Loading...
Minutes 06-23-87MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING HELD IN COMMISSION cHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA TUESDAY, JUNE 23, 1987 AT 7:30 P.M. PRESENT Walter "Marty" Trauger, Chairman Robert Wandelt, Vice Chairman Harold Blanchette Marilyn Huckle Martin Jackier Simon Ryder Robert Walshak Gary Lehnertz, Alternate Bob Rousseau, Alternate Carmen Annunziato, Director of Planning Jim Golden, Assistant City Planner Tambri Heyden, Assistant City Planner (Non-voting) (Non-voting) The meeting was called to order at 7:35 P.M. by Chairman Trauger. He recognized the presence in the audience of Mayor Nick Cassandra, Vice Mayor Ralph Marchese, Commissioner Dee Zibelli, Commissioner Ezetl Hester, former Mayor James Warnke, former County Commissioner Dennis Koehler, Chamber of Commerce member Bill Martin, and Mike Rumpf, a member of the Planning Staff. Chairman Trauger then introduced the Board members and the other members of the Planning Staff. READING AND APPROVAL OF MINUTES The approval of the minutes of the meeting of June 9, 1987 was postponed until the next regular meeting of the Board. ANNOUNCEMENTS None. COMMUNICATIONS Chairman Trauger announced that several communications had been received that would be introduced at the appropriate time during the meeting. NEW BUSINESS A. PUBLIC HEARINGS LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT AND REZONING Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Boynton Beach Village Center Dennis P. Koehler, Esquire Paul Himmelrich, Trustee North sid~ of West Boynton Beach Blvd., between intersection with Old Boynton MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 Legal Description: Description: Road and the L.W.D.D. E-4 canal See "Addendum A" attached to the original copy of these minutes in the City Clerk's Office Request for an amendment to the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan from "High Density Residential" to "Local Retail Commercial" and rezoning from R-3, Multi-Family Residential, to PCD (Planned Commercial Development District) for the purpose of allowing construction of a 165,000 square foot shopping center including a 63,000 Square foot anchor store, a 42,000 square foot minor anchor store, 55,000 square feet of mixed retail floor space, and a 5,000 square foot outparcel Mr. Golden read a memo dated June 12, 1987 from Mr. Annunziato to the Board, which gave a summary of the applicant's request. (See copy of memo found in City Clerk's Office.) Mr. Golden also read the memo's explanation of surrounding land use and zoning, present zoning and allowed land uses, and the applicant's proposed Master Plan. Mr. Golden noted the relevant Comprehensive Plan policies were outlined in the Staff report, but he wished to elaborate on Area 36, which was an area of potential land use conflict. Due to increased traffic that would be drawn to the Boynton Beach Mall, there would be pressure to rezone these parcels from residential to commercial. Other than minor adjust- ments to the existing zoning district boundaries, it was recommended that commercial zoning not be allowed to extend westward along Old Boynton Road and Boynton Beach Boulevard, because ~of serious traffic congestion and degrading of the residential environment of adjacent neighborhoods. Mr. Golden further explained how the Evaluation and Appraisal (E&A) Report evaluated rezonings (Level of Service "C" as the base standard for reasonable and safe service on an average annual basis). Mr. Golden next noted the three Planned Commercial Development Standards listed in the memo (relation to major transportation facilities, roadway improvements and utility extensions, and physical character of the site), and he read the related information. Mr. Golden also read information about economic standards, regarding market studies and employment projections. - 2 MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 Regarding infrastructure, Fir. Golden advised that the proposed water, sewer and drainage system was adequate to serve the proposed development; the water demand for this project would be less than for the existing zoning. Mr. Golden said the City had adopted Level of Service "C" as the base standard for stable operating roadway conditions, and he made other comments regarding the roadway capacity analysis. Mr. Golden added that the establishment of a shopping center at this location would generate an average of 9,646 new trips per day, which would be seven times the traffic generated by the current land use. Mr. Golden said a revised study had been done, but the outcome was not substantially different. Mr. Golden then reviewed the five major issues relevant to this request: 1) whether development of this property for commercial uses will have an adverse impact on surrounding residential properties a~d wo~ld set a precedent for commer- cial rezoning of the residential parcels Which front on Old Boynton Road in the immediate vicinity ("yes" in both cases); 2) whether there is an adequate supply of existing commer- cially zoned property in the vicinity (there is an abundant supply within a one mile radius); 3) whether the property in question is physically and economically developable under ~he existing zoning ("yes"); 4) whether cOmmerCial zoning of ~his proper~y would be consistent with Comprehensive Plan P~licies for the location of and access to commercial land ~ses (consistent in part, inconsistent in part); 5) whether ~evelopment of this property for commercial land uses will have a significant impact on roads in the vicinity (will h~ve significant impact and will not comply with Palm Beach C~unty Performance Standards Ordinance or the E&A Report). In conclusion, the commercial zoning request would be con- sistent with the Comp Plan policies for the location of and access to commercial land uses, but inconsistent with stated policy for Land Use Conflict Area 36 of the Comp Plan E&A Report. The ~oadway system would not be able to accomodate the additional traffic generated by this project, even after taking into consideration the developer's proposed roadway improvements. In addition, ~he Planning Department concluded ~he rezoning would cause a significant cha~n~e in the character of the neighborhood. The Pla~nlng Departme~t,~therefore, recommended that the commercialization of this parcel not be a~lowed, and that the request for amending the Future Land Use Plan and rezoning be denied. Chairman Trauger announced that after the applicant spoke, anyone in the audience who wished to speak would be able to participate in the Public Rearing. He explained that those - 3 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 wishing to speak in favor of the request could speak first, followed by those who wished to speak in opposition to the request. Chairman Trauger requested that the remarks be kept as brief as possible and that the same points not be repeated. Dennis Koehler, Esquire, The Concourse Suite 800, 2000 Palm Beach Lakes Blvd., West Palm Beach, Florida 33409, introduced members of his development team. Mr. Koehler said he hoped to prove that, contrary to City staff beliefs, this project would not, because of its design, have a negative impact on the surrounding community. He further hoped to prove that the traffic performance standards, as well as the City's standards fo~ Rlanned CommerCial DevelOPment approval, had been met in every respect by th~ proposed improvements. Mr. Koehler brought attention to various materials he had distributed to the Board members including: an outline of his presentation, a ten page memorandum of responses to all critical comments that had been made about the project, a letter of support written by a resident of the community closest to the proposed project, a letter proposing a 50' natural buffer ~rese~ve, a iett~r listing proijected costs of developer-contr~buted road imprQvements, a~d a Sun-Sentinel news article. (See copies of these items~ in the City Clerk's Office.) Mr. Koehler showed Board members and the audience "pond apples," which grow on the property in question. He said the City Forester had requested that these be preserved. Mr. Koehler advised that he was proposing to do what no residential developer could do--preserve intact a 100% visual buffer consisting of the existing vegetation, and he showed sketches of how the property would look as a residential development and how it would look with his proposed plan. Mr. Koehler believed the real issue was to balance competing interests. He repeated that he hoped to prove his commercial development would not cause serious traffic congestion and a downgrading of the residential environment, as stated in the E&A report. Mr. Koehler next discussed a map which showed the pattern of existing development in the surrounding area. He asserted that his property was a residential island in a sea of com- mercial developments, with the exception of the eastern tip of the property which had a C-2 designation. Mr. Koehler's client was proposing to donate, construct and maintain this .7 acre property to the City as a public park with a plaza - 4 MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 and a clock tower in a Mizner, Mediterranean-style architec- tural theme. In reference to Mr. Golden's statement that the site plan was limited to a 25' buffer, Mr. Koehler said residents had suggested the buffer be increased to 50'. Mr. Koehler believed, because of unique limitations on that buffer area, it could be preserved without the usual, negative impact. He pointed out other features of the site plan, including three entrance corridors to the shop- p~ng center lined with flowering trees and a full buffer along Boynton Beach Boulevard. Mr. Koehler said his client also was proposing construction of traffic signals at Leisureville