Minutes 05-12-87MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD ~ELD IN
COMMISSION CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
TUESDAY, MAY 12, 1987 AT 7:30 P. M.
PRESENT
Walter "Marty" Trauger, Chairman
Harold Blanchette
Marilyn Huckle
Martin Jackier
Simon Ryder
Robert Walshak
Robert Wandelt
Gary Lehnertz, Alternate
William Schultz, Alternate
Carmen Annunziato,
Director of Planning
Jim Golden
Assistant City Planner
Tambri Heyden,
Assistant City Planner
Chairman Trauger called the meeting to order at 7:30 P. M.
~e introduced the Members of the Board, the Planning Staff,
and the Recording Secretary. Chairman Trauger recognized
the presence in the audience of Vice Mayor Ralph MarChese;
Commissioner Ezell Hester; Commissioner Leonard Mann;
Commissioner Dee Zibelli; former Vice Mayor Carl zimmerman;
City Manager Peter Cheney; Chamber of Commerce representa-
tives Owen Anderson, Executive Vice President, and Bill
Martin, Immediate Past President; and Samuel Scheiner, Vice
Chairman of the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA).
MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF APRIL 28, 1987
Mr. Blanchette said he was listed as being absent, but he
was not advised that he was appointed to the Board until
May 1st. Mrs. Huckle called attention to the third para-
graph on the last page of the minutes and said it should
read "City Commission meeting last Tuesday" instead of last
Thursday.
Mrs. Huckle moved that the minutes be approved as amended,
seconded by Dr. Jackier. Motion carried 5-0. Messrs.
Blanchette and Wandelt abstained from voting as they were
not present at the meeting of April 28.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Mr. Wandelt announced that he will not be at the next meet-
ing because he will be on vacation during the month of June.
COMMUNICATIONS
None.
- 1 -
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
ELECTION OF VICE CHAIRMAN
Mr. Ryder moved to nominate Robert Wandelt as Vice Chairman,
seconded by Mrs. Huckle. Chairman Trauger asked if there
were any other nominations. There was no response, and
Chairman Trauger declared the nominations closed.
Fir. Ryder moved that the nominations be closed, seconded by
Mrs. Huckle. Mr. Wandelt was elected Vice Chairman by
acclamation.
Mr. Walshak asked if they were going to vote on the nomina-
tion, as he thought that was customary. Since there was
only one nomination, C~airman Trauger said Mr. Wandel~ was
elected b~ an acclamation call and unanimous vote, which is
approved in Robert's Rules of Order.
OLD BUSINESS
None.
NEW BUSINESS
On the agenda, Dr. Jackier noted there were a couple of
site plans regarding Hunters Run, and he wished that it be
noted in the record that he is a resident of Hunters Run.
He agreed with Chairman Trauger that he has nothing to do
with the management but wanted to make it known that he is a
resident there. Chairman Trauger saw no conflict of interest.
Dr. Jackier stated that he did check with Raymond Rea, City
Attorney, and was informed that it was perfectly okay for
him to vote on these matters.
A. PUBLIC HEARINGS
Project Name: Lopez Medical Office Complex
Agent: None
Owner: Nelson Lopez, M. D.
Location: South side of S. E. 23rd Ave., between
Seacrest Boulevard and the Florida East
Coast Railroad right-of-way
Legal
Description:
Description:
Lot 9, PLAT OF HIGH POINT, Boynton
Beach, Florida, as recorded in ~lat
Book 23~ Page 225, Public Records of
Palm Beach County, Florida
Request for relief from Section 5-141
(e) "Drainage" of the Parking L~t
Regulations
- 2 -
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
.Mr. Blanchette interrupted to say he had a conflict of
interest on this because he had prepared the original plans
sometime ago, and he wanted to abstain from voting.
Mr. Golden read Mr. Annunziato's memorandum of May 6, 1987,
which was addressed to the Board, and is attached as Exhibit
A to the original copy of these minutes in the City Glerk's
Office. The memo stated that the Technical Review BOard
(TRB) recommended that the request be denied and gave the
reasons.
Chairman Trauger questioned whether Dr. Lopez would be using
the building he is currently in and the current one, which
is being finished and is towards the railroad track. Mr.
Golden believed that some of Dr. Lopez's associates would be
in the new building.
Chairman Trauger was at the property when the rain w~s
coming down hard; water was running off all sides of the
back parking lots, and the swales were full in front. He
wondered if that was the surfacing they plan to leave on the
parking lot. Mr. Golden replied that they are proposing to
keep the parking lot intact and to add onto it. Therefore,
the rainfall would collect and flow into the right-of-way
from S. E. 23rd Avenue.
Mrs. Buckle read the third reason for the TRB's recommenda-
tion on page 3 of Mr. Annunziato's memo, and asked if they
were suggesting that the three additional parking sp~ces
could cure this problem. Mr. Annunziato could not t~stify
the s~aces would cure the problem, but said they wou~d
certainly help alleviate the problem of storm water. The
applicant would have to provide for the City Enginee~ calcu-
lations as to the accumulation of storm water retention,
depending on the depth, and the permeability of the Soils.
Mr. Annunziato suspected that a substantial amount of the
storm water run-off could be contained. In the past, when
they have had instances like this, it had been common
practice that the applicant had to improve the situation by
providing landscaped areas to accumulate some of the storm
water run-off.
Mr. Ryder asked to see the slide showing the two buildings,
side by side. In view of the fact that the TRB recommended
that the P&Z Board not approve this, if what Mr. Annunziato
referred to could be worked out, Mrs. Buckle asked if there
was still hope from his department that this might be
solved. Mr. Annunziato answered that there was a potential
- 3 -
MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
for alleviating the problem. He told Mr. Ryder it would be
up to the applicant to determine how to design the site, and
said it would require an engineering analysis of the site.
Mrs. Huckle asked if the remarks were addressed to the total
new site. Mr. Annunziato replied that they were addressed
to both sites. Mr. Ryder did not recall seeing plans of the
second building, and he understood it was a restoration.
Mr. Annunziato confirmed that was correct, and added that it
was below $100,000
Chairman Trauger said there must have been about 2½ inches
of water on the lot when he drove in there, and it was all
going towards the back and over to the left. It was not
coming out the driveway at S. E. 23rd Avenue. Mr. R~der
said there is a slope between the two buildings.
At the TRB meeting, Mr. Golden said the City Engineer
related the fact that what they saw included provisions for
addressing drainage. The slope is directed toward the
middle into a trench. Mr. Golden did not know why they had
not continued with that, but the City Engineer felt it was
a situation calling for a technical fix rather than a
variance.
Mrs. Huckle asked if it was correct that the building was
completely erected and almost completed before this came to
light. Mr. Golden replied that the building was fairly well
complete. It was hard for Mrs. Huckle to believe they could
get that far along with ~nspections without stumbling into
the problem of possibly having to redo the whole parking lot
to allow for drainage. She thought it was quite an invest-
ment for this problem to crop up at this late date. Mr.
Golden said the ~riginal plans did provide for drainage, and
there was an indication from the City Engineer that they
were meeting requirements. He did not have the full back-
ground as to why the variance came about.
Nelson Lopez, M. D., 236 S. E. 23rd Avenue, said when he
originally built his office, the parking lot was built
according to whatever was in force at the time. It became
necessary to expand his square footage, but Dr. Lopez never
thought he would run into the kind of expenses he did.
When Mr. Golden had said something about a French drain, Dr.
Lopez recalled that he asked how much it would cost to do an
addition to the parking lot, which was 10% or 12% of the
total surface of the parking lot. When this came up, he
- 4 -
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MAY 12, 1987
would have to redo the whole parking lot to comply with the
Code. Dr. Lopez said it came up because of his ~gnorance.
He knew nothing about the new Codes and regulations, or he
would never have started a project like this.
Mrs. Huckle asked how many parking spaces are new parking
spaces. Dr. Lopez answered that he currently has 14 parking
spaces, which are adequate for his present practice. Since
the renovation, he would be getting three more parkin~
spaces ~n the front and three in t~e back, in additio~ to
the 14 spaces.
It appeared to Mr. Ryder that the three spaces Dr. Lopez
proposed to add in the front might be in a critical a~ea, as
it might be an area Dr. Lopez might want to retain fo~ water
retention rather than paving it for parking.
