Loading...
Minutes 06-09-98 MZNUTES OF THE PLANNTNG & DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETI'NG HELD TN COMM'rSSI'ON CHAMBERS,, CI'TY HALL,, BOYNTON BEACH, FLOR,ZDA~ ON TUESDAY, .1UNE 9,, 1998 AT 7:00 P.M. PRESENT Lee Wische, Chairman James Reed, Vice Chairman J. Stanley Dub~ Pat Frazier Hike Friedland Steve Myott Haurice Rosenstock ABSENT H. Vance Gragg, Alternate William Sherman, Alternate Hike Rumpf, Acting Planning & Zoning Director Hike Pawelczyk, Assistant (. ty Attorney Bulent Kastarlak, Dir. of De elopment 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEG~6.NCE Chairman Wische catted the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m., and led the Pledge of AII~ Flag. lance to the 2. INTRODUCT'rON OF MAYOR~, COMMTSS'rONERS AND BOARD MEMBER Chairman Wische acknowledged the presence i~ the audience of Commissioners and Nellie Denahan. He introduced the Acting Planning & Zoning Director, Secretary, and the board members. 3. AGENDA APPROVAL Hr. Dub~ moved to approve. Hr, Hyott seconded the motion that carried unammoL 4, APPROVAL OF MINUTES Vice Chairman Reed moved to approve. Hr. DubA seconded the motion that carried mie Titcomb ~e Recording nanimously. Chairman Wische acknowledged the arrival of Hayor Taylor. 5. COMMUN'~CA"r/ONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS: Am Planning and Zoning Report 1. Final disposition of the May 26, 1998 Planning & Board meeting agenda items. Hr. Rumpf rePorted the following City Commission action on items addressed by Development Board: ~evelopment Planning & MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACV,, FLORTDA Approved the Bradshaw variances with some discussion but no alter conditions of approval. Riverwalk Plaza remains on the table. This application was originally table, at the City Commission level. Approved Boynton Commerce Center PID major site plan modification and plan with no discussion. Approved the Hamptons of Boynton Beach pro.iect with no discussion. T site plan was approved w th no changes to staff comments, Approved Barrera Land Use Amendment/Rezoning/Annexation and will mo the Ordinance stage. Approved Stor-AII Comprehensive Plan Text Amendment including the add 116.1 to modify the definition of Office/Commercial land use classification new concept proposed by the applicant. This item will move forward to at the State level Mr, Rumpf further reported that additional information was requested regarding th Award Program No progress has been made on that program, However, Mr, Rum Ordinance regarding this program, There is a deadline of October/November, He s Director of Development about this program and it is believed that the deadline c~ concept of program details will be brought forward with respect to program deta meeting, With respect to the issue of landscaping and signs, Mr, Rumpf reported that Ms formalizing recommendations to the Commission and they have referred this to atas Mr, DubA thanked Mr, Rumpf for his quick response on the LDR and zoning maps, 6, OLD BUSINESS: None 7, NEW BUSINESS: A. PUBLIC HEARZNG Code Review 1. Project: Agent: Location: Self Storage facilities (tabled at 5/26/98 William Morris Kilday and Associates, Inc. N/A 2 3U ~E 9, 1998 ~tion of the for 30 days the new site e Hamptons forward to :ion to Policy Io include the A for review )eveiopment f located the ~oke with the ~ be met. A ~ at a future Heyden was force. ~eeting) MEETING MINUTES PLANNI'NG & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLOR]:DA 'IUNE 9, 1998 Description: Request to amend the Land Development ~Regulations, Chapter 1 and Chapter 2, to expand the definition for self- storage facilities to differentiate between limitedl access self- storage facilities and multi-access, self-storage facilities; to add limited access self-storage facilities to the list of permitted uses within the C-1 Office/Professional zoning district, and to change the design requiremen criteria and other development standards for facilities. Chairman Wische advised that a letter was received from the applicant requesting until the meeting on ]une 23, 1998. Motion. Hr. Dub~ moved to approve. Hr. Myott seconded the motion that carried unanimous s, Iocationa] se f-storage )stponement B. USE APPROVAL 1. Project: Agent: Location: Description: Amerope Enterprises, Tnc. (tabled at 5/26/98 meeting) Robert Hat-ton Northeast corner of High Ridge Road and Miner Request for use approval to add wholesale disi ray and nuclear shielding glass products to t~ Commerce PID list of permitted uses. Attorney Pawelczyk administered the oath to all who would testify during these proce When Chairman Wische stated that there were no conditions associated with this a RUmpf advised that there is one condition requiring environmental review. A. Edward Testa advised that the environmental review has already been compl for. Mr. Rumpf explained that Occupational License would hold the final processing of t~ this review was completed. Mr, MyOtt recalled that the board reviewed the manufacture and testing of the p~ ago. He questiOned how the business had changed to make it necessary to come board. Mr. Testa said the business has not changed. He has been conducting this business 18 years. He is doing the same thing in a different location. Mr. Rumpf explained that Mr. Testa was in a location in the M-1 zoning distrk business was relocated to a PID, a review of the use was required. 