Blvd. and at the realigned Old Boynton Road/S.W. 8th St. intersection; the client in th? funding of these traffic signals. Mr. advised his client would donate the $100, for the realig.nment of Old Boynton Road as a co~ approval. Mr. Koehler discussed the conditions for PCD approval, which included site plaa restrictions, developer constructed traffic rovements, and impact fees. He noted he had supplied a list 28 proposed conditions ~of approval that his client would be willing to accept in exchange for approval. Mr. Koehler said developer impact fees of over $250,000 would be paid as part of his project. Mr. Koehler addressed the traffic concerns of the people of Treasure Island and Venetian Isles. He told of counting traffic during peak hours on June 17 and finding an average waiting time of two seconds per vehicle. This remark drew several objections from the audience. Mr. Koehler knew the City was ultimately contemplating five lanes on Old Boyuton Road, and he suggested the road be kept at three lanes. He further suggested, after the intersection was signalized, reducing the road to three lanes with no passing permitted along the curved lanes, so the people's front yards would not be taken away. Mr. Koehler also suggested that the current two-lane wooden bridge over the E-4 canal could be improved to three lanes by the applicant. He added hi~s client was willing to make these coneessions to comply with the City's p~an to insure the q~Ualit~ of the residential area and the r~duction of traffic probl~ems. Mr. Koehler showed elevations of the proposed Boynton Beach Village Center. He also distributed photographs of what a 4-story structure would look like from a canal bank if the vegetation was removed, tke multi-family unit in Leisureville just South of Boynton Beach Blvd., close-ups of the native environment along the canals which would be preserved, and a close-up of the roots of the pond apple tree. - 5 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 Mr. Koehler reported he had asked their market experts to find the more appropriate land use for the property--residential or commercial. He read from a letter from Land Research Management, Inc., which described the character of the area as commercial. Referring to the City staff report, Mr. Koehler complimented the efforts of the staff. He thought the report said more good than bad about the project, and he said every purpose of the PCD zoning district was achieved with this project. Mr. Koehler noted that, of the nine Comprehensive Plan policies listed in the report, his project directly addressed and satisfied six of them. He remarked this project was not a strip shopping center, but rather a unified commercial project. Mr. Koehler sa~d the Comp Plan encouraged the development of clustered neighborhood and community commercial centers at arterial and collector intersections, and he asserted that his project was located at such an intersection. Mr. Koehler concluded ~hat the staff had painted the Worst cas~ scenario possible in recommending denial ~of the project, and he relfuted some cf their assertions. Mr. Koehler added that not all of the City traffic consultant's recommended road improvements were required. He told of three things the traffic consultant said had to happen for this project to go forward: 1) Boynton Beach Blvd., from the project's east entranc~ to 1-95, would have to have two additional travel lanes; 2) Intersection improvements at 1-95 and Boynton Beach Blvd. would have to be made (but the staff admitted this might be beyond the scope of any developer's ability); 3) Congress Avenue, from Old Boyston Road to N.W. 22nd Avenue, would have to have addi- tional travel lanes. Mr. Koehler asked Ken Rogers, the Project Engineer, to respond to these traffic issues. Ken Rogers, 1495 Forest Hill Blvd., West Palm Beach, Florida, wished to first address the traffic consultant's comments on how this project meets the County's Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance. Mr. Rogers referred to the area of Boynton Beach Blvd. from the project to 1-95; he said that area was basically a four-lane roadway. Mr. Rogers said his staff thought the road would have to have additional paving and curbing to increase it to a six-lane roadway. However, upon inspection, they found the six-lanes are already built; the road has 3ust been striped as four-lane. The road would merely n~ed to be restriped as a six-lane roadway. Mr. Rogers said doing this would take care of the major impact of this project. Addressing the traffic consultant's second point, Mr. Rogers did not believe that section of Congress Avenue had the same - 6 - MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 classification and would not need to be widened as a condition of approval. He said that portion of Congress Avenue had an existing volume of traffic below the capacity of the roadway, even with the added traffic from this project. Mr. Rogers advised that, over the next few months, Palm Beach County would be increasing the roadway capacity; even using the lower volumes, the capacity was not exceeded. Referring to the traffic consultant's third comment, Mr. Rogers proposed that the developer would pay for the reconstruction of the overpass to eliminate the median and provide additional thru- lanes and ~urning lanes on Boynton Be~ch Blvd., with construction similar to that on 10th Avenue North in Lake W~rth and Southern Blvd. in West Palm Beach. By doing this, there would be allowance for adequate capacity for existing traffic a~d proposed traffic increases. Mr. Rogers also commented on Mr. Golden's report, which indicated that Old Boynton Road was in poor condition. Mr. Rogers stated the existing volumes on that road are under less than half the capacity of the road. He explained that, due to the opening of the Boynton Beach Mall, there has been a 170% increase in traffic on Old Boynton Road (according to traffic studies made by his office two years ago and this year). Mr. Rogers said the long- time residents are used to having a low traffic volume, but even with these increased volumes, the traffic is within acceptable limits. Therefore, the impact of this project on the traffic on Old Boynton Road would be within the limits allowed in the Comprehensive Plan. Mr. Rogers commented on the difficulty encountered by drivers exiting Coral Drive and Venice Drive onto Old Boynton Road. He stated that, on Venice Drive from 4:45 to 5:45 p.m. on June 16, 18 vehicles were counted leaving Venice Drive. The average wait of those vehicles turning left was 4 seconds, and the average wait of those vehicles turning right was 1.5 seconds. Of the 8 vehicles leaving Coral Drive during that same period of time, the average wait for vehicles turning left was 9 seconds and for vehicles turning right was 3 seconds. Mr. Rogers noted tkese waiting periods were within acceptable periods of waiting tilme for people livlng along a collector roadway. Mr. Rogers concluded that this project would impact Old Boynton Road, but within the standards of the Comp Plan. Mr. Ryder thought Mr. Rogers had given the impression that there were six thru-lanes on the 1-95 overpass; Mr. Ryder said there were only four thru-lanes, because the other lanes were access lanes to 1-95. Mr. Ryder further thought Mr. Rogers implied it would not be too difficult to take out the median to increase - 7 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 the overpass capacity. Mr. Ryder did not see how this could be done without substantially rebuilding the overpass. Mr. Rogers replied that the median could be removed, and the shoulder area of the curb could be reduced. He explained to Mr. Ryder how the lanes were now designed and how they could be reconstructed. Mr. Rogers added the only work would be done on top of the structure between the existing curb lines. He reaffirmed that there was enough room to have three lanes approaching each intersection. Mr. Ryder still did not see how it couid be done. In response to Mr. Walshak's inquiry, Mr. Rogers said the turn lanes west of 1-95 at Industrial Blvd. would not be touched. Mr. Walshak thought the intersection was dangerous enough now without having to cut across three lanes, of traffic when turning east onto Boynton Beach Blvd. Mr. Annunziato explained that by reconstructing the approaches before the first signal, there could be three lanes in either direction. However, the turn lane would not go through the second light, but would terminate at the left turn. The capacity of the overpass would be increased by extending the stacking for the ~eft turns,, so there would be no interference of the passage of two lanes over the overpass. Mrs. Huckl~ asked if the traffic generated from Oakwood Square had been i~cluded in the calculations for traffic impact in that area. Mr. Rogers responded that the answer was both "yes" and "no." He explained that the City staff and the ordinances required that two sets of circumstances be con- sidered. The first set of circumstances required looking at existing plus project traffic. The second set of circumstances required lo~king at the ultimate condition when the entire area is built o~t. Therefore, in the ultimate build out, the traffic from Oakwoo~ Square had been considered. Mr. Koehler concluded that their proposals answered every one of the questions raised by the City staff. He said that, in light of the fact that Boyn=on Beach Blvd. appears to already be capable of having six thru-travel lanes between the project and 1-95, his client was now prepared to commit to construction of the additional lanes on the overpass as required. Mr. Ryder still did not believe this could be done. Mr. Koehler replied this was a technical question that could be answered technically. Mr. Koehler added that the traffic engineer had