Loading...
Minutes 05-14-96 MINUTES OF THE PLAN~ING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING HELD IN COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL,' BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON TUESDAY, MAY 14, 1996, AT 7:0C P.M. PRESENT J. Stanley Dubb, Chairman Jim Golden, Vice Chairman Jose Aguila Robert Eisner Barry Hill Maurice Rosenstock Lee Wische Pat Frazier, Alternate James Reed. Alternate Tambri Heyden~ Planning & Zoning Director Jerzy Lewicki, Assistant Planner Mike Rumpf, Senior Planner Mike Haag, Zoning & Site Develop. Admin. 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairman Dub6 called the meeting to order at 7:07 p.m., and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 2. INTRODUCTION OF MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS, AND BOARD MEMBERS Chairman Dub6 acknowledged the presence in the audience of Vice Mayor Jaskiewlcz and Commissioner Tillman, and introduced the Board members. He announced that alternate member, James Reed, would be participating in the board discussion, but would not be a voting member of the beard unless one of the regular members leaves the meeting. 3, AGENDA APPROVAL Mr. Rosenstock acknowledged the number ol residents in the audience who were present to address the rezoning of the Hills al Lake Eden PUD. Motion Mr. Rosenstock moved to move up item 7.A. 2, Hills at Lake Eden PUD, to make it Item 7.A.1 in order to expedite ~his process. Vice Chairman Golden seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Motion Mr. Rosenstock moved to accept the agenda as amended. Vice Chairman Golden seconded the motion which carrie~ unanimously. 4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Mr. Wische moved to approve the minutes of April 23. 1996. Mr. Aguila seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 5. COMMUNICATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 A. Report from the Planning and Zoning Department 1) Final Disposition of Last Meeting's Agenda Items This item was deferred until later in the meeting. 6. OLD BUSINESS: None 7. NEW BUSINESS: A. PUBLIC HEARING Rezonin.q Project Name: Agent: Applicant/Owner: Location: Description: Hills at Lake Eden PUD Burl Gentry Newport Properties, Inc. 15.45 acres located at the west side ol the intersection of Seacrest Boulevard and Gulfstream Boulevard Request to amend original rezoning conditions to reduce the required minimum unit size to be constructed in the PUD from 2,400 to 1,800 air- conditioned square feet and reduce the required average size of the units to be constructed in the PUD from 2,600 to 2,400 air-conditioned square feet. The presentation was dispensed with since all board members were familiar with the project. None of the board members had any questions of staff. Burl Gentry, Gentry Engineering, agent for the applicant, advised that the developer did a marketing study prior to initiating plans and the final development. He found that this would be an overbuild as far as overpricing the homes for this area. Because of this concern, he has present information that justifies the request for 2.400 square feet average and 1,800 square feet minimum. This would allow the developer to scale the homes between Seacrest and Swinton. The larger homes will be kept closer to Swinton near the higher priced homes in the area, and the smaller homes would be in the area of Seacrest to keep the homes comparable to the homes ocated across the street. The developer is in agreement with all of the other conditions which were part of the approval. That included ail of the preserves, wall, berm, and perimeter landscaping. The problem the developer has is being able to build something he can sell. Mr. Wische pointed out that the developer ~s reverting back to the first site plan that was submitted. The board unanimously rejected that plan. Mr. Wische asked if the developer was still getting paper MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 value forthe preserve and setbacks. Mr. Gentry said the conditions approved by the City Commission are being maintained. Mr. Wische said his objection to this request is that the board denied the original request. The applicant submitted a new site plan requesting larger lot sizes. The board denied that request also. The applicant then wentbefore the City Commission, and they agreed to the plan for 2,400 square feet and 2,60Osquare feet, The applicant also agreed to the larger/ct sizes. He feels the developer should have had enough foresght to do the studies prior to making an agreement. Mr. Wische will hbld the dave oper to the agreement The applicant is now reverting back to the 1,800 square feet and 2,400 square feet. Mr. Wische will not support this project. Mr. Gentry advised the applicant originally requested the 1,800 square foot minimum which was the same as the prior zoning. Mr. Aguila feels this request is simpty for the developer to make more money. He does not feel comfortable with the arguments made in the staff report or the arguments made by the applicant. CHAIRMAN DU E~E~ ANNOUNCED THE PUBLIC HEARING. He requested that the speakers not be repetitive. Ellen Smith, Unruh, Smith & Associates, represented the Neighborhoods of Lake Eden. This request violates acommitmentthe developer made less than 60 days ago. The 1,800 square feet was part of the original request. That request was supposed to be substantiated with market studies about the viability of the homes on these lots. The Neighborhoods o! Lake Eden asked for copies of the market study, but were told no study existed. Staff also requested market information, but that information was not supplied. The criteria that ensures viability is compatibility. At the time of the last request, Ms. Smith reviewed seven standards of the Code that speak directly to compatibility. The neigt~borhood directly adjacent to this project is Lake Eden Plat 4. In the last two years, the average home that was sold in that neighborhood was 2,800 squar6 feet under air. The Neighborhoods of Lake Eden objects to being looked down upon from a interior project which is at an elevation 1,500 feet higher. She requested that the board assist in protecting one ef the finest neighborhoods by not allowing this project which will be at Code minimums. She requested that the developer be required to fulfill his commitment. Gary Lehnertz, 619 SW 2 Ave, feels the problem with this development is that it smacks of someone saying, "1 can't make enough money. I want more, so I have to do something to do that." The people who suffer are the residents of Boynton Beach. in Boynton Beach, we have seen the need for larger houses and lots, and more upscale housing that can attract CEOs from large businesses. This area is ideal for that 'type of housing. The developer is proposing just the opposite. He urged the board to recommend denial of this project. Bob Lalane, 832 SW 32 Ave., ives four houses from the corner of this development. His house is over 5,000 square feet under air. The frontage of the lot is 200'. He does not feel that what the developer wants is fair. The homeowners made concessions, and so did the developer. He requested that the board "just say no". He wants to see a nice development which is compatible with the neighborhood. MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYN~ON BEACH, FLORI DA MAY 14, 1996 CHAIRMAN DUBI~ POLLED THE AUDIENCE TO SEE iF THERE WAS ANYONE IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT OTHER THAN THE APPLICANT'S AGENT. THERE WAS NO ONE PRESENT WHO WAS IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED Mr. Rosenstock reported that he was a participant in the discussions that have taken place since the beginning of this project. His opinions have not changed. He does not feel the developer ~s doing the right thing [or ti~e citizens of Boynton Beach. 'It is unnecessary to take a thriving upscale neighborhood, and reduce the property values by allowing a lower cost project to come into the area. He Will not support this project. Mr. Hill and Vice Chairman Golden agreed with the remarks made by Messrs. Wische and Rosenstock. Chairman Dub6 reported that one of the things that came out of the Vision 20/20 Conference was the fact that upscale housing is needed east of 1-95. There are not many places east of 1-95 to accomplish this. To reduce the square footage of the homes will defeat what it took 2Y2 days to gain consensus on. Motion Mr. Aguila moved to DENY the request to amend the original rezonmg conditions to reduce the required minimum unit size to be constructed in the PUD from 2,400 to 1,800 air-conditioned square feet, including staff comments. Mr. Rosenstock seconded the motion which carried unanimously. TO ACCOMMODATE THE PEOPLE REMAINING IN THE AUDIENCE, CHAIRMAN DUBt~ ACCEPTED A MOTION TO REORDER THE AGENDA. Motion Vice Chairman Golden moved to amend the agenda to move Item 7.B.3, The Boyn~on Beach Mall, to just after the request we reviewed, Item 7.A.1 HiIIs at Lake Eden PUD. This will be the new Item 7.A.2. Mr. Eisner seconded the motion which carried unanimously. AFTER THE MOTION WAS MADE, THE BOARD MEMBERS REALIZED THE APPLICANT HAD NOT YET ARRIVED. Motion Vice Chairman Golden moved to delete the previous motion. Mr. Wische seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Conditional Use Project Name: Agent/Applicant: Owner: Location: Description: St. Joseph's Episcopal Church and School Jerome F. Milord St. Joseph's Episcopal Church and School 3300 South Seacrest Boulevard Request to construct a 7,591 square foot new library, 4 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND .DEVELOPMENT BOARD, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 