Dr. Lopez was willing to do whatever was necessary, add he
explained. There was discussion about whether the property
is in a low area, water problems, and the number of pDrking
spaces. Mrs. Huckle asked Dr. Lopez if he could get ~long
with 18 parking spaces. Dr. Lopez answered, "Certainly."
Mrs. Huckle asked how congested the parking lot is un~er
normal circumstances. Dr. Lopez replied that it is not very
congested. He was just trying to renovate the place, but
never dreamed it would be this cost.
Mrs. Huckle questioned whether the dedication of 15 fDet
of right-of-way for S. E. 23rd Avenue would cause a p~oblem.
She asked if Dr Lopez was familiar with ~his requirement,
and read the last paragraph of Mr. Annunziato's memo. Mr.
Ryder explained that it was to provide for future, possible
widening. Dr. Lopez said that would be no problem.
Vice Chairma~ Wandelt asked if Dr. Lopez would have a~di-
tional associates. Right now, Dr. Lopez wanted to usD the
space for his own private practice, which has grown. He
made a mistake going into that little house. Mrs. Hu~kle
asked about the Urologist. .~r. Lopez replied that th~
Urologist is temporarily using the office until he can
establish his own practice.
If the TRB considers cutting out three of the parking areas
as a possible solution, it seemed to Mr. Ryder that a study
should be made. He reiterated that the three spaces in
front could possibly be prepared as a retention area. If
the three parking spaces are given up, and drainage would
be provided, Chairman Trauger asked if this would then
- 5 -
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
comply, or if it would take additional work on the rest of
the parking lot, such as resurfacing and grading. Mr.
Annunziato answered that it may. He added that there are
other:additional parking lot construction requirements such
as lighting, curbing, and landscaping. The issues related
to the additional landscaping are technical issues. They
are calculations that engineers perform. It must be deter-
mined whether or not Dr. Lopez can meet the Code requirements.
Mr. Ryder thought it might be appropriate to table this,
pending a study and report with regard to the possibility of
reducing the parking areas and supplying a retention area.
Mr..Annunziato rec0mmended that, prior to tabling, the Board
Conduct the public hearing and then require that the appli-
cant meet with the city staff to further discuss his problems.
Chairman Trauger was concerned about retaining the water on
the on-site drainage part. When the applicant prepares an
engineering study, Mr. Annunziato said that will be
determined.
Mr. Ryder explained to Dr. Lopez that the matter of run-off
was important and, if he could do that, it would not be as
expensive as resurfacing the entire area. Dr. Lopez asked
if he would need an Engineer"s report. Mr. Ryde~ answered
to comply with the Code, they need to contain water on the
premises.
Chairman Trauger asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of
the proposal. There was no response. Chairman Trau~er
asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to the proposal.
There was no response. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Vice Chairman Wandelt moved to TABLE this for a further
engineering study, seconded by Mr. Ryder. Mrs. Huckle asked
whether the motion should include that Dr. Lopez should
refer back to the TRB for review, or if it would autqmati-
cally go that way. Mr. Annunziato thought it would auto-
matically go that way.
For the record, Mr. Annunziato said the applicant was being
requested to evaluate replacing three paved parking spaces
wit~ a dry retention facility and then to provide, fur the
~~ ~r~ ~w~n~gS~yc~ee~_the
~ents. The applicant will also be back before this Board
ith that report.
- 6 -
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
Chairman Trauger repeated the motion and included the above
comments by Mr. Annunziato. A vote was taken on the motion,
and the motion carried 6-0. Mr. Blanchette abstained from
voting. See Exhibit B, Form 8B, Memorandum of Voting
Conflict for County, Municipal, and Other Local Public
Officers, attached to the original copy of these minutes in
the Office of the City Clerk.
LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT.AND REZONING
Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Description:
Description:
Dutch Property
None
Walter Dutch
West side of N. W. 7th Court, north of
West Boynton Beach Boulevard
Lot 11, less the North 45 feet and the
North 20 feet of Lot 12, DEIERL PARK,
according to the Clerk of the Circuit
Court in and for Palm Beach County,
Florida~ in Plat Book 23, page 236.
Request for an amendment to the Future
Land Use Element of the Comprehensive
Plan from Low Density Residential to
Local Retail Commercial and rezQning
from R-iA (Single Family Residential)
to C-2 (Neighborhood Commercial) for
the purpose of expanding the existing
C-2 zoned parcel to the south under the
same property ownership
Mr. Golden read the memo addressed to the Board, dated May 4,
1987, from Mr. Annunziato, which is attached to the original
copy of these minutes in the City Clerk's Office as ~xhibit
C. Chairman Trauger was informed that the dentist's office
is adjacent to the property. He wondered how deep i~ was
around the back, where the dentist's office is. Mr.
Annunziato replied it is 74 feet.
It was the recommendation of the Planning Department that
this request be denied, owing to the likelihood of further
degradation in the adjacent residential neighborhood, as
further explained in the memo.
Mrs. Huckle asked Mr. Golden to elucidate more about the
southern part of Lot 10 and the northern part of Lot 11.
She asked if the home was sitting on parts of two lots.
Mr. Golden said the way the west side of the street was
developed, it did not match the way the lots were platted.
- 7 -
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
North of the parcel which is to be rezoned,
exists on that parcel occupies the north 45
and the south 25 feet of Lot 10. Mr. Ryder
it is staggered on both sides of the street.
the home which
feet of Lot 11
interjected that
There were comments about the area. Mr. Golden said it is
an older area of the City. Mr. An~unziato wanted to amplify
a point made by Mr. Golden. He said there a~e lots of
reasons for expanding the commercial zone in this ar~a, but
he thought the real underlying issue here was whether or not
it was desirable. There is a rather small number of single
family homes. Expanding the commercial zone ~orth of it
would result in an enhanced level of degradation on ~hose
homes. It would be bringing the commercial ~ses further
into this sort of isolated single family a~ea. Mr.
Ann~nziato sta~ed that the Planning Department did not think
that was desirable.
If it is determined by the Board that this is a reasQnable
and desirable change of land use to square off the zoning
boundary, Mr. Annunziato said it would obviously still carry
those same problems, only to a greater extent, because they
wil~l be spli%ti~ng a home on the east, and it also was not
ser'iously recommended.
If you look to the back lot line, where the restaurant is,
and the back lot line of where they are permitting the doctor
to expand, Chairman Trauger said it is almost a straight
line. TO bring the commercial back, they would have an
~deal line through there. Mr. Annunziato responded, "except
f~r the impact it would have on the single family homes."
If that were to go through, Chairman Trauger said a wall
would have to be put up in back of that. Mr. Annunz~ato
confirmed that wherever commercial property is develQped
along the north lot llne, there would have to be a wall.
Mr. Golden believed there would only be a ten foot separa-
tion.
Chairman Trauger informed Mrs. Huckle that someone is occupy-
ing the house now. Dr. Jackier asked if they would also be
aggravated by piecemeal rezoning if they did this. Mr.
Annunzia~o answered affirmatively and said this was similar
to the s~tuat~on that evolved around Gulfstream Lumb~r.
Chairman Trauger commented that the City has been deterior-
ating all along Boynton Beach Boulevard. The R1AA p~rcels
have become Commercial all along that strip.
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
Mr. Ryder reminded the Members that a study is going to be
made as to what the future should bring with regard tD
further development on Boynton Beach Boulevard. He said it
is Area 36 in the Comprehensive Plan, and there are specific
questions about extending commercial zoning along the
thoroughfare. It appeared to Mr. Ryder that the Boar~ would
be, in a way, thwarting the possible efforts that wil~ be
made to come up with some reasonable development.
After further discussion, Mr. Annunziato cautioned th~
Board on basing their decisions on this action on the
potential outcome of the study. He thought the application
should be evaluated on its merits. Mrs. Huckle aske~ if
this application would be part of th? moratorium. Mr.
Annunz~ato answered, "No," and explained that it was filed
previous to the moratorium.
Mr. Ryder noticed mention was made that it is only 50 feet,
and it does not conform presently, but it did at one time.