advised the capacity would be increased by 50%. Mrs. Huckle asked why Mr. Koehler had stated the buffer could be preserved only by his project. Mr. Koehler explained that the setback requirements for a residential project are not - 8 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 close to 50' (Mr. Koehler said that while the setback requirement for his project was 25', they had committed to doubling it to 50'.) Mr. Koehler said, if a residential developer was found, that developer would not want to place the buildings close to Boynton Beach Blvd., but rather would locate them close to the waterway. In addition, the resi- dential structures would feature the waterway as a selling feature, and much of the buffer would be eliminated to give a better view of that waterway. Concerning the pond apple issue, Mr. Annunziato said it was the policy of the L.W.D.D. to clear drainage rights-of-way to provide for flow of water and access. He said the City might be able to deal with the pond apple issue in a different way. The City might be able to require some State agency to comply with Comprehensive Plan requirements. In reference to the 50' buffer, Mr. Annunziato said the 50' buffer existed on paper, but not in the policy of the City of Boynton Beach. He explained that the buffer was composed primarily of exotic species that the City had determined were not welcome in Boynton Beach. Mr. Annunziato added developers have been required to remove such exotic species as part of their land development process. He advised that, even if a residential project were going there, it would be recommended that the buffer be taken down. Mr. Annunziato concluded that the issue of the 50' buffer was more directly related to the creation of a land use conflict (by having commercial in close proximity to residential) than to the policy of eradicating exotics. As for the right-of-way for the realignment of Old Boynton Road and N.W. 8th Street, Mr. Annunziato said that pro3ect was scheduled for the next couple of months. Concerning market reports, Mr. Annunziato agreed that there was a demand for commercial space on approaches to a regional mall; however, he felt the issue was whether it made sense to have more commercial. Mr. Annunziato thought the property might not have been developed residentially yet because of the high price of the land, rather than because of land use. As for traffic, Mr. Annunziato stated that, at build out, the City staff found serious fault with this application. Concerning the overpass, Mr. Annunziato said extending the turn lane and removing the interface would increase the capacity; however, at build out, he was not sure it would make much difference. Mr. Annunziato added this problem was not solely at Boynton Beach Blvd., but this problem is going to exist throughout 1-95 in South Florida; so far, there is no answer. - 9 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOA-RD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 THE BOARD TOOK A BREAK AT 9:05 P.M. 9:20 P.M. TEE MEETING RESUMED AT When the meeting resumed, Chairman Trauger announced that anyone wishing to speak in favor of the request could come forward at this time. Jay Russell, 1231 Gondola Lane, wished to make three points. Mr. Russell stated that, as a native Floridian employed by a general contractor, he has seen good and bad planning and has worked for good .and bad developers. Mr. Russell believed this to be a good, planned project. He thought the native area could be spared, but he thought it would be lost if the land was developed residentially. Mr. Russell also was in favor of the realignmen~ of Old Boynt0n Road, and he believed the bell tower would be a nice point of interest for the City. Mr. Russell did not see how development in this area could be prevented. Wayne Scott, 1033 Coral Drive, Treasure Island, stated that he was a resident on the waterway immediately behind the planned project. He believed residents living on the water- way had as much or more to lose as anyone in that area. Mr. Scott did not wish to see the vegetation disturbed in his back yard. He did not think a residential development would do justice to the privacy he now enjoyed, nor did he think a residential developer would be financially able to accomodate the current residents' needs as this developer could. Mr. Scott had attended to meetings for residents in his community, and the consensus at those meetings seemed to favor a com- mercial development with conditional approval. One item Mr. Scott disagreed with was the delivery times of 6:00 a.m. until midnight. He favored the hours of 7:00 a.m. until 7:00 p.m., with deliveries being made a maximum of six days a week. Bill Martin, 1041 Coral Drive, said the view from his back yard probably convinced him to purchase his present home. Mr. Martin remarked that he always felt he would sell his home, if anyone built across the Waterway. He commented that probably everyone in the neighborhood would rather see the area stay as it is now, but he realized this was not a long term possibility. Mr. Martin felt that the vegetation would be saved for a short time.and then would all be lost, if this project was not approved. Mr. Martin said the devel- oper had been very cooperative with the residents; he also said that, while some residents had taken the time to listen to Mr. Koehler, others had pre~erred to "shout him down." Mr. Martin did not think shouting and screaming was going to prevent anything from happening there. Mr. Martin agreed - 10 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 with Mr. Scott's remarks about the delivery hours. He also stressed that the only way the residents approved of this project was if the native vegetation and species were left intact. Mr. Martin closed by saying he knew the Board members and City Commissioners were people who would listen to reason, rather than being shouted into action by a noisy minority. Jim Corbitt, 2399 $.W. llth Avenue, Leisureville, remarked that he had been impressed by Mr. Koehler's presentation. ~e did not foresee a residential development located in this area, as the surrounding area was entirely commercial. Mr. Corbitt said this projec~t had better vegetation borders than any other project h~ had seen. He noted that loading from the rear of the pro~ject was also very desirable. Mr. Corbitt mentioned the better than average parking lot pIantings that were proposed, as Well ~as the proposal to pa~'for~ traffic signals, as positive factors. Susan Russell, 1231 Gondola Lane, stated that she should be opposed to this project, because it brings competition to the commercial developer by whom she is employed. Mrs. Russell remarked that, looking at the development occurring to the west, the area needs this well planned development. She believed the area would not be desirable as a residential area. Mrs. Russell urged that the request be approved. Daniel Boyar, 712 S.W. 3rd Avenue, requested that the rezoning request, if granted, be granted conditionally. Mr. Boyar said it should be required that the developer provide a generous, substantial buffer zone and that mostly native vegetation be used whenever plantings are made. Mr. Boyar noted that the land along the canal was of special concern, and he suggested a 100' setback because of concern for wildlife along the canal. He agreed that a 50' buffer along the north side would provide an adequate barrier for the residential area. Mr. Boyar also recommended a special planted area at the apex, or east, area of the property for aesthetic reasons, since Boynton Beach Blvd. is the City's main thoroughfare. Mr. Boyar remarked that developers should ~ot~ be allowed to come into the City and devastate the wooded a~eas, leav%ng seas of concrete in their place. Mr. Boyar added that, while concrete makes an area oppr~essively hot, trees are a natural air conditioner. Mr. Boyar said the existing t~ees in the buffer zone should remain, beisg gradually weeded .out over a period of years. Tom Miller, 1059 Coral Drive, Treasure Island, agreed with the comments of Mr. Scott and Mr. Martin. Mr. Miller said this developer was bending over backwards in order to be approved. Mr. Miller remarked that the developer's concern - 11 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 was not only for their project, but also for the welfare of Boynton Beach. As there was no one else who wished to speak in favor of the project, Chairman Trauger invited those who wished to speak in opposition to come forward. William Walton, 308 Venice ~rive, Venetian Isle, stated that he had lived in his home by the E-4 canal for the last 1t years. Mr. Walton had enjoyed the view and watching the wildlife and the fishermen during those years. Mr. Walton added that, when buying his home, he had been concerned with the zoning, knowing the land would some day be developed. If the zoning had been commercial, Mr. Walton said, he would not have purchased the home. Mr. Walton said, despite the promises ~of the developer to provide the buffer zone, he had to think of the possible negative effect this project Could have oB the community and surrounding residential areas (increased tr. affic .and its p~tential dan~er with the large n~mber Of children in the area, pollution, no~se, dumpst~rs attracting rodents, disturbance ~a~sed by deliveries ~ket). Mr. Walton said ~he shoppin~ center ~ ~al to the-survival of the co~nity, shoppiug centers already ~isting in the a~ea, Mr. WaltQn said ~e was not asking not develO~ tke l~nd, but he was asking him to develop it as presently zoned. ~dna Walton, also of 308 Venice Drive, told of a survey she took of vacancies in area shopping malls. She reported that there were over 119 vacant stores to be rented, not including Cross Creek Center or 25-30 additional stores in this new project. M~s. Walton