art and lecture building, housing a preschool facility, and a 299 square foot addition to the Classroom #5 building in place of the demolished library and lecture/art buildings. The board dispensee with a staff presentation since they were all familiar with the back-up material. Mr. Lewicki used the overhead projector to display the site plan. Bill Milord, 3600 South Conqress Avenue, advised that he reviewed the 27 comments in Exhibit "D", and agreed that all of them would be addressed prior to issuance of the building permit. They had no objection to any of the comments. Mr. Aguiia noted that the sight of the air conditioning units on the roof of the new gym is terrible. He asked Mr. Milord to COnsider screening those units. He also questioned what the applicant plans to do about the units on the roof of the new building. Mr. Milord advised that no one else expressed a concern. The gymnasium is already constructed, and has been approved. At this point, he did not know what the applicant could do about Mr. Aguila's concern. Mr. Aguila said screening can be added at any time. He requested that the applicant consider screening the existing equipment, and advised that he would add this as a condition of approval. Mr. Rosenstock questioned why staff did not pick up this item since there is a Code requirement which states that if the equipment is visible from a distance of 600', it must be screened. Ms. Heyden advised that the Screening requirement is part of the Community Design Plan that was adopted in April of 1995. Mr. Milord staled that the units for the new buitding are not nearly as large as the ones for the gymnasium. In addition, the units are already screen by the parapets. Mr. Aguila advised that the Code requires the units to be screened so that they are not visible for 600'. CHAIRMAN DUB~ ANNOUNCED THE PUBLIC HEARING. THERE WAS NO ONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO SPEAK ON THIS PROJECT. Mr. Wische advised the applicant that there are many inexpensive materials that can be used to shield the air conditioning units. Mr. Aguila suggested using a 2" square aluminum tube attached to the roof with a fabriC. This isnot an expensive item, and the net effect is a much more attractive project. Motion Vice Chairman Golden moved to recommend approval of the conditional use request to construct a 7,591 square foot new library, art and lecture building, including a preschool facility, and a 299 square foot addition to the Classroom #5 to replace the demolished library and lecture/art buildings, subject to all staff comments including appropriate screening in accordance with City Code. Mr. Wische seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 5 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 Land Use Amendment/Rezoninq Project Name: Agent: Applicant/Owner: Location: Description: The Boynton Beach Community Development Corporation (CDC) Law Office of Allen Wm. Martincavage, Sr. The Boynton Beach Community Development Corporation (CDC) Three parcels totaling 0.339 acre at 2191 Seacrest Boulevard (southwest corner of Gateway Boulevard and Seacrest Boulevard) ReqUest to amend the land use from Moderate Density Residential to Office Commercial and to rezone from R-1 (Single-Family Residential) to C-1 (Office/Professional) At the board's request, no staff presentation was provided. Chairman Dub6 was under the impression that the use intended was a temporary use, and at some point in time, there would no longer be a need'for the use at this location. Once the parcel is rezoned to C-1, someone else could come in with plans for a two-story office building. Ms. Heyden explained that the use intended is not a temporary use. Diana Bowman, attorney with the law firm of Allen Martincavaqe, 1200 South Federal Hiqhwa¥, represented the Boynton Beach CommLmity Development Corporation. This building wilt be used for their offices. The BBCDC is a non-profit corporation that hal ps working couples or single people buy affordable housing. This corporation's main goal is to help beautify and increase· property values in the City. The BBCDC already owns these three lots which are in the neighborhood where they are working to help people get affordable housing. Because this land is so close to the 1-95 intemhange, it is not beneficiaJ to Keep it as residential This will be used as an office to take applications from prospective home buyers.. In addition, there will be board meetings of the organization held at this location on a monthly basis. Mr. Aguila questioned what would happen in the future if Gateway Boulevard is widened. Ms. Heyden said such a move would probably render the building unusable. The building is only 3' back from the sidewalk. Mr. Aguila pointed out that if this did, happen, the BBCDC would no longer be there, but the zoning would be C-1. He questioned whether the zoning could be conditioned upon that building and that use, and it reverts back to original zoning should, by widening the road, or by the BBCDC moving, or whatever, they no longer use that site. Ms. Heyden felt that was a reasonable condition. Ms. Heyden also pointed out that at this time, the rezoning is in connection with this particular use. However. if the road is not widened and someone else in the future wants to redesign the building, they would be allowed whatever height is allowed in the zoning district. Her suggestion is to limit the height to one-story. Mr. Aguila recommended adding the condition that the height remain at one story. Mr. Rosenstock expressed concern about the legality of the board's ability to do this pending the 6 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 conditions mentioned by Mr. Aguila: He feels the City Attorney should check this out to see if this zoning change can be approvec with the conditions discussed. At this point, he would vote against this. Mr. Aguila feels Mr. Rosenstock's concerns were legitimate. He suggested approving the project. and prior to the City Commission meeting, the City Attorney can investigate this situation prior to approval by the City Commission. CHAIRMAN DUBI~ ANNOUNCED THE PUBLIC HEARING. Ernestine McCloud, 2181 NW 1 Street, asked if the City would be willing to buy out the rest of the residential if the zoning is going to change. She explained that she is located right at the corner of Gateway Boulevard. Chairman Dub~ explained that this change will improve the area because this building is currently an eyesore. The BBCDC will be improving the building. The board is now discussing including restrictions on the rezoning so that it cannot be converted into an unsightly office building which would change the area. Only three lots will be rezoned to C-1. Shirley Jaskiewicz, 1917 .SW 13 Avenue, was happy that the board is taking action on this property beca~use it is currently an eyesore. This particular corner is as wide as it will ever be. It is currently four lanes with turn lanes on both sides. There will be improvements from Seacrest to Federal Highway with regard to widening the road slightly; however, it will only be widened to three lanes. Ms. Heyden advised that the building will not change, but there will be a parking lot constructed with landscaping. That area will face Mrs. McCloud's property. In Vice Chairman Golden's opinion, there is a larger issue here that has been overlooked. When he worked as a member of City sta[f in the 1980s, prior to the construction of the interchange, there were several developers who asked about the opportunities to rezone this area east of 1-95. The developers realized that with the interchange going ~n, this area would be a prime location for commercial development. If this request is approved, it will set the stage for other developers to request rezoning of other parcels in the area. Since this area is a great location for commercial development and a major entrance to the City, the City should develop a plan for this area which Would provide something nice as an entrance feature. Motion Mr. Aguila moved to approve the request to amend the land use from Moderate Density Residential to Office Commercial and to rezone from R-1 (Single-Family Residential) to C-1 (Office/Professional) with the following conditions: Should the Boynton Beach Community Development Corporation relocate to another site, the zoning reverts back to the R-1 adjacent zoning classification; 2. that the height of the building comply with R-1 zoning; and 3. that the City Attorney confirm to the City Commission that these conditions are legal. MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 Mr. Rosenstock seconded the motion. Vice Chairman Golden advised that he would not support this request because he feels that approving this request will set the stage for something that may be undesirable down the road in terms of other rezon~ngs. He feels there should be a master plan. Mr. Aguita felt Vice Chairman Golden made a very good point, but he does not anticipate a problem. Mr. Rosenstock questioned whether Vice Chairman Golden's point was being defeated by the fact that Mr Aguila makes the point that once this occupant leaves that location, the zoning will revert to the original zoning category. Vice Chairman Golden is still concerned that while this is zoned commemial, developers could come in for rezonmgs on property within the area. Attorney Bowman explained that thero is a stipulation in the deed from the City which states that if the use is ceased, the zoning will revert back. Vice Chairman Golden advised that he is not concerned about this property, but he does have concern about other properties in the area. Mr. Wische explained that future requests can be dealt with when