3 ~,oad ribution of x- High Ridge Jings. )lication, Mr. :ed and paid license until duct months ck before the n the City for When the MEETTNG MI'NUTES PLANNT~NG & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH; FLOi~DA 3U~IE 9, 1998 Motion Mr. Dub~ moved to approve the request for use approval to add wholesale distribL and nuclear shielding glass products to the High Ridge Commerce PID list of pc subject to all staff comments. Mr. Rosenstock seconded the motion that carried unan Realizing that he neglected to announce the Public Hearing, Chairman Wisch announcement. There was no one preSent who wished to speak on this item. C, SITE PLANS NeW Sit~e Plan 1. Project: Agent: Location: Description: Banyan Cove Apartments Chuck Yanette Parker-Yanette Design Group East side of US #1; approximately 300' south of Request for site plan approval to construct units and private recreation on 17.13 acres Chairman Wische advised the applicant that the board has read the back-up packet and is familiar with the application. He requeSted that the applicant address only th( he does not agree with or those that require clarification. ChuCk Yanette; Parker-Yanette Design GrOup, 900 South US Highway Florida, introduced the development team made up of Mark HanSon, Yvonne Consultant and Jim Drotos, the Civil Engineer. ITEM i#4- "All buildings shall be protected throughout by supervised, automatic sprinkler system. (NFPA 101,18-3.5.2)" · ~I'EM#5- 101,18-3.4)' "A fire alarm shall be provided in all three (3) story bL Mr. Yanette reported that the typical scenario is that all buildings would have fire alarms three-story buildipgs are required to have sprinkler systems. Mr. Rumpf said he would have to get clarification of this item since he does not codes. Mark Hanson, 1062 Coral Ridge Drive, Coral Springs, advised that all buildings concrete and thei roofs will have concrete deck with the trusses on top. Mr. Rosenstock Was satisfied with this explanation. 4 :ion of x-ray 'mitted uses nously. made the ~ke Street apartment information se comments ~1, 3upiter, Zeal, Traffic n approved, idings. (NFPA and the ~ow the fire rill be poured MEET/NG MTNUTES PLANNI'NG & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 3UNE 9, 1998 :~tem #9 - "The Police Department realizes that this project has a conceptual approval from D.O.T. and the Police Department did study the enclosed traffic study, however, the Police Department strongly disagrees with the concept of allowing vehicles to exit the complex and turn left to travel south on South State Police Department feels this wil create a dangerous stacking in the safet right-of-way violations." Hr. Yane~e explained that this comment refers to the turn out onto US #1. D.O.T. approval. The applicant's traffic engineer has determined that the left turn southbound is an acceptable turn. The appFcant wants to continue to use that median cut is existing. Hr. Rumpf said this is a condition that the Police Department usually generates. Mi omitted because it is unenforceable. However, it is e safety-related issue. Mr. eliminate the comment because the Police Department takes offense with the f sometimes omits Comments that are not as enforceable as others. The applicant is the approval they have received and they can move forward. Mr. DubA pointed out that the curb cut was put in place by the State (D.O.T.) Chairman Wische agreed and further pointed out that there are many left turns Highway. Mr. Rosenstock added that this is a recommendation. However, it is not our Code. · Item #44 "Reduce building #15 to 2 stories or obtain cot Lago for 3 stories." Mr. Yanette reported that the original intent was to have two-story buildings on this .oad 5. The and severe as provided ~ut to head turn. The ~y times it is ~mpf did not ct that staff :orrect about a left-turn. long Federal ~ violation of ~nt from Via )ortion of the site. However, when they visited the site, they found that there are very unusual ,xotic tropical species remainingi on the site from the previous horticultural garden that existed. ]~ an effort to save as much of th s vegetation as possible, and because of concern about blockin~g the view of the Intracoasta Waterway from the Via Lago residents, the applicant was forced ~.,o use smaller buildings in this akea. That resulted in the need for a three-story bu Id ng to attain ~he number of units they planned. The applicant