He commented that it would need permission from the ~oard of
Adjustment, and they would probably get it, because Now else
would they be able to use the land. Mr. Ryder noted~ention
was also made that it possibly would be difficult to get
someone to build there because i~ is close to a commercial
area. However, by going with this, they would be ta~ng a
commercial area and putting it next door to an existing owner
that has been there all along and never expected to ~e next
to a commercial area.
Mr. Annunziato added that the property was purchased under
its current zoning in 1978, as shown by the deed in ~he
report. He said perhaps the proper ownership of the!property
lies with the property owner to the north, and added that
they could look at it that way.
Mrs. Huckle asked whether Mr. Dutch owns Lot 2, across the
street. Mr. Golden answered that he owns Lot 1. Lo~ 2 is
o~ned by MPL Associates on the tax record. Mrs. Huc~le said
Mr. Golden kept alluding to Lot 2 for purposes of squaring
off, and she wondered if that was what that recommendation
was. If it was not a part of the application, Mr.
Annunziato was sure there would be an application soon, if
this was approved.
Mr. Blanchette realized the existing jagged line that they
have was because they did go around houses on the C-l, but
to straighten that line parallel to the right-of-way ~ould
involve about five houses. He was saying going all ~he way
w
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
to the M-1 line. Mr. Blanchette clarified that he was talk-
ing about the irregular line that they have now that extends
from the M-1 line to the east and jogs around those houses.
If they take C-1 all the way back to the M-1 line, he asked
if that would take about five houses. Mr. Annunziato
answered, "Yes." He said that could occur, but a change of
that portion should more likely occur as a result of the
Comprehensive Plan Change. Mr. Blanchette expressed that
he hates jagged lines, and there was a problem here that
would make it more jagged.
Mr. Golden pointed out that the separation between the wall
and the home would be about 12 feet.
Walter Dutch, 240 Southland, Palm Beach, Florida 33480,
said he owns Lot 12. A woman that was with him passed out
exhibits. Mr. Ryder stated that Mr. Dutch owns Lot 12 and
a portion to the north. Mr. Dutch confirmed that but said
there was a question about the split lots, and he thought
that needed to be clarified.
Mr. Dutch referred to the exhibits that were passed out and
said one map showed no markings on it. Mr. Raymond Dumond
filed that plat twenty or thirty years ago, and then he
decided to develop it. When Mr. Dumond decided to develop
it, Mr. Dutch said Mr. Dumond decided 95 foot lots were too
big, so he subdivided his lots, split them (part of one and
part of another), and made approximately 70 foot lots and,
as a result, where he had six lots before, he now had eight
lots, so all of the lots in Deierl Park were not developed
in that area as they were platted, but as the platter deve-
loped them. That is how the splits came.
Mr. Dutch had picked up all of the current deeds to all of
those properties, showing all of the splits, if the Members
were interested. He said it has been this way since Mr.
Dumond platted the property. When Mr. Dumond developed the
property and changed from the smaller lots, Mr. Dutch said
Mr. Dumond made the south 50 feet of Lot 11 part of Lot 12.
Mr. Dutch acquired Lot 12 in two acquisitions, including
the south 50 feet of Lot 11, so he now has the one p~rcel of
Lot 12 and the south 50 feet of Lot 11. His opinion was that
when the zoning was prepared, the zoners or map makers failed
to recognize that the lots had been split differentl~ than
they were platted. Had the zoners and map makers recognized
that, they certainly would have zoned the south 50 f~et as
part of Lot 12.
- 10
MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
Mr. Dutch said his property has been split by zoning, and
the south 50 feet of Lot 11 is a nonconforming lot (R1A).
R1A requires 75 feet, 25 foot front and rear setbacks, and
12 for the sides. The property does not conform to the
zoning that is placed there. It is undevelopable and unuse-
able. Therefore, Mr. Dutch said the governmental body has
taken that piece of property away from him. He cannot use
it.
Mr. Dutch's request was that the Board ~put him together
again" instead of splitting him down through with a ~eparate
zoning. He asked that it be moved over where it should
have been. Mrs. Huckle questioned whether Mr. Dutch did not
know he was being split when the zoning was applied. Mr.
Dutch did not It was a question of where the line was.
The map at th~ City Hall has s~nce been revised, but, at
that time, the map was very va~ue. Until a couple o~ months
ago, Mr. Dutch did not know specifically because he ~ad
never seen the new map. Then he decided that he better
clean it up. Mr. Dutch stated that it has probably ~een
there for quite awhile, but he was not aware of it.
Mr. Dutch gave each Member a copy, and read paragraph 5 g,
Section 3, from page 1896 of the Boynton Beach Code. He
said he is going through a remedial process of curin~ a
piece of land that has been damaged by what he thought was
probably governmental error.
Mr. Ryder brought out that at one time, the lot was conform-
ing. Mr. Dutch recalled that 60 feet had been the minimum,
and he thought it was now a 70 or 75 foot front. When Mr.
Dumond developed it, it was moved back over to 50 feet, so
Mr. Dutch did not believe, at any time, it would have
conformed to any zoning in the City if you tried to ~emove
it from Lot 12.
Mr. Blanchette asked how close the lot is on Lot 11 ~o what
would be the zoning line if the City zoned that 1/2 of a lot.
Mr. Dutch replied that the south line of the nearest lot
north is 13 feet from the lot line. He had it surveyed
prior to this. Mr. Blanchette asked what the proposed
property they were talking about would be used for. He
wondered if it would be an extension of the commercial pro-
perty that is on the south of it. Mr. Dutch answered that
it would be connected to and part of the property fronting
out to Boynton Beach Boulevard. In effect, it would make
the commercial lot larger. It is almost a minimal lot now
for good commercial development.
11 -
MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
If they add another 3,700 square feet to the front lot and
make it more commercial, Mr. Dutch said they can design a
better building, use more adequate setbacks, more landscap-
ing, and still comply with the parking requirements and land
use requirements. Adding to the front will make a better
commercial lot, which Mr. Dutch thought was the desire of
the City Commission for Boynton Beach Boulevard.
Mrs. Huckle asked if Mr. Dutch had an interest in de~eloping
this himself, or if he wanted to make it more salablE. Mr.
Dutch.replied ~hat.he has no plans to us? the proper%y~ for
anything at this t~me. He is simply trying to heal ~he
property. This was called to Mr. Dutch's attention when
someone came to him, wanted to buy his lot, but said he
(Dutch) had a problem. Mr. Dutch went to City Hall,
· nvestigated, and there was a problem, so he denied ~he sale
and is not making any attempt Co sell it now. He just wants
to cure the property.
Chairman Trauger asked if anyone wished to speak in ~avor
of the proposal. There was no response. Chairman Trauger
asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to the
proposal.
Susan Ivey, 317 N. W. 7th Court, did not want a wall 13 feet
from her house. She informed Mr. Ryder that they ha~e grape-
fruit and tangerine trees on the side of their house_ Two
orange trees ire on Mr. Dutch's property. Mr. Ryder asked
how far Mrs. Ivey's trees were from her property line. Mrs.
Ivey said it was not far.
When they purchased their house in November of 1985,
Ivey said Wendy's was not there. They had two overgr
empty lots. Wendy's came, and the traffic down that
end street increased. You can hear the outside micro
for Wendy's as clear as a bell. There is a house adj
to Wendy's that is now vacant. Mrs. Ivey does not kn
owns it now, but it has deteriorated. Trucks and car
in the empty lots. People eat and socialize there, a
lots are constantly covered with litter, paper cups,
beer cens. No effort has been made to clean the lots
Intoxicated transients are in the empty house, and Mrs.
said it is really frightening.
~wn
dead
phone
~cent
~w who
s park
md the
and
up.
Ivey
Mrs. Ivey continued that people trying to get into Wendy's
think N. W. 7th Court ~s a through street, and they~are
constantly turning around. Mrs. Ivey gave the Board a
letter, signed by the owners of five properties, which
- 12 -
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MAY 12, 1987
objected to this request. A copy of said letter is attached
as Exhibit D to the original copy of these minutes in the
City Clerk's Office.
Mrs. Ivey said the people realized that the proposal was for
both lots to be zoned for business, and they want to keep
that from happening. The people are afraid of what ~ business
on either side of their street will do to them when ~ business
that is now there is affecting the subdivision.
