the 90% Promenade Design Drawings, which will move the permitting and construction of the Promenade forward. Staff is also recommending the approval to submit for permits from the SFWMD. The 90% Drawing presented are within the framework of the budget adopted by the CRA Board at its August 2004 Board Meeting. 6447 MEMO TO: CRA Board FROM: Douglas Hutchinson SUBJECT: DATE: Consideration of Burkhardt Construction Work Authorization Number Seven for Off Site Water Main Improvement Pass-Through Contract for the City of Boynton Beach October 4, 2004 Attached is Work Authorization Number Seven for the Off Site Water Main Improvement, which will be a pass-through contract with the City of Boynton Beach. Work Order Number Seven includes the water main improvements connecting to Boynton Beach Boulevard, which will be fully reimbursed by the City of Boynton Beach. The amount of this pass-through work is $357,427.20. The usb of our contractor helps to assure quality, timing, and lower construction cost for all entities. Work Authorization Number Seven has been sent to Legal Staff for review. Staff is requesting that the CRA Board approve Work Order Number Seven totaling $357,427.20. Additionally, Staff is requesting the CRA Board appoint Jeanne Heavilin to sign the Off Site Water Main Improvement interiocal agreement between the City of Boynton Beach and the CRA once it is completed to our satisfaction. This will allow the project to move forward with no delays. 6448 EXHIBIT F WORK AUTHORIZATION WORK AUTHORIZATION NO. 7 TO: BURKHARDT CONSTRUCTION, INC. 1400 ALABAMA AVE., SUITE #20 WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33401 CONTRACT NO. BBB 2003-1 DATE: 10~5~2004 BOYNTON BEACH BLVD. EXTENSION, PROJECT NAME: PROMENADE AND RlVERWALK PROJECT PROJECT NO. BBB 2003-1 Under our AGREEMENT dated June 26, 2003. You hereby are authorized and directed to make the following change(s) in accordance with terms and conditions of the AGREEMENT: For the Additive Sum of: THREE HUNDRED FIFTY-SEVEN THOUSAND FOUR HUNDRED TWENTY-SEVEN AND 201100 $357,427.20 Original Agreement Amount Sum of Previous Work Authorizations This Work Authorization (Add) Present Agreement Amount $115,800 $5,759,150.45 $357,427.20 $6,232,377.65 The time for completion shall be (increased/decreased) by XXXX (XXX) calendar days due to this Work Authorization. Accordingly, the Contract Time is now XXXX (XXX) calendar days and the final completion date is XXXXXXXXXXX. Your acceptance of this Work Authorization shall constitute a modification to our Agreement and will be performed subject to all the same terms and conditions in our Agreement indicated above, as fully as if the same were repeated in this acceptance. 6448 The adjustment, if any, to this Agreement shall constitute a full and final settlement of any and all claims arising out of or related to the change set forth herein, including claims for impact and delay costs. The Contract Administrator has directed the Contractor to increase the penal sum of the existing Performance and Payment Bonds or to obtain additional bonds on the basis of a $25,000. O0 or greater value Work Authorization. Check if applicable and provide written confirmation from the bonding company/agent (attorney-in-fact) that the amount of the Performance and Payment bonds have been adjusted to 100% of the new contract amount. Accepted: By: By: 10/5/2004 Owner 6450 OFF SITE WATER MAIN IMPROVEMENTS (CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH) Updated through October 4, 2004 From: Burkhardt Construction, Inc. 1400 Alabama Ave. ¢Y20 West Palm Beach, FI. 33401 Att: Dennis E. Haynes Tel: (561) 659-1400 Fax: (561) 659-1402 To: Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency 639 East Ocean Ave., Suite #107 Boynton Beach, FL. 33435 Att: Douglas Hutchinson, Director Tek 737 - 3256 Fax: 737 - 3258 Project: C.R.A. Project # 2003-1 Utility Improvements for city of Boynton Beach Boynton Beach Blvd./Off Site Utility Work (Fed. Hwy.) Engineer: KJmtey - Horn And Associates, Inc. 4431 Embarcadero Ddve West Palm Beach, FI. 334070 Plans: Sheets 1, 20.1, 20.2, 21.1, 21.2,-21.3 & 21.4 All sheets dated 03126104 with no revisions except: 20.1 & 20.2 dated 07~08~04 revised 05/14, 05119, 06102, 07/15, & 08/12/04 Item Descriptio~ Quantity Mobilization/General Conditions 1 Total Includes All Of The Following; Permitting Layout & As-Built Drawings Supervision & Project Manager Standard Insurance Overhead Performance & Payment Bond Testing Costs Design/Build Insurance LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LS Unit Price $43,445.00 ~ount 6451 OFF-SITE WATER MAIN 1 OF 3 Maintenance of Traffic I Vehicle Message Board Advance Warning Signs Hi-intensity Lights Corral Barricades Flashers Steady Bum Lights Specialty Signage Temporary Striping Permanent Striping Detour Signage Flagmen Temporary Steel Plates Clearing & Grubbing Clearing & Grubbing LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LS LS 1 LS $19,015.00 $ 4,305.00 $19,015.00 $4,305.00 $4,305.00 $43,750.00 Subgrade, Base & Asphalt Sawcut Asphalt Flowable Fill 2" Type S Asphalt Remove Existing Asphalt Curb Removal Curb & Gutter Sidewalk Removal Sidewalk Lartdscape/Irrigation Remove existing. Landscaping Restore Irrigation Replace Median Plantings 1000 LF 90 CY 1290 SY 1290 SY 25 LF 25 LF 1000 SF 1000 SF ILS ILS ILS $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 1.20 96.00 12.00 9.00 4.80 24.00 1.25 4.85 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 1,200.00 8,640. O0 15,480.00 11,610.0o 120. O0 600. O0 1,250.00 4,850. O0 $1,500.00 6452 OFF-SITE WATER MAiN 2 OF 3 Water Main 12" DIP CL 350 12" MJ Gate Valve 12" 22.5 degree bend 12" 45 degree bend 12" x 6" MJ Tee 12" x 12" MJ Tee 12" MJ Cap 6" DiP 6" MJ Gate Valve 6" x 6" Tapping Tee & Valve 6" 90 degree bend 6" MJ Cap 2" Blowoff Sample Points Concrete Thrust Blocks EMS Marker Replace 6" Tee w/6" cross Tie into existing 12" DIP Tie into existing 6" DIP Cut in and Cap exist. 6" Jack & Bore Cassing Spacers Dewatering Storm Drain Relocation Pigging w/12" x 12" Wye 612 LF $92.45 4 EA $2, O5O. OO 2 EA $849.00 6 EA $899.00 4 EA $886.00 2 EA $1,453.00 3 EA $742.00 36 LF $88.80 4 EA $1,282.00 I EA $5,672.00 I EA $675.00 2 EA $445.00 2 EA $1,632.00 4 EA $445.00 10 CY $495.00 10 EA $39.00 I EA $3,205.00 1 EA $845.00 ILS $845.00 ILS $765.00 110 LF $745.00 12 EA $275.00 I LS $35,765.00 1 LS $12,345.00 1 EA $4,204.00 $249,717.20 $56,579.40 $8,200.00 $1,698.00 $5,394.00 $3,544.00 $2,906.00 $2,226.00 $3,196.80 $5,128.00 $5,672.00 $675.00 $890.00 $3,264.00 $1,780.00 $4,950.00 $390.00 $3,205.00 $845.00 $845.00 $765.00 $81,950.00 $3,300.00 $35,765.00 $12,345.00 $4,2O4. O0 Total Contract Value $357,427.20 6453 OFF-SITE WATER MAIN 3 OF 3 MEMO TO: CRA Board FROM: Susan Vielhauer SUBJECT: Consideration of Items Regarding CRA Bond Issue Time Table for the Boynton Beach CRA Capital Improvements Revenue Bonds, Series 2004 DATE: October 4, 2004 Attached is a preliminary time table for the Capital Improvement Bonds for the CRA. This is a tentative schedule we will try to follow with a closing date of December 16, 2004. 6454 THE BOYNTON BEACH COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 Timetable gRBC Dain Rausche October November ] December i0 11{ 12 131 14{ 15{ 16{{ 141 15{ 16{ 171 18{ 19{20[{121 131 141 15/ 16{ 171 18/ 171 ~81 191 201 2~I 22{ 2~ I 21{. 221 2~1 241 251 261 27/[ 19{ 201 21/ 22/ 23[ 241 25/ [:2 251 261 271 2SI 29[ 301{ 2SI 29[ 30 / I I / 1261 27128/29130/31[ / City: BC/DC: FA: PA: P: Boynton Beach CRA City of Boynton Beach Bond Counsel/Disclosure Counsel - Moyle, Flanigan, Katz, Raymond & Sheehan, P.A. Underwriter - TBD Financial Advisor - RBC Dain Rauscher Paying Agent - TBD Printer - Imagemaster Date Function Responsible Party Thursday, August 26 CRA Board Provides Preliminary Approval for Financing and Selection of Bond Counsel CRA Tuesday, September 14 Monday, October 4 CRA Approves Budget and Bond Counsel Contract 1. City Accepts CRA Budget 2. City Prov/des Preliminary Approval to Provide Back-up Pledge CRA City, CRA City Friday, October 8 1.. Distribute first draft of Resolution and Preliminary Official Statement (POS) 2. Submit Package to Insurance Companies and Rating Agencies BC/DC FA Tuesday, October 12 CRA Adopts Reimbursement Resolution and approves RFP for Underwriter CRA, BC/DC Thursday, October 14 CRA Publishes First Notice of RFP CRA Friday, October 15 Comments Due on Documents All Sunday, October 17 CRA Publishes Second Notice of RFP CRA Tuesday, October 19 Distribute 2na Draft of Documents BC/DC Wednesday, October 20 Receive Rating Indication (12:00 Noon) FA Thursday, October 21 Underwriter Proposals Due City 6455 10/6/2004 THE BOYNTON BEACH COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CAPITAL IM2PROVEMENT REVENUE BONDS, SERIES 2004 Timetable October November 5} 6} 71 8[ 911 71 81 91 10{ 11[ 12 12[ 13t 141 151 16il 141 15/ 161 171 181 19 ~9 20[ 2~ 22 231[ 2~ 221 231 24[ 25 26 December s 271 [ ~9 201 21 221 231 2,*I 25/ Date Friday, October 22 Monday, October 25 Wednesday, October 27 Tuesday, November 9 Tuesday, November 16 Wednesday, November 17 Thursday, November 25 Tuesday, November 30 Wednesday, December 1 Week of December 6 Wednesday, December 15 Thursday, December 16 Function Recommendation Regarding Underwriter 1. Receive Insurance Commitment (12:00 Noon) 2. Recommendation Regarding Insurer 3. Comments due on Documents Distribute Revised Documents with Insurance Information 1. CRA Adopts Bond Resolution 2. CRA Selects Underwriter City Council Adopts Resolution Print and Distribute Preliminary Official Statement Thanksgiving Price and Sell Bonds CRA Signs Bond Purchase Agreement 1. Print and Distribute Final Official Statement 2. Distribute Draft of Closing Documents 3. Distribute Draft Closing Memorandum Pre-Closing Closing WRBC Dain Rauscher Responsible Part~, FA FA FA All BC/DC CRA All BC/DC All UW,CRA BC/DC, P BC/DC FA All All 6456 10/6/2004 MEMO TO: CRA Board FROM: Susan Vielhauer SUBJECT: DATE: Consideration of Items Regarding CRA Bond Issue Reimbursement Resolution Number 04-02 October 4, 2004 On October 4, 2005 the City Commission approved following actions: permission_ for the CRA to secure debt and gave the CRA a City Backed Pledge for the bonds. Staff is working with Bond Counsel, Mark Raymond and Financial Advisor, Julie Turner to move the CRA forward in this process. The first order of business is for the CRA Board to adopt-a Reimbursement Reso~t~ The.