Loading...
Minutes 05-11-99 h MINUTES OF THE PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETIN~G HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FI~ORIDA, ON TUESDAY, MAY 11, 1999 AT 7:00 P'M. PRESENT Lee Wische, Chairman J. Stanley Dub6, Vice Chair Mike Friedland James Reed Maurice Rosenstock Frances Cleary, Voting Alternate ABSENT Pat Frazier Steve Myott Woodrow Hay, Alternate 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE M[chael Rumpf, Director of Planning Mike Cirullo, Acting Assistant City Al Hanna Matras, Economic Research Zoning 3rney Caiyst Chairman Wische called the meeting to order at 7:02 p.m. and led the =ledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 2. INTRODUCTION OF COMMISSIONERS AND BOARD MEMBERS Chairman Wische introduced the Board Members, Acting Assistant City At,)rney Mike Cirullo, Mike Rumpf, Director of Planning and Zoning and Hanna MatrasI Economic Research Analyst. Chairman Wische advised all those persons who would be testifying this/evening to please dse and be sworn in by Acting Assistant City Attorney Cirullo. Attorney Cirullo administered the oath. 3. AGENDA APPROVAL Chairman Wische called for a motion to approve the Agenda. Motion Vice Chair Dub6 moved to approve the agenda. Mr. Reed seconded the motion. Motion unanimously carried. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA May 11i, 1998 Vice Chair Dub6 said there was something in the m~nutes of the last meeting, which he wished to-clarify. Vice Chair Dub6 stated it was what he said, but was not the way he meant it. Vice ~hair Dub6 wished to clarify the ne,x? to the last line in the nex[t to the last paragraph on Page 14. The sentence now reads He feels the new Commis~sioners are ~ot aware of that process" V ce Char Dub6 would like the sentence to read "The old Comm ssion anytime they got a change in a site plan would send it back tol this Board and give the Bc~ard this c~onsideration." Vice Chair Dub6 said he wasn't really criticizing the Commission, he just wanted to see if theywould do the same thing. Motion Vice Chair Dub6 moved that the minutes of the April 27, 1999 meeting, as a~ approved. Motion seconded by Mr. Friedland. Motion unanimously carried. 5. COMMUNICATIONS ANDANNOUNCEMENTS A. Planning and Zoning Report (1) Final disposition of the April 27, 1999 Plar Development Board meeting agenda items Mr. Rumpf reported that on May 4, 1999, the City Commission took the folio on items previously reviewed by the Planning & Development Board. (a) (b) (c) (d) Mobil Statio~ Use Approval at Quantum Park was MFT Development, Lot 58 site plan at Quantun approved. Stor-AII Conditional Use Approval was approved. Mobil Gas Station was approved for Quantum Parl~ 6. OLD BUSINESS None 7. ZONING CODE VARIANCE A. PUBLIC HEARING Zoninq Code Variance 1, Project Name: Agent/Owner: The Center for Self Discover Anne Salter & Carrie Mathe~ 2 lended, be ling and ring action pproved. Park was MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA May 11;, 1998 Location: Description: 112 SE 23rd Avenue Request for relief from Chapter 21, Signs, Article Ill, Section 5. Requiring a 10-foot front setback for a sign, to allow a 9-foot variance, or -foot front setback. Chairman Wische requested the agent take the podium. Ms. Anne Salter, the co-owner of The Center for Self Discovery took Chairman Wische noted that the request has been denied by staff, recommending a more acceptable alternative to grant relief from the Cod allow a 7-foot side set back variance for a sign and to allow the site sign three feet from the side property line. Ms. Salter said she has had a sign in the front of the property for 18 years an~ to pul a new attractive sign in its place. Ms. Salter said she hired a sign comp sign company informed Ms. Salter that she needed to apply to the City. Ms. she has applied to the City and since last October has been dealing with Salter presented photographs of the sign to the Board and said the sign square by 80" high, which is smaller than permitted by the Codes. Ms. Salter said she went through the application process and was informed th; replace the sign by making some minor alterations in the structure. Ms1 Sal when it came time to get the permit, it was denied because of the new codes the location of the sign. Ms. Salter said she was informed that if the structure torn down, she could have done something with the existing structure. Ms. Salter said she had a meeting with the Planning staff in March and was t qua!ified for a variance. Ms. Salter said she applied for a 9-foot variance to back where it was. Putting the sign on the side of the property wouldn't look e podium. ut staff is Section to be placed ust wanted ~ny and the Salter said staff. Ms. ~s only 10' t she could ~.r said that ealing with ~adn't been ~ld that she )ut the s~gn as nice and might impede parking, since there is a very limited parking lot. been