Mr. Ryder asked Mrs. Ivey how old her house is. Mrs. Ivey
answered that the house was built in 1959. She believed it
was the first one that was built on that street. Mr. Ryder
asked if Mrs. Ivey was aware of the status of the vacant
property. Mrs. Ivey answered that they knew it was ~esi-
dential. Mrs. Huckle advised that the corner proper~y was
zongd commercial when Mrs. Ivey bought there, and sh~ asked
if Mrs. Ivey was aware of that. Mrs. Ivey answered, "Yes",
but she and her husband thought the other section was resi-
dential and that if anything was built, the walls woqld be
that much further away from their house and would seOlude
them from the business.
Mr. Blanchette asked if the thing Mrs. Ivey was afraid a
fast foods chain might be built on the lot. Mrs~ Ivey
replied that they probably would not be opposed ~f t~ey
could have a say about what kind of business went in there,
or if they knew it would be a Monday through Saturday, 8:00
to 5:00 business. Mr Blanchette said a lot of thos~ that
Mr. Dutch mentioned c~uld happen at that point, and Mr.
Dutch did say that it would be landscaped beautifully.
If that parcel of land is commercial, Mrs. Ivey said 13 feet
is not a lot of feet. (The wall would be 13 feet from her
house.) Mrs. Ivey said all she could do was voice t~e
majority of the property owners' opinions. They are con-
cerned about the condition it is now (the vacant lots and
house across the street). Mr. Ryder said the Board ~ould
not give them any assurance ~f what the u~e ~°uld be~ In
the event of a change in zoning, any permissive use in that
zoning would be possible.
Mrs. Ivey said N. W. 7th Court only has ten houses. Half of
them are residents, and the others are rented. Mr. ~utch
interjected that there are 12 residences on the street now.
Except for those people that are away, Mrs. Huckle asked if
Mrs. Ivey was able to get a signature from everyone %hat
opposed it. Mrs. Ivey answered affirmatively. Mrs. Huckle
- 13
MINUTES -PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MAY 12, 1987
wondered if anyone on the block encouraged this. Mrs.
Ivey answered that everyone encouraged her, and she explained.
Mrs. Buckle clarified that her question was whether any
neighbors were in favor of Mr. Dutch's rezoning. Mrs. Ivey
replied, "None," and confirmed Mrs. Buckle's statement that
they were all opposed to the applicant's request. Their
concern is that deterioration will move in a northward
direction. When .Mrs. Ivey moved into the neighborhood,
everyone seemed to be very nice, but they have gotten very
grumpy.
In the event that Mr. Dutch is not able to attain a rezoning,
and he has a piece of property that is so little that it
would also abut C-2, Mrs. Huckle said that property oould
just sit there. It is non-conforming and anyone trying to
build, even if they got a variance, might not like t~e idea
of being up against commercial, and that would leave the
property owner with unuseable land. Mrs. Huckle asked Mrs.
Ivey if she would want to purchase additional land from Mr.
Dutch. Mrs. Ivey answered that they would certainly sit
down and talk "turkey". Mrs. Huckle pointed out that it
WDuld give Mrs. Ivey a buffer, and she thought that would be
preferable to a six foot concrete wall and a commercial
development.
If this property is developed as it is now and that ~0 foot
buffer is between Mrs. Ivey and her house, Mr. Blanchette
said Mrs. Ivey could have the same problem with litter. If
a wall was there, they would not see it. A portion of that
yard looks like her yard, so Mrs. Ivey said she is forced to
keep it up because of pride.
In reference to getting the lots cleaned, the noise down at
Wendy's, and the vacant house people are using, Chairman
Trauger told Mrs. Ivey to go to the Building Department and
talk to Bert Keehr, Deputy Building Official, Mrs. Ivey
said the neighbors have made numerous phone calls. Someone
goes in, mows the lawns, but nothing is done the next day.
Mr. Annunziato was sure the Building Department responded,
and response is occurring, but added that it takes time.
Mr. Annunziato read Exhibit D into the record.
Charles Holt, 415 N. W. 7th Court, said Robert Panucci, who
lives beside him, has one of the newer houses that was built
around 1975 or 1976. Mr. Holt has owned his property for
about nine years, and he and Mr. Panucci (409 N. W. 7th
- 14 -
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
Court) have their properties for sale. Mr. Panucci's house
has been for sale for about a year, and he is having a very
difficult time selling. Mr. Holt has had his house for sale
since December, and he has not had any decent offers.
Mr. Holt said he and Mr. Panucci are more interested in what
is happening to the end of the street and the two lots Mr.
Dutch owns there, and they are also interested in op~ning
the street up because traffic comes down. Mr. Holt has a
circular driveway, and a lot of times people have run over
his mailbox and torn his hedge down. Mr. Holt emphasized
that he and Mr. Panucci are concerned, and that he opposed
the rezoning the~ were talking about.
As no one else wished to speak, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS
CLOSED.
Mr. Ryder moved to endorse the recommendation of the Planning
Department and DENY the request to rezone. Vice Chairman
Wandelt seconded the motion, and the motion carried 6-1.
Mr. Trauger voted against the motion.
3. Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Legal
Description:
Description:
Holiday Inn
Charles B. Bland, Jr., P.E.
Charles and Patricia Leemon
N. W. 1st Avenue at N. W. 4th Street,
southwest corner
Beverly Hills, Addition 3, Lots 1, 2,
3, 4, 5, 6 and 7, less the southerly 13
feet of Lots 1, 2, 3 and 4, less the
west feet of Lot 4, Block 72.
Request for an amendment to the Future
Land Use Element of the Comprehensive
Plan from Low Density Residential to
Local Retail Commercial and rezoning
from R-lA (Single Family ResIdential)
to C-3 (Community Commercial) for the
purpose of allowing construction of a
parking lot addition for the existing
hotel
and
ABANDONMENT
Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Holiday Inn
Charles B. Bland, Jr., P.
City of Boynton Beach
15
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
Location:
Legal
Description:
Description:
N. W. 1st Avenue, between N. W. 4th
Street and Interstate 95
See Exhibit F attached to the original
copy of these minutes in the Office of
the City Clerk
Request for the abandonment of a 50 foot
wide local street
Mr. Annunziatc's memo dated May 4, 1987, addressed to the
Board, was read by Mr. Golden. Said memo is attached to the
original copy of these minutes in tbs City Clerk's Office as
Exhibit E. The Planning Department recommended that
commercialization of this parcel not be allowed and that the
application be denied.
Chairman Trauger asked how many additional parking spaces
there would be. Mr. Golden replied that it was a conceptual
site plan.
If there was a consensus by the Board for approval, Mr.
Golden said they should also consider the abandonment. If
there wgs a consensus for approval, he recommended that it
be contingent upon the approval of the abandonment, as the
two go hand in hand.
Based on the original approval of the Holiday Inn, Mr. Ryder
thought they had to assume that a number of parking ~paces
were added to serve the purposes of the establishment at
that time. Mr. Golden said parking requirements for hotels
are more stringent now. Since they were asked to co~sider
a change in zoning and not to approve additional parking,
Mr. Ryder said i~ was easy to surmise that the applicant had
plans for expansion, and he thought the Board Member§ had to
keep that in mind.
Below the hedges on the back, where the houses are gging up
to where this abandonment request is, Chairman Trauger asked
whether the walls used on the other side of the parking lot
would knock out the noise and headlights that would be so
objectionable if they put in a parking lot. A vegetation
hedge is there right now.
Mr. Golden recalled a fence surrounded it. You woul~ have
a wall on the south and east sides. Mr. Golden advised that
was if they do it as proposed and if the abandonment is
approved also. If that does not occur, they could see the
situation of commercial traffic in a residential neighbor-
16
MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
hood. If the abandonment is not approved, the access to the
property would be by the two residential streets.
In regard to the abandonment, if this is approved and subse-
quently two homes are built, then that can be used for
access. Since the City would be making a gift of the land
encompassed by the right-of-way because the applicant owns
both sides of 1st Avenue, Mr. Ryder asked if there was not
a possible City use, such as a lift station rather than
abandoning further use.