-.-Resolution-expresses- the-iht -ent of- the CRA to reimburse eligible expenditures with tax-exempt bond proceeds in connection with the acquisiti~ cc~.structio~ and equipping o~ vadous CRA Projects Additionally, it will provide an effective date from which to reimburse. This resolution will enable_the CRA_ta.reimbume-the CRA General Fu~d_~t_~ money spent on the Boynton Beach Boulevard, Riverwalk, Promenade Project, the 70 Public Parking spaces in the Marina Parking Garage and land. acquisition 60 days prior te the adoption of this Resolution and before the bonds are issued. Staff is recommending theformal adoption of this Resolution. 6457 RESOLUTIOi~O. 04-02 A RESOLUTION OF TI:[E BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE BOYNTON BEACH COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY EXPRESSING INTENT TO REIMBURSE ORIGINAL EXPENDITURES WITH PROCEEDS OF CERTAIN TAX- EXEMPT OBLIGATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH THE ACQUISITION, CONSTRUCTION AND EQUIPPING OF VARIOUS COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Commissioners of the Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency; Section 1. This Resolution is adopted for purposes of United States Treasury Regulation Section 1.150-2. Section 2. The Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (the "CRA") expects to incur expenses relating to the acquisition, constmcfion and equipping of various community redevelopment projects. The CRA reasonably expects that it may reimburse or/~nal expenditures made with proceeds of debt. The maximum principal amount of debt expected to be issued for the reimbursement may be up to $19,575,000, although the CRA is not by this Resolution obligated to issue any debt or to proceed with any particular component of such projects. Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 12th day of October, 2004. BOYNTON BEACH COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY By: Title: Chair 6458 MEMO TO: CRA Board FROM: Susan Vielhauer SUBJECT: Consideration of Items Regarding CRA Bond Issue RFP NO. 2004-2 Underwriting Service DATE: October 4, 2004 On October 4, 2004 the City Commission. approved-the following actions: permission for the CRA to secure debt and gave the CRA a City Backed Pledge for the bonds. Staff is working with Bond Counsel, Mark Raymond and Financial Advisor, Julie Turner to move the CRA forward in this process. The second item of business is for the CRA Board to hire an Underwriter for a tax-exempt bond issue, in the approximate amount of $19,600,0DO.to fund. the acquisition and construction of CRA improvements such as public streets, parks and a public parking garage. After careful review of the CRA Purchasing Policies it has been determined that we will have to secure Underwriting Services through the RFP process. Staff has secured the help of Julie Turner, Financial Advisor and Mark Raymond, Bond Counsel to develop a RFP for Underwriting Services as well as the timeline. The RFP was sent to Lindsey Payne, CRA Board Attorney for review. Attached is the RFP for Underwriting Services for your approval. .Staff is recommending the CRA Board approve the RPF for Underwriting, which will be posted on October 14, 2004 and October 17, 2004. Staff has attached the Legal Notice, which will be posted in the Palm Beach Post. Staff is- also- recommending- that- Ju-lie Turner, Financial. Advisor for the- CRA- Board review, ali. submittals and bring forth the most qualified candidate to the CRA Board at the November 9"~ CRA Board meeting. 6459 Public Notice Request for Proposal Underwriting Services CRA RFP No. 2004-2 Underwriting Services ISSUING ENTITY: BOYNTON BEACH COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CRA) PROPOSAL SUBMISSION DATE: October 21. 2004 by 3:00 PM (Eastern Day Light Savings Time) GENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION The FIRM will provide Underwriting Services for a tax-exempt bond issue in the approximate amount of $19,600,000 to fund the acquisition and construction of CRA improvements such as Public Street, parks and a public parking garage. The bonds will be secured by tax increment revenues of the CRA and a back-up pledge of a covenant to budget an appropriate form the City of Boynton Beach. The CRA has reviewed may financing options and plans on issuing fixed-rate, 20 year "AAA" insured bonds. RFP SUBMITTAL This RFP is the first step in the procurement process for the selection of Underwriting Services. There will be no pre-submittal meeting for the RFP. The PROPOSAL must be submitted no later than 3:00 PM Eastern Savings Time on Friday, October 21, 2004 to: Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Attention: Douglas Hutchinson 639 E. Ocean Ave. Suite 107 Boynton Beach, FI 33435 And RBC Dain Rauscher Attention: Julie Turner, Financial Advisor 100 -- 2nd Avenue South, Suite 800 ST. Petersburg, FI 33701 For further information and RFP Documents contact: Douglas Hutchinson at the above address or 561-737-3256 between 8:00 AM and 5:00 PM. 6460 Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) Request for Proposal Underwriting Services CRA RFP No. 2004-2 Underwriting Services REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL ISSUING ENTITY: BOYNTON BEACH COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CONTACT PERSON: Douglas C Hutchinson TELEPHONE NO. (561) 737-3256 FAX NO. (561) 737-3258 RFP ISSUE DATE: October 14, 2004 ADDRESS FOR SUBMITTAL: Boynton Beach CRA 639 E. Ocean Ave. Suite 107 Boynton Beach, Florida 33435 PROPOSAL SUBMISSION DATE: 3:00 P.M., Oc..tober 21, 2004 (Eastern Day Light Savings Time) All RFP's will receive a date stamp to provide conclusive proof of the timeliness of filing. All RFP's received after the assigned date and time will not be considered. The RFP's received on time will be opened Publicly and read aloud. The CRA will in no way be responsible for delays caused by the United States Mail or any other delivery service caused by any other occurrence. 6461 Page- 1 of 13 SPECIFICATIONS FOR CRA RFP No. 2004-2 for Underwriting Services PART I - INTRODUCTION 1-1 OBJECTIVE The Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (the "CRA") is seeking qualifications from a Firm interested in providing Underwriting Services, (the "PROPOSER") for a tax-exempt bond issue in the approximate amount of $19,600,000 to fund the acquisition and construction of CRA improvements such as public streets, parks and a public parking garage. The bonds will be secured by tax increment revenues of the CRA and a back-up pledge of a covenant to budget and appropriate from the City of Boynton Beach. The CRA has reviewed many financing options and plans on issuing fixed-rate, 20-year "AAA" insured bonds. PART II - DESCRIPTION OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 2-1 2-2 NAME AND TELEPHONE NUMBER OF CONTACT PERSONS Questions regarding the RFP must be directed to Doug Hutchinson, the Executive Director (561-737-3256) or Julie Turner, Financial Advisor, BBC Dain Rauscher (727- 895-8871). There will be no independent communications between the PROPOSER and individual members of the CRA. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The CRA serves an area of approximately 6 square miles. The CRA was created under Florida Statutes 163.356 in 1982 and has operated as a unit of a local government within the boundaries of the CRA in Boynton Beach. On October 1, 2002, the CRA was given independent status by the City and is controlled by a CRA Board. The CRA's assessed value history is as follows: 6462 Page 2 of 13 Boynton Beach CRA Assessed Value Year 1989/90 1990/91 1991/92 1992/93 1993/94 1994/95 1995/96 1996/97 1997/98 1998/99 1999/00 2000/01 2001/02 2002/03 2003/04 Final Base Year Statutory Taxable Taxable Reduction Millage Rates Available Valuation Valuation Increment Factor (.95}, Count~ CitT Increment % Change $ 39,466,737 $ 25,024,468 $ 14,442,269 $ 13,720,156 13.3770 183,535 * 74,997,745 59,767,752 15,229,993 14,468,493 13.7957 199,603 * 9% 77,257,229 59,767,752 17,489,477 16,615,003 12.3051 204,449 * 2% 73,396,553 59,767,752 13,628,801 12,947,361 4.3178 7.9518 158,859 -22% 70,614,592 59,767,752 10,846,840 10,304,498 4.3278 7.9518 126,535 -20% 71,929,663 59,767,752 12,161,911 11,553,815 4.293l 7.925l 141,167 12% 73,498,930 59,767,752 13,731,178 13,044,619 4.2177 7.9251 158,398 12% 74,712,938 59,767,752 14,945,186 14,197,927 4.2358 7.9251 172,660 9% 75,719,530 59,767,752 15,951,778 15,154,189 4.6000 7.9251 189,808 10% 78,410,383 59,767,752 18,642,63l 17,710,499 4.6000 7.8160 219,894 16% 81,928,346 59,767,752 22,160,594 21,052,564 4.6000 7.8160 261,389 19% '317,835,353 291,906,169 25,929,184 24,632,725 4.6000 7.8160 305,840 17% 372,405,731 291,906,169 80,499,562 76,474,584 4.5500 7.8160 945,685 209% 407,644,247 291,906,169 115,738,078 109,951,174 4.5000 7.6000 1,330,409 41% 511,268,089 291,906,169 219,361,920 208,393,824 4.5000 7.5000 2,500,726 88% Average % Change 29% * Combined millages of several agencies before determined to be exempt (Children's Services, Health Care) The CRA currently has a bank loan outstanding in the amount of approximately $2,607,000 secured by tax increment revenue bonds which will be on a parity with the proposed bond issue. The CRA's outstanding bank loan has average annual debt service of approximately $317,000 maturing in the years 2005 through 2016. PART 3-1 III - QUALIFICATION REQUIREMENTS SUBMISSION OF QUALIFICATION The PROPOSER must submit the following to be considered for this RFP: An original (so marked) and eight (8) copies of the RFP must be sent to: Doug Hutchinson Executive Director Boynton Beach CRA 639 E. Ocean Avenue, Suite 107 Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Additionally, one (1) copy must be sent to: Julie Turner Financial Advisor RBC Dain Rauscher 100 - 2nd Avenue South, Suite 800 St. Petersburg, FL 33701 Title Page- Title page showing the RFP's subject, the firm's name, addresses and telephone number, the contact's name and phone number, and the date of the RFP. 6463 Page3 of 13 Table of Contents- The table of contents of the RFP should include a clear and complete identification of the materials submitted by section and page number. Transmittal Letter- A signed letter of transmittal briefly stating that the PROPOSER has an understanding of the work to be done, the commitment to perform the work in a timely manner, a statement why the PROPOSER believes itself to be best qualified to perform the engagement and a statement that the RFP is a firm and irrevocable offer for ninety (90) days. Technical Qualifications- The detailed RFP should follow the order set forth in Section 4-2 of this RFP. 3-2 Qualifications must be submitted in a sealed envelope clearly marked with the name of The PROPOSER and CRA RFP No. 2004-2 Underwriting Services. TECHNICAL QUALIFICATIONS Overview of the Firm and Professional Team - Provide a brief overview of your firm and resumes of the professionals who would be assigned to the CRA (not to exceed 4 pages). Florida Underwriting Experience - Provide a brief description and a list of your experience underwriting Florida bonds, particularly of a similar nature as the CRA's proposed bonds, since January 1, 2000. Marketing and Distribution - Assuming that the CRA's Bonds are issued as "AAA" insured 20-year debt, please indicate how your firm would market and distribute the Bonds (not to exceed 2 pages). Innovative Ideas - Please provide any ideas or recommendations you might have for this proposed issuance (not to exceed 2 pages). References Provide a list of three (3) references (name, address and telephone number) that the CRA may contract regarding the PROP©SER'S qualifications. Other Information - Provide any other information your firm deems appropriate (not to exceed 2 pages). Independence- The PROPOSER should provide an affirmative statement that it is independent of the CRA and the CRA Board. The PROPOSER shall also describe any professional relationships with any CRA Staff or CRA Board Members for the past five (5) years, together with a statement explaining why such relationships do not constitute a conflict of interest relative to performing the Underwriting Services. In addition, the PROPOSER shall give the CRA written notice of any such professional relationships entered into during the period of this agreement. 6464 Page 4 of 13 License to Practice in Florida- An affirmative statement should be included that the PROPOSER and all assigned key professional staff are properly licensed to practice in Florida. Regulatory Action and Litigation - The PROPOSER shall provide information on the circumstances and status of any disciplinary action taken or pending against the PROPOSER or its staff during the past three (3) years with state regulatory bodies or professional organizations. The PROPOSER shall also describe any litigation or proceeding whereby, during the past two years, a court or any administrative agency has ruled against the PROPOSER and or any staff member in any manner related to its professional activities. Similar information shall be provided for any current pending litigation. PART V - EVALUATION OF RFP PROCUREMENTSCHEDULE After submission of the RFPs, the Evaluation Selection Committee shall review each RFP and rank them based on the proposer with the most responsive proposal to serve as the CRA's Underwriter. Some RFPs may be selected for oral presentation in front of the Evaluation Selection Committee prior to a recommendation being presented to the CRA Board. The Evaluation Selection Committee shall rank the RFPs to be presented to the CRA Board for final ranking and selection, which may include an oral presentation or interview. .~ 5-2 FINAL SELECTION Based on the Evaluation Selection Committee's review and possible oral presentation to the Evaluation Selection Committee and the CRA Board, or both, the CRA Board will rank the RFPs and authorize a contract with the PROPOSER ranked the highest. The CRA Board will select the PROPOSER that meets the best interests of the CRA. The CRA Board shall be the sole judge of its own best interests, the RFPs, and the resulting contract agreement. The CRA Board decisions will be final. The PROPOSER will be selected in a timely manner. Following notification of the firm selected, the CRA will expect a contract to be executed by the parties within thirty (30) days. PART VI - GENERAL CONDITIONS FOR FIRMS 6-1 FAMILIARITY WITH LAWS The PROPOSER is assumed to be familiar with all Federal, State, and Local laws, Ordinances, Rules and Regulations that in any manner affect municipal underwriting. The PROPOSER will in no way be relieved from responsibility due to ignorance of any or all Federal, State, and Local laws, Ordinances, Rules, and Regulations. 6465 Page 5 of 13 6-2 6-3 6-4 6-5 6-6 6-7 EXECUTION OF RFP RFP's must contain a manual signature of an authorized representative of the PROPOSER. RFP OPENING RFP's shall be opened in public on the date as specified in the RFP. It is the PROPOSER responsibility to assure that the RFP is delivered at the proper time and place. The CRA will in no way be responsible for delays caused by the United States Mail or any other delivery service or by any other occurrence. RFPs, which for any reason are not so delivered, will not be considered. RFPs by telegram or telephone will not be accepted. RIGHT TO REJECT RFP The CRA reserves the right to reject any or all RFPs and to waive technical errors, or to accept any RFPs that are in part deemed as the best responsible PROPOSER and the most advantageous to the CRA. EVALUATION FACTORS The CRA expressly reserves the right to: · Waive any defect, irregularity or informality in any RFP or RFP procedure; · Reject or cancel any or all RFPs; · Reissue the RFP Invitation; · Extend the RFP opening time and date; · Procure any item by other means; · Increase or decrease the quantity specified in the RFP Invitation unless the PROPOSER specifies otherwise. STANDARDS Factors to be considered in determining whether the PROPOSER is responsible: · Availability of appropriate resources and expertise as indicated by the PROPOSER to meet all contractual requirements; · A satisfactory record of performance; · A satisfactory record of integrity; · Qualified legally to Contract within the State of Florida and with the CRA; · Supplied all necessary information in connection with the inquiry concerning responsibility. INFORMATION AND DESCRIPTIVE LITERATURE The PROPOSER must furnish all information requested in the RFP. Further, as may be specified elsewhere, each PROPOSER must submit for evaluation descriptive literature and technical specifications covering the services offered. 