Loading...
Minutes 10-12-93MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING HELD IN COHHISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 1993 AT 7:00 PRESENT Gary Lehnertz, Chairman Marilyn Huckle, Vice Chairwoman Nathan Collins Bill Miller Bradley Weigle Paul Davis, Alternate Stanley Dube, Alternate ABSENT Tambri Heyden, Senior Planner Vincent Finizio, Deputy City Engineer Mikel Jones 1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE Chairman Lehnertz called the meeting to order at 7:00 p.m., and led the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. 2. INTRODUCTION OF HAYOR~ COHHISSIOMERS AND BOARD MENDERS Chairman Lehnertz introduced the Board members and City Attorney Cherof. There were no City Commissioners present in the audience. 3. AGENDA APPROVAL Ms, Heyden announced that Item 7, C-1, has been withdrawn. Motion Mr. Dube moved to accept the agenda with the elimination of Item 7,C-1. Mr. Miller seconded the motion which carried 7-0. 4. APPROVAL OF MIHUTES Motion Vice Chairwoman Huckle moved to approve the minutes of the September 14th meeting as submitted. Mr. Weigle seconded the motion which carried 7-0. 5. COMMUNICATIONS AND ANNOUNCEMENTS A. REPORT FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT There was no report from the Planning and Zoning Department, 6. OLD BUSINESS None - i - MINUTES - PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA OCTOBER 12, 1993 7. NEW BUSINESS A. REZONING MODIFICATION TI) ZONING CONDITIONS 1. Project: Agent: Owner'· Location: Jonathan's Grove Scott Bennewitz Gee & Jenson M.I. Homes lO-acre site located east side of Lawrence Road approximately 1,000 feet south of Hypoluxo Road Description: Request for modifications to conditions imposed at time of rezoning to R-lA. Ms. Heyden made the presentation. She displayed an overlay of the preliminary plat to show the modifications which were requested. The first modification includes location of the wall fifteen feet south of the northern boundary of the property rather than along the northern boundary. Further, the property was required to be platted as shown on the conceptual plan presented at the time of rezoning which has a minimum lot size of 70' x 137'. The modification would reduce the minimum lot depth of 137' for lots 1-14, and Lots 16-17. Lots 1-14 will be reduced less than one foot, Lot 16 will be twenty feet (20') short and Lot 17 will be twenty-five feet (25') short. There will also be a reduction in the minimum lot width of 70' for Lot #1. Also, the con- figuration of Lots 16 and 17 will become dog-leg lots. In considering the remedies, a private road rather than the public road would have to be proposed along with a drainage easement on the private lots, rather than drainage tracts. No visual improvement to the project would be gained by such solutions. Based on that conclusion, staff recommends that the requested modifications relative to lot size be approved on the preliminary plat. Regarding the proposed wall location, staff believes wall maintenance problems will occur, It will be difficult to access and it e~fectively reduces lot depth. Staff recommends that the applicant expl.ore, with Florida Power & Light, locating the wall along the northern project boundary. Vice Chairwoman Huckle wondered what difference would result in maintaining the wall at the northern boundary as opposed to fifteen feet (15') into the lots. Ms, Heyden explained that in the past, a number of property owners spoke against the rezoning of this project. As a compromise, the lot size and depth were pro- posed to appease those property o~ners to the north. Further, the City Commission imposed the requirement for the walt. By locating that wall south, it reduces the depth of the lots. Richard Staudlnger~ the applicant's engineer, advised that FPL was contacted regarding the location of the wall. The wall was located on the north side of the property within the easement. Because of transmission lines in that ease- ment, FPL refused to allow the wall in that location. The applicant's only -2 - H]~HUTES - PLAHHIHG AND DEVELOPMENT BOAP~ HEETING BOYHTON BEACH,, FLORIDA OCTOBER 12, 1993 choice was to move it south. Mr. Staudinger said the homeowners will be required to maintain the wall and the landscaping within the easement. Mr. Staudinger further pointed out that it is more beneficial to locate the wall to the south because there is an existing drainage swale ~ich serves the homes to the north. The applicant does not wish to disturb that drainage. In order to maintain the face of the wall if it is on the north property line, the Jonathan's Grove homeowners will have to go onto the properties on the north. In response to Chairman Lehnertz' question, Mr. Staudinger stated