plans to heavily screen the area with relocate Palms from elsewhere on the site and the addition of Areca Palms. The original plan for thi site showed buildings all through this area. Mr. Rosenstock questioned whether the residents of Via Lago have registered any c( Rumpf advised that he did not receive complaints, but he did receive comm, residents. Staff has been communicating with these residents. This comment w, project more consistent with the Via Lago project. Codes and Ordinances of the City. aplaints. Mr. ats from the )uld make the However, this project meets the setbacks and Ttem ~48 - "As per Comprehensive Plan requirements, ~ove all catch basinsi from paved areas into lawn areas to provide pretreatment, and p,fovide a water quality baffle detail for the pipe leading from the drainage retentio area to the Tntracoastal Waterway'." 5 MEE'r~NG M:LNUTES PLANNTNG & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH~ FLOR[DA Jim Drotos, Civil Engineer with Shah Drotos and Associates, said there are many wa for the State required water quality treatment of stormwater runoff. Hr. Drotos woul~ IL ~IE 9f 1998 /S to prowde like to have the flexibility in the design to meet the State requirements, South Florida Water 4anagement D str ct and the Lake Worth Drainage D str ct w thout having to do it as st pu ated, The applicant ~ r has submitted a prelim nary conceptua drainage plan as required at this point, Once they ente the final design stage, they will review the actual water quality treatment of the sto~ mwater pr or to discharging through Lake Worth, Mr. Rumpf said he could only endorse the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, in response to Mr. Rosenstock's question about submitting drainage plans, Mr. Droto: they have on y begun the final eng neering design on this project. Tt will probably b two weeks. Mr. Rosenstock advised that ~he board could approve the project pendin the Planning Department. Mr. Drotos said he could submit something to thc Department showing the treatment facilities being planned, but it would not be a fina Mr. DubA pointed out that a permit is required from the State for the outfali. -I applicant will have to meet all of the requirements. Mr. Rumpf agreed that there i that the project will ultimately meet all of the requirements. Mr. Hanson reported that a similar project was recently completed in the Village Beach They did pretreatment for the dra nage by providing exfiltration trenches. Al goes into the lake system and is treated before it outfails into the Lake Worth Dra There are other ways to do the pretreatment and the applicant would like that flexibi Hr. Rosenstock questioned why it is a problem to submit the drainage plans to Hanson explained that these are .lengthy documents and every time there is a chai retention area, all documents must be changed. Mr. Hanson is certain the applica the standards. Vice Chairman Reed pOinted out that our Comprehensive: Plan requires a specific I the present time, the State has appropriated $1 million to restore the Lake W°rtl would prefer to see the comment stand until the apPlicant can come forward proposal that has benefits beyond what the Comprehensive Plan offers. Mr. Myott alsO felt that if the aPplicant was proposing something better than the Plan requires, he would support it. HoWever, he feels it will be easier to collect th parking aisles than it Will be from the grassed area, Mr. Hanson said he would like to leave as much playable greenspace as environment and an exfiltration system provides an excellent drainage system. Chairman Wische pointed out that in addition to the conditions of approval, the appl to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and South Florida Wate advised that complete in i approval by Engineering ~lan, erefore, the no question F North Palm the drainage !age District. ~/. ihe City. Mr. Ige to a small it will exceed rocedure. At Lagoon. He ith a specific .'omprhensive water in the ~dssible in this :ant is subject Management MEETZNG MI'NUTES PLAN NTNG & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORZDA District review. Mr. Hanson said he is used to this procedure and has given this a thought, He is confident he can work this out with Engineering, 31~ ~IE 9, 1998 reat deal of Mr. Rumpf recommended that an additional clause be added to the comment that rea,~ s: or the intent of policy is equally met through alternative me,ins · ' nt" satisfactory to the Engmeenng Departme . Mr, Myott recommended adding "as long as this meets the standard in terms of c outfall", The applicant agreed to this addition, Item #51- "Transfer, in the form of a Quit Claim Deed to Via area used for the wall structure which ~s encroaching onto the prG northwest corner of the parc . Hr. Yanette explained that there is a privacy wall ~)ehind one of the Via Lago units. would prefer to provide an easement rather than a Quit