allowed to put up a temporary sign. Ms. Salter did not think the sign v hazard and presented pictures of the sign and the view of the street whet parking lot. Ms. Salter said she is still requesting that she be allowed to place front of the property. Ms. Salter said she has ~s a safety exiting the her sign in Chairman Wische inquired if Ms. Salter was told that once she took down the Id sign she would have to conform to the present codes and she said she was not told this! Mr. Rumpf is not sure what transpired between the applicant and the Building Deparlment. Mr. Rumpf said that staff is familiar with non-conforming regulations and should ha ,e informed the applicant accordingly. Mr. Rumpf said that the application received was 3r the front 3 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA May 1% 1998 variance. Mr. Rumpf said that the temporary approval means that the temporarily kept there and is actually permanently in place. Vice Chair Dub6 stated that all non-conforming signs in the City have to be re certain date. Therefore, the sign still has a date when it would have to be re Rumpf said there have been multiple interpretations of this requirement. Mr. when Attorney Cherof and the former Planning Director discussed sun-seE ng the end of 19~9, it was nterpreted to mean the signs had {o have three primar of non-compliance--set back, height and area Mr. Rumpf sa d approximate signs were identified as being subject to the sunset. This pa~ticu ar s conforming from a certain respect, but is not subject to the sun-setting clause conforming in both area and height. Vice Chair Dub~ said that once the variance was approved, the sign woul¢ Chair Dub~ said that he looked at the sign and it is obvious that the sign is per place and isnot a temporary sign. Vice Chair Dubb said you cannot see the b~ sign coming from the west because the hedge cuts it off. Vice Chair Dub putt ng-the ,sign in permanently was in comp ere defiance of the City de~ variance. MK. Salter said she made a mistake in good faith and she would taken the cid sign down if she could'not have replaced it. Ms. Salter said ,she do everything v~at the City has asked. Ms. Sa ter sa d she had to spend anot applY tc~ the ~oard and sh~ operates a small business. Vice Chair Dubb said Ms. Salter's old sign was sitting on top of the sidewalk. said it has been hurling her business not to have a sign. Mr. Fdedland said he has driven by the sign and thinks it is an attractive sign was obtrusive because of the location of the sign. Mr. Friedland thinks that stal up With a workable solution. Mr. Friedland pointed out to Ms. Salter that the in can be loved by a oved. Mr. ~,umpf said ae signs at limitations ~ 15 to 16 In is non- ;cause it is ~tay. Vice ~anently in tom of the said that iai for the ~ever have las tried to ~er $400 to Ms. Salter but said it has come has been trying to institute new sign regulations and did not want to see the sign aim, cst on the sidewalk. Chairman Wische pointed out that the City ,tried to work out a so ution and lasked Ms Salter if she was not going to accept the City s recommendation. Ms. Salter said she was not going to state that she would not accept the City's recommendation. Mr. Rosenstock inquired if a great deal of the applicant's clients are walk-ins. said she has gotten hundreds of clients from the sign on the property. Mr. F~ pointed out to the applicant that there has to be certain parameters that the C ii in its Codes. Mr. Rosenstock did not feel that the applicant's request for a vad the requirements. Mr. Rosenstook said that whether the sign sits on the number of feet back from the street, he did not feel it would have any effe¢ 4 Ms. Salter osenstook / must set ~ce meets treet or a upon the MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA May 1!, 1998 applicant's business, and therefore did not feel that the Board should grant t Vice Chair Dubb asked Attorney Cirullo if the City could approve a 7' side set instead of the request for the front setback, or would the issue have to come Board as a second request. Attorney Cirullo stated that the notice was for a 9' setback and the Board is be consider the City's denial, not to approve a side set back. Mr. Rump stat correct, Attorney Ciru lo sa d that the s Cie setback couldn't be considered because the [oc~;[ion of the set. back on the property has been changed. Atto inquired if side and front set backs were covered by different Code sections. Chairman Wische announced the public hearing and asked if anyone in t~ wished to speak. Attorney Frank Palen of Ruden, McCIosky, Smith, Schust~ of West Palm Beach took the podium and requested clarification if this B~ makes recommendations for approval and denial to the City Commissior Wische stated was that correct. Attorney Palen stated if the advertising wa,~ to allOw the Board to make a recommendation to the City Commission would 1 need to be reuadvertised. Chairman Wische asked Attorney Palen if he did n( the record that the variance was denied, but would like the variance to be with the side setback of' 7'. Attorney Palen stated that the lot is a non-conforr the applicant has a dght to have a sign somewhere on the site. Attorney Pa the problem could be corrected tonight and forwarded to the City Commission. e variance. ~ack tonight back to the lg asked to ~d this was lis evening 'ney Cirullo ~ audience r & Russell ard merely Chairman not correct ~e variance : want it on -advertised ~ing lot and .