asked if another supermarket was really needed. Josephine Bernard, 400 Venice Drive, presented petitions bearing the names of area residents opposed to this project. ~rs. Bernard also was concerned with the impact on traffic this project would have. Mrs. Bernard was concerned with the safety of the large number of children who wait for buses on Old Boynton Road. She also agreed that there wsre too many shopping centers in the area already. Mrs. Bernard disputed the validity of Mr. Koehler's traffic studies, as the "snow birds" and many vacationing families were not in town and schools were already closed for the summer. Mrs. Bernard believed th~ planned park Would be nothing more than an undesirable "hangout." Bill Childers, 304 Venice Drive, in reference to the pond apples, remarked the L.W.D.D. has control of the area where - 12 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 they grow; and if they decided to take out the pond apples, the developer would have a hard time preventing them from doing so. Mr. Childers said sound is increased and carries over the waterway, and he was concerned about the increased noise that would be generated by this project. Mr. Childers said he might not have bought his property if it had been zoned commercially. He also thought it was not necessary to build any more shopping centers. Jim Haynie, 1055 Old Boynton Road, remarked that everyone in Florida likes to live on the water, but they do not want to share their view. Because Of the better residential environ- ment in the neighborhood, the property prices have g~ne up, and Mr. Haynie wanted it to stay that way. Mr. Haynie said that Old Boynton Toad will end up like Seacrest Blvd., if it continues to be widened. He said that would decrease the value of the neighb6~h~od. James B. Wilson, Jr., 1224 Isles Court, referred to a military term, "overkill," which he compared to the plans for yet another shopping center. Mr. Wilson said people seemed to be under the impression that no one had approached the City about having a residential development on this land, but he said that was not the case. Mr. Wilson then gave instances of people who had wanted to develop the land residentially and explained why their plans had failed. Mr. 'Wilson also commented that good lawyers are good salesmen, and he said Mr. Koehler had done a good job trying to sell this project. However, Mr. Wilson was concerned about the colossal growth that was going to be occurring to the west of the City, and he feared the loss of aesthetics in the process. Mr. Wilson ~emarked that the final products of these commercial developments are never quite as attractive as they were presented to be ~t the time. Mr. Wilson believed that an attractive residential area could be built, and the aesthetics could be spared also. Arnold Thompson, 1307 N.W 8th Court, remarked that just about everything had already been said. Mr. Thompson noted that Woolbright Road has a nice residential, multi-family area to the west of 1-95, and he said something similar should be built on the land in question. Mr. Thompson said most of the 50' buffer that had been discussed should be removed. He said that Melaleuca trees caused respiratory problems and Australian Pines would be dangerous in a hurricane. Mr. Thompson also believed the refrigeration on top of the proposed stores would be rather noisy. He also mentioned the noise that would be caused by the delivery trucks late at night. As no one else wished to speak, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. 13 MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 Mr. Koehler wished to make a brief rebuttal to the Public Hearing comments. He noted that there had been seven speakers in favor of the project and seven speakers in opposition, and he remarked that the Board's job was to balance the interests and make the decision that would best serve the greater Boynton Beach community. Mr. Koehler addressed a comment made by Dan Boyer, who was in favor of the pro~ect. Mr. Koehler said Mr. Boyer, an officer of the Florida Audubon Society, had suggested the most important factor was the landscaping, vegetation and ecosystem. Mr. Koehler then commented on ~r. Annunziato's statement that the buffer zone was a ~snomer, the exotics were not welcome, and the L.W.D.D. would probably remove them. Mr. Koehter believed the L.W.D.:D. would listen, if the City asked them not to destroy the native vegetation. Mr. Koehler then showed drawings of what the area would look like with the 50' buffer and the proposed building, and he asserted that it was necessary for the existing vegetation to remain. Mr. Koehler next read from the E&A Report, which recommended that exotic species "should" be removed during construction, and he remarked that it said "should" rather than "shall." Mr. Koehler said that gave this Board and the City Commission discretion to decide whether or not to remove the vegetation. Mr. Koehler next stated reasons why the vegetation should remain. First, the residents in the area had requested that it be preserved, and the landscaping materials, once removed, could never be replaced to that capacity. Second, the buffer zone was limited by water bodies and pavement; therefore, the exotic vegetation could not spread and choke out other vege- tation, and the limitation of certain trees to the buffer zone should prevent the problem of them blowing down during hurri- canes. Third, the Melaleuca trees, which have the problem of being drinkers of large amounts of water, would be in an area that would serve drainage purposes; so, in f~ct, those trees would promote the goals of the area. In response to Mr. Annunziato's comment about the order of taking for the right-of-way, Mr. Koehler noted there was an order of taking, but the government would have to pay his client for that; furthermore, his client was willing to donate that $100,000 to the government as a condition of approval. Mr. Koehler also advised that they were proposing to provide Lolley-the-Trolley service to and throughout Leisureville to the project. He said this would satisfy Leisureville's concern - 14 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 for senior citizen/resident transportation, as well as their concern for the possibility of traffic accidents. Mr. Koehler also remarked that he did not hear one Leisureville resident speak in opposition to the project tonight. In response to Mrs. Walton's report of her inventory of vacant stores in the area, Mr. Koehler remarked that any well-designed project filling a consumer need could be successful on Boynton Beach Blvd., because it is the east-west major arterial which connects old and new Boynton Beach. Mr. Koehler said the key to success of any shopping center would be an anchor tenant, which his project had. He added that, in the free enterprise system, everyone has the opportunity to fail or succeed. Mr. Koehler concluded that this project, subject to conditions, would comply wi~bthe Comprehensive Plan and would give the City the opportunity to make a dramatic entrance statement about the City of Boynton Beach. Chairman Trauger noted the receipt of several letters and pe'titions from citizens concerning this project. (These can be found in the City Clerk's Office.) Mr. Ryder commented that rezoning from residential to commercial usually is done for monetary gain. Mr. Ryder said applicants for such zoning changes often show little concern for any harm that might ensue from such changes on an established, residential community. Mr. Ryder counted 20 shopping centers between 1-95 and Congress Avenue which were, to a great extent, vacant; he saw no pressing need to rezone from residential to commercial. Mr. Ryder also thought the 1-95 overpass was an important consideration. He commented that the eventual improvements often take place long after the developments are presented. Mr. Ryder also voiced traffic concerns. Mr. Ryder felt the City had gone too far in considering changes from residential to commercial. He said Boynton Beach began largely as a residential community, and while commercial facilities are needed, in this case, they are already there; more are not needed. Mr. Ryder also reflected that there is much undeveloped property still available that is properly zoned for commercial purpose. In response to Mr. Koehler's remark that he had heard no opposition from Leisureville resi- dents, Mr. Ryder said he was hearing it now. Mr. Annunziato reported there would be a Public Hearing on this project before the City Commission on July 7, 1987. Mr. Annunziato also wished to address a dilemna imposed on the Board by the E&A Report. The report suggested that a - 15 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 development should not be approved, if additional traffic would cause roadways to mo longer operate within provided levels of service. Mr. Annunziato asked how the Board could approve something that appeared to be in direct conflict with the E&A Report. Mrs. Huckle asked about Mr. Rogers assertions about the traffic. Mr. Annunziato said the Table concerning traffic showed a build out reaction, and he stated that roadway con- ditions would deteriorate in the future. Chairman Trauger asked, since they were talking about commercial development on Boynton Beach Blvd. and its impact on traffic, why Cross Creek Center had been rezoned from residential to commercial, if there was s~ch a high concern. Chairman Trauger agreed that the traffic impact would be great, but he wanted to point out the fact that zoning from residential to commercial was being approved in other cases. Mr. Ryder pointed out that the ~lanning Department had not been in favor of rezoning Cross Creek Center. Mrs. Huckle asked for clarification on the issue of the exotic species and the vegetative buffer; Mr. Koehler