they are received. The motion carried 6-1. (Vice Chairman Golden cast the dissenting vote.) B. SITE PLANS New Site Plan Projecl Name: Agent: Applicant/Owner: Location: Description: Nautica Sound (f/k/a Knollwood Groves PUD) Karyn I. Janssen Kilday and Associates, Inc. Alan Fant, GL Homes of Boynton E~each Il Corporation Northwest corner of Lawrence Road and the LWDD L-19 canal Request for site plan approval of private recreation, common area landscaping, and project signage for a 424 unit, single-family residential PUD No presentation was made by staff. Pauline Walter, Kilda¥ & Associates, 1551 Forum Place, West Palm Beach, said there are several comments requiring discussion. However. she raised one additional issue. This project abuts Hypoluxo Road. The originally-submitted landscape plans proposed only landscape and berming around Hypoluxo Road. Based on in-house discussion, the applicant would like to amend the plans to propose a wall within the Hypoluxo Road buffer. The wall would be centrally located within the buffer. All of the required landscaping would be on the northern (exterior) side of the wall. Additional landscaping would be put on the southern side of the wall. The color of the wall would 8 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 be consistent with the sign and other amenities at Nautica Sound. This wall has been discussed with the Planning and Zoning Department, Engineenng, Utilities: and the Building Department prior to bdnging this issue forward. None of the departments had any major issues. The minor issues have been worked out. The applicant will amend the plans if this is agreeable to the board. In response to Mr. Aguila's question, Ms. Walter advised that there ~s an 80' canal right-of-way, and the wall will be set back about 25' from the project's property line. Ms. Waiter addressed the comments as follows: oEngineering Comm?nt ~3 - The applicant has provided a bus pickup/drop-off area for the residents f Nautica Sound. L~ghting will be Progided. However, the applicant would like a modification to Comment #3 which says, "A timer will be instaJled which will correspond with the school's schedule for bus pickup and drop-offs for lighting of that facility." The reason for this modification is to eliminate having ]ight shine imo the rear yards of some of the residences. Mr. Hukill has agreed with this modification. The board members had no objection to this request. Engineering Comment #4 - Mr. Hukill has requested that continuous curbing be utilized in the recreation area parking lot as opposed to wheel stops. His rationale is that it will increase the amount of open space. Ms. Walter explained that the recreation area already has a substantial amount of open space. She requested consideration for the wheel stops as proposed on the site plan. The board members had no objection to the use of wheel stops. CHAIRMAN DUBE~ ACKNOWLEDGED THE PRESENCE IN THE AUDIENCE OF MAYOR AND MRS. TAYLOR, AND COMMISSIONER TILLMAN. Building Comment #5 - Ms. Walter said there is a discrepancy in the interpretation of sign face area. The way the definition for defining sign face area reads, if a sign ~s composed of individual letters or symbols, using the wall as the background with no added decorations, the sign area shall be calculated by taking the sum of the areas of the smallest contiguous rectangle containing letters. symbols or continuous lines. The applicant has defined this as follows: Because the letters are put on the background of the sign, you would take a box that would go around the letters and the symbols to calculate the sign face area. The Code allows 32 square feet of sign face area. The applicant is proposing 23 square feet of sign face area. The discrepancy in the interpretation is due to the fact that the applicant is using a cast stone as the background of the wall as opposed to a CBS wall. That opens the interpretation for that to be considered a decoration. In that case, the Building Department is recommending that the sign face area be calculated including the whole face of the sign. While the applicant understands the Building Department's concerns, Nautica Sound is attempting to become an upscale development. The use of items like cast stone and soft muted Mediterranean colors sets forth that image. She requested the board's consideration to go with the applicant's definition of sign area. MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 Chairman Dubb pointed out that the recommendation is that the applicant either change this or seek a variance. However, Ms. Walter explained that even with a variance, the increase would not equal the sign face area of the wall because an applicant is only allowed to increase by 25 percent. Mr. Wische agreed with the applicant's interpretation of the measurement for sign face area. Ms. Heyde~ said she would tike to discuss this with the City Attorney so that she can ensure that the City is nol deviating from what has been done in the pabst. Planning & Zoning Comment #13 - This is a requirement to provide a continuous hedge around the parking Iht within'the recreation area. Th, e applicant has provided the continuous hedge around the parking lot where it is visible, from adjacent right-of-ways. This is consistent with Code. The Code also requires that along interior lot lines, discretion can be used with berming and landscaping to visually screen the parking area. Ms. Walter displayed a rendering of the recreation area showing that the perimeter of the entire recreation areaw Ibe bermed and landscaped. That-berming and landscaping, in conjunction with the recreational amenities, will adequately,screen the parking area on two sides, and the hedge will screen the remaining two sides. The applicant is attempting to keep the circulation open for users of the facilities. Ms. Waiter requested that the berming and landscaping on the perimeter be counted toward screening the parking iot. Ms. Heyden believes this comment can be worked out with the applicant. In response to Mr. Aguila's question, Ms. Walter advised that the applicant has no objection to the condition relative to the bus shelter area. With regard to the comment regarding the use of continuous curbing rather than wheel stops, Mr. Eisner felt there would be less of a trip hazard if the continuous curbing was put in. Ms. Heyden pointed out that wheel stops are less expensive than continuous curbing, and under the Code, the applicant has an option to use either. Ms. Walter said the difference in cost between continuous curbing and wheel stops is only $750. Therefore, cost is not a factor in the decision to go with wheel stops. Planning & Zoning Comment #14 - This comment addresses a continuous hedge in the buffer on both the east and west sides of the property. On the rendering, Ms. Walter showed a 15' FPL easement. FPL lines run straight through this parcel of property. The developer worked with FPL aha the lines will be relocated; however, FPL wants to maintain a 15' easement to allow access to the poles where the lines will turn. FPL will not allow a hedge in the 15' easement. The applicant proposes that the hedge will be installed around the back of the property and wrap into the FPL easement with a curve, around the sides of the lot. Ms. Heyden agreed to delete Comment #14 if the applicant provides a letter from FPL. Ms. Walter is certain FPL will provide confirmation that they will not allow the hedge. Planning & Zoning Comment #17 - This comment requires that the Phase II landscape buffers be constructed whenever a contiguous property develops even if the developer ~s not ready with l0 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 Phase Il. The developer does not have an objection other than requesting consideration for them to install only the hedge, rather than the hedge and trees. The trees will be installed with the Phase II development. Mr. Rosenstock explained that if the trees are planted prior to development, they will be mature when the development comes in and will provide a better buffer. Mr. Rosenstock said he would not support the project unless the applicant agrees to plant the trees and hedge. Ms. Walter confirmed that the applicant will plant the trees along with the hedges. Comment #17 can remain as written, and the applicant agrees to comply. Mr. Reed noted that the three smallest lakes are less than 18' deep. He does not believe they are large enough to be viable especially in the dry season In addition, as small and shallow lakes, they will be an extraordinary expense on the homeowners' association. Ron Last, Project Enqineer, Lawson& Noble, said thesame type of lakes exist in Nautica. This lake configuration~ is consistent throughout the area. In times of drought, the lakes will recede, but no extensive problems hav~ been experienced with this configuration. Mr. Reed appreciated the answer, but stated that if he was a buyer, he would be concerned about the costs associated with maintaining these lakes. In response to Mr. Rosenstock's question, Mr. Last advised that the water table is 12'. The common areas will be spdnklered off the lake. The individual homes will be irrigated by using City water. The homes on the lakes will have the option of drawing water off the lakes. Homeowners are permitted to have wells for irrigation purposes. Mr. Rosenstock questioned whether or not the City has a Code regarding the installation of wells rather than using City water for irrigation purposes. When no answer was forthcoming, he recommended that a Code be established regarding the use of effluent or well water for irrigation. Chairman Dubb reminded Mr. Rosenstock that this item was addressed in the E.A.R. review, and