~n asked if Attorney Cirullo stated that Mr. Rumpf informed him that the side and front setbacks were the same Code sections. However the set back is for a different location on t~e property. Attorney Cirullo said he has concerns about the notice. Mr. Rosenstock a~sked if the reque~ should be tabled and re-advertised correctly and then placed back on the agenda. Attorney Cirullo said if the E~oard is dealing with an application for a specific vadance and at the same time being asked to consider staff recommendations, then the re uest could be withdrawn by the applicant for re-notice. Vice Chair Du b6 asked why the request couldn't be tabled and have the appli¢ mt change the application and then come back before the Board. Ms. Salter inquired if si' .~ would be required to pay another $400. Vice Chair Dub6 said he was trying to avoi, this. Mr. Rumpf said that all the work has been done and did not think the applicanl should oe charged another $400. Attorney Cirullo said that the applicant must request that the vadance be -e-noticed. Therefore, Attorney Cirullo said that the request should be withdrawn and re noticed so that the Board Can propeny vote on staff's suggestion. 5 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA May 11, 1998 Mr. Rumpf said that the applicant could modify the application with the assisb and there would be an additional advertisement fee, which would be betw $160. Mr. Reed felt the applicant has been mislead by the City and unless there i completely fatal, the Board should approve the decrease ~'equ rement as prop~ and not require the applicant to go through anymore processes nor spen~ money. Attorney Cirullo asked to see a copy of the notice. Mr. Rosenstock pein1 notices must be very clear as specified by statute. Mr. Rosenstock said that is improper and the Board allQws this, what would happen if someone objec sign is erected and this is a flaw, the City would be at fault. Attorney Cirullo said he had an opportunity t,o examine the notice and the r specifically to a 10' front setback reducing a 9 to a 1' front set back. There is of changing a side setback from a 10' side setback to a 7' side setback a~ material change. Attorney Cirullo did not think that the Board could app recommendation tonight based upon the notice before the Board this evenir Cirullo said that the setback has to be re-noticed. Mr. Rosenstock said he would suggest that the applicant withdraw her app reply for the side setback. Ms. Salter said this has been a real hardship for he not sure if She wants to go through this process again and have the new re~ down. Ms. Salter said she has nowhere else to place a sign. Chairman Wi out that this Board has to follow the legal advice of its attorney. Ms. Salter re¢ the City not charge her any more fees. Chairman Wische said the BeE jurisdiction on this. Attorney Palen requested a clarification from Attorney Cirullo on the proces., Palen said if the issue is withdrawn, there would be no new application infer would be necessary for his client to present. Attorney Palen said he had con~ the applicant withdraws, it would take months for the request to be re-heard F~alen requested that the request be re-advertised correctly based recommendations. Mr. P, umpf said it would take a total of 20 days to Therefore. the request could be heard at the June 22nd meeting. nce of staff ~n $100 to something ~ed by staff any more ;d out that "the notice ~ when the ~tice refers ~o mention this is a eve staff's Attomey cation and and she is ~est turned , he pointed pested that ird has no Attomey nation that ~=rns that if Attorney upon staff's r~-advertise. Mr. Rosenstock asked why the applicant was having difficulty accepting the pl'ocess and stated she currently has a sign on the property and no one is telling her to take it down. Ms. Salter said she would not be able to attend the June 22nd meeting anc requested another date. MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA May 11[, 1998 Attorney Cirullo suggested that the Board table the request to a date certain i the variance can be noticed properly. Ms. Salter requested that her request for a variance be tabled. Mr. Reed re( the request be re-advertised with no cost to the applicant. Chairman Wische not within the Board's jurisdiction. Motion Vice Chair Dub~ moved to table the applicant's request to