had said the wording of the E~A Report was they "should" be removed, yet Mr. Annunziato's memo said they "must" be removed and are prohibited in landscaping. Mr. Annunziato replied that Mr. Koehler was accurate in respect to the language of the Comp Plan. However, practically, the position of the City Commission (as expressed through issuance of Development Orders) has been that exotics be removed, iMrs. Huckle said this seemed to be a rather vital issue in this project, and she thought it was rather vague as to how the ~Board should interpret this. Mrs. Huckle also asked if the L.W.D.D.'s will superceded the City's will in the issue of removing this vegetation. Mr. Annunziato said the policy clearly has been to remove exotics. In terms of revegetation, the policy requires that exotics cannot be used in landscaping. Chairman Trauger asked, if the exotics were removed and replaced with native vegetation, what the position of the L.W.D.D would then be. He wondered why the L.W.D.Do had not cleared the banks in the last 20 years. Mr. Annunziato responded that the issue with the L.W.D.D., as far as the. City was concerned, revolved primarily around the pond apples. He said the City would be in a position of supporting the continued existence of the pond apple, if possible. Based On a similar situation involving WXEL, Mr. Annunziato thought arguments could possibly be made in favor of the pond apples. He did not think, however, an 16 MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 argument could be made for species that had been determined undesirable. Mr. Ryder thought the buffer issue was a side issue, while the main issue was whether another shopping center was needed adjacent to an established residential area. Mr. Walshak thanked Mr. Koehler for his effort to make such a detailed presentation. Mr. Blanchette thought the project was a super one, but he felt it was in the wrong location geographically, because of the traffic. Mr. Blanchette also remarked that there soon might be an interchange at the Turnpike and Old Boynton Road, which would further increase traffic. Vice Chairman Wandelt also agreed that another shopping center was not necessary, but he felt this was a beautiful project and was the lesser of two evils (the shopping center or high rises). Alternate Gary Lehnertz also felt another shopping center was not needed. He also was uncomfortable with the suggestion for the overpass, as he was familiar with the Southern Blvd. bridge and did not like its layout. Mr. Lehnertz believed a nice residential area of two-story townhouses or condominiums could be developed in this location. He disagreed with Mr. Koehler's statement that having water on two sides would prevent the spread of Melaleucas and Australian Pines; he said these trees are spread through airborne seedlings, and a 50' waterway would not prevent them fro~ being spread throughout surrounding areas. Mr. Lehnertz further said the fact that Melaleucas absorb water was a moot point, as far as drainage, because the drainage and swales have to be there anyway. He added that, if there was a dry spell, the Melaleucas could present problems with the sprinkler wells. Motion Mr. Ryder moved that the Board endorse the recommendation of the Planning Department by DENYING the request for rezoning from residential to commercial. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Huckle and carried 7-0. A RECESS WAS TAKEN AT 10:40 P.M. 10:50 P.M. THE MEETING RESUMED AT ANNEXATION 2. Project Name: Citrus Glen Agents: Michael D. Gordon, Esquire - 17 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 Owner: Location: Legal Description: Project Description: Enrico Rossi, P.E. Knollwood Orange Groves, Inc. Lawrence Road at Miner Road extended, southeast corner See "Addendum B" attached to the original copy of these minutes Request to annex a 53.604 acre tract of land LAND USE ELEMENTAMENDMENT AND REZONING Project Name: Agents: Owner: Location: Legal Description: Project Description: Citrus Glen Same as 92 above Same as above Same as above Same as above Request to show annexed land as Low Density Residential and to rezone from AR (Agricultural Residential) to a Planned Unit Development with a Land Use Intensity=4 to permit the develop- ment of 250 units, including 132 zero lot line, single-family detached units and 118 duplex units Mr. Golden read from a memo from Mr. Annunziato to the Board members dated 6/11/87, which gave the background information for these requests (See copy of memo found in the City Clerk's Office). Mr. Golden informed the Board of the current land use and zoning of the surrounding areas, and he discussed the Master Plan of the project, showing the transparency and the rendering of the plan. Mr. Golden stated that included in the request to annex were the City-owned lift station and the rights-of-way for Lawrence Road and the L-20 canal. Regarding Miner Road, Mr. Golden said, the Master Plan and Staff comments provide for its dedication and construction. Mr. Golden then read from the memo regarding future land use and rezoning! of the area. He also noted the three policies in the Comp Plan which addressed annexations, which the memo discussed. Mr. Golden said the Planning Department recommended that the applications be approved, subject to comments listed in the memo as Exhibit "C". - 18 - MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 In answer to Mr. Ryder's inquiry about Miner Road, Mr. Golden replied that, with the approval of this project, 180' of Miner Road would have to be dedicated within a certain period of time. Then in a greater period of time, Miner Road would have to be constructed. Mr. Annunziato added the rights-of-way have already been dedicated, and the plans for the portion of the road between Congress Avenue and Sandalwood Blvd. have been approved by the City and should be constructed soon. He said the applicant has until October to complete construction of Miner Road from Sandalwood Drive to the western limits of his property. Mr. Golden advised Chairman Trauger that this property was not the operating Knollwood Orange Groves, but was on the other side of the road. Mr. Annunziato stated there has not been a Commercial grove there in eight or more years. In response to another question by Chairman Trauger, Mr. Annunzlato said the ground water storage tank was east of and adjacent to this project, and he noted the regional pumping.station was on the northwest corner of this property. In response to Mrs. Huckle's inquiry, Mr. Annunziato said 108' was the right-of-way width for Miner Road. He noted that Miner Road could potentially be a four-lane divided highway at build out. Michael D. Gordon, 515 N. Flagler Drive, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401, was representing the project. Mr. Gordon said the gross density of the Planned Unit Development would be 4.66 units per acre. Mr. Gordon said he agreed in principle to all of the staff comments, but he felt certain comments would require clarification or further definition. Mr. Gordon promised to meet with the necessary departments to resolve these issues prior to the City Commission meeting. Chairman Trauger said Mr. Gordon would have to agree totally to the comments tonight. Chairman Trauger stated that this was a Public Hearing, and he asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of the requests. Robert Grauch, 8546 Duke Court East, asked if these units were proposed to be rental or purchased dwellings. Mr. Annunziato replied that they would be purchased. Nathan Miller, builder for the project, Intracoastal Development, Inc., 70 S. Congress Avenue, Suite 201, Delray Beach, Florida 33445, told Mr. Grauch the homes would be between 1,300-2,000 square feet and would cost between $80,000-$120,000. Hearing that information, Mr. Grauch said he was in favor of the project. He said he was happy to see the gross density at 4.66 units per acre. - 19 MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 AS no one else wished to speak in favor of the requests, Chairman Trauger asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to the requests. Helen Schwartzenberg, 8876 Princess Donna Court, stated there was a serious traffic problem on Lawrence Road. She said new building was occurring on 22nd Avenue between Lawrence Road and Congress Avenue that would bring in more traffic. She wondered if there were future plans for developing Lawrence Road. Chairman Trauger advised that road was in the County Land Use Plan for the next five years. Mr. Annunziato did not think there were any plans to extend Lawrence Road to more than the current two lanes. Mrs. Schwartzenberg said the addition of an elementary school would further impact the area traffic. Mr. Annunzia%o reported t~affic studies had been made, and Lawrence Road would continue to operate under Level of Service "C". Mr. Annunziato ~ applicant would be ~expanding the of Road and Miner Road width turn lanes. He ~ ~ extendsd to Military Trail in the very near Joan Starr, 7689 Lawrence Road, presented petitions signed by people opposing the Land Use Element Amendment and rezoning of both the Citrus Glen and Lawrence Groves projects. Mrs. Starr was opposed to the rezoning and lan~ use changes for both of these ~projects. Mrs. Starr said she and her neighbors have enjoyed quiet, country living for many years.. With the entrance of many developers, tropical vegetation, cows, and now orange groves are disappearing. According to the news reports~ Mrs. Starr said, South Florida has reached the limits of population that the water supply will sustain. Mrs. Starr added there are good water management laws, but j~st too many people. She was not against development, but it seemed to Mrs. Starr that growth should be limited in a reasonable way. In view of the already crowded roads, over ~eveloped land, depleting water situation, and the PUD not b~ing Conducive to the ~ype of homes already in the neigh~0~h~od,. Mrs. Starr urged that the requests be denied. Mrs. ~.