Claim Deed. Mr. Hat applicant would grant the easement in perpetuity (until the wall falls down). When asked why the applicant prefers an easement rather than a Quit Claim Deec said the property line is defined on many documents. It is easier to grant the ease residents of Via Lago do not have an objection to that proposal. Item #52- "Reduce the height of the column and aluminum fenc~ to 4' along the US 1 righbof-way. To retain the 5' to 5'-3" height, a va additional height must be obtained." The applicant is attempting to provide a 6' high sig~ wall. They want to have the sig by columns and decorative 'ail in between another similar column. This wi aesthetically pleasing wall system for the signage and entry. This is not intended system. When you pass the outermost columns, a 4' fence begins that meets proposal is a decorative element that is part of the sign wall. Mr. Rumpf explained that staff ~s consistently applying the Code in this circun applicant will have to go through the variance process. Chairman Wische announced the Public Hearing. Bob Harper, 28 Via Laoo, said most of the residents believe this will be avc project. He enumerated the following: The residents of Via Lago have no problem with the applicant granting an easement than a Quit Claim Deed, 2. With respect to the lighting, the residents want to make sure the lighting provide security and no glare for both complexes. 7 ~lity and the ]o, the land ~erty at the 'he applicant ;on said the Mr. Hanson ~ent and the combination lance for the ,wall flanked provide an be a fence 2ode. Their ;tance. The y compatible rather balanced to [4EETTNG MZNUTES PLANNI'NG & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORI'DA 3UNE 9f 1998 3. With regard to drainage, the res dents want to ensure that whatever the develol~er does will not create.a drainage issue in Via Lago or the vacant property between the two prtjects. I. 4. The residents have discussed landscaping and have been discussing the colors Of roofs with the applicant. 5. One consideration not brought up, but included in the attached letter, addresses ~he possibility of getting a variance for the number of required parking spaces. There are 180 ~nits and the Code requires 375 parking spaces. This property lies just south of the inlet. Th~ residents of Via Lago would like this project to retain as mu~:h of the naturai beauty that currently exists. Because of the parking requirements, there w I be spaces dose to a natural beach containing a great deal of mangrove trees. The residents r~quested tl~at consideration be g yen to reducing the required number of. parking spaces so that the developer can moue two of the buildings back approximately 30. This would require the elimination of approximately 15 parking spaces. Tn response to Cha rman Wische's quest on, Hr. Harper said the [esidents have ~ consideration with the developer who has no objection to this request. As currently building is very close to the beach. Tf the parking is eliminatec~, it will be more appealing from the water view. Tt was confirmed that a variance would be required to eliminate the parking spaces. Hr. Hanson explained that Boynton's parking requirements for a project that is self- far in excess of what is needed for the project. He said the project he complete( Farms Road is a very similar project that required less parking per unit than Approximately 40 to 50 parking spaces are vacant in the evening. The Code requir the amenities. Host of the residents do not drive to the amenities. Hr. Harper said the issue of the three-story building was addressed. The working with the developers to determine how the building can be altered .' the building would be a one-story structure next to Via Lago. Tn additio '~nclude additional mature landscaping in that area. The final plans have viewed, but the residents feel they will be able to work out this issue with thc Hr. Harper introduced Bob Taylor and Bill Edwards, board members from Via gentleman wished to make any additional comments. Hs. Frazier questioned whether or not the ~ssue of moving the building back had with staff. Hr. Harper responded affirmatively and advised that Hr. Rumpf visited the site to( Heyden visited the site previously. The parking controls this issue. Staff does not with this request. scussed this roposed, the aesthetically ~ntained are on Propedty this project. parking for residents are that part of they would ~ot yet been developers. tgo. Neither ;en discussed y and Tambri nave an 'ssue MEETZNG MZNUTES PLANNt'NG & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORTDA 3UNE 9, 1998 With no one else wishing to speak on this application, Chairman Wische closed the public hearing. ! Hr. Dub~ said he drives to the amenities in his community. He questioned where the people would park if the spaces are eliminated behind Building #9. Mr. Rosenstock agreed with the developer that most of