6466 Page 6 of 13 6-8 6-9 6-10 6-11 6-12 6-13 6-14 6-15 INTERPRETATIONS Any questions concerning conditions or specifications should be directed in writing to the CRA Office no later than five (5) days prior to the RFP opening. CONFLICTS OF INTEREST The award hereunder is subject to any and all conflicts of interest that exist or may arise with the CRA Board, its employees or agents. ADDENDA (S) From time to time, the CRA may issue an addendum to change the intent or to clarify the meaning of the RFP. Any addendas will be distributed to the recipients of the RFP. However, it is the PROPOSER's responsibility to check with the CRA office and immediately secure all addenda(s) before submitting a RFP. EXCEPTIONS Exceptions to any portion of this RFP shall be concisely noted in the RFP on a separate sheet marked "EXCEPTIONS TO RFP" and this sheet shall be attached to the RFP. DISPUTES In case of any doubt or difference of opinion as to the items to be furnished hereunder, the decision of the CRA Board shall be final and binding on b.o.th parties. GOVERNMENTAL RESTRICTIONS In the event any governmental restrictions may be imposed which would necessitate alteration of performance of the service offered on this RFP, it shall be the responsibility of the successful PROPOSER to notify the CRA at once, indicating in a letter the specific regulation, which required an alteration. The CRA reserves the right to accept any such alterations, including any price adjustments occasioned thereby, or to cancel the contract at no expense to the CRA. LEGAL REQUIREMENTS Federal, State, County, and Local Laws, Ordinances, Rules, and Regulations that in any manner affect the items covered herein apply. Lack of knowledge by the PROPOSER will in no way be a cause for relief from responsibility. ON PUBLIC ENTITY CRIMES All RFP Invitations as defined by Section 287.012(11), Florida Statutes, requests for RFP's as defined by Section 287.012(16), Florida Statutes, and any contract document described by Section 287.058, Florida Statutes, shall contain a statement informing persons of the provisions of paragraph (2)(a) of Section 287.133, Florida Statutes, which reads as follows: 6467 Page '7 of 13 6-16 6-17 "A person or affiliate who has been placed on the convicted vendor list following a conviction for public entity crime may not submit a RFP on a contract or provide any goods or services to a public entity, may not submit a RFP on a contract with a public entity for the construction or repair of a public building or public work, may not submit RFP's on leases of real property to a public entity, may not be awarded or perform work as a contractor, supplier, subcontractor, or consultant under a contract with any public entity, and may not transact business with any public entity in excess of the threshold amount provided in Section 287.017, for CATEGORY TWO for a period of 36 months from the date of being placed on the convicted vendor list". ADVERTISING In submitting a RFP, the PROPOSER agrees not to use the results therefrom as a part of any commercial advertising. Violation of this stipulation may be subject to action covered under "NONCONFORMANCE TO CONTRACT CONDITIONS". ASSIGNMENT Any Purchase Order issued pursuant to this RFP invitation and the monies, which may be come due hereunder, are not assignable except with the prior written approval of the CRA. CEO or Principal Agent of Corporation (Print) CEO or Principal Agent of Corporation Date Witness (Print) Witness Date Page 8 of 13 6468 ATTACHMENT 1 THE PROPOSER ACKNOWLEDGEMENT Submit RFP's To: Boynton Beach, Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) 639 E. Ocean Ave. Suite 107 Boynton Beach, FI 33435 RFP Title: CRA RFP No 2004-02 Underwriting Services RFP Received By: October 21, 2004 Eastern Day Light Saving Time NO later than 3:00 PM RFP Date and Time Received (CRA Use Only): RFP's will be opened in the CRA Office unless specified otherwise. Deadline for receiving this RFP is scheduled for: October 21, 2004 and may not be withdrawn FOR ninety (90) days after such date and time. All awards made as a result of this RFP shall conform to applicable policies of the CRA and the requirement of state law. Name of Proposer: Business Name & Form: Mailing Address: Physical Address: City/State/Zip: Area Code: Area Code: E-Mail: Telephone Number: Telephone Number: Authorized Signature Name Typed 6469 Page 9 of 13 THIS PAGE TO BE SUBMITTED ALONG WITH RFP IN ORDER FOR PACKAGE TO'BE CONSIDERED COMPLETE AND ACCEPTABLE ATTACHMENT 2 NONCOLLUSION AFFIDAVIT OF THE PROPOSER State of : County of ) ., being first duly sworn, deposes and says that: I am the PROPOSER (Title) of Corporation or Business Entity) that has submitted the attached RFP: , (Name of I am fully informed respecting the preparation and contents of the attached RFP and of all pertinent circumstances respecting such RFP. Said RFP is genuine and is not a collusive or sham RFP. Further, the said THE PROPOSER nor any of its officers, partners, owners, agents, representatives, employees or parties in interest, including this affiant, has in any way colluded, conspired, connived or agreed, directly or indirectly with any other Firm or person to submit a collusive or sham RFP in connection with the Contract for which the attached RFP has been submitted or to refrain from proposing in connection with such Contract, or has in any manner, directly or indirectly, sought by agreement or collusion or communications or conference with any other firm or person to fix the price or prices in the attached RFP or to fix any overhead, profit or cost element of the RFP price or the RFP price of any other~-Firm, or to secure through any collusion, conspiracy, connivance or unlawful agreement any advantage against the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) or any person interested in the proposed Contract. The qualifications quoted in the attached RFP are fair and proper and are not tainted by any collusion, conspiracy, connivance or unlawful agreement on the part of THE PROPOSER or any of its agents, representatives, owners, employees, or parties in interest, including this affiant. (Signed) (Title) Subscribed and sworn to before me This __ day of ., 20 My commission expires 6470 Page 10 of 13 THIS PAGE TO BE SUBMITTED ALONG WITH RFP IN ORDER FOR PACKAGE TO BE CONSIDERED COMPLETE AND ACCEPTABLE ; ATTACHMENT 3 ANTI-KICKBACK AFFIDAVIT STATE OF FLORIDA ) : SS COUNTY OF PALM BEACH ) I, the undersigned hereby duly sworn, depose and say that no portion of the sum herein proposed will be paid to any employees of the Boynton Beach CRA as a commission, kickback, reward of gift, directly or indirectly by me or any member of my firm or by an officer of the corporation. By: NAME - SIGNATURE Sworn and subscribed before me this day of 2004 Printed Information: NAME TITLE NOTARY PUBLIC, State of Florida at Large COMPANY "OFFICIAL NOTARY SEAL" STAMP 6471 Page 11 of 13 THIS PAGE TO BE SUBMI'Fr'ED ALONG WITH RFP IN ORDER FOR PACKAGE TO BE CONSIDERED COMPLETE AND ACCEPTABLE II. III. IV. V ATTACHMENT 4 INSURANCE REQUIREMENTS General Liability THE PROPOSER agrees to provide comprehensive General Liability Insurance for the benefit of the CRA with combined single limits of $1,000,000 per occurrence, for Bodily Injury and Property Damage Liability. Coverage must be afforded on a form no more restrictive than the latest edition of the Comprehensive General Liability'Policy, without restrictive endorsements, as follows and shall include: Premises or Operation; Independent Contractors; Broad Form Property Damage; Broad Form Contractual Coverage applicable to this specific Agreement, including any hold harmless or indemnification agreement; and Personal Injury Coverage with Employee and Contractual Exclusions removed with minimum limits of coverage equal to those required for Bodily Injury liability and Property Damage Liability. The CRA is to be included as "Additional Insured" with respect to liability arising out of services performed for THE PROPOSER by or on behalf of the CRA or acts or omissions of THE PROPOSER in connection with such services. Professional Liability THE PROPOSER agrees to provide professional liability insurance for the benefit of the CRA with combined single limits of $1,000,000 per claim and which insures against errors and omissions by THE PROPOSER, its sub contractors and other professionals. Worker's Compensation THE PROPOSER agrees to provide Worker's Compensation and Employer's Liability Insurance for the benefit of the firm's employees, if required by law. Indemnification In performing its services hereunder, THE PROPOSER will use that degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable members of its profession practicing in the same or similar locality at the time the services are provided. It is agreed that THE PROPOSER is not a fiduciary of the CRA. THE PROPOSER and its officers, directors, employees, agents, consultants and sub contractors shall indemnify and hold harmless the CRA or anyone claiming by, through or under the CRA or third parties, for any and all claims, losses, costs or damages whatsoever arising out of, resulting from or in any way related to the services under this agreement from any cause or causes, including but not limited to, the negligence, professional errors or omissions, strict liability or breach of contract or any warranty, express or implied. Automobile Liability 64?2 THE PROPOSER agrees to provide Business Automobile Liability coverage to include bodily injury and property damage arising out of ownership, maintenance or use of any Page 12 of 13 auto, including owned, nonowned and hired automobiles and employee nonownership use. Limits: Bodily Injury- Property Damage- $100,000 each person $ 300,000 each occurrence $ 50,000 each occurrence VI VII Certificates of Insurance Before commencing performance of this contract, THE PROPOSER shall furnish the CRA with a duplicate Certificate of Insurance for the required insurance as specified above, which shall contain the following: A) B) C) D) Name of insurance carrier(s). Effective and expiration dates of policies. 