~u~kle asked how Mrs. Starr would ~nvision this land being d~eTOp~d, and Mrs. Starr p~eferred h6mes similar to what is already %here, rather than a PUD. Steve Cromartie, 7839 Lawrence Road, asked if, although the development would be fee simple, people could buy and then rent them. Mr. Annunziato stated that this ~as correct. Mr. Cromartie said he was against rental propert3 in his area, which is now zoned agricultural. He knew development of the area could not be prevented, but he would like~ to see something that would allow a lesser number of people ~o live there. - 20 MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 AS no one else wished to speak, Chairman Trauger declared that THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. In response to Chairman Trauger's inquiry, Mr. Annunziato said that 132 zero lot line, detached homes were planned for this area. Chairman Trauger asked why, with all the land, they would be zero lot line. Mr. Miller replied that, on the basis of market studies, it was determined that was the best possible use of the land. Chairman Trauger thought the homes would be located too closely together; he thought there would be a common wall. Mr. Miller explained that duplex or attached patio dwellings .would have the common wall, but these homes would have side yards. Mr. Fernandez, the architect for the project, added that there would be better utilization of the side yards in this proposed concept. There was further dlscu~sion. Mr. Blanchette asked if the Board would be able to see the designs of these homes before final approvall Mr. Annunziato advised that single family and detached duplexes were exempt from review, unless they were condominiums. Board members discussed the fact that they had recommended to the City Commission that they be provided with a concept of the type housing to be in the PUDs, but the Commission had not agreed with their request that the PUD Ordinance be amended. Chairman Trauger asked what type of construction the homes would be. Mr. Miller answered that there would be masonry construction, and the homes would be single story with one- or two-car garages. He said there would be at least three d~fferent models of the single family home with twelve dif- f~erentlelevations. Mr. Miller stated it was too early for final architectural drawings. Mrs. Huckle asked if the land use intensity took the lake area into consideration. Mr. Annunziato said the density, as opposed to the land use intensity, did include the lakes; the 4.6 units per gross acre calculation did include the lakes and the roads. Mr. Annunziato said the net density was probably much higher, perhaps 6 or 7 units per acre. Regarding the density ~ssues, Mr. Annunziato said these issues were much discussed when the E&A Report was adopted. Mr. Annunziato told of the land uses of surrounding properties, which all had higher densities than this proposed density. Regarding the non-annexation option, he said this leaves the impression that the property may not be developed or may be developed as something less; however, the County Comprehensive Plan would provide for densities twice as high. Mr. Annunziato 21 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 said these densities were assigned to the property before the applicant got involved. In response to Chairman Trauger's inquiry, Mr. Miller said he had never been involved in a building corporation that had gone bankrupt. Mr. Miller said he intended to develop and build this site. Motions Mr. Ryder moved to accept the recommendation of the Planning Department and approve the request for annexation of Citrus Glen, subject to staff comments (See "Addendum Cl-9" attached to the original copy of these minutes). Mr. Gordon stated he agreed with all these comments. Mrs. Huckle seconded the motion, which carried 7-0. Chairman Trauger asked'the applicant if he would be able to have some sort of sketch or visual representation of the project before the City Commission meeting. Mr. Annunziato advised that the Public Hearing for Citrus Glen (and Lawrence Groves) would be at the July 21 City Commission meeting. (Boynton Beach Village Center would be heard at the July 7 meeting.) Mr. Miller thought he could present a rendering of a typical detached home and a typical patio building. Mrs. Huckle asked if, in changing from agricultural to low density residential, this would be the lowest residential category in a PUD. Mr. Annunziato advised that densities could be as low as desired, but still be consistent with the maximum 4.8 dwelling units per acre permitted in that zoning. Mrs. Huckle asked if the density could be required to be any lower; Mr. Annunziato answered that the Board could recommend to the City Commission a lower density. Mr. Ryder moved to endorse the recommendation of the Planning Department and approve the request to show annexed land as Low Density Residential and to rezone from Agriculture Residential (AR) to a PUD with a Land Use Intensity=4 to permit the develop- ment of 250 units, including 132 zero lot line, single-family detached units and 118 duplex units, subject to staff comments. The motion was seconded by Dr. Jackier. The motion failed 3-4. Voting in opposition to the motioa were Vice Chairman Wandelt, Mr. Walshak, Mrs. Huckle and Chairman Trauger. The request for the Land Use Element Amendment and rezoning was DENIED. Mr. Walshak explained the dilemna he faced was whether to approve projects without knowing what they looked like. Mr. Walshak said he would never vote on a project that he could not see what it looked like. - 22 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 ANNEXATION Project Name: Agents: Owner: Location: Legal Description: Project Description: Lawrence Groves Michael D. Gordon, Esquire Enrico Rossi, P.E. John and Anita Van Hezewyk, Co-Trustees Lawrence Road at L.W.D.D. L-19 canal, southeast corner See "Addendum D" attached to the original copy of these minutes Request to annex a 48.231 acre tract of land LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT AND REZONING 5. Project Name: Agents: Owner: Location: Legal Description: Project Description: Lawrence Groves Same as ~4 above Same as above Same as above Same as above Request to show annexed land as Low Density Residential and to rezone from AR (Agricultural Residential) to a Planned Unit Development with a Land Use Intensity=4 to permit the develop- ment of 231 units, including 103 zero lot line, single-family detached units and 128 duplex units Miss Heyden read from a memo dated June 16, 1987 from Mr. Annunziato to the Planning and Zoning Board members (See copy in City Clerk's Office) regarding the request. She reviewed the current land use and zoning of th~ surrounding properties, the Master Plan, the future land use and rezoning of the land, and the Comprehensive Plan policies relative to annexation. Miss Heyden advised that the Planning Department recommended approval, subject to staff comments. Chairman Trauger commented that, looking at the diagram, he did not see many orange grove trees preserved. Mr. Fernandez said the landscape architect who had been working with City Forester Kevin Hallahan could address that subject later. Mr. Fernandez said they would leave as many trees as feasible. - 23 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 Chairman Trauger asked if the design of the homes would be the same as in Citrus Glen. Mr. Miller replied that these would be slightly higher priced and a little larger. These homes would be from 1,400 to 2,100 square feet and would cost about $6,000 more than the homes in Citrus Glen. It was determined that there would be 128 duplex units, rather than 118, as listed on the agenda. Chairman Trauger asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of the-requests. No one wished to speak. He then asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to the requests. H. J. Ramacle, 7611 Lawrence Road, Lantana, Florida, informed the Board that one of the surrounding properties listed, Manor Forest, was now known as Fox HolLow. Mr. Ramacle said most of the homes in the area were 2½ _ 3 acres, and he said the planned project would not be consistent with what was already there. ~. Ramacle said he knew t~e proRerty had to be developed, but e thought the present residents ~would be ruined, as far as their investments were concerned, if duplexes were located across the street. He said he would not be able to sell his home, if these dwellings were built there. Eleanor Johnson, 7729 Lawrence Road, voiced her opposition to the requests. Mrs. Johnson said she delivers mail in the area, and she told of serious traffic problems that occur during the "season." Steve Cromartie, 7839 Lawrence Road, believed that, even if some of the orange trees were left, they would be lost anyway; and he explained why. Mr. Cromartie said the Manor Forest development was probably only 30% sold out in a three-year time period. He did not think these planned units would sell. Mr. Cromartie did not want to be annexed, because he did not wish to be surrounded by another Manor Forest or Fox Hollow. He added he would like to see the first project be successful before a second pro]ect was started. Joan Starr, 7689 Lawrence Road, agreed that Fox Hollow was a sore spot among the current area residents. She advised that Fox Hollow had changed hands five times since it inception. In answer to Mr. Ryder's inquiry, Mr. Cromartie said about 20 fourplexes had been sold. Mrs. Starr said that, even though Fox Hollow's property was not on Lawrence Road, their entrance was. Robert Grauch, 8546 Duke Court East, said he spoke rather