Mr. Annunziato said the Board had come to the issue of
right-of-way abandonment, and he did not want to veer away
too much from the issue being discussed, which was whether or
not it is desirable to extend a commercially zoned parcel
that is to intrude into a residential neighborhood. Clearly,
Mr. Annunziato said there is an intrusion. He thought the
Board was evaluating whether or not it is a desirable change
in land use and if it is .or is not, what the effect will be
on the neighborhood. Mr. Annunziato said it was the
Planning Department's opinion that it would not enhan=e the
livability of that neighborhood.
Mr. Ryder recalled that he opposed this years ago. He did
not think it was enough room, and he did not think iQ was
safe because it was practically on the off ramp of I~95, and
it would impact on the residents. Mr. Ryder thought it
could be exacerbated by changing the zoning to permit an
expansion of possibly the hotel.
Charles Leemon, 501 West Ocean Avenue, requested that the
Board concur with the request. He pointed out that ~e
brought with him their Engineer, President of Operations,
General Manager, and the rest of his family.
Mr. Leemon said the parking area they were requesting would
be adjacent to their building on the south side, and they
have had many requests from their older clients to get close
to the buildiag. He knew Mr. Ryder recommended that they
have parking in front of the building, and they finally
worked it out, but it is quite a distance for people to go
through the commercial building and arrive at their rooms.
Mr. Leemon said their request would certainly help and
enhance the opinion of Boynton Beach by the clients Of the
Holiday Inn.
Mr. Leemon said they developed an artist's conception of
what the parking lot will look like, and it does not get onto
- 17
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
the public streets. They will do heavy landscaping and will
do it up right because he lives next to it. Mr. Leemon said
they will even limit the height of vehicles that go there.
It will be restricted strictly to the room guests. Their
research showed that between 9:00 P. M. and 10:00 P. M. is
usually the last check-in of their hotels, so trucks and
vans will not be there.
Mr. Blanchette asked i~ they have an overflow into t~e park-
ing lot now, so there is no accessible parking after a
certain time. Mr. Leemon answered,."No," but said t~ey have
an extensive length of walk for their guests. The average
age of their guests is probably ten years older than the
normal Holiday Inn. They were unaware of that when ~hey
built the parking lot.
Mr. Blanchette asked when they have the most cars there at
one time. Mr. Leemon said it was at breakfast time and
at 5:00 P. M., when the Early Bird is on. Mr. Blanc~ette
determined that the restaurant was the r~ason they might
have an overflow of parking at any one time. Mr. Le~mon
~pprised him that they have not had a problem with parking.~
Mr. Blanchette asked if it was that people would have to
walk too far. .Mr. Leemon answered affirmatively and added,
"iespecially when they are e%derly." Mr. Blanchette cDuld
mot understand why the applicant needed more parking, other
tihan making it more convenient. Mr. Leemon hoped it Nould
~e consistent with other Holiday Inns and said they try to
keep a first class hotel here. They followed the requests of
their guests. It is tantamount to action when they g~t
s~veral requests on the same item, and they know it a
need.
Mrs. Huckle questioned whether the depth of the proposed
parking lot would create an additional lengthy walk. Mr.
Leemon answered, "No", and informed her that the room build-
ing is adjacent to that area, and that would shorten up the
walk. The end of the proposed lot would be 17 feet,but
that would be closer than the closest parking lot. Mr.
Leemon agreed with Mrs. Huckle's statement that it w~s
because they walk through the dining room, at the top of the
hill.
Mr. Blanchette heard something before about traffic qccurrlng
on another street to the south of the parking lot, a~d the
site plan did not show any openings on that. Fir. Le~mon's
son, Charles Leemon III, gave renderings to each Member.
- 18
MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
Dr. Jackier asked if valet parking would solve the problem.
Mr. Leemon replied that Holiday Inn guests want to park their
own cars.
Vice Chairman Wandelt asked if Mr. Leemon planned any
expansion to the hotel or restaurant. Mr. Leemon hoped
eventually to develop the property more, but it was not in
the near future. Re asked the Member? t? notice on the
rendering that all traffic was kept w~thln the hotel, and
they plan to restrict the parking where the arrows were to
limit it to small vehicles.
Mr. Ryder asked what happened to the emergency gate they
could have. Mr. Leemon answered that it is still there.
other words, Mr. Ryder said they were not going into 1st
Avenue at all but were going directly into what is the
abandoned area.
In
Mr. Leemon apprised the .Members that their lawyers told them
homeowners own to the middle of their streets. The property
that is abandoned is really owned by the people that own the
property adjacent to them. Mr. Leemon recalled Mr. Ryder
said something about a gift of the property. Mr. Ryder
responded that everyone has that, but they do not dare to
build there.
Charles Bland, Professional Engineer licensed in the State
of Florida, Grand Junction, Tennessee (near the headquarters
of Holiday Inn) wished to address the Board in a technical
nature in the form of a rebuttal to the report that the
Planning Department put in front of them. He asked that the
site plan be displayed on the screen.
Mr. Bland said their Attorney, David Centola, told t~em
that there is a format to add to this rezoning that has a
restrictive covenant which does lend the use of this lot to
~arking. Attorney Centola told them this afternoon that he
poke to the City Attorney, and there is a method to do
this. Mr. Bland wanted to emphasize that it was Mr. ILeemon's
sole intent only to use this ~rea as a parking lot, and he
wanted to deemphasize any potential use that might ceme with
it by use of a restrictive covenant, which was contrary to
the report to them that it is possible. Mr. Bland just
wanted to tell the Board what Attorney Centola told ~hem,
after speaking to the City Attorney of Boynton Beach.
Mr. Bland also wanted to bring to the Board's attention
that the abandonment issue was important because, if the
- 19
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
80YNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
abandonment was granted, that would give them the ability to
restrict the traffic to within the wall and the parking lot.
If the abandonment was not given, they would have the
possibility for the traffic to spill out into the residential
neighborhood. If the abandonment was granted, Mr. Bland
said they would have the opportunity to keep the traffic
well within the Holiday Inn property, where the ingress and
egress is to Boynton Beach Boulevard. Mr. Bland reminded
the Members that it would help, not hinder, to grant the
agandonment.
Mr. Bland wished to address a number of items that might be
construed to be a detriment to the parking lot and t~ll why
they are not. He called attention to a photograph t~ey had
showing the two lots as they now exist. The Members|could
see there was some form of fence there now, and Mr. ~l~nd
stressed that it is an attractive fence, all encompassing,
and contrary to What the comment about the fence was~ in
this case, Mr. Bland said the fence abutted Mr. Leem~n's own
personal residence, and he had no object~ons to the ~ence.
Mr. Bland informed the Members that the fence does cqme into
the property of one neighbor to the west. He also s~id
%here will be no trucks because it will be physically.
· mpossible, b~ virtue of the design, for trucks to get back
into the parking lot. There will be no loading and Unload-
lng in th~ area because the kitchen and the seating ~reas
are well away from it. They are on the Boynton Beach Boule-
vard side of it, and there is no changing %hat. The dumpster
is also on the Boynton Beach Boulevard side of the building,
and there is no change there.
Mr. Bland said the parking l~t lights will be a low light;
they will not create unbecoming glares, and they will be in
a softer version, consistent with what.is required for park-
ing lotS. The bigges~ no~se in the neighborhood will remain,
and that was its proximity to 1-95 and the off ramp ~hat is
there. He thought that was the biggest objection.
For understanding, Mr. Bland reemphasized that the parking
lot does allow guests who have rooms at the souther~ end of
the building to get into the building from therein. Other-
wise a person, as is the ca~e now, might well have to park
to the extreme right-hand sade of the chart, walk all the
way through the commercial building, down the little walk-
way, and into the elevator to get into the building. The
walking distance will be short.
20 -
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
Mr. Bland also wanted to address the fact of whether or
not the lot is economically desirable as development into
single family residences. It was obvious to him, and he
thought every one else, that the closest lots in the neighbor-
hood to the hotel were the two lots they were talking about
now. Mr. Bland did not think anyone would want to build a
house that close to a hotel.
Mr. Bland thought it would be helpful for the Board to know
that Mr~ Le~mon has spent over $100,000 fixing up the house
that he lives,in, so he thought Mr. Leemon was there ~o stay
in a residential mode. He felt it would be a mistake to .
assume that Mr. Leemon had any plans to add commercial zoning
to this.