30-days written notice by carrier of any cancellation or material change in any policy. Certificates of Insurance stating that the interests of the CRA are included as an additional named insured, and specifying the Project. Such insurance shall apply despite any insurance, which the CRA may carry in its own name. Subcontractor Insurance THE PROPOSER is advised to require all of its subcontractors to provide the aforementioned coverage as well as any other overages that THE PROPOSER may consider necessary, and any deficiency in the overages or policy limits of any subcontractors will be the sole responsibility of THE PROPOSER. 6473 Page 13 of 13 MEMO TO: CRA Board FROM: Susan Vielhauer SUBJECT: Consideration of Assembly & Redevelopment Incentive Grant Program DATE: September 28, 2004 Staff has developed this program to encourage owners to collaborativeiy assemble properties for redevelopment within the Community Redevelopment Area. This is a 50% matching grant, which can be used for surveys, initial site planning, appraisals, legal and/or feasibility studies for the assembled property areas. The grant program will be available to owners who plan to assemble properties for redevelopment with twelve (12) months of completion of. the grant activity work. The aggregate area of commitment must be a minimum of 1.5 acres assembled for projects in the MU-L zoning and 2.0 acres for projects proposed as MU-H zoning. The minimum number of different grant applicants (properties) is three; however there is not maximum number of properties or owners. The work must be done by a qualified third party Professional with the selected Professional's resume attached to the program agreement. All invoices for the approved work from the Professional must be signed by the applicant(s) or sub-applicant(s) and submitted to the CRA for payment. The payment will be made directly to the Professional with 10% retainage until all work and deliverables are received. The goal of this grant is to encourage redevelopment activity in the target area. All grant applications will be reviewed by staff and then presented to the CRA Board for approval. Staff is recommending the approval of this program. 6474 2004~2005 ASSEMBLY & REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE GRANT PROGRAM GUIDELINES ASSEMBLY & REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE The following guidelines define the extent and scope of the CRA Assembly & Redevelopment Incentive Grant Program. This is a 50% matching grant, which can be used for survey, initial site planning, appraisal, legal and/or feasibility studies for the assembled property areas. The purpose of the funding program is to encourage collaborative efforts and partnerships between the Boynton Beach CRA, Business Associations, Citizens, City of Boynton Beach, Chamber of Commerce, and Private Businesses. The funds from the CRA are granted and not repayable except in the cases of applicant default as defined herein. The following guidelines are applicable to this program: The program is available only for property located within the Community revitalization Area of the Boynton Beach Commbnity redevelopment Agency (CRA). Note: See attached CRA Area Map. Eligibility Requirements: The grant program will be available to owners who plan to cooperatively assemble properties for redevelopment within 12 months of completion Of the grant activity work. Aggregate area of commitment must be a minimum of 1.5 acres assembled for projects in the MU-L zoning and 2.0 acres for projects proposed as MU-H zoning. The minimum number of different grant applicants (properties) is three; however there is no maximum number of properties or owners. All participating property owners are sub-applicants to the grant and must prove ownership. They may either be the owner of record or be the buyer of record to be eligible for grant funding. Attach to this agreement as Exhibit "A" is the information form, which must contain a listing of all estimated costs for each of the requested activities. Each activity shall have a written quote from a qualified Professional defining the exact scope of work to be performed. (Attach in Exhibit "A'). All costs associated with being part of an overall master assembly shall be identified. Attach an area map showing all participant properties in Exhibit "A". 6475 Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency Assembly & Redevelopment Incentive Grant Application Revised 08/11/04 o Contractor: The work must be done by a qualified third party Professional. The chosen Professional's resume is required to be submitted as an attachment to the program agreement Exhibit Required Accounting and Deliverables: Invoices for approved work from the Professional shall be signed by the applicant (s) or sub- applicant(s) and submitted to the CRA for payment. Payment will be made directly to the Professional with 10% retainage until all work and deliverables received. That acknowledgement shall be defined in the application and approvable by the CRA board prior to funding. Maximum Grant Amounts: The CRA will provide, on a reimbursement basis, a dollar for dollar matching grant for eligible Assembly & Redevelopment Incentive Grant Projects up to a total of rE'teen thousand dollars ($15,000) of CRA fund funds for the assembled area. APPLICATION PROCESS FOR ASSEMBLY & REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE GRANT PROGRAM. An applicant seeking a grant may secure an application from the Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) located at 639 E. Ocean Ave., Suite 107, Boynton Beach 561-737-3256 office hours Monday - Friday 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM. Applicant shall obtain, read, and understand all aspects of the Assembly & Redevelopment Incentive Grant Program Agreement, including program and accounting requirement regulations. One odginal application and eight (8) copies of all materials are to be returned to the Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency for review and approval by the CRA Board. Applicants must take the necessary steps to insure that their submitted application is propedy time stamped to document receipt by the CRA. Upon approval, appropriate grant program documents will be prepared in the CRA office and the applicant will be notified of approval by return mail. The Applicant shall provide a completed application and back-up documents prior to the 15th of the month before the CRA Board Meeting for consideration for funding. An application shall be considered complete when the Applicant has provided all the required elements and the staff has reviewed and deemed the application complete. APPLICATION TO THIS PROGRAM IS NO GUARANTEE OF FUNDING. FUNDING IS AT THE SOLE DISCRETION OF THE CRA BOARD. 6476 Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency Assembly & Redevelopment Incentive Grant Application Revised 08/11/04 Contact Information: Douglas C Hutchinson 639 E. Ocean Avenue, Suite 107 Boynton Beach, F! 33435 561-737-3256 561-737-3258 (Fax) hutchinsond~ci.boynton-beach.fl.us www.boyntonbeachcra.orq 6477 Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency Assembly & Redevelopment Incentive Grant Application Revised 08/11/04 2004~2005 ASSEMBLY & REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE GRANT PROGRAM PROGRAM AGREEMENT Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency THIS IS AN AGREEMENT, entered into this day of , between the Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency, hereinafter referred to as CRA and , a Property Owner (s), hereinafter referred to as the applicant. PROGRAM AGREEMENT Term: The property owner(s) must complete the survey, initial site planning, appraisal, and legal and/or feasibility study within six (6) months of the grant award. Failure to complete the survey, initial site planning, appraisal, legal and/or feasibility study in a timely manner will result in the property owner(s) losing the grant reimbursement opportunity. Further, the applicant shall enter into an agreement for sales, exchange, etc with a third party developer within twelve (12) months of the date of completion of the grant work. The Board may consider time extensions. Time Extension: The Grant may be extended one time for up to six (6) months by the CRA Board. The request for the extension must be recei'~ed no later than thirty (30) days prior to the deadline for action. The extension request shall include extenuating circumstances leading to the need for an extension. The extension is at the sole discretion of the CRA Board. If grants are not extended and applicants to not complete the Grant are Scope of Work and/or fail to enter into a third party redevelopment agreement, the applicant(s) are in default. The redevelopment agreement shall require the developer to submit a site development plan to the City/CRA within twelve (12) months of the agreement execution. Maximum Grant Funding Amounts: The CRA will provide a matching grant uP to the amount of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000) to encourage improvements on residential properties for approved expenditures. Default Clause: If no redevelopment sale, contract or agreement occurs within the program term of twelve (12) months after completion of grant activities, the grant funds or prorated share thereof; will be recovered from the defaulting sub-applicant (s) by the CRA. CRA acknowledgement of Funding: The Applicant will acknowledge the CRA's participation in the Assembly & Redevelopment Project. That acknowledgement shall be defined in the application and approved by the CRA Board prior to funding. Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency Assembly & Redevelopment Incentive Grant Program Agreement Page 1 of 6 Revised 08104104 64'78 No Guarantee for Funding: Applicants must complete and submit an application to be considered for funding. APPLICATION SUBMITTAL TO THIS PROGRAM IN NO WAY GUARANTEES CRA FUNDING. Certification: The Applicant hereby certifies that they are the legal owner of the property. The Grant Application is herby included as program documentation and is attached as Exhibit "A". Indemnification: The Applicant agrees to protect, defend, reimburse, indemnify and hold the CRA, its agents, its employees and elected officer and each of them, free and harmless at all times from and against any and all claims, liability, expenses, losses, costs, fines and damages, including attorney's fees, and causes of action of every kind and character against and from CRA which may arise out of this Agreement. The applicant's recognizes the broad nature of this indemnification and hold harmless clause, and voluntarily makes this covenant and expressly acknowledges the receipt of good and valuable consideration provided by the CRA in support of this obligation in accordance with the laws of the State of Flodda. Applicant's aforesaid indemnity and hold harmless obligations, or portions or applications thereof, shall apply to the fullest extent permitted by law but in no event shall they apply to liability caused by the negligence or willful misconduct of the CRA, its respective agents, servants employees or officers, nor shall the liability limits set forth in Section 768.28, Florida Statutes, be waived. This paragraph shall survive the termination of the Agreement. Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency Assembly & Redevelopment Incentive Grant Program Agreement Page 2 of 6 Revised 08/04/04 The program information form is attached as Exhibit "A" and Ds herby made a part of this agreement. By signing this agreement and formal requesting consideration of grant funding, the property owner certifies that all information and statements made are true and correct. Witness (Date) Applicant (Date) CRA Director (Date) STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PALM BEACH BEFORE ME, an officer duly authorized by law to administer oaths and take acknowledgements, personally appeared ..... who is personally known to me or produced as identification, and acknowledged he/she executed the foregoing Agreement for the use and purposes mentioned in it and that the instrument is his/her act and deed. IN WITNESS OF THE FOREGOING, I have set my hand and official seal in the State and County aforesaid on this day of ,200__. NOTARY PUBLIC My Commission Expires: 648O Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency Assembly & Redevelopment Incentive Grant Program Agreement Page 3 of 6 Revised 08/04/04 EXHIBIT "A" PROJECT INFORMATION Name of Representative of Applicant(s): Address: Address: City/State: Phone # Day: Fax: Survey r-I Legal I~ Zip Code: Evening: E-Mail · Site Planning, Engineering and/or Architectural i"1 Feasibility Study ~1 Other ~ Appraisal Description of the Assembly & Redevelopment Proiect 6481 Boyntor) Beach Community Redevelopment Agency Assembly & Redevelopment Incentive Grant Program Agreement Page 4 of 6 Revised 08/04/04 ASSEMBLY & REDEVELOPMENT INCENTIVE GRANT INFORMATION Attach the following items as Exhibit "A" Project Information Page, Group Contract Representative, (Assembly & Redevelopment Project write-up describing in detail the scope of the Project, and the Professional performing each scope of work); · List of all properties, their ownership, PCN Number, size and current use. · Resumes of ali Professionals performing work on the project; · Project schedule and time line; · Maps or sketches of the project site showing each property; · Budget for the work covered under this application with sources and uses; · Provide photos of proposed project site (electronic preferred). NOTE: An expense amount changed from an approved Application without prior CRA Board approval may be subject to non-payment by the CRA. Applicable documents must be attached for the Application to be processed. 6482 Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency Assembly & Redevelopment Incentive Grant Program Agreement Page 5 of 6 Revised 08/04/04 6483 Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency Assembly & Redevelopment Incentive Grant Program Agreement Page 6 of 6 Revised 08104t04 MEMO TO: CRA Board FROM: Susan Vielhauer SUBJECT: Consideration of Single Family Residential Fa(;ade Grant Program DATE: September 28, 2004 Staff has developed this program in order to encourage single family owner occupied residential property owners to upgrade their properties by improving the external appearance of their homes within the Community Redevelopment Area. This program mirrors the Commercial Fagade Grant program, which is in existence presently in the CRA area, and is a matching reimbursable grant up to $15,000. The program is limited to single family owner occupied residential properties and the applicant must supply proof of residence as part of the application process. Eligible exterior improvements include; · Fagade Reconstruction and/or Architectural Improvements; · Painting; · Shutters; · Awnings/canopies; · Doors/windows (repair and/or replacement); · Landscaping around the home; · Irrigation; · Driveway re-paving and/or re-sealing; · Exterior Lighting; · Exterior wall repairs (e.g. stucco, brick or wood repairs and replacement); · Roof; only if new construction is for architectural enhancement (The grant does not apply to reroofing of an existing roof for maintenance or repairs). The goals of this grant are to halt deterioration, stabilize property values, enhance appearance of the area, and facilitate and encourage redevelopment activity in the target area. All grant applications will be reviewed by staff and then presented to the CRA Board for approval. Staff is recommending the approval of this program. 6484 BEACH 200412005 SINGLE FAMILY OWNER OCCUPIED RESIDENTIAL FA(;::ADE IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM GUIDELINES PROGRAM GUIDELINES The following guidelines are intended to define the extent and scope of the program. The purpose of the program is to encourage single family owner occupied residential property owners to upgrade their properties by improving the external appearance of their homes. The result will halt deterioration, stabilize property values, improve and upgrade appearance of the area, and facilitate and encourage redevelopment activity in the target area. The following guidelines are applicable to this program: The program is available only for property located within the Community Revitalization Areas of the Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA). Note: See attached CRA Area Map. The program is for single family owner occupied residential properties. The property owner must be the full-time occupant of the property. No rental or income properties are eligible. Applicant must supply proof of residency by Voters Registration, utility bill in their name or current driver's license with property address. The CRA will consider approval of grants for exterior improvements to a home which faces main and/or secondary access streets. The exterior rear of a building facing an alleyway will also be considered. Eligible exterior improvements for this program include: · Facade Reconstruction and/or Architectural Improvements; · Painting; · Shutters; · Awnings/canopies; · Doors/windows (repair and/or replacement); · Landscaping around the home; · Irrigation; · Driveway re-paving and/or re-sealing; · Exterior Lighting; · Exterior wall repairs (e.g. stucco, brick or wood repairs and replacement); · Roof; only if new construction is for architectural enhancement (The grant does not apply to reroofing of an existing roof for maintenance or repairs). All work must be 'in compliance with applicable Boynton Beach Building Codes and alt contractors must be licensed in Boynton Beach/Palm Beach County. 