hastily before when he said he was pleased with only 4.66 units per acre density. After hearing that was gross density, - 24 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA JUNE 23, 1987 he was not pleased. Mr. Grauch wondered if the developer would be willing to compromise and put in less units per acre, if the annexation was approved by the City Commission. He noted a total of 481 units in the two projects would produce an approximate 962 additional cars on Lawrence Road. Mr. Grauch thought the demand for this value of housing might be less than some of the developers anticipated. He requested that the Board recommend to the City Commission a lower density. Cliff Leisinger, Landscape Architect, remarked the City of Boynton Beach was going to grow no matter what. He was not sure how many acres of land in the City limits were in citrus (current or past) at the present time. Mr. Leisinger said his client wanted to take this and develop a citrus grove within the residential development~ He agreed that a lot of the ~rees would be lost because ~f bringing the grade Up and installing utilities. Mr. Leisinger said they were trying to provide a certain image and wo.ui~ work ~ry closely with the City Forester to save as ~any trees as P0Ss~le. As no one else wished to speak, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Motions Mrs. Huckle moved to approve the annexation for Lawrence Groves' 48.231 acre tract of land, subject to staff comments (See "Addendum D" attached to the original copy of these minutes). The motion was seconded by Mr. Ryder. Mr. Gordon agreed to all staff comments. A vote was taken, and the motion carried 7-0. Mrs. Huckle commented that the gross density (4.79) of this project was slightly higher than that of Citrus Glen. She then moved to DENY the application for a Land Use Element Amendment and rezoning for Lawrence Groves. The motion was seconded by Vice Chairman Wandelt and carried 5-2. Dr. Jackier and Mr. Blanchette opposed the motion. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 12:15 A.M. Linda Warlick Recording Secretary (Five Tapes) - 25 '" :: A parcel.of 'land.in Sect{on 20; ~bwnship 45 South: ~ange 43 Eas~;(~palm~: ~ch ..,%,°...~Co~tY__,. Flortd. ai: .~_~ pa~..Uc~larly described as follows: CclNr~ncin _ ~ ..... east caurner O~ said. c' · g at the So{lth · ~, ~.. . . . ~Se ~-ion 20, run h%sterl alon · - ' . .:- 1671,44 .feet,. to a-l/2" iron pipe in tim w~-~y~-, g..t~. S~u~ Ul l~.ne of.~afd Sec~{.on . -~-~, ~ .:~a, .~,,. ~-za~. of subdivision of said Section ~,.~^., :_- .a.,. _r,t¥ .- page 20, public.recOrds Of Palm Beach County, Florida; thence Northerly making a~ angle with 'said Scuth. line of SecLion 20, treasured frc~ West to North of 920 ...~, and along said Westerly' r.i.q.ht of-way line of sai~.road, being also the Easement- : of lief. ill-of said subdtvlszon of Section 20, a xstance of 330.38 feet' to 'a'point '.in a line parall.el' to and 330 feet Nor.ti]erly (n~asured at riqht anqles) frcm the t ~ou .f_h lin~ of said Section 20, said point being tile Point of Beginning arx~ the South- ~. east corner of the parcel of ].and herein described; thence Norti)erly along i-tj~e san~ dOurse 52.85 feet. to an intersection with the Sout]~erly right of way line of '~-~,nton Road; thence Northwesterly along said riqht of way line, ax~ n~king an ~n£;l~ with .the preceding c°~rse; raeasured frc~n South to Northwest, of 137o 25', 4)¢list~74qckT, of 398.42 feet; .thence Southwesterly, making an anqle witil the prec~hn( t . cured from Southeast to S~,e~.~o~ ~ ,~ ^, - .. ' -in .~{s ~= -A ....... ~--_-._~o~, u~. ~uu~ u , a ~lstan¢~ of 720.77 ..... o~uEl~ ±lee or said Sect.foe.20; ' ~,~ thence Easterly along said parallel line 877 feet, more or less, to th.g l?Oill~ 9 -., Beginning.. .. " :'5~i [! ' PARCEL 2 }~"~'" :,-".;:. . . .,a-* -.'..~ ,,. t[+s.:~ t :. ~he S6uth 330 feet of I~t Il 1. of tile Suing{vici.on of tile West 'Phre~.:(~la~-~;.~..i.:i of Section 20 Township 45 Sou~h, Range 43 E~Lst, a~x! the Nl~-a of Section'29, Town-]. ship 45 SQuth, Range 43 East, in Palm Beach County, Florida, accx)rding:.to the PlaL. thereof recorded in the office of ~]e Clerk of the Circuit Court in e~ for Palm. 'Beach County, Florida, in plat book 7, paqe 20, except{ncI therefrcm~ tile South 165. '- ~eet of the East 528 feet of said l.mt ].5]. ' -- -'- Also, all of that part of the South 330 fe_~t of Section 20, T(~jp ~5'Scxl~h - "Range 43 East, in Palm Bead] coanty, Florida, 1ylng be.t%~.~n the %'/est line of'the .. above described Lot 1II and the low water Ii. ne of I~ke Bo~ql~or~ Canal. '...] '.? A cert~.ip parcel of real prol~rty in Section 290.Tc;~ship 4S South~ l~ange ~3 East, City of Boynton Beac]l, Pah~ L~.ach Century, Florida, ~,re particularly des-..: .ii...: ct{bed as' follcws: Frc~n.t~e North~st corner of Section 29, T~mship 45 South, Ranqe 43 East~'-'2!'- Palm Beach] c.o~.ty, Florida, run North 8?° 43' 48" .'- s ' · . La. t alonq tile Nort]l llne of -. ' said Section"~29 a distance of ]940.40 feet to the I'~int of i~aginninq and the N0~t~L · 'h~st corner, of the herein descril~_xl ]warcel; cm~ntinuo thence alone{ the North line of said Section 29, Nort3] 87° 43' 48" East a distance of 7]6.46 fc~:t to the North:i " One-Quarter...corner of said Section 29; thence Nort.h 88° 02' 00" East along tile: -..' North line of' said Section 29 a distance of 329..t6 feet, nero or less, to a point in tile Northerly extension of tile East line of Replat of First Section,- Pahn Beach Leisureville-.as san,~ is recorded in plat t~Dok 28, aL paqes 201 202 and.203, Ihlblic Records of l~lm Beadl Count5 , Florida; thence South (Il° 12' 55" 'East along said Northerly extension a distance of 67.3'1 feeL, ~Dre or less, to the centerline of - - State I~xad S-804 as san~ is recx~rded in Road plat lxx)k 2, paqes 2]7 tl~rough 220,.' 1A~blic Records of Pal,n Beach County, Florida; khence South 72° 02' 36" West alo~l said centerli~e a dista~..Ce of 498.37 feet, ~r)re or ]ess, to the begi~ming of a -;:- - c%wve cx)ncave 'to tile North, havinq a radius of 1910.(18 feet a~ld a central angle "" of '15° 5l'/3071 tilence ~sterly alonq tile arc of said cnlrve a distance: of 528.67 fc~t to the'end of said (.~lrve; thence South ;I7O 54' 06" West a distance of 4.t.52: fc~t; thencelNorth 2° 05' 54'.' West a distance of 27.1.82 fc~t, n~l-e er less to-. tine Point og.iL~linnlnq. , P~u-c~l 4 ' ' : :' ~ The So~th.165 feet of tile East 528 fc~t of lzDt III, Section 20, Tc~nshi ' ,,' ~.qe 4.3.E,., ':as.,,, ~lat l:x~ok 7, pacK: 20, Pain 3each County Records - ¢~ ...... :...p. ,4_~5S _ ~'~lm .... ~ ~e M?rtl~.iA~,l~lbb, as filed in Official ~eeor¢l Book 490, Paqe 466 ' '~ ': ; ~a~ii .~QunEy, l'lori¢la t . . ' . 'Parcel 6' ' "' ' ~DDENDEM ~ ' '' ':'--- ~' -- .=-:--'A Par~-l-:6~3,.ta~d-in-S6c[lbn'i~-, :i'~kmshi p 45 South, Ran, l~ 4 1 I';ast, I'~/m Be~'~" Oxmt¥,[ F!ori~.a,'~!n~.r.e particularly descril~l as fei .; crm~-nce;a.~:t.he Southeast cX~rner et said Section 2~); thence S. 88o02,36,,Wi' - [asstaed).~ alonc[.~he. South line of sa~d Sent'ion 20, a distance of ]644.66 feet to~'; '..-, the Southwest~:oolf~'el. of the East lIolf (E½} of tile Sot~theast ~arter (SE~.~) of the- . scuto~n~s,t':~rte~.~(sw~) of ~he soutt,~ase C~,a~ter ~sr'%) o~ said Se 't~-- : ' L.~ar~er .'(SE¼) of.lthe Southwest (~lart~r I.%a~[, . '.; ,,-:- u;-l; o~ the Sou~Jl6ast . ? Section 20, a distance of 15.0 feet 't~ ~Ii~4~ .or. Ln.e Southeast ~klarter (SE¼) of .- ;~ - ' - i . ,otn.~ or lk~linn~nq, said point bela' -'-" the Southeast COrner of the parcel herelll descr~l : , · q ~ d. zst.ance of 324<24 feet} thence ~]o-m,, ..... ~xl: .Ulcer., Continue N. ]o38,46,,W' ;: [X)lnt in the'EasE:-]ine I~ 111 . N ..... ~ ,,u J~., a dlstan~ of 19 lo ~^.f.. - --.~ . 29, To~/nshii) 45 k~uth, Rautge 43 East," aa recx)rdc~l in pL'.iL lwYok 7, 'p~iqe 20 of ...... - .,u~xuvls]on Section 20 · ;~)Lic Records of Palm. Beach County, l"lo~-ida; the:nc~_? S. O°4?']]"W-, alon¢l't]~e said {Cast line' Ixlt 1~1;- a distance ¢)f 339. ]-1 fee:t3 thellca., N. 88o02,36,,F , a ¢]/~tEulce Of : . 26.7'2. feet.tq_~_~l.-.?oin~.of [~-(linainq. ~ ADDENDUM A " CITRUS GLEN LEGAL DESCRIPTION ~ A PARCEL OF LAND BEING THE WEST THREE.QUARTERS {W.3/4) OF THE NORTH ONE-HALF OF THE NORTHWEST ONE-QUARTER(N~¥.I/~) OF SECTION 18, TOWNSHIP 45 SOUTH, RANGE .i[~'~ EAST, PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA; LESS, HOWEVER, THE RIGHT OF WAY FOR L.W.D.D.'CANAL L20, BSING THE NORTH 50.00 FEET OF SAID SECTION, AND LESS THE RIGHT OF WAY FOR LAWRENCE ROAD, (AN 80.00 FEET RIGHT OF WAY); EXCEPTING THEREFROM, THE WEST 140 FEET OF THE SOUTH 140 FEET OF THE NORTH 248 FEET OF SAID PARCEL. SUBJECT TO EASEMENTS, RESERVATIONS, RESTRICTIONS AND RIGHTS OF WAY OF RECORD. CONTAINING: 53.60 ACRES- TOGETHER W)TH THAT PORTION OF THE LAKE WORTH DRAINAGE DISTRICT CANAL L-20 RIGHT OF WAY ABUTTING THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE DF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED SUBJECT PROPERTY AND THAT PORTION OF LAWRENCE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY ABUTTING THE WEST PROPERTY LINE OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND TOGETHER WITH THE WEST 140 FEET OF THE SOUTH 140 FEET OF THE NORTH 248 FEET OF SAID PARCEL. ADDENDUM B MEMORANDUM June 16, 1987 TO: FROM: RE: CHAIRMAN ANDMEMBERS, PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CARMEN S. ANNUNZIATO, PLANNING DIRECTOR ~ITRUS GLEN-STAFF COMMENTS Please be advised of the Planning Department's comments in con- nection with the above-refsrenced request: 1. Developer to sod andirrzgate' the south side of Miner Road. 2. Developer to dedicate 108 feet of right-of-way for Miner Road within forty-five (45) days of Master Plan Approval. 