the first meetir Motion seconded by Mr, Rosenstock, Motion carried 6-0. Ms. Salter requested the date of the first meeting in July and was infom July 13th. Abandonment 2. Project Name: Owner: Location: Description: Mark Daly City of Boynton Beach East Coast Railroad Avenu~ S.E. 10th Avenue and S.E. 8th Request approval for aband a portion of street abutting 12 (POSTPONMENT REQUE~ JUNE 22, 1999 PLANNI DEVELOPMENT MEETING FOR THE CONCURRENT R order that ested that said that is in July. ;d it was , between ~,venue )nment of operty. rED TO ~G AND ALLOW [VIEW OF A RELATED VARIANCE REQ~JEST.) / Attorney Cirullo requested that the Board vote on the request for postponement! Motion Vice Chair Dub~ moved that the request for postponement by Mark Daly be MotiOn seconded by Mr. Reed. MOtion carried 6-0. B. TIME EXTENSION 1. Project Name: Agent: Owner: Palm Walk ACLF Richard T. Sovinsky, RA Ehasz Giacalone Architects, PC Palm Walk Associates 7 approved. MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA May 111, 1998 Location: Description: Southwest 19th Street Request for a one year time ex~ens|on for Conditional Use approval and cencurrency certification (May 5, 1998 to May i, 2000) to construct a 48 bed adult living fa',ility to be known as Palm Walk. Chairman Wische asked if there were any staff comments and Mr. Rumpf sak no additional comments. Vice Chair Dub6 asked the agent if he was present at the hearing last year an~ was~ Vice Chair Du bb said he remembers asking the question about anoth6 extend for another year and at that time the Board was informed that this applicant and thatthe old builder was no longer involved because he couldn't Vice Chair Dub~ said he remembers asking the applicant at the time what w~ him from coming back in a'year and the applicant said he had the funding an~ was ready to go. Mr. Jim Tomasello said he was requested to appear tonight and said he ~ person that Vice Chair Dub6 spoke to at that time, but he was present in th Mr. Tomasello said he was asked by Palm Walk Associates to inform the Bo~ are ready to go, but have not concluded their contract negotiations with manager, which is very vital to their project. Mr. Tomasello said that th architect, and a general contractor, but need the extension to allow them manager on board. there were he said he request to Nas a new let funding. JId prevent everything 'as not the ; audience. 'd that they ~ir national y have an to get the Mr. Rosenstock asked if the owner has a time certain when construction would beg~n. Mr. Tomasello said he could speak to the owners of the project and as soon as thff agreement with the manager ~s made a time line could be given. The owners t~ave e~erybody in place. Mr. Rosenstock felt 30 to 60 days should be sufficient. Mr. Tomaselle requested that the Board consider a six-month extension. Mr. Rosenstock said that the project has been discussed since 1995, but Mr~ Tomaselio said that was a different developer. Chairman Wische announced the Public Hearing. No one wished to testify ar Wische closed the public hearing. Motion Mr. Rosenstock moved that the extension for Palm Walk Associates be den seconded by Ms. Cleary. Motion carried 6-0. 8 Chairman d. Motion MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA May 1!, 1998 Vice Chair Dubb said that in the past the Board has approved extensions, bL caveat that there would be no more approvals and Vice Chair Dubb requested noted in the file. Mr. Rumpf said in this case staff would not accept an appl postponement, but Mr. Rumpf was not certai~ that staff could deny a postponement. 8. OTHER None 9. COMMENTS BY MEMBERS Chairman Wische said that this Board requested a meeting with the Attorney Commission on ~ssues pertinent to this Board and the City Commission. Wische said he asked Ms. Byrne to coordinate the meeting. added the [hat this be :ation for a equest for nd the City Chairman Mr. Rumpf said he had two dates available for the Board's consider~ :ion. The Commission is requesting that a joint meeting be considered prior to one of lis Board's regular meetings to begin at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, May 25~n or Tuesday, June 22'a. Mr. Rumpf said it is anticipated the meeting would take one and one-half hodrs and the Board's regular meeting would begin at 7:30 p.m. Mr. Rosenstock asked what the specific issue for the meeting was. Attorney that this Board wanted to have a joint meeting to discuss !,he interaction b Board and the Commission and the review of this Board s recommendal discussion, it was determined to hold the meeting on June 22nd at when all the Board members would be available. 10. ADJOURNMENT Motion Ms. Cleary moved to adjourn. Motion seconded by Mr. Rosenstock. properly adjourned at 7:55 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Barbara M. Madden Recording Secretary (one-tape) 9 .~irullo said ~tween this on, After i:00 p.m, e meeting