will be addressed again in the future. Mr. Rosenstock suggested expediting this item before additional plans are approved. CHAIRMAN DUBE~ ANNOUNCED THAT ALTHOUGH THIS WAS NOT A PUBLIC HEARING, THE BOARD WOULD ACCEPT INPUT FROM THE AUDIENCE. THERE WAS NO ONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO SPEAK ON THIS APPLICATION. Motion Mr. Wische moved to approve the request for site plan approval of private recreation, common area landscaping, and project signage for a 424 unit, single-family residential PUD, subject to all staff comments and the addition of the item you put on the agenda tonight. Vice Chairman Golden questioned whether or not the motion included Comment #14. Mr. Wische answered affirmatively and clarified that the motion is subject to all staff comments. MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 Ms. Heyden advised that she noted changes to. Comments #3, 4, 5, 13, and 14. Mr. Wische concurred. Mr. Hill seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 2. Project Name: Agent: Applicant: Owner: Location: Description: Knuth Road PCD Service Station Kieran Kilday Kilday and Associates, Inc. Andrews & Copans Gas & Oil Company, Inc. Bill R. Winchester. Elsie A. Winchester individually, Elsie A. Winchester as Trustee, Ruby A. Winchester, The Winchester Family Partnership= Ltd. SouthWestcorner of Boynton Beach Boulevard and Knuth Road Request for site plan approval to construct a convenience store with gasoline sales and car wash on 1.13 acres. Pauline Walter, Kilda¥ & Associates, 1515 Forum Place, West Palm Beach, advised that there are several comments she would like to discuss with the board. The first Comment, which is a potential addition item for the project is, as a PCD, the Code permits the submission of a master sign program requesting signage for the development. The Knuth Road PCD was approved years ago. The applicant is now proposing of the first outparcel which is a gas station. A master sign program was never submitted for this project. The applicant is now proposing two s~gns on the service station oarcel. One of the signs will be a major monument sign at the corner, and a secondary directional sign at the proposed entrance off Knuth Road. Pursuant to the Code, because this is one parcel without an approved master sign program, the applicant is only allowed one sign. The master sign program was submitted to staff and they have not had an opportunity to review it in detail. The applicant is hopeful the review will occur prior to the City Commission meeting. Ms. Walter explained that the applicant is proposing a comprehensive sign program for the center. There is a developer, a contract for sale and the project engineer is working on the plans for the gas station. The balance of the site does not have a tenant or user at this time. However, the applicant has organized a consistent sign elevation, proposed sign square footages and height, and the gas station will comply with the sign code as well as future development on the parcel. The applicant is proposing three main entry signs at the main entries to the commemial center. One sign will be located at the main entrance off Boynton Beach Boulevard, one off the northern entrance on Knuth Road, and one at the southern entrance on Knuth Road. These s~gns are proposed at a 20' height. The applicant has reviewed al~ of the signs that exist on the surrounding three corners. It is believed that all ofthose signs were put in through Palm Beach County, and they range in height from 25' to 35'. In addition, the developer is proposing a secondary s~gn for each of the outparcels fa financial institution and the gas station). The gas station sign will be 12' in height, and the financial institution sign will be 10' in height. Each of the signs will be located on the individual parcels. ]2 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 At this point, Ms. Heyden advised the members that this master sign program will not be going to the City Commission next Tuesday because staff does not have the time to review it. This package requires TRC review. Since the Commission will not be receiving this request next Tuesday, the board decided to terminate the presentation on the master sign program. Chairman Dub6 noted that the dumpster enclosure is only 10'. Two dumpsters cannot be accommodated in that area. He reminded staff that they were supposed to be making certain that ail enclosures would be wide enough to accommodate two dumpsters. Ms; Walter advised that the applicant has a condition relative to the dumpster enclosure, and they agree to widen it. rvls. Heyden said staff is working on a recycling ordinance, but it not yet complete. However, staff works with developers to include dumpster enclosures to accommodate two dumpsters. Planning & Zoning Comment ~e23 (a) and (bl - With regard to Comment #23a, Ms. Walter advised that there is an agreement with this property and the adjacent property owners to construct a buffer wall. The way the condition is worded, it would require that buffer wall to be completed prior to ~ssuance of a building permit. The applicant would like to construct the buffer wall concurrent with the construction of the gas station. The developers will be working with representatives of the homeowners' association between this meeting and the City Commission meeting to try to arrive at an agreement on this issue. Ms. Heyden advised that this was a condition of the PCD rezoning which was promulgated based on a public hearing. A large number of homeowners from the Stonehaven Homeowners' Association attended the public hearing, and a joint agreement exists. Ms. Heyden would be hesitant to change this condition. The wording in the comment comes directly from the zoning conditions. Mr. Rosenstock recommended that the wall be built as stated. Ms. Heyden agreed to check the language: and if it is misstated, the comment will be changed. Comment 33b - This comment is in regard to the installation of a traffic light. The way the condition is written, it is inconsistent with the agreement and how government puts in traffic lights. The State and County require warrant studies and they have to warrant that the traffic signal is needed before it is built. The developer cannot agree to build it if the County has not warranted it. However, Ms. Walter stipulated to build it if the County asks the developer to do so. She advised that they are required to build it by the settlement agreement. Mr. Aguila noted that on the southwest corner of the property, there is an indication of future parking. He has a problem with that because of the possibility of access to the financial institution and the associated traffic activity in the center. Mr. Aguila would support this petition with that area closed off, as shown on the landscaping plan. Ms. Walter explained that it is consistent with the currently approved master plan for the Knuth Road 13 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 PCD, and has been on the plan since the original approval. The intention is to provide as much cross access between the uses on the site to discourage people from driving out on Boynton Beach Boulevard and Knuth Road. Mr. Aguila agrees with tt~e concept, but feels there is too much going on in that small corner. It is an unsafe situation. Ms. Walter agreed to look at this situation. Chairman Dub~ expressed the same concern as Mr. Aguila because of the stacking. Comment #13 addresses moving that stacking. Ms. Waiter is in agreement with that condition. In response to Mr. Aguila's question about what can be done to address his concern. Ms. Heyden said there is no other alternative for cross access. If the board recommends that it not be provided, there will be no cross access. Mr. Aguila referred to one of the maps distributed with the master sign program and pointed out that the length of the island on the ingress/egress on Knuth Road is much longer than the island shown on the gas station. If the island is as short as the one on the gas station, a left turn could be made into the gas station. Ms. Heyden questioned whether or not the applicant feels the cross access serves a purpose. Ms. Walter responded affirmativaly, and stated the applicant would like to keep it. It is consistent with the currently approved plan. The cross access internally keeps traffic off the roads externally. In response to Vice Chairman Golden's question, Ms. Heyden confirmed that only the gas station has been approved Anything wrapping around the gas station parcel can change. Ms. Walter said the balance of the project will come back at some time in the future for site plan review. It is conceivable that the parking area can be significantly redesigned. These comments will be given consideration. CHAIRMAN DUBI~ ANNOUNCED THAT THE BOARD WOULD ACCEPT INPUT FROM THE AUDIENCE. Pat Booth, a resident of Banyan Creek, said he does not see the border walls being constructed as the development is coming in. One piece of property was cleared and demuckec~, and it is holding a high concentration of water. No wall has been constructed. This is happening against the agreement with the homeowners' association. Ms. Heyden reviewed 'the agreement. With regard to the traffic light, governmental jurisdiction is included. Therefore, Ms. Heyden agreed with Ms. Waiter's comments relative to timing and warrants. As far as the construction of the masonry wall, it must be done simultaneously with site preparation and prior to commencement of any construction of the buildings. Vice Chairman Golden interprets that to mean that the developer can get a clearing permit, but not a building permit. Mr. Aguila agreed that prior to the