these projects have a tremen of excess parking. He pointed out that if the neighbors and developer get toge Planning & Development Board approves the project pending the staff recommenda' amendments thereto as made this evening, the developer can consent to apply variances. As IVlr. Myott explained that the board was not presented with colored elevations, roc or graphic information of the project, Mr. Yanette displayed the colored elevations an He further explained that if the Planning & Development Board approved this proj~ would appear on the Consent Agenda for the City Commission meeting. Everything be worked out with the developer before that meeting. Mr. Rosenstock said the approval would be contingent on the amendments made al The secretary would transcibe the comments for approval. Vice Chairman Reed said there are three elements that require clarification: Whether or not to allow the decorative fence that exceeds 4' ar variance; ous amount aer and the ons and the for the two tile samples color chips. :t tonight, it )uld have to meeting. requires a There is a proposal with respect to water treatment that is other tnan what is required by the Comprehensive Plan; and 3. There is a proposal that would require another variance for parking. These items would have to go forward for more work before the entire package is complete. Vice Chairman Reed agreed with Mr. Rosenstock's comment that most places seem to have too much parking. ~[n this case, there may be a reason to make some of that parking area pervious instead of hardtop. Mr. Dub~ referred to Ordinance 97-22 that states the nine variance requests that ar the Commission. Parking is not one of those nine items. The Planning & Devel approves parking. Therefore, this issue will come back to the Planning & DevelopmE Attorney Pawelczyk administered the oath to Bulent Kastarlak, Director of Developm~ Mr. Kastarlak advised that if the board agrees to reduce the ratio of parking to ~ create an exception and set a precedent. Furthermore, by reducing the number of F the developer might want to build more units. He suggested that the developer le; as is and eliminate the parking spaces to add more additional greenspace. 9 ,~ approved by ~pment Board ~t Board. nits, it would ~rking spaces, ye everything MEETZNG MZNUTES PLANN'rNG & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORZDA 31. Mr. Rosenstock clarified for Mr. Kastarlak that the proposal is to eliminate parking sp~ one building back to perserve the beach area along the Intracoastal Waterway. Th, not intend to reduce the parking ratio, Mr, Hanson suggested moving the site plan forward in its present configuration and will file for the variances. [f the boaYd wants to allow the reduced number of parkin, applicant can adjust the site plan. Mr. Rosenstock asked if Mr. Hanson would pledge that he would fulfill the obligatic stated, Mr. Hanson responded affirmatively and stated he is in agreement on ail is: Lago and thinks they can work outthe one building issue to everyone's satisfaction. In response to Hs. Frazier's question, Mr. Hanson said this project would attract business people, single people, and single parents. The rentals without premiums ' $1,000 to $1,300 per month. Each of the buildings will have different coI0r schemes. Mr. Rosenstock asked Attorney Pawelczyk if he could include in his motion the staten the minutes by the developer, the board and the residents of Via Lago. Attorn responded affirmatively as long as reference ismade to the particular comments that Mr. Rumpf enumerated the comments as follows: Items 4 & 5 need to be clarified. Mr. Rumpf will confirm that the lane reversed. Item #9 is a recommendation only. If we need to reject it, it wi based on the attorney's recommendation. In the past, if something is enforceable or adhered to, then it is rejected. Hr. Rosenstock clarified that if this is not against the Codes of the City of Boynb developer can go ahead with the project. Item #44 regards the height of Building #15. The comment st~ unless it is altered to restrict Building #15 to two stories. Item #48 regards drainage. Language will be added to alter comment to say, "or the intent of the Comprehensive Plan is equally · . ns~, through an alternative engineer ng mea . Mr. Dub6 referred to Item #44 and pointed out that the developer does not want building to two stories. Attorney pawelczyk advised that the board said they wante( comment. Mr. Rumpf pointed out that the cOndition reads: "Reduce Building #15 to 2 sb consent from Via Lago for 3 stOries''. He suggested modifying the condition to rea( written consent from Via Lago HOA per design''. The developer agreed to this modi! 10 ~IE 9~ 1998 :es to move board does ~e applicant spaces, the Is that were ~es with via me retirees, ~ill cost from .'nts made in y PaWelczyk were made. ~age can be be lot Beach, the 1ds :his net 'o reduce the to reject that ies or