that if the walt is moved to the proposed location, the 137' lot depth woul, d be short, but the 15' easement is not Usable by the homeowners anyway. He clarified that the 137' lot depth is not up to the easement. It includes both the fifteen feet (15') and a drainage swale. On the south side, it includes a drainage swale. Ms. Heyden pointed out that even if the wall was located as close as possible, the Building Department requires the footer to be set back two feet (2'). That area could be used for maintenance. Also, as shown, th~ landscape/drainage easement where the wall is proposed does not cover wall maintenance. Chairman Lehnertz questioned whether any of the lots on the north side will be themandated 9,590 square feet, Mr. Staudinger explained that all of the lots meet the minimal 9,590 square feet; however, the depth of the lots will be 136 feet versus 137 feet on the north side. Ms. Heyden said easement area can be used to meet lot area requirements. Mr. Staudinger reiterated that the applicant has no other option regarding the location of the wall because of FPL's requirements, Morgan $, Bragg, 3989 715t Avenue $ou~h, referred to the map which was displayed and sai~-he own~ ~el #8. P--~-~-~ei #306 is owned by Mr. Wittman. His property is "L" shaped and he owns the entire property line on the south side of Jonathan's Grove. Mr. Bragg said he is one of the property owners who was appeased by the City Commission's actions. When this project was proposed in 1989, the adjacent property owners requested protection from the backyards of the homes in this project. Their properties are zoned Agricultural. He has no objection to the wall being built fifteen feet (15') further to the south, tt would provide a better place for maintenance. Further, the road on which he is located goes very close to the property l~ne. A wall at the edge of the pavement would a dangerous condition. Drainage problems would also be created. Mr. Bragg further requested that a clarification be made that the wall be required at a minimum of six feet (6') in height. Motlon Ms. Huckle moved to approve the modification to the conditions of zoning as requested by the applicant with the clarification that the construction of the wall shall be six feet (6') in height, fifteen feet (15') south of the north boundary of the property. Mr. Dube seconded the motion. -3- MINUTES - PLANNING AND DEVELOPNENT BOARD NEETING BOYNTON BEACH,, FLORIDA OCTOBER 12, 1993 Mr, Bragg explained that he will be out of the State when this goes before the City Commission and he asked that his comments be presented to the Commission. Mr. Dube advised Mr. Bragg that the Commissioners receive copies of these minutes so they will be aware of his comments. The motion carried unanimously. B. SUBDIVISIONS PRELIMINARY PLAT Project: Agent: Owner: Location: ~ona~han's Grove Gee & Jenson Engineers M.I. Homes lO-acre site located east side of Lawrence Road approximately 1,000 feet south of Hypoluxo Road Description: Establishment of land value on a per-acre basis. Request approval of preliminary plat and construction documents. Mr. Finizio made the presentation. This request is divided into two parts. The first request is for approval of the preliminary plat and construction plans. The other issue is a determination of a fair land value on a per-acre basis for this property. The City's Code requires that when a development is constructed, the developer must contribute a land dedication for recreation or a fee in lieu of a land dedication. Because of the small size of the project, they have opted to pay a fee. The City uses an equation based on the number of residences or units. Jonathan's Grove must provide a value of .576 acres. Pursuant to Code, the Planning and Development Board should deliberate and decide on the fair market value, Staff performed an analysis of what similar subdivisions had been assigned by prior Planning and Development Boards and City Commissions. The developer's contract to ourchase indicates a land value of $36,000 per acre. That would equate to a dedication fee of $20,736. In reviewing values assigned by prior Boards, City staff found that the Citrus Glen project, on the same side of Lawrence Road, had a value determined and agreed upon in the amount of $49,500 per acre in 1989. Another project, Lawrence Groves, was valued at $69,800 per acre. City staff also learned that property on Jog Road was sold to the Palm Beach County School Board for $63,0D0 per acre. Mr. Finizio contacted M.I. Homes and requested an appraiser's report on land sales in the area. The information provided listed the following: $700,000 for twenty (20) acres $200,000 for ten (t0) acres $3Z0,000 for nine (9) acres $370,000 for fourteen (t4) acres $324,000 for 17.9 acres -4- MINUTES -:PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA OCTOBER 12, 1993 Mr. Finizio pointed out that Lawrence Road is a collector road, and access to the site and existing conditions play a role in determining the value. All of the values were averaged out and staff arrived at a figure of $52,500 per acre. Staff recommends the Planning and Development Board accept that figure or accept the applicant's figure of $36,000. The Board also has the option of deliberating and adjusting the figure. In response to Mr. Collins' question, Mr. Finizio stated that the $69,000 per acre value for Lawrence Groves was from 1989. Mr. Davis asked if a procedure exists for resolving disputes between the City and the developer. Mr. Finizio stated that if the Planning and Development Board accepts the $52,500 recommendation, the Code provides a procedure where the applicant can have an appraiser perform a fair market value appraisal. The City Commission will then make the determination with regard to whether or not it is acceptable. This is done at the applicant's expense and it can be quite costly. Mr. Miller questioned whether fluctuations and value since 1989 had been con- sidered in providing the historical information. Mr, Finizio explained that that type of information is provided in an appraisal. Staff uses recent land sales to arrive at a figure. Chairman Lehnertz pointed out that the $69,000 per acre value for Lawrence Groves was a very recent figure. They paid the City a recreation fee of $109,000. Mr. Finizio said that these costs for recreation are absorbed by the purchasers. Mr. Davis confirmed that the City normally accepts the developer's estimate unless something is unusual. Mr. Finizio stated that this type of situation does not occur very often. Glen Ntcotra~ P. O. Box 6305~ West Palm Beach~ is the agent for the owner. He complimented staff for their cooperation in getting this project through the City quickly. He feels this is a significant issue because the difference between the $52,500 and the fee the developer feels is correct represents $8,000 over thirty-two {32) lots. The developer purchased ten {10) acres at a cost of $360,D00. The developer engaged a third party, Appraisal Associates, Inc., to research recent land sales in the vicinity of this property. Five transactions were provided with closings from November, 1992 through May, 1993. They were as high as $35,000 an acre to as low as $18,000 an acre. In response to Chairman Lehnertz' question, Mr. Nicotra indicated that not all of the properties were located within City limits. Mr. Nicotra said the research discounted transactions in the late 1980s. The developer feels his valuation of $36,000 per acre is proper. Chairman Lehnertz requested the target prices at which the homes will be solS. Mr. Nicotra stated they will range from $130,000 to $~80,000. In response to Mr. Davis' question, Mr. Nicotra stated the developer is comfortable with the figure of $36,000 per acre. -5- MINUTES - PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA OCTOBER 12, 1993 Mr. Finizio stated that he will stand by his recommendation regardless of the more recent values provided by Mr. Nicotra simply because his recommendation is based on sales which are closer in proximity to the area in question. Many of the lots presented by Mr. Nicotra are odd-shaped lots which are off collector roads. Access and exposure is a key issue in developing a subdivision. Mr. Nicotra stated a formal appraisal will cost $4,500. Mr. Miller said he was not enchanted with the historical information which was provided because real estate values have declined. Chairman Lehnertz felt City staff used a lot of values to reach a compromise. In looking at the market research, all of the land was outside the City and did not have the infrastructure, sewer or water lines. The City offers a great deal which is not offered outside. Further, this is a difference of $8,200 which will be absorbed by the thirty-two homeowners at a cost of approximately $250 per home. Chairman Lehnertz did not feel this was an exorbitant amount to add to a home which costs a minimum of $1307000. Mr. Collins agreed completely with Chairman Lehnertz' remarks. Further, Chairman Lehnertz explained that this money will go into a pot to pro- vide recreation facilities in the City which will include this particular area. This is a small amount of money for such facilities. Mr. Nicotra stated Jonathan's Grove is installing a $70,000 sanitary sewer lift station which will benefit these homes and the entire northwest quadrant of the City. Further, Jonathan's Grove will be providing a 1,250 foot wide, six foot high masonry wall at a cost of $60,000 along the northern