6485 Maximum Grant amounts: The CRA will provide, on a reimbursement basis, a Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency Residential Fa<;ade Improvement Grant Application Revised 08/04/04 o dollar for dollar matching grant for eligible fa(~ade improvements up to a total of fifteen thousand dollars ($15,000.00) of CRA funds. The Far_,,ade Grant program will honor expenditures completed up to 30 days prior to application, improvements underway and proposed improvements. It is preferred to submit proposed improvements. The Fa0ade Grant program may only be used one time in any three year period for any one property. Properties may re-apply for additional grants any time after three (3) years from date of previous grant approval. Project phasing of up to two years can be requested. APPLICATION PROCESS FOR RESIDENTIAL FA(j::ADE IMPROVEMENT GRANT PROGRAM An applicant seeking a grant may secure an application from the Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) located at 639 E. Ocean Ave., Suite 107, Boynton Beach 561-737-3256 office hours Monday - Friday 8:00 AM to 5:00 PM. Applicant shall obtain, read, and understand all aspects of the Residential Facade Grant Program. One original application unbound and eight (8) copies of all materials are to be returned by the 15th of the month prior to the CRA Board meeting to the Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency for review and approval by the CRA Board. Applicants must take the necessary steps to insure that their submitted application is properly time stamped to document receipt b~;~ the CRA. Upon approval, appropriate grant program documents will be prepared in the CRA office and the applicant will be notified of approval by return mail. Applicant shall not have an outstanding City of Boynton Beach lien against their property, in the event that an Applicant has an outstanding City of Boynton Beach lien against the property, the grant will not be awarded until complete satisfaction of the lien. APPLICATION TO THIS PROGRAM IS NO GUARANTEE OF FUNDING. FUNDING IS AT THE SOLE DISCRETION OF THE CRA BOARD. Contact Information: Douglas C Hutchinson 639 E. Ocean Avenue, Suite 107 Boynton Beach, FI 33435 561-737-3256 561~737-3258 Fax hutchinsond~,ci.boynton-beach.fi.us www.boyntonbeachcra.or,q 6486 Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency Residential Facade Improvement Grant Application Revised 08/04/04 2004~2005 SINGLE FAMILY OWNER OCCUPIED RESIDENTIAL FACADE IMPROVEMENTS GRANT PROGRAM PROGRAM AGREEMENT Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency THIS IS AN AGREEMENT, entered into this day of , between the Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency, hereinafter referred to as CRA, and , a Property Owner, hereinafter referred to as the Grantee. PROGRAM AGREEMENT Alterations: The Grantee agrees not to alter, renovate, or demolish the new facade for five (5) years, commencing at the time final inspection by the CRA is completed, if violated by the Grantee, the CRA may choose to require grant fund repayment and enforced by property lien. Inspections: A minimum of three (3) inspections by the CRA are required. Those minimum CRA inspections are (1) at the time of the application, (2) during work and (3) final inspection. Additional inspections may be required by the CRA. These inspections in no way are substitutes for requ!red City Inspections and compliances. It is the sole responsibility of the Grantee to schedule inspections with the CRA and City. Term: The property owner must complete the fa(~ade improvement project within six (6) months of the grant award unless the project is approved as a phased project in which case the project must be completed within six (6) months of the commencement of the final phase. Failure to complete the fa(~ade improvements in a timely manner will result in the property owner losing the grant reimbursement opportunity. The Board may consider time extensions. Grant Extension: The Grant may be extended for six (6) months by the CRA Board. The request for the extension must be received no later than thirty (30) days prior to the deadline for action. The extension request shall include extenuating circumstances leading to the need for an extension. The extension is at the sole discretion of the CRA Board. 5. Maximum Grant Funding Amounts: The CRA will provide a matching grant up to the amount of Fifteen Thousand Dollars ($15,000) to encourage improvements Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency Residential Fa(;ade Grant Program Agreement Page I of 6 Revised 08/14t04 6487 on residential properties for approved expenditures. Matching: The following can be used as match for the applicant: Cash and/or in- kind and sweat equity work. In-kind and sweat equity may not be greater than 50% of the project and shall not exceed the cost of project materials. Default Clause: If the Grant is not extended and/or if the residential improvements are not completed within the grant term of six (6) months, the Grantee will be considered in default of the grant application terms. Grantee acknowledgement of CRA Funding: The Grantee will acknowledge the CPA's participation in the Residential Facade Improvements Grant. Acknowledgement shall be the placement of a CPA Grant sign conforming to City sign guidelines. Grantee shall grant the CPA and/or the City of Boynton Beach the rights and use of photos and project application materials. 9. Certification: The Grantee hereby certifies that they are the legal owner of the property and all taxes and liens are paid in full (Attached as Exhibit "A"). 10. Warranty Deed: Attached in Exhibit "A" is a copy of the warranty deed, legal description and latest site survey. 11. Indemnification: The Grantee agrees to protect, defend, reimburse, indemnify and hold the CPA, its agents, its employees and elected officer and each of them, free and harmless at all times from and against an, y and all claims, liability, expenses, losses, costs, fines and damages, including attorney's fees, and causes of action of every kind and character against and from CPA which may arise out of this Agreement. The Grantee's recognizes the broad nature of this indemnification and hold harmless clause, and voluntarily makes this covenant and expressly acknowledges the receipt of good and valuable consideration provided by the CPA in support of this obligation in accordance with the laws of the State of Florida. Grantee's aforesaid indemnity and hold harmless obligations, or portions or applications thereof, shall apply to the fullest extent permitted by law but in no event shall they apply to liability caused by the negligence or willful misconduct of the CPA, its respective agents, servants employees or officers, nor shall the liability limits set forth in Section 768.28, Florida Statutes, be waived. This paragraph shall survive the termination of the Agreement. Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency Residential Fagade Grant Program Agreement Page 2 of 6 Revised 08/14104 6488 11. Insurance Requirements (Attach as Exhibit "B"): If Contractor Is Hired: Contractor shall, on a primary basis and at its sole expense, agree to maintain at all times during the life of this Agreement, insurance coverage, limits, including endorsements, as described herein. The requirements contained herein, as well as CPA's review or acceptance of insurance maintained by Contractor are not intended to and shall not in any manner limit or qualify the liabilities and obligations assumed by Contractor under the Agreement. A4 Liability & Additional Insured - Contractor shall maintain Commercial General Liability and Business Auto Liability at limits not less than five hundred thousand dollars ($500,000) per occurrence. APPLICANT'S further agrees to endorse Community Redevelopment Agency as an "Additional Insured" to the Commercial General Liability, but only with respect to negligence other than CPA's negligence arising out of this Agreement. WorkeFs Compensation & Employer's Liability - Contractor agrees to maintain or self-insure Worker's Compensation & Employers' Liability insurance in accordance with Florida Statute, Chapter 440. C. Statement or Certificate of Insurance - APPLICANT'S agrees to provide a statement, or Certificate of Insurance, evidencing insurance for the above required coverage to the attention of CPA 639 E. Ocean Ave., Suite 107, Boynton Beach, FI 33435 or attached as Exhibit "B'. No Contractor: Applicant will complete and notarize Exhibit "B" Hold Harmless Agreement and Attach. REIMBURSEMENT This program is a reimbursement grant. That is, all work must be done and paid for by the Grantee, prior to the CPA's funds being released. The CRA will provide reimbursement to the grantee upon submittal of a complete Reimbursement Request and approval of completion by the CRA Board. Reimbursement Request shall be summarized in a report and accompanied by proper documentation by the Grantee. Proper documentation will consist of (1) Project accounting including invoices, receipts or other acceptable evidence of payment from suppliers and licensed contractor(s) that have been marked "paid" with a "release of lien" signed by each. Proposals for "work to be completed" or "bids" are not considered proper contract documentation. Each item will be supported by a canceled check showing the face of the check, as well as the Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency Residential Fac.,ade Grant Program Agreement Page 3 of 6 Revised 08/14/04 6489 back of the canceled check, (2) the Grantee shall warrant that all bills related to the Project are paid in full including, but not limited to, all contractors, subcontracts, labor, materials, related fees and permits, and (3) the Application for re-imbursement shall provide a minimum of four 3"x5" color "during" photos and a minimum of four 3"x5" color "after" photos of the Project taken at the same location and approximately the same position as the "before" photos submitted for the program. The Reimbursement Request from the Grantee shall be submitted no later than the 15th of the month before for consideration by the CRA Board at its next month's meeting. Reimbursement shall be issued ten (10) days after approval. 