issuance of the very first building permit, the wall must be constructed. ]4 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING ANDDEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 Motion Mr. Wische moved, on the request for site plan approval to construct a convenience store with gasoline sales and car wash on 1.13 acres, subject to staff comments that were agreed upon and discussed this evemng. Mr. Aguila seconded the motion. Vice Chairman Golden said he will vote against this because he has a problem with this entire project that goes back to the way it was rezoned, Mr. Rosenstock concurred. The motion carried 4-3. (Vice Chairman Golden and Messrs. Eisner and Rosenstock cast the dissenting votes.) Maior Site Plan Modification Project Name: Agent: Applicant: Owner: Location: Description: Boynton Beach Mall Department Store F Cormac C. Conahan, Esq. Hedgson, Russ, Andrews, Woods & Goodyear DeBartolo Properties Management, Inc. Boynton-JCP Associates, Inc. Ltd., a Florida limited partnership 801 North Congress Avenue Request to amend the previously-approved site plan to construct a 162,502 square foot department store with parking structure. At Chairman Dub~'s request, Mr. Haag used the overhead projector to display the site plan showing the proposed department store and parking structure. Mac Conahan, Attorney practicinq in Boca Raton, Florida, and Rod Bosler, Senior Proiect Engineer, were present on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. Conahan explained that the proposal tonight is to place a sixth department store at the site. This is essentially the first proposal that was presented in 1985, and approved in a development order in 1991. In 1991, the proposal for the sixth department store was shelved. Sears, which was proposed for the sixth department store, moved into the area vacated by Jordan Marsh. At this time, a store is interested in coming into the Boynton Beach Mall, and everything looks positive to add another anchor tenant. With regard to the issue of the preservation area, the 1985 proposal, which ended in 1989, did not preserve the trees. After years of appeals, a compromise was made to preserve the trees. The applicant is not proposing any changes to the agreement made in 1991 with respect to the preservation. The applicant has had the final form of the comments for only 18 hours. Comments 3, 11,41,50 and 54 address the parking deck. Meetings were held today with City staff to address technical issues related to the ramps, and sizing issues. Mr. Conahan requested leaving these issues for further discussions with staff prior to the City Commission meeting. He believes the items can be worked out that deal with internal configuration of the deck. Those items should not affect site plan issues. MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 The following items are clarifications: Item #10 - This item addresses wheel stops. When the Mail was approved in 1984, no wheel stops were included for the entire Mall project. The applicant is of the opinion that the variance which affects the wheel stops is effective for the entire project. The applicant does not feel it would be appropriate to have wheel stops in a small section of the Mall. The applicant considers wheel stops dangerous in a site with this configuration, and hopes the condition was listed for checklist purposes only, and not as a condition of final approval. Ms. Heyden advised that she was unable to locate the variance. However, if this remains as a condition, the City Commission can deal with it. Mr. Conahan advised that he sent Ms. Heyden copies ofthe, meeting minutesproving that avadance exists. Ms. Heyden did not receive the copies of the minutes. Item #'14 - This item deals with fire lane signs. Mr. Bosler said he was unclear whether this refers_te the entire perimeter of the Mall, or the specific site. Having a sign every 50' would have a tendency to create the appearance of a picket fence. This seems excessive in conjunction with the stdping that is also required. Mr. Aguila agreed this seemed to be a waste of money and effort. Item #33 - Drainage - Mr. Conahan said there will be no further discharge from their drainage pond, but they will be increasing the impervious areas. Mr. Bosler felt the intent was that the applicant would not increase the discharge of storm water off the property. When additional impervious area is added, the volume of run-off is increased within the existing retention. Item #26 - Mr. Bosler had several discussions with the City Forester. The applicant plans to expand the parking lot, relocating the existing cruising lanes around the parking lot, and doing additional work adjacent to the building that will be required. He indicated that a great deal of landscaping material would be impacted. Some of that landscape material is not in healthy condition, and some of it is too large to move economically. The applicant would like to set out a program where he, the City Forester, and a landscape architect would walk the site and determine which plant materials could be moved to different location around the property. There is some confusion that Item #26 refers to the 235 trees shown on the existing locations. The applicant is anticipating relocating 235 trees. However, they will relocate all within that group that are capable of reasonably being relocated. This is a matter of clarification. Item ~24 - This deals with the existing tree count. There was a survey prepared in conjunction with the last site plan approval which identified all trees that were on the pine preserve property. Mr. Bosler assumes there are trees there which were too small to count and have now grown to the size to be counted, and others have died. The applicant intends to put together a management plan with the assistance of the City Forester that would call out how to gc through the preserve, clean it out, and then provide ongoing maintenance to ensure that it is kept clean. Some of the existing plantings in the preserve include Slash MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOA~RD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 Pines. This might be the appropriate place for relocation of the trees, if there are gaps ~n the pine preserve, the applicant will plant additional pines to fill in the gaps. A great deal of this area ~s vine covered today, and there will have to be a process to work through it. Mr. Aguila pointed out that the logic being proposed sounds good. However, with regard to ongoing maintenance, he noted that over the last 10 years, no one has done anything with the preserve area. He inquired what the applicant intends to do in the future if this application is approved. Mr. Bosler admitted that the development order addresses dealing only with exotics. The development order did not include afull ongoing management plan. Staff asked the applicant to prepare a managemant plan, and the appl cant has agreed to that condition. Staff and the City Forester will review it, and the applicant Will comply with it. This will be a condition of approval. Item #43 - Building Height - There is a requirement to screen any rooftop installations; however, the requirement states that the screening canno~ exceed 45'. There will be elevator hous ngs on the roof. If the height of the building is 44' it will not be possible to screen the ele~'~tor housing and not exceed the height limitation, Mr. Aguila explained that this comment relates to roof-mounted air conditioning equipment. An elevator housing is something entirely different. Item #37 - Building Height - The proposed store has an arched entrance feature with radius over the main entry which takes it to the height of 54'. That is 9' above the entry. reviewing the Code, it permits screening and architectural features such as cupolas. The applicant is hopeful the Commission will allow the architectural feature because it is signature of thee store. The applicant will seek relief from this height requirement from the Commission. Mr. Bosler feels this is a functional feature and will help screen some of the rooftop equipment. Mr. Conahan said there are clarifications required regarding items 17, 19, 21, and 46. These are all landscape items which the applicant discussed with the City Forester. The applicant believes these conditions have been met, but would like to leave them for a meeting he hopes to have with Mr. Hallahan for clarification purposes. Some materials have been submitted, but the comment was not deleted. Mr. Conahan said that an approval from this board wilt enhance the applicant's ability to bring to Boynton Beach a store they will be proud of. In response to Chairman Dub6's question, the applicant stated that of the 56 comments listed in Exhibit "D", he would like Item 10 removed. Other than the items mentioned, the applicant has no objection to complying with the comments. The comments that were mentioned require clarification. Mr. Rosenstock requested that the applicant address Item #11, secudty in th~ parking tot. Mr. Bosler explained that they are not prepared with a response to that question at this time. The deck design is in the development and design phase. There have been discussions about lighting, but there have been no discussions about a security system. He offered to contact the deck consultant to get his op~n~on on this item. MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 Mr. Rosenstock expressed concern for the patrons who use this proposed parking facility. He pointed out that if one person gets mugged in the garage, people will be demanding that our Police Department provide patrols. Mr. Rosenstock recommends that the applicant provide a security system