When the Planner gave his summary to the Board, Mr. ~land
said he (Mr. Golden) accurately stated that they could build
a case either way for this piece of property being rezoned.
Of course, the Planner has the idea of trying to kee~ it in
a residential use. While the Planner's s~m~ry was correct,
for the very reasons the applicant wants to change the
zoning, Mr. Bland said the reasons will protect the resi-
dential character of the neighborhood.
Mr. Bland continued that the fence they will build will be
attractively landscaped, and will act as a buffer to lights
and noise. They will do many things to improve the
neighborhood and not detract from it. Mr. Bland did not
think Mr. Leemon would make th? investment in the residence
he has if he thought that parking lot was going to be bad
for his neighbors and him. He also pointed out that
Leemon's hotel manager lives on the lot to the extreme
right-hand cut out, and he has been a good neighbor.a~l of
~hese years. They want to and intend to be go~d nelg~bors,
and Mr. Bland said the rezoning will help towards tha~ end.
If this is granted, Mrs. ~uckle thought there would bD an
abundance of area in the old parking lot. She asked if
there was any anticipation that would serve any other
purpose. Mr. Bland assumed Boynton Beach was a growing
community and t~at, at some point, there will be an
expansion of the Holiday Inn, if it is at all possibl~.
What expansion that would occur would not occur in this
d~rect~on but would occur ~n the d~rectlon of Boynton Beach
Boulevard.
Mrs. Huckle again commented that there is a lot of la~d
there. If the parking lot is approved, it will leave a lot
21 -
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
of space. Once again, Mr. Bland said the expansion would
be on the commercial land and not on the other.
Chairman Trauger read a petition that was handed him, signed
by 35 neighbors, who were in oDposition to the request.
A copy of said petition is attached to the original copy of
these minutes in the City Clerk's Office as Exhibit G.
Chai.r~n Trauger asked if any one wished to speak in favor
of the proposal. There was no response. Chairman T~auger
asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to the 'proposal.
Earle Waters, 416 N. W. 1st Avenue, said his house w~s
~ ~-~ 1-~8,-~en t~-~t-~s s~ a dirt road. He got a
petition from the landowners that they would agree to pay
the City if the City would pave the road.
Mr. Waters believed this was spot zoning, which the ~ity has
always been opposed to. The Holiday Inn has spread ~he word
that this is needed for a parking area, and the neighbors
think that is not true. Mr. Waters went there for dinner
one Sunday night and waited to be seated. The Clerk at the
desk told someone they had one room left. Mr. Waters said
there were still pa~king spaces outside. If they need the
parking bad enoughr Mr. Waters said the applicant has two or
three lots on Boynton Beach Boulevard.
When the zoning was changed on N. W. 1st Avenue so t~ey
could run the hotel from Boynton Beach Boulevard to 1st
Avenue, Mr. Waters said there were three stipulations set up
by the City Commission, and he guessed the applicant agreed
to the stipulations because they got the zoning. One
stipulation was that there would be a six foot wall ~round
all their property. This was not done on N. W. 1st avenue.
There is a wire fence.
The second stipulation was that they would start building at
a specified time. They did not reach their deadline, but
being good neighbors, Mr. Waters said the neighborhood did
not find fault with them.
The third stipulation was that they were not to have ingress
or egress on N. W. 1st Avenue to their property. No~ they
want the neighbors to sell them the third one, and the
neighbors have no intention of sitting by and letting them
do that. Mr. Waters said that would take away all of the
three stipulations laid down by the City Commission in order
to rezone that to co~unercial.
- 22 -
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
Mr. Waters said the Holiday Inn is not too particular as to
how they do business, because he suspected that their hotel
is renting out the duplex, which is located on a lot zoned
for houses only.
Ed Cohen, 511 West Ocean Avenue, stated he is Mr. Lee~on's
next door neighbor and the owner of what kept being ~eferred
to as "that other house". He felt left out because he found
out a lot of neighbors got letters about this hearing, and
they who are adjacent to the supposed parking lot received
no notice. Mr. Cohen takes the Post and Sentinel and never
saw the legal notice. Only because their neighbors told
them about the meeting was he here at all, and he felt he
probably was the ~ost concerned of all the neighborimg
properties.
Mr. Cohen thought it was well-known that Mr. Leemon bought
o~e of the proposed lots involved in the parking lot very
recently, and he bought it as a residentially zoned ~ot. Mr.
Cohen did not know ~f Mr. Leemon bought the entire p~operty
for the purpose of rezoning, and he did not think so; but,
h~ving bought this, Mr. Cohen did not think there was any
reason to change the zoning on the lot which was so recently
purchased.
When Mr. Lee~n said this was just going to be a parking lot,
Mr. Cohen believed him, but he said to suppose Mr. ~emon
sells the property tomorrow. He sold another hotel qery
recently, and the~e things transfer. Once it is rez~ned
CL3, Mr. Cohen sa~d they w~ll have no control whatsoever ~ver
what is done in that parking lo~. The neighbor~ do ~ot like
the idea of bein? next door, adjacent to a parking lot.
Parking lot stories are in the newspapers every month,
although Mr. Leemon was sure they would have securi%y, etc.
Mr. Cohen told of having his car ripped off while traveling
and said there is no way to have protection. He sai~ it
would afford an easier way into his home, and he was con-
cerned. Mr. Cohen bought his house in November. Helooked
for a nice area with nice neighbors and a quiet street.
~e is at the end of a dead end street, and he feel= ~ike his
back yard is private.
Mr. Cohen thought this could very easily go by the B~ards
with a pa~king lot and an additional commercial use next
door to h~m. if that goes commercial, he said he wo~ld
try to make his house commercial and turn it into a ~usiness.
Mr. Cohen said he might as well or move somewhere else.
- 23
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
Mr. Cohen said the neighbors feel their property must
deteriorate substantially in the entire neighborhood, and he
elaborated. They like the way the neighborhood exists, and
it would be most unfair if the Board would change something
that has existed, that they relied on to exist. They have a
buffer zone between them and commercial property, and it
should remain that way.
Mr. Annunziato said the notice issue may be due to th~ fact
that Mr. Cohen was a recent purchaser, and the notice may
have gone to a previous property owner. Mr. ~ohen exclaimed
that was six months ago, and they are now registered ~oters.
Mr. Annunziato explained that there is a list of property
owners shown on the last tax roll, which is used as a basis
for mailing.
~alerie Brooks, 434 N. W. 1st Avenue, said when the p
~b---6~gh--~-~ ~r~-~e~o~, ~-~wa--~--~-~idential, and he
aware of this. She thought the property was bought w
plans ahead to change it, and that was the reason the
chase was made. The houses of the residents of the
hood are small, but they are kept clean. They would
keep it as a quiet, residential area without spot zon
They went through this when someone wanted to put in
minium, and Ms. Brooks hoped they would not have to g
through it again.
~operty
~a s
[th
pur-
~ighbor-
like to
lng.
condo-
There being no one else who wished to speak, THE PUBLIC
HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Mrs. Huckle did not really see a compelling need for
parking. Maybe it would be more ~onvenient for the g
of Holiday Inn, but to invade a slngle family neighbo
for the commercial use was contrary to the Comprehens
Plan and contrary to the intent of the City Commissio
citizens of the City have, for the most part, endorse
family residences and neighborhoods, and Mrs. Huckle
the continuity of such families was of uppermost impo
to the community. She stated she would not like to s
invasion of commercial property into the neighborhood
:he
lests
~hood
[ve
~. The
~ single
)elieved
~tance
~e the
Mr. Ryder said the City Planning Department's report
referred to the fact they would be voting on a change of
zoning to C-3. The gentleman who represented Mr. Lee~on
said he understood that was not so. As far as Mr. Ryder
knew, the request had been changed to C~3. He told t~e
applicant the City has a zoning classification where it is
possible for ~he City to lock in its use, but he was ~ot
24 -
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12,
1987
aware of any provision in regard to what they were con-
sidering, and that was a change to C-3.
Vice Chairman Wandelt agreed with Mrs. Huckle.
Motion on Land Use Element Amendment and Rezoninq
Mrs. Huckle moved that the Board concur with the reco~enda-
tion of the Planning Department and DENY the request of
Holiday Inn for an amendment to the Future Land Use Plan amd
to deny the zoning from R1A (Single Family Residential) to
C-3 (Community Commercial). Mr. Ryder seconded the motion.