4. Grant funds will be reimbursed exclusively for eligible work and approved change-orders that have been approved by the CRA. The program information form is attached as Exhibit "A" and is herby made a part of this agreement. By signing this agreement and formal requesting consideration of grant funding, the property owner certifies that all information and statements made are true and correct. Witness (Date) Property Owner (Date) CRA Director (Date) STATE OF FLORIDA, COUNTY OF PALM BEACH BEFORE ME, an officer duly authorized by law to administer oaths and take acknowledgements, personally appeared , who is personally known to me or produced as identification, and acknowledged he/she executed the foregoing Agreement for the use and purposes mentioned in it and that the instrument is his/her act and deed. IN WITNESS OF THE FOREGOING, I have set my hand and official seal in the State and County aforesaid on this day of ,200___. NOTARY PUBLIC My Commission Expires: Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency Residential Facade Grant Program Agreement Page 4 of 6 Revised 08/14/04 6490 200412005 RESIDENTIAL FA(~ADE IMPROVEMENTS GRANT PROGRAM INFORMATION FORM (EXHIBIT "A") (Please Print or Type Only - Use Additional Sheets If Necessary) APPLICANT INFORMATION Name of Property Owner: Address of Property: City/State: Zip Code: Phone # Day: Evening: Fax: E-Mail: PROJECT INFORMATION Describe improvements to be done to the property. Attach the following items: -~ · Project work write-up(s) describing in detail the scope of the project, · Plans or sketches of the renovation and/or building improvements if applicable, · Site plan and plant list for landscape projects, · Third-party cost estimates from three (3) licensed contractors, · Estimated time line, · Evidence of financial ability to pay for the project (approved loan, cash account, line of credit, etc.), · A minimum of four (4) 3" x 5" color "before" photos of the project which must include "public views", of all sides and/or work proposed, · Project color chips, material samples if applicable and material specs (if applicable), · Warranty Deed and Legal Description or Real Estate Purchase Contract, · Proof of Occupancy by the Applicant. Boynton Beac~h Community Redevelopment Agency Residential Fagade Grant Program Agreement Page 5 of 6 Revised 08/14/04 6491 200412005 SINGLE FAMILY OWNER OCCUPIED RESIDENTIAL FACADE IMPROVEMENTS GRANT PROGRAM HOLD HARMLESS (EXHIBIT "B") (hereinafter know as Applicant) to the extent permitted by law, agrees to protect, defend, indemnify and hold the Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency (hereinafter know as CRA), and its officials, employees and agents harmless from and against any and ali lawsuits, penalties, damages, judgments, decrees, costs, charges and other expenses or liabilities related to the Applicant's negligence in connection with or arising directly out of the Single Family Owner Occupied Residential Fagade Improvements Grant program with CRA. The Applicant further agrees, to the extent permitted by law, to investigate, respond to, provide defense for, and defend any such claims, etc., at its sole expense and agrees to bear all other costs and expenses and attomey's fees relating thereto. (Date) (Applicant) STATE OF FLORIDA ) ss: COUNTY OF PALM BEACH) I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized to administer oaths and take acknowledgments, personally appeared known to me to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, who acknowledges before me that she executed the same and an oath was not taken. Witness my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this __ day of ,2003. My commission expires: NOTARY PUBLIC Boynton Beach Community Redevelopment Agency Residential Fagade Grant Program Agreement Page 6 of 6 Revised 08/14/04 6492 MEMO TO: CRA Board FROM: Susan Vielhauer SUBJECT: Consideration of Recommendation of Legal Selection Committee DATE: October 1,2004 The Evaluation Committee, which included Jeanne Heavilin, Henderson Tillman and Douglas Hutchinson, met and reviewed the seven submissions for Legal Services for the Boynton Beach CRA. After reading and reviewing all seven submissions the following two firms stood out above the rest because of their legal expertise in Government Law as it pertains to Florida Statues 163. These firms have an excess of 15 years of experience each with CRA's and are well qualified to represent the Boynton Beach CRA. '~ The Evaluation Committee would like to recommend that Ms. Nancy Stroud of Weiss, Serota, Helfman, Pastoriza, Guedes, Cole and Boniske, P.A. and Mr. Kenneth F. Spilias of Lewis, Longman & Walker P.A. present their qualifications to the CRA Board at the November 9, 2004 meeting for final CRA Board selection. 6493 X. Commission Action Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Community Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at th/s meeting 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 includes the testimony and evide6~gtl~von which the appeal is to be based. The CRA shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal oppommity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchinson at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. : Xl. Board Member Comments Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Community Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbat~n record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the testimony and evidence upon wh/ch the appeal is to be based. 6495 The CRA shall fro-rash appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchinson at 561-73%3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. Xll. Legal Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Community Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceed/ngs is made, which record includes the testimony, and_evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. 6496 The CRA shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disabihty an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits ora service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchinson at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. XIII. Other Items Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Community Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting 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 includes the testimony and evidence u~)~hich the appeal is to be based. The CRA shall firrnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchinson at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity ha order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. x v. Future Agenda Items A. Consideration of Interlocal Agreement with the City of Boynton Beach for the Boynton Beach Boulevard Extension Promenade and Riverwalk. (November). B. Consideration of Interlocal Agreement for the MLK Phase I Project. (November). C. Consideration of CRA Workshop (November). D. Consideration of Executive Director's Employment Contract (November). E. Interview and Selection of New Legal Representation for the CRA (November). F. Consideration of CRA Amended 2004/2005 Budget (November). G. Consideration of amendment to CRA Procurement Policy (November). H. Consideration of Modification to the Direct Incentive Program to include Arts Commission Elements for Incentive Scoring (December). I. Consideration of Arches Project Site Plan and Incentive Amendment (TBD). Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Community Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting 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 includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. 6498 The CRA shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchin.qon at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. xv. Adjournment. Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Community Redevelopment Board with respect to any matter considered at th/s meeting 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 includes the testimony and evidence upo_n.w~l~ich the appeal is to be based. The CRA shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the CRA. Please contact Douglas Hutchinson at 561-737-3256 at least twenty-four hours prior to the program or activity in order for the CRA to reasonably accommodate your request. ZO oa. Ell III III © Z EL. 0 o Z 0 Z )- 0 nq 0 [~ EL Z rY >_ D w >- wO~ W 0 < D <D d d i- W UJ T W z>~ z_~l o Z 0 0 d-ggl.~O'-Og # 11 '~' 031111"i~lild AIsrlOIA3~Id 3¥S-3O-qr '..' ' i ~~ . ~ .~ ...... i I. Z ,I ooo-~ d o 0 z o 0 Z 0 I,I 7 LU W~W rK Q_ Q~ ]1 MATCH TO SHEET 6,1 L~i~ I1~ /lllll/Illll I ZLd 512 1 I I I III MATCH TO SHEET 7,2 II 0 z z Z W z Z 0 0 dd (_9 d d °d d dd xd d d dd ? 7 ,-- ? ? o m (D 0 cOcO o E_o o (- 0 C C)- .-- C) (D ~ '-- 0 0 -C, L ~_ (D cO 0 0 C cOco o c g --° co ~ = = -~_ o ~ ? '~_ _~ ° O_O_ 0 0 0 (D __ °° 0 0 -- C ~_' C' ('- 0 0 C- c- .... 0 0 L. c- ~_ ~ c" CL d~ 0 ~ ,,,m o r~ Z 0 n~ (_5 Z Z Z Z Z Z Z W -rz~ mO >-> o o ~ 'c. · o _6-~ "~ c° ~ -o P~.9 mr~w -(3 ~¢ ~ r~ 0 o Znn _ -- ~ -o O,,,m . 7 I I < .,~ <~ x d dd d d rr © 0 ~_j c- O mm e~_ c ~ o o~ o c '- J i < ~ ~_ o m o o c 'u o. 0 ~ L ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ c c 0 c L c % o o I ~ ~l 0 o o 0 '~ % '~ ~ % ~ ' I ZZ Z Z Z Z Z o-- I I I II III MATCH TO SHEET 9.2 zc~ w r~- wo- ~-~w IIiI LLI 0 0 rn 0 ~>~ 8 o i , '. , MATCH TB SHEET 9,1 i , MATCH TD SHEET 10 ' , .,, , ~~ '"'. .._ i I i · - ~-- ~ j z ~ ~= 0 j ~ ~ ~ 0 - ~- ~ . ~ ~ d i ~ ~ =z ~ ~ + j , ~ ; , . ii i~ i ~-' ill ii il I i // //~[~- ~" . >' 0 _ 0 m : II:i ! ~ ~ m , I ' i I I ~m ~ ~ 00+~ ~ l m i I II~ : MATCH ID SHEET 10,1 I ;I I,I,i,i,i, , ,,I,,I,I