3. -~ve~oper to complete the construction of Miner Road (two lane section) within eighteen (18) months of Master Plan approval. Common area landscaping requires review and approval by the Community Appearance Board. Attached single-family units, entrance wall signage, and the recreational amenities require site plan approval. CSA:ro CARIV~EN S. ADDENDUM C1 Carmen Annunzia to Planning Director Kevin J. Hallahan Forester/Horticulturist MEMORANDUM April 30, 1987 Citrus Glen PUD The applicant for the above project should be aware of the following: 1. Must provide a tree management plan for all the existing citrus trees on the property. ~' The citrus trees ~shown on the plan to be preserved appear not to meet the intent of the new Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan. 3. The applicant can meet with me to discuss these two issues at their convenience. ' K~n J.~all~han KJH: ad ADDENDUM C2 MEMORANDUM Carmen Annunziato Planning Director Don Jaeger :.~Ch~ef Inspector Building Department June 16, 1987 Master Plan Review: Lawrence Groves Lawrence Road (Second Review) The following comments are generated from the conceptual master plan drawings submitted for preliminary review. 1. City Code discourages double frontage lots. If these lots are approved, there must be an adequate buffer provided, meeting all Code requirements, between the lots and the collector road. 2. The recreation area will require a separate site plan review. Consult Appendix A-Zonings Section 11, H-16 e.12 of the Boynton Beach'-Code of Ordinances for parking requirements. 3. Landscapimg for all common areas must be reviewed and approved by the Community Appearance Board. Ail common landscaped areas and landscaped areas in the right-of-way must be fully sprinkled. 4.' There is a small parcel of land at the northeast section of the property, just north of the L-i9 Canal, which is no~ contiguous to the development. Indicate how the parcel will be treated when the project is developed. Notes: Street names and building numbers must be reviewed by the Building, Fire, and Police Departments as well as'the Post Office. Entry wall signs must be submitted for staff and City Commission approval. Structure setbacks from property lines and distances between buildings must comply with Table 600 of the 1985 Edition of the Standard Building Code. Permits must be secured from the South Florida Water Management District and the Lake Worth Drainage District. DJ:bh XC: E. E. Howell ADDENDUM C3 Carmen Annunziato Planning Director John Witdner Parks Superintendent ME; iORANDUi-,. May 1, 1987 Citrus Glen P.U.D. Further review of the Master Plan of the Citrus Glen P.U.D. indi- cates considerable landscaping iA medians and R.O.W. along public streets within the sub-division. The developer should be aware that the Parks Division does not plan on providing landscape maintenance along these roads. A Home- owners Association should be responsible for landscape maintenance in botk the common areas and the R.O.W. within this sub-division. ohn Wildner .- CC: Charles Frederick, Director, Recreation & Park Dept. File JW:ad ADDENDUM C4 TO: RE: MEMORANDUM April 23, 1987 Carmen Annunziato, City Planner Annexation Requests; Lawrence Groves & Citrus Glen Upon review of the subject properties consideration should be given to providing a neighborhood park which will service these developments as well as other residential areas currently developed or to be developed in the immediate vicinity. As the School Board is'considering purchase of an 18 acre site between these developments and a 26 acre u~developed parcel is adjacent to the school site, an opportunity exists to acquire a portion of the 26 acre site, andwith the cooperation of the School Board, develop a school/park complex. - -Acquisition and development funding for such a project would come from the Land Dedication Trust Fund. The subject developments will be required to provide fees in lieu of land per our subdivision regulations which would be applied to these costs. Operation and maintenance costs for the new park site would be funded from the general fund and would add to the Park Division'sbudget requirements. Exact annual costs will depend upon final size and design and use of the site. The development of school/park sites is consistent with our comprehensive plan recommendations and goals. Charles C. Frederick, Director Recreation & Park Department CCF:pb Attachments CC: John Witdner, Park Supt. w/att. ADDENDUM C5. TO: RE: MEMORANDUM June 16, 1987 Carmen Annunziato -r{City Planner _~pril 1, 1987, Land Use Amendment Applications I have reviewed the applications and legal documents provided to me by your April 15, 1987 Memorandum dealing with Boynton Beach Village Center, Lawrence Groves and Citrus Glen. After evaluating the documents with regard to their conformance with Section 6.F.3 of Appendix A, and Section 6 Appendix B Planned Unit Development Regulations (requirements of unified control), I believe that all of the documents provided establish that the unified control requirements have been met. RAR/ras ' ' Enc. Raymond A. Rea City Attorney - Original Documents Attached cc: City Manager ADDENDUM 26 BOYNTON BEACH STAFF COMMENTS Building: Police: Public Works: Fire: Personnel and Purchasing: Utilities: For this department, there is no direct tie to evaluate budget impact. However, any project of size will impact needs for people. Developments of this size are part of this department's overall growth plan. The combined developments of Citrus Glen and Lawrence Groves will result in the following expenditure: Salary increase: 3 x 18,268= 54,804 Operating and Maintenance: 3 x 153 = 459 Capital Outlay: 1 rear loadpacker=85,000 .Consideration should be given toward the extension of Miner Road at the earliest possible convenience for proper access. We currently use either N.W. 22nd Avenue or Hypoluxo Road which causes some delay in response time. The Personnel and Purchasing staff- ing would be directly impacted by this annexation contingent upon how many additional employees, supplies, and equipment is needed by the rest of the City. If we are told the total numbers, we can pro- vide a definite response. The Utility Department is strictly revenue supported. As such, anti- cipated revenues will offset in- creased outlay for salaries and operation and maintenance personnel. The developer will have to pay all appropriate capital facility charges and his fair share of existing off-site utilities. AQDDNDUM C7 April 1S, 1987 Mr. Carmen Annunziato, AICP City of Boynton Beach Planning Dept. 200 N. Seacres~ Blvd. P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, FL 33435 Re: Citrus Slen/LawrenceSrove Annexations Dear Mr. Annunziato: The County Planning Division staff has found the requested density proposals of 4.82 du/ac to be consistent with the density range of 8-12 du/ac, {Medium-Medium High Residential) permitted for the sites in the County Comprehensive Plan. The following table and attached map will summarize the surrounding developments to help give your staff an idea of the development character of the area. Hame cf . Development Homes at Lawrence Manor Forest Sausalito Groves Sandpiper Cove Whispering Pines Mobile Rome Park Land-Use ~ateqory Zoning Density L - M RS/PUD 4.35 du/ac L - M RS/PUD 4.58 du/ac N - MH RM/PUD 6.5 du/ac M - HH RM/PUD ~.0 du/ac M - HH AR 6.69 du/ac Sunny South Mobile Home Park M MH RS 5.1 du/ac Please contact our office at 697-4001 if we can provide further information on this matter. Respectfully, RFH:RW:st FILE: GEH4/AHNUHZIA 3400 BELVEDERE ROAD . WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33406 . (30S) 471-]520 -- ~DDENDUM ~ Adams, Vice Chairman T. Marcus ~ - · J. Elmquist' Oorothy Wilken April 30, 1987 Mr. Carmen S. Annunziato, AICP Planning Director City of Boynton Beach 200 S. Seacrest Boulevard P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, FL 33435 SUBJECT: CITRUS GLEN/LAWRENCE GROVES REVIEW OF TP~tFFIC IH?ACT ANALYSES Dear Mr. Annunziato: Palm Beach County Traffic Division staff has reviewed traffic impact analyses which you sent to us for the subject developments. The following comments are submitted for your consideration: 1) 2) Dedication of right-of-way:should be required in accordance with the County's Thoroughfare Right-of-Way Protection Map. Lawrence Road requires an 80' right-of-way and Miner Road a 108' right-of-way. Turn lanes on the internal collecter roadways and all main development accesses should be required in accordance with the traffic studies you sent us. 3) Since Miner Road is required for site access and traffic distribution, the segment of Miner Road adjacent to the site should be constructed by the developer as a two lane cross section in accordance with County standards and over an alignment that will connect with the segment committed to the east. 4) Payment of traffic impact fees should be required in accordance with Palm Beach County Ordinance #85:10. The opportunity to review these land development traffic impact analyses is appreciated. Please do not hesitate to contact me or Mr.. Allan Ennis of my staff if you have any questions. Sincerely, OFF~~INEER Charles R. Walker, Jr., P.E. Direct_, Traffic Division CRW/AAE/jd File: Municipalities "Boynton Beach" ' An Equal Opportunity - Affirmative Action Employer" BOX 1989 WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33402-1989 ADDENDUM C9 LAWRENCE'GROVES 'LEGAL DESCRIPTION THE WEST qUARTER OF THE NORTHEAST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER, AND GOVERNMENT LOT 3, BEING THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION ?, TOWNSHIP 45SOUT~, I~ANGE'43 EAST. CONTAINING 44.78 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE.LAKE WORTH DRAINAGE DISTRICT CANAL L-19 RIGttT OF WAY ABUTTING THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED SUBJECT pROPERTY'AND THAT PORTION OF LAWREBCE ROAD RIGHT OF WAY ABUTTING THE WEST pROPERTY LINE OF THE SUBJECT pROPERTY.