obtain "... or obtain ation. MEETING MTNUTES PLANN]:NG & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH~ FLORa'DA 'IL ~IE 9, 1998 Item #51 will be altered to have either a Quit Claim Deed or an easement~ in perpetuity agreed upon by the parties. / / Ttem #52 relates to the height of the fence that is within the building setback area, This condition will remain as is and the developer ~'ill submit a variance application, Motion IVlr. Rosenstock moved to approve Banyan Cove Apartments located on the east approximately 300 feet south of Lake Street as spelled out in our agenda item #7. the staff comments as reiterated by Nike Rumpf; namely Items 4, 5, 9, 44, 48, and easement. Item #52 stays as a variance. It must obtain approval from the City Co~ the Planning & Development Board. Mr. Friedland seconded the motion. Mr. Rosenstock referred to Item #53 and the discussion about lighting. He developer that im proper lighting would result in no security or too much glare. agreed to work out the lighting problem and use shields at the top of the lights. Mr. Rumpf referred to a letter submitted by William Edwards, Robert Harper and behalf of Via Lago. Their Comment #1 references staff comment #43. However, does not totally cover their request. This issue can be worked out between the devE Lago. (A copy of the letter is attached to these minutes.) The motion carried unanimously, 8, OTHER None 9, COMMENTS BY MEMBERS None 10, AD3OURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Planning IA Development Board, made by Mr. Dube and seconded to adjourn the meeting. The meeting Properly adj( p.m. net N Prainito (,.~net M: Deputy City Clerk (Two Tapes) 11 le of US #1 I subject to · which is an ~mission and ~minded the ~e developer )b Taylor on )mment #43 oper and Via motion was ~rned at 8:20 Mr. Mike Rumpf Acting Director of Planning and Zoning City Hall Boynton Beach,Florida 33435 Reference : Banyan cove Apartments ( "Project" ) Dear Mike, In anticipation of the Planning & Development Board reviewing the above-referenced Project on June 9th,we want to submit the following issues for consideration the deliberations by the Board. Prior to the meeting or 9th,several meetings have been held between represent- atives of Via Lago and the proposed Banyan Cove ApartmE project. These discussions have been constructive and have demonstrated the willingness of the Project principles work closely with the residents of Via Lago as the pro2 moves through the approval process. Our intention this evening is to formalize our primary issues and to make a part of the Board's minutes. The issues ( and references to your Board packet,where applicable ) are as follows : 1. Every effort should be made to reduce to an absolute minimum any glare from the Project lighting into the t! Lago residences. As part of this issue,it is requested lighting be provided for the walkway north of Building along the walkway connecting the Project property to t! Lago property ( refer to Comment 43 ). 2. Consideration should be given to the drainage lssue~ the proposed project to the Intracoastal. Use of retail walls,sea walls,etC.,should ensure the continued viabi2 of the existing beach front and natural landscaping ( to comments 10 and 36 in the Board packet ). 3. Efforts should be made to remove and replace the ma] at the end of the exisitng common road running through Lago and ending at the property line of the proposed P~ ( refer to comment 46 in the Board packet ). ~ring the ~t ~o =_ct them Via ithat [e Via from lng ity efer holes Via ' to]ect 4. Every effort should be made to landscape around the periphery of the parking spaces located on the Eastern end of the project. Such landscaping will alleviate the starkness of the asphalt as seen by the residents of V~a Lago. Also,pavers should be used on the parking spaces~at the Eastern end of the project ( refer to comment 23 and 45 in the Board packet ). 5. Consideration should be given to eliminating some o~ the parking requirements for the pool area and buildings )~9 and I6 so that Buildings 8 and 9 can be set back further fi'om the water and beach area. 6. The roofing materials,colors,etc.,should be consistent and compatible with the general appearance of the Via ago community ( refer to Comment 41 ). 7. Consideration should be given to reducing the numbe of stories for Building 15 to two ( vs. three ). such a c] ange will help to maintain the compatibility between the Pr~ ject and Via Lago ( refer to comment 44 ). 8. Consideration should be given to continuing the wal the northwest corner of the Via Lago property to the existing wall running between Ben Venuto's Restaurant the Project's property. 9. Provide mature landscaping between Building 16 and Vai Lago property..the Northeast corner. from Your careful consideration of these issues during your deliberations will be sincerely appreciated. Respectfully submitted, June 9,1998