Motion carried 7-0.
Discussion on Abandonment
Chairman Trauger asked if there was any more discussion on
the abandonment. Mr. Annunziato wished to expand on what
the Members read in the report. There was a recommendation
that perhaps the 50 foot right-of-way could be abandoned if
the entire right-of-way was converted to an easement.
Mr. Annunziato told the Members to realize that every major
utility in the City crosses 1-95 at this location. This
afternoon, Mr. Annunziato had a conversation with a repre-
sentative of the Utilities Department concerning what is
meant by doing that. If it were abandoned, it would still
have to stay open and accessible on a 24 hour a day basis
because at any time, you can have damage to a major feeder,
which would affect half of the City.
The City Engineer suggested this can be abandoned if the
entire right-of-way is converted to an easement. In
retrospect, Mr. Annunziato thought it made sense to have the
street not in street form. At some time an the futur~, it
may be developed as a street, but it will always be open as
a street for access to those utilities. Based on conversa-
tions he had with the Utilities Department, Mr. Annunziato's
recommendation was that the abandonment not be approved.
Mr. Ryder asked about access, in the event they would have
two single family homes. Mr. Annunziato thought the road
could be built. However, the road would always be open to
access those utilities. Mr. Ryder pointed out that the road
would only go to the houses and not beyond that. If houses
are built, fronting on 1st Avenue, which is a potential, Mr.
Annunziato explained that the street can and should be built.
However, it will be a street always open to access by the
- 25 -
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
BOARD
MAY 12, 1987
utility companies, whereas, if it is abandoned,
always be the question as to whether or not how
used would meet that criteria.
there will
it is being
For an example, Mr. Annunziato asked whether a wall would be
across the street, and whether it would be landscaped, etc.
He thought that could be a problem when they are talking
about the main corridor for utilities crossing through the
~ity of Boynton B~ach. There is the water main, sewer main,
outhern Bell, main gas feeders, and Mr. Annunziato ~elieved
the power is there as well. He reiterated prior statements.
Mr. Annunziato told .Mr. Ryder he felt it could be used as a
street because they can always tear the street up without
having to ask the property owner for access to his property,
even if it is an easement. He agreed with Chairman ~rauger
that the street would be about 150 feet long.
Chairman Trauger asked if the applicant wished to present
anything further on this.
Mr. Bland thought it should be emphasized that the utility
companies have no objection to it, if it can be made in the
form of an easement. If it is all right to have a street
there, he felt it was all right for Mr. Leemon to own both
parts of it. Mr. Leemon owns the property on both sides, is
willing to agree to the easement, will provide 24 ho~r
access to it, and Mr. Bland said there will be no reason,
other than supposition, to believe that Mr. Leemon would do
anything to prevent it. Mr. Leemon would be the last person
who would want a crisis that close to a development that is
worth $7,000,000 or $8,000,000. Mr. Bland elaborated and
repeated prior statements.
Mr. Ryder asked if they were considering a change in owner-
ship at this point. Mr. Bland answered, "No." Mr.
Annunziato interjected that Mr. Leemon suggested earlier
that the property owners own the center on the street. He
thought what he was referring to was the fact that if a
street is abandoned, State law requires that it be split
down the middle, and each side would gain fee simple owner-
ship of the land, and it would disappear as a dedicatsd right-
of-way.
Mr. Ryder wondered how that would work with the easement.
Mr. Annunziato guessed what would be suggested was thRt the
applicant said he would turn around and give the City back
a utility easement. Mr. Bland confirmed that was correct,
26 -
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MAY 12, 1987
and added that would allay the fears of all the utility
companies. Mr. Annunziato did not think it would allay the
fears of all the utility companies, based on the conversa-
tion he had this afternoon with the Utilities Department.
They were very m~ch concerned with any kind of development
that would interfere with the ability to access.
Mr. Bland argued that the utility companies ~de the state-
ment that they could live with an easement, if that was the
way it came o~t. Mr. Annunziato agreed that they made the
statement but, based on what the plan showed, he did not
think they would be happy with it.
Chairman Trauger asked if anyone else wished to speak in
favor of granting the abandonment. There was no response.
Cgairman Trauger asked if a~yone wished to speak in opposi-
tion to the abandonment. There was no response. THE PUBLIC
HEARING WAS CLOSED.
If the property owner owns both sides of that street, Mr.
Blanchette asked why the City should attempt to put a street
there that would go no place but to the end of the right-of-
way. Mr. Annunziato answered to serve the two lots and the
two property owners. If the property owners wanted the
street, Mr. Blanchette knew they would have to access them.
Mr. Ryder advised that a street would not go in otherwise.
It would remain the wa~ it is now. Chairman Trauger wondered
who would want a street in there.
Mr. Walshak asked if they could tie an easement to the
approval of this. Mr. Annunziato answered affirmatiVely.
Mr. Walshak questioned whether it was legally admissible
this instance. Mr. Annunziato replied, "Absolutely."
Motion on Abandonment
Mrs. Huckle moved to DENY the application for the abandon-
ment of N. W. 1st Avenue (a 50 foot wide local street) bet-
ween N. W. 4th Street and 1-95, requested by Holiday Inn.
Vice Chairman Wandelt seconded the motion, and the motion
carried 4-3. Mr. Blanchette, Chairman Trauger, and Mr.
Walshak voted against the motion. The abandonment was
DENIED.
THE BOARD TOOK A BREAK FROM 9:45 UNTIL 9:58 P. M.
- 27
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MAY 12, 1987
SUBDIVISIONS
PRELIMINARY PLATS
Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Description:
Hunters Run Tract I
Greg Fagant P. E.
Summit Associates, Ltd.
West side of South Congress Avenue,
between the LWDD L-28 and L-30 canals
Request for the approval of the construc-
tion plans and preliminary pla~ which pro-
vides for the construction of Infra-
structure improvements to serve 86 units
at Tract I of the Hunters Run Plan~ed Unit
Development
Mr. Golden said the site plan for Tract I was approve
January by the City Commission. This was one of the
site plans to come through that fell under the new Co
hensive Plan requirements, and Mr. Golden explained.
plat submitted did not.address any of those items. T
construction plans of the plat, which includes an int
part of the drainage s~stem, was not addressed. In a
tion, there was a comment from the City Engineer stat
that the drainage plan did not meet the requirements
subdivision regulations. The Planning Department rec
mended that this item be TABLED.
~ in
~irst
npre-
The
.:gral
~di -
lng
~f the
Mrs. ~uckle moved to TABLE this item until the n~xt r~gular
meeting. Chairman Trauger thought they should first ~ear
from the applicant, and asked if he agreed with the r~commen-
dation. Charles N. Gilbert, Architect, Summit Associates,
Ltd., 2500 Clubhouse Lane, understood and said they cRn
always resubmit it. V~ce Chairman Wandelt seconded the
motion, and the motion carried 7-0.
2. Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Legal
Description:
Description:
Blum Plat (Lakeside)
Walter A. Cornell, Inc.
Pal~rs Development Corporation
North of Old Boynton Road, East of
10th Street
N, Wo
Blum Plat (Lakeside), Sec. 20, Twp. 45
South, Rge. 43 East, Palm Beach County,
Florida
Request for approval of the construction
plans and preliminary plat which provides
for the construction of infrastructure
· mprovements to serve a twenty-four (24)
lot single family subdivision
- 28
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MAY 12, 1987
Mr. Golden said this request was approved in January, 1986
by the City Council. The applicant received an extension
on the preliminary plat, and a final plat was never submitted
within that time frame. Over time, things changed, and the
plat was resubmitted. The applicant addressed some of the
comments from the previous submittal. The TRB recommended
approval, subject to staff comments attached as Exhibit H to
the original copy of these minutes in the City Clerk's
Office.
Mrs. Huckle raised a question about the abandonment. Mr.
Golden explained that it was contingent upon the construc-
tion of the new road and the relocation of the force main.
So long as the abandonment is conditioned upon the
replatting of the property, Mr. Annunziato told Chairman
Trauger one could argue that even if a Resolution was
approved for abandonment, that Resolution w~as not effective
u~%il the plat was approved. The corridor is open as a
u~ility corridor, and it will not be a utility corridor once
the plat is constructed because the utilities in that
corridor are changing to the streets.