property line. Mr. Nicotra feels that perhaps $36,000 is more representative of an adjusted value of this property compared to others iq the City. Chairman Lehnertz feels this is a benefit of moving into someplace first. Mo~lon Mr. Dube moved that we accept the City's recommendation to put the value at $52,500. Mr. Collins seconded the motion which carried 5-2. (Messrs. Weigle and Miller cast the dissenting votes.) With regard to the preliminary plat, Mr. Weigle questioned Item #2 on Page 4 of Ms. Heyden's memorandum. Ms. Heyden advised that the bi~e path is not within the project. It is along Lawrence Road and it is 8'. There are some gaps in the path at this point. It was confirmed for Mr. Weigle that the Public Works Department coordinated with the developer regarding providing 90' of pavement which is sufficient for Sanitation truck turning. Stacking was addressed during a prior City Commission and Planning and Development Board meeting regarding a variance request and it was determined there would be no significant stacking of vehicles entering or exiting the site. Chairman Lehnertz questioned whether the vinyl-coated fence will be reintroduced. Mr. Finizio will research this, but stated that if it was a condition of approv- al and it was indicated on the approved master plan, the City's Codes state -6- HINUTE$ - PLANNII~ AND DEVELOPNENT BOARD ~EET~NG BOYNTOH BEACH, FLORIDA OCTOBER 12, 1993 that the preliminary plat documents and developer plans shall coincide with the master plan, Mr. Staudinger stated the fence is included on the south side and it includes a hedge. #o~lon Mr. Collins moved to approve the request of preliminary plat and construction documents. Ms. Huckle seconded the motion which carried unanimously. Ms. Heyden questioned whether or not this motion included the Planning and Zoning Department memoranda. Mr. CrOllins and Ms. Huckle agreed that the motion should include the statement, "subjeCt to all staff comments". Another vote was polled which carried 7-0. C. USE APPROVAL 1. Request to allow es a permitted use a fruit ami vegetable ma~ke~ at the Shoppe$ of ~olbr~ght Planned Commercial OeveloPment (PCO) This item was withdrawn. D. CONSISTENCY REVIEW Definition of educational institutions for an amendment to the zoning code in connection with permitting educational institutions in Planned Industrial Development districts (PID) Ms. Heyden made the presentation. In August, 1993, the Board determined that educational institutions in the Planned Industrial Development district (PID) were consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The City Commission discussed this issue and instructed staff to arrive at a definition. Staff tried to keep the definition broad so that the flexibility of the Board and Commission would not be compromised; however, day care centers and artist and dance studios could be argued as not appropriate because of their emphasis on commercial gain. These uses could be allowed in a PID under a different land use category. Ms. Heyden recommended the definition be added to the ~'Definition of Terms" sec- tion of the Zoning Code rather than within the "Uses Permitted" section of the PID regulations. The reason for that recommendation is that the uses listed in the PID regulations are very broad and general. With or without the definition, determination of what specific use will be allowed in a PID is something which goes before the Planning and Development Board and the City Commission. In response to Mr. Miller's question, Ms. Heyden stated a Montessori school would be permitted under the definition which has been recommended. Mr. Davis requested clarification on bOW the process works. Ms. Heyden explained that Planned Districts require submission of a master plan. That master plan must show locations for different types of land uses. In the near - 7- MINUTES - PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA OCTOBER 12, lgg3 future, the Board will see a master plan modification for Quantum Park. They will be substituting several research and development parcels for educational institutions. Following that, the applicant will request a use approval for a high school under the land use category. The Board will then eva~uate whether or not the high school is appropriate on the lot. Mr. Collins moved that we accept the consistency review plan that was presented to us by the Planning Department as it relates to the educational institution definition and that it will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Weigle seconded the motion which carried unanimously. 8. COMMENTS BY MEMBERS None 9. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting properly adjourned at 8:15 p.m. Prainito Recording Secretary (Two Tapes) -8-