which will benefit the community. Mr. Bosler reminded Mr. Rosenstock that the Mail has a private security company that patrols the property. The impacts of this parking deck are being assessed. Mr. Bosler offered to provide an answer to this question for the City Commission. In response to Mr. Aguila's question, Ms. Heyden advised that this application will not come back tothe planning and Development Board relative to the building elevations. Mr. Aguila feels very little effort was made on the parking garage, it is boring. He asked if the applicant c,~uld do something tO make it more aesthetically pleasing. Mr. Bosler said the applicant has est ,a?shed a high clearance on the gr,ound floor. The customary f oor-to~floo~ ratio is. approx mately 11. The applicant has provided 17 for the first floor. This will help security, n add t on, p anter islands have been created that run continuously across the front of the deck. This will provide a dense landscape screen. Mr. Aguila recommended breaking up the continuity of the upper level. Mr. Bosler said it is anticipated that there will be a precast finish. However, the actual detailing has not been refined. The applicant will be particularly sensitive to the detailing of the facade treatment. This garage must be open for ventilation and light, but the applicant will come up with a scheme which is functional and compatible with the remainder of the center. He agreed that the elevations of the Mall are plain. He is confident the aDplicant can do much better than what currently exists. Stella Rossi, 625 Whisperin.q Pines Road, said she spoke with people eight years ago regarding preserving the pine area. According to Resolution 91-37, the conditions of the Development Order require the pine preserve to be a native habitat iQ perpetuity, and all exotics must be removed. The loss of the pines, and the degradation of the site, was due to the fact that nothing was ever done in the area. A landscape buffer along the west boundary of the preserve along Jarvert was to be ~3rov ded; however, that has not been done. Littoral zone plantings were reauired around existing r~ention ponds. This was not,done. In order for this preserve to survive, exotics must be removed periodically and a managemen[ plan must be submitted. A buffer should be provided between the preserve andthe new parking ~n the east. Ail lighting should be shielded down to eliminate spill over into the preserve. LittOral plantipgs should be required on existing and proposed retention ponds for water flow and~aesthetics. All plants should be native. There should be no approval until a management plan is submitted. Gary Lehnertz, 619iSW.2 Avenue, strongly urged the board to follow Mrs. Rossi's advice. This deve oper has made many promises, and not kept them. Rita Adams, 3562 Noreen Avenue, said she does not understand the reason for covering up the drainage canal for additional parking. The Mall parking is never full. They should not eliminate the preserve and wildlife for additional parking that is not necessary. She recommended letting the applicant add additional parking to the parking garage, and not over the canal. Oliver Martin, 3527 Kitel¥ Avenue, is concerned about DeBartolo's noncompliance with Resolution MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 No. 91-37. They have made many promises in the past, but have not come through. He requested that the board make DeBartolo live up to the terms of the Resolution and abide by rulings made by the board to enhance and preserve the areas. The residents do not feel they have been treated fairly by DeBartolo. Previous Commissions have set a bad precedent by not holding the DeBartolo Corporation to the conditions set forth in the Resolution. Rebecca Martin, 3527 Kitely Avenue, requested a permanent 6' high chain link fence landscaped 0n the West side around the preserve. She presented a petition from the residents of the are~.. Michael, Kinq, 3513 Harlowe Avenue~ lives adjacent to this development and is opposed to any development in this area. He is concerned abOUt the building height, and wants to see a management plan before anything is approved. He further reminded the board of the danger of over expansion. A resident of 3642 Kitel¥,Avenue, said he is not opposed to the development of the store and the parking lot; however, he requested a buffer for the neighborhood. Chairman Dubb pointed out that if this application is approved tonight, Comment #18 states that a tree management plan must be submitted. If the City Commission approves this plan, the management plan will be a requirement. Robert Barn, 3642 Invanhoe Avenue, said there is a concrete wail on the west side of the Mai facing the development to the west. It contains graffiti. Mr. Barn reported this condition to the Mall, and was told their maintenance staff would handle it. He made a second call when nothing was done, and was told it would be taken care of. It is eight months later, and the condition still exists. f they could not take the time to take care of that small item, why should anyone believe they will · ~ take care of the other ~tems mentioned. Sam Hoover, 3642 Lothair Avenue, has seen the graffiti on the wall which has not been cleaned up. He recommended p~tting the parking structure on the opposite side of the Mall where no residents will have to look at it. What will happen if they don't follow up on their management plan? Chairman Dubb reported that the City Commission has already discussed pulling out old site plans to make sure the properties are brought up to their site plan approvals. Charles Matthews, 3567 invanhoe Avenue~ lives behind the Mall. The parking garage will serve no purpose other than to attract undesirables. The integrity of the neighborhood will go down. He feels this is another scheme by DeBartolo. Mr. Conahan said when the plan was brought in and approved in 1989, it was approved by the Regional Planning Council. The plan called for the removal of half of the trees and some of those provisions were related to the restricted area. In .1991, there was no requirement for a management plan. The applicant has now come forward and asked for an extension of the Development Order which has conditions the applicant will comply with. This site plan approval requires a management plan. Mr. Conahan said the issue o! graffiti was brought to his attention a few months ago. He is also MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD~ BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 concerned about this situation. He talked with the Mall representatives and was told it would be addressed~ He stated that he would talk with the representatives again, and if they do not take care of it, he will paint over it himself. in response to Vice Chairman Golden's question, Mr. Conahan confirmed that the preserve will be fenced with a 6' high chain link fence. Vice Chairman Golden also noted in the staff report that there is an issue of the number of parking spaces. A variance Will be required if the applicant cannot get enough parking spaces. Mr. (~onahan said one Of the conditions is to finalize the Lake. Worth Drainage District agreement. The applicant has conceptual approval after discussions with the City Attorney. He believes the exact language will be approved within the next few days. Mr. Aguila noted that they are required to provide 6,144 spaces and are actually providing 6,421 They are over the number of Spaces required. Mr. Haag advised that these are the numbers accbrding to the plan, but the physical count is different. Mr. Aguila said if they are 277 spacesover, he would recommend that the 44 spaces in the western- most and southern-most areas be eliminated. The preserve area could stay larger. Also, the western alignment of the road goes up a space or two. Counting those spaces on the northern half of the western roadway, you could eliminate 30 or 40 spaces. That would allow the preserve to grow larger. Based on what is shown, 80 to 100 spaces could be eliminated to make the preserve larger. Mr. Conahan said the canal is a disturbed, cut grass canal area. There are issues that may affect some of the parking spaces relative to the parking garage. In addition, this proposal is under a development order which was approved by the Commission. The applicant requires that area for parking to make the project viable. Mr. Rosenstock pointed out that the closer the individual is to an object, the greater the wow is cul off in the long distance. He recommended that the applicant plant trees along the canal and instal a fence. That will provide a view of greenery instead of cars. The applicant said that will be done. Mr. Rosenstock also recommended installing a hedge against the buffer wall as a means of preventing graffiti. Mr. Bosler agreed with this recommendation. He said they will be providing a 6' high fence and a fast-growing hedge (Cocoplum) fronting it and Waxed Myrtle trees. One of the conditions requires a continL~ous r0~, of Waxed Myrtle trees. Mr. Rosenstock recommended that the applicant view the Federal Building in Fort Lauderdale to see the plants that have been hur~g from the parapets on every story of the building. It is very pleasing to the eye and Iow in maintenance costs. Mr. Hill questioned when the graffiti will be removed from the wall. Mr. Bosler said this was the first he heard of the problem. He will discuss this situation with Mail representatives tomorrow and request that it be removed within [he next day or two. Ms. Heyden said there were 10 or 12 comments mentioned that required clarification. She confirmed that Comments 3, 11, 41, 50 and 54 deal with the parking garage. She asked Mr. 20 