Mr. Annunziato informed Mrs. Huckle that the Board acted on
the abandonment. Mrs. Huckle knew they did, but Chairman
Trauger had brought up a question she had.as to whether the
abandonment was ~till viable. Mr. Annugzlato thought it was.
Mrs. Huckle pointed out that the map stall showed abandon-
ment. Since they did not do anything with the other part,
Chair~n Trauger questioned why the abandonment would not
die with it. Mr. Golden explained that the applicant never
followed through on the conditions of approval. Once they
do that, that will set the final mechanism in place.
Kevin m. Cornnell, of Walter A. Cornnell, Inc., Consulting
Engineers & Surveyors, 22 Southeast Fourth Street, Boga
Raton, Florida 33432, said the reason the plat was s~alled
was because the original engineer is no longer in the area.
He was told by Tom Clark, C~ty Engineer, that the abandon-
ment was never recorded, but it still stands.
Mr. Cornnell said it is their intention to proceed with the
abandonment as part of the plan. Mrs. Huckle asked if he
meant he was going to make a request for abandonment 9ver
again. If Mr. Cor~nell was not mistaken, the request for
abandonment was still valid, but the City has not recorded
it because.it is contingent upon the approval of the plat.
Mr. Annunz~ato stated that th~ City will check on the status
of the Resolution.
29
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
Chairman Trauger asked if Mr. Cornnell understood all of the
staff comments. Mr. Cornnell had not read them all, but he
talked to the City Engineer about the drainage concerns and
was willing to agree with those concerns. Chairman Trauger
asked if he ~as willing to accept all staff comments as
presented. After discussion, Mr. Cornnell read the staff
comments.
Mr. Annunziato recollected that the Resolution was approved,
but the effectiveness of that Resolution may have been held
in abeyance until the recording of the plat. Mr. Cornnell
said the staff comments were the type of thing they had
talked to the staff about, so he accepted the staff comments.
Mr. Ryder moved to approve the preliminary plat, seconded by
Mr. Walshak. Mrs. Huckle asked if they should put in a pro-
vis,on to follow up on the abandonment approval.
Mr. Annunziato said he would find out tomorrow about
the status of the abandonment. Chairman Trauger asked if
anyone else felt it should be included in the motion. There
was no response. Motion carried 7-0.
Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Description:
Quantum Park Plat No. 1-A
Enrico Rossi
Quantum Associates
North Congress Avenue, north of N. W. 22nd
Avenue, northeast corner
Request for the approval of the preappli-
cation/master plan and the construction
plans and preliminary plat which provides
for the construction of Quantum Boulevard
between the western boundary of the PID
and Congress Avenue
Mr. Golden explained that the reason for the combined docu-
ment was because the road was part of the preliminary plat
for Savannah Square, which never had a final plat recorded.
Therefore, the City made the determination that there was no
need to go through all those steps just for the roadway.
Mr. Ryder was informed that Quantum Boulevard would be a
private road. Mr. Golden said it will provide for the
westerly extension of Quantum Boulevard from the Planned
Industrial Development to Congress Avenue, which will allow
them to proceed with their project, independent of Savannah
Square. The TRB recommended approval, subject to the staff
comments attached as Addendum I to the original copy of these
minutes.
30 -
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
Mrs. Huckls asked whether it would require signalization.
Mr. Annunziato answered that was accommodated in the Develop-
ment of Regional Impact (DRI), and he believed it had
signalization. Because the plat of Savannah Square did not
go forward, Quantum Boulevard ended up terminating where the
PID is. Because they both bought their properties from the
same property owner, Mr. Annunziato said they were able to
negotiate the recording of this plat, which allows for the
dedication of the rights-of-way for Congress Avenue and
N. W. 22nd Avenue, as well as Quantum Boulevard, so they can
build Quantum Boulevard to Congress Avenue. There was
discussion.
Mrs. Huckle asked if this road would have limited access
with gates, etc. Mr. Annunziato did not believe there was
any limitation in the form of gates, but said it will be
controlled to the extent that it Till be private. Eventually,
it will be patrolled by both public and private security
forces, as are the rest of the roads in Quantum Park.
No one was present to represent the applicant. Mr.
Annunziato thought the Board would be safe to go ahead and
recommend approval, and he explained.
Mrs. Huckle moved to approve the request, subject to staff
comments. Dr. Jackier seconded the motion, and the ~otion
carried 7-0.
C. SITE PLANS
Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Legal
Description:
Description:
Quantum Park Sales Facility
Ken Swable,
R. P. Carbone Construction Co.
Quantum Associates
West side of Interstate 95, between
Miner Road extended and the Boynton
(C-16) Canal
The SW½ of Sec. 17, Twp. 45 S., Rge.
43 E., Plot No. 1, Palm Beach County,
Florida
Request for site plan approval ~o
construct a 1,680 square foot temporary
sales facility on the southwest ~orner
of Lot No. 1 at Quantum Park of Commerce
Planned Industrial Development
Miss Heyden said Lot 1 is bordered on the east by the E-4
Canal and to the south by N. W. 22nd Avenue. She said the
- 31
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
proposed building will be rectangular with a covered entrance.
Parking wit-t be provided south of the building with one
access on N. W. 22nd Avenue. Due to the temporary nature of
the facility, water will be provided by a private well, and
sewer will be by a private septic tank on the site, to the
rear of the building.
Mr. Walshak asked if this was a temporary facility, a
trailer, or a prefabricated building. Ken Swable,
R. P. Carbone Construction Co., 400 Fairway Drive, Deerfield
Beach, Florida 33441, showed a rendering of the building.
He said Quantum Associates hired them to design and ~uild
the sales office. They had an original approved set of
plans in the City for this size. It was approved as a
temporary office building, ready to go to permit, and it did
not have to go before the P&Z Board.
When they started, Mr. Swabte said they were going to just
put up a temporary building, and it was their understanding
that it would.just be a temporary building. When the~ talked
to Mr. Annunziato, they found out they would have to go
through the P&Z Board, site ~lan approval~ etc , so they
started all over again and did the rendering of what they
are going to build.
When they went through the TRB, Mr. Swable said some things
came up. If it is going to be a temporary building, ~hey
offered to post a bond with the City that at some poiDt it
would be torn down. Mr. Swable said they are being a~ked
how long the building will be there, and the City wants a
bond, but they cannot do that until the property KS p~atted.
Mr. Swable emphasized that it is a sales office and iS
temporary in nature. Every assurance was given to the City.
They went through the ~ntlre site plan approval process,
which Mr. Swable said Ks not necessary for a temporary sales
office under the Code. There were a lot of things he did
not understand, but Mr. Swable wanted to build it for
Quantum.
Mr. Annunziato told the Members it was a temporary building
that was not temporary. It was built on the site lik~ any
other building. Mr. Annunziato explained that in the appli-
cant's minds, it was temporary because it will be replaced
by a different structure at that location sometime in the
future. This was different than a trailer that is pu~led on
the site, which was the original proposal. Mr. Swable
disagreed, saying it was a modular building on a foundation.
32
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
Mr. Annunziato said the City's interpretation of the Code
was that this plan should go for site plan approval. Dr.
Jackier asked who described it as temporary. Mr. Annunziato
replied that the applicant described it as temporary. Under
the Zoning Code, Mr. Swable said it specifically states what
a temporary building is. It does not say anything like
trailer.
Mr. Swable was not arguing about it because they are going
ahead to do it. His point was they are going to do other
projects in the City too. Mr. Annunziato an~ he discussed
it, and Mr. Swable said they will go through with it~ but if
it is going to be a trailer and is temporary, they should
change the Zoning Code and say temporary trailer, not
temporary building.
Mr. Walshak pointed out that a layman, looking at it, knows
it is not a temporary structure. It is built on site like
any ot~er commercial building. Mr. Walshak was a little
leery about that kind of stuff. He said Mr. Swable was
building a beautiful building and calling it a temporary
facility. Mr. Swable said then they should call it permanent
and eliminate all of the other requirements. Then they will
tie into the sewer and the water. They just want to get it
built so they can sell something.
Mr. Annunziato knew of no reason why the building could not
be treated as a permanent structure. From the size of