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 Conahan to expound on those issues. Mr. Conahan explained that the applicant went before the TRC today. There were anumber of issues that were raised by Mr. Hukil/about turning areas and the mechanics of the deck. There will be a meeting tomorrow to work out those details. Comments #3 and 50 are inconsistent. Comment #50 should be the surviving condition of the two. MST Heyden said the conflict between Comments #3 and 50 can be taken care of. However, she questioned whether the applicant was objecting to Comments #11,41, and 54. Mr. Conahan said the issue of security was already discussed. T.h,.e applicant agrees to discuss this issue with staffthis week. With respect to Comment #41, at t. oday s meeting, there was a discussion cfa numbe~ of.items reg,'ding the columns, siai!'s, wall, and elevators on grades 2 and 3 of the parking garage. Cladfica[ion is needed to iron out ~hese cemments. Vice Chairman Golden advised that these comments will be included as conditions to be worked out with staff. Motion Mr. Rosenstock moved to approve pending all recommendations of the staff, and they can work it out. Mr. Wische seconded the motion. Chairman Dub~ stated that the applicant did not object to anything other than the one comment mentioned earlier. Ms. Heyden said there are s~x comments staff did not have an opportunity to respond to. Chairman Dub~ was of the opinion they were clarified during the earlier discussion. Vice Chairman Golden advised that the applicant needs to deal with staff prior to the City Commission meeting. Ms. Heyden advised that staff has rewewed these comments with the applicant, and agreement cannot be reached on some of them. The applicant stated that there ~s a need to meet with staff to determine the language of some of these issues. The applicant does not have any problem with this board indicating that approval is subject to the conditions, but also subject to further discussions with staff prior to City Commission approval. Mr. Rosenstock said he intends to stipulate that all items by staff must be approved by staff prior to recommendation to the full Commission. If not approved when submitted to the Commiss;on, they will have to make a decision. Ms. Heyden stated that it is staff's opinion that all of these comments stand and are necessary. Vice Chairman Golden said the board is moving forward with approval subject to these comments. Ms. Heyden questioned whether or not the board had a recommendation relative to the pitch on the aisles in the parking garage or the fire lanes. Mr. Rosenstock said he agrees with the developer that s~gns every 50' in the fire lane will look terrible. Mr. Conahan said he realizes the approval will be subject to the comments; however, the applicant felt it was necessary to indicate that clarifying discussion is necessary. He is hopeful staff will agree with what they work out. If staff does not agree with what the applicant works out, the applicant will proceed to the Commission with the conditions listed. Mr. Conahan will discuss this further with Ms. MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOAi~I~ BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 Heyden tomonrow, and if Ms. Heyden does not agree with their proposal, they will leave it out. Mr. Aguila requested that the applicant carefully look at the 80 spaces on the west end, and if it is possible to de without them. he would like to see that area as green area. The applicant agreed to consider this request. Mr. Rosenstock agreed to withdraw his first motion. Motion On Item 7.B.3., namely, Boynton Beach Mall, Department Store F, applicant DeBartolo Properties Management, nc. owner Boynton-JCP Associates, Inc. Ltd., a Florida limited partnership, Mr. Rosenstock moved that thins application be approved. This property s ocated at 801 Congress Avenue, and their request is to amend the previously-approved site plan to construct a 162,502 square foot department store with parking structure. The approval is pending all of the staff comments and, particularly, that the City Commission grant relief from Item #10. Mr. Wische seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Dr. Eisner left the meeting. Mr. Reed took his place as a voting member. Project Name: Age~t: Applicant/Owner: Location: Description: The Vinings at Boynton Beach - Phase II CCL Consultants, Inc. Boynton Beach II Limited Partnership, a Florida limited partnership, and its assigns East side of SW 8th Street, approximately 1900 feet north of Woolbright Road Request to amend the previously-approved site plan to increase the number of apartment buildings from 12 to 16, omit building types III and V, add a volleyball court and reconfigure other recreation amenities, alter building types Il and IV, add a building type VI, and reconfigure the parking and access area. Mr. Haag displayed an overlay of the existing approved site plan, and one showing the modifications. The modifications are limited to north of the lake. The layout is the same, but the lar~oest change is that the proposal now calls for some of the buildings to have garages. This will eliminate a great deal of the parking spaces around the facility. A number of the units did not change. Louis Campanile of CCL Consultants, introduced Bettina Scher, who advised that she was present to answer any questions posed by the members and to work out any of their concerns with the comments promulgated by the various City departments. Item #3 - This is a Fire Department comment relative to lift station access. The applicant is not sure if this comment means from the north or from their project. They need clarification on this comment and will work it out prior to City Commission. Item #9 - Thi~ is no longer a concern of Mr. Hukill's after meeting with the applicant today. 22 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 Item #12 - '['his is no longer a concern of Mr. Hukill's after meeting with the applicant. Item #18 - The applicant has two additional feet of pervious area with the wheel stops. The continuous curb is not something the applicant wants to construct because they want the project to be the same as it is in Phase I. Phase t has wheel stops. Item #20 - The applicant agrees with this comment. The two large Live Oak trees will stay, but the applicant needs to ~vOrk with the Forester to locate them. Item #21_ - The applicant explained that the only change in Phase I is that they will be connecting to the drainage lines. Mn Haag agreed that drainage is not a concern of his. He asked the applicant tO place a note on the plan. item #26- The applicant said the survey was for his property not for the proper~y of others. Mr. Haag advise~J,that the easement is on the applicants property as well as on the property Of others. Two and one-half feet of easement is on the Vinings' property. Item #29 - Mr. Campanile explained that the actual space is 18', but the paved area is 16'. He will clarify it on the drawings. Item #32. - Mr. Campanile displayed the forest green railing. It is the same color scheme used in Phase I. The green railings are used in the breezeways. The porches have white railings. Mr. Haag explained that the architectural plans show this as opposite. The plans must be changed. Item #35 - This comment deals with trees. The applicant was of the op~mon that their proposal was better than the approved buffer plan which contained Slash Pines and Lantana. They were proposing Oaks and Cccoplums. They asked for consideration of this proposal. Item #38 - The applicant does not agree with this comment. This comment is laid out so that the buffer is 600' away from any buildings which would be provided with first COs. In addition, [orce main relocation is required in this area. The applicant would like some of the COs prior to completion of the force main relocation. He would agree to reword this comment so that it reads, "by the ninth CO". Mr. Aguila inquired as to the number of buildings to be constructed. Mr. Campanile advised that there will be t6. Ms. Heyden agreed to compromise with half. Item #42 - The applicant would like to eliminate the hedge requirement between the two phases. These two projects are under two different ownerships. They would like to work this out with an access easement, if possible, but would prefer not to have the hedges between the phases, in addition, they would like to keep the existing landscape plan on the access road. In response to Mr. Rosenstock's queszion, Mr. Campanile said the City is aware that two ownerships exist. Ms. Heyden said the company name is the same. They nave not yet submitted their 23 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 homeowner documents for the second phase. There might be other concerns as a result of two different Ownerships. The applicant will require a landscape appeal if the hedge is nol put in. As long as the homeowner documents provide fc.~ common maintenance and access to all other recreation, etc., it should not be a problem approving the deletion of the hedge. Mr. Rosenstock suggested that the board recommend to the City Commission that they contact the City Attorney to determine the affect on the project with two separate, distinct corporations, and to determine the ramifications to the City in approving the plans. Ms. Heyden said the ramifications are access, maintenance, and access to recreation. As long as that is covered in the homeowner association documents, there are no ramifications. Bettina Scher, Trammel-Crowe, said when the site plan was brought in for approval, the City required them to plat the projects individually. There are two separate owners onthis property, and that was finance driven. T. he owners fought platting~ but staff insisted. Everyone knew there were two owners. There is a homeowners' association tha!,functions as the Woolbright Place PUD. An apartment complex does not need to file homeowners association documents 5ecause it is a single owner. The renters are not assessed individual assessments. Ms. Heyden said Phase I and Phase II were conceived as one project constructed in two phases. They share access and recreation. R. egardtess of the fact that it is a rental project, the City still needs to have homeowners' association documents because they share common facilities. Ms. Scher said there is a master association which runs the drainage for the entire PUD. Mr. Cherof has reviewed that association document which is public record and recorded. There are prowsions in that document whereby if one of the developments is single-family, it must form a sub-association whereby each individual hemeowner must pay for its own internal improvements. Since there is a s~ngle owner, legally, they are ~not required to do that because they provide for the maintenance of the entire area. There is an entity known as Boynton Beach I Limited Partnership, and one known as Boynton Beach II Limited Partnership. Mr. Rosenstock did not feel this board should have to determine the ramifications of two ownerships. He will abstain from voting on this project. Ms. Heyden recommended that if there was no objection to the deletion of the hedge, that the requirement for Unity of Title also be deleted, provided Unity of Control is verified. They will have to replat Phase II, and it will be checked at that time. Comment #43 - The applicant would like to be able to use Cypress mulch to match what was used in Phase I, rather than Melaleuca mulch recommended by staff. Chairman Dub~ pointed out that staff should stop "recommending" and start requiring this item. Mr. Aguila pointed out that Cypress needs to be preserved. He is not opposed to another kind of mulch being used, but he would prefer that they not use Cypress. The applicant agreed to look into this matter. With regard to the landscape buffer plan, Mr. Haag advised that this proposal only calls for two 24 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 different species. The other plan has multiple species. Staff does not consider it a betterment plan. The applicant agreed to keep the original plan. Motion Mr. Aguila moved to recommend approval of the request to amend the previously-approved site plan to increase the number of apartment buildings from 12 to 16, omit building types I I and V, add a vo eyba I court and reconfigure other recreation amenities, alter building types II and IV, add a building type VI and reconfigure the parking and access for The Vinings at Boynton Beach ~ Phase II subject to all staff comments. Mr. Hill seconded the motion. ~ls. Heyden confirmed that there was a board consensus to delete the continuous curbing omment #18 and replace it with wheel stops. With regard to Comment #38, there was a consensus to require the buffer landscaping on the north property line to be completed at the time of the eighth (8th) CO. On Comment #43, the applicant will consider using mulch other than Cypress mulch. The motion carried 6-0. (Mr. Rosenstock abstained from voting on this application.) C. OTHER Discussion Ms. Heyden advised that the following two Ordinances are in the process of being adopted. Both have been approved on first reading. The City Commission forwarded them to the Planning and Development Board for comments. The second reading of these Ordinances will occur on Tuesday, May 21, 1996. Change to Environmental Regulations to codify Comprehensive Plan policies regarding preservation areas for environmentally sensitive land. This Ordinance will codify the policies regarding the 25 percent preservation requirement for "A" rated sites. This was part of an original regulation that was never approved. Mr. Aguila questioned whether or not the City would compensate him for the land he would have to preserve if he owned 100 acres which was an "A" rated site. Ms. Heyden responded negatively. He questioned whether or not any case law exists relative to this issue. Ms. Heyden said it is potentially a "touchy" subject. Change to Community Design P an to no longer disallow drive-through windows facing rights-of-way provided landscape buffer and building design criteria are met. This change was initiated by the City Commission A major redevelopment of Causeway Shopping 25 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 14, 1996 Center is planned. Part of that redevelopment involves the Walgreen's Pharmacy. A new concept of Waigreen'S is a drive-through pharmacy window. Because of their location in the center, they are limited to where the drive-through window can be located. The City Commission feels that rather than not allowing drive-through windows facing rights-of-way, there are other ways to mitigate the impacts. Staff devised criteria for building facade design, landscaping and buffering. Mr. Rosenstock reminded staff that the purpose of the original Ordinance was to eliminate having to see vehicles lined up at the drive-through from the main thoroughfare. Ms. Heyden said the landscaping requirements will deal with that problem. The landscape buffer must bea minimum of 10' and the .berm must be a minimum of 3'. Mr. Aguiia said the 3 to I ratio cannot work at 10'. HOWever, it will work at 20L A 4 to 1 ratio will workbetter. He recommended leaving it as written, and:those involved will see that it does not work at a 3 to1 ratio. Ms. Heyden advised that Waigreen's has designed their facade using these requirement. 8. COMMENTS BY MEMBERS Ms. Heyden offered to provide a report of the City Commission action on last month's agenda items. However, many of the members were already aware of that action. Chairman Dub6 reminded the members of the Police Department Memorial Service and Awards Ceremony which will take place tomorrow at 12:30 p.m. at Bethesda Hospital. 9. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the board, the meeting properly adjourned at 11:00 p.m. ~ J~net M. Prainito "-'Recording Secretary (Five Tapes) May 20. 1996 26 PETITION ..... We, the residents of Pine Acres, DEMAND that the DeBartolo Corporation (owners of the Boynton Beach Mall) provide the following for the preservation of the 6.2 acre pine preserve that ~buffers our neighborhood from the mall. Clear out all exotic growth in the preserve Replace. removed exotic growth with native plants Remove all garbage Place shielded lights in the parking lot -Place a 6~ high chainlink fence around the entire preserve he fence pond d to have walking access to th6 mall preserve, fence, wall, pathway and retention pond Signature Print name and Address 9 10. 11. PETITION We, the residems of Pine Acres, DEMAND that the DeBartolo Corporation (owners of the -~- Boynton Beach Mall) provide the following for the preservation of the 6.2 acre pine preserve th buffers our neighborhood from the mall. ~ ~ Clear out all exotic growth in the preserve Replace removed exotic growth with native plants Remove all garbage Place shielded fights in the parking lot high chainlink fence around the entire preserve side of the fence · 11 Put native plantings on the west s~de of the wa pond neighborhood to have walking access to th6 mall Maintain, the preserve, fence, wall, pathway and retention pond 12. 13 PETITION We, the residents of Pine Acres, DEMAND that the DeBaxtolo Corporation (owners of the B0ynton Beach Mall) provide the following for the preservation of the 6.2 acre pine preserve t~ buffers our neighborhood from the mall. Clear out al! exotic growth in the preserve Replace removed exotic growth with native plants Remove all garbage Place shielded lights in the parking lot Place a round the entire preserve the west side of the wall pond }d to have walking access to th6 mall ,.fence, wall, pathway and retention pond Signature Print name and Address PETITION W the residents of Pine Acres, DEMAND that the DeBartolo Corporation (owners of the B¢.~tton Beach Mall) provide the folloxving for the preservation of the 6.2 acre pine preserve that buffers our neighborhood ~om the mall. Clear out all exotic growth in the preserve Replace ,removed exotic growth with native plants Remove all garbage lot preserve the west side of the wail to have walking access to the mall wall, pathway and retention pond PE'I i.'ION ~ ~'We, the residents of Pine Acres, DEMAND that the DeBartolo Corporation (owners of the Boynton Beach Mall) provide the following for the preservation of the 6.2 acre pine preserve that -'-nuffers our neighborhood fi:om the mall. Clear out all exotic growthin the preserve Replace removed exotic growth with native plants Remove all garbage Place shielded lights in the parking lot :Place a ,6' high chainlink fence around the entire preserve Put native plants on the west side of the fence: put nafiveplantings ~on the west side of the wall eighborhood to hawe walking access to the~ mall fence, Wall, pathway and retention pond i ~ona'mre Print name and Address PETITION -~'We, the residents of Pine Acres, DEMAND that the DeBartolo Corporation (owners of the 3oynton Beach Mall) provide the following for the preservation of the 6.2 acre pine preserve that - ~ouffers our neighborhood from the mall. Clear out all exotic growth, in the preserve Replace removed exotic growth with native plants Removeall garbage Place shielded lights in the parking lot chainli~k fence around the entire preserve side of the fence west side of the wall to have walking access to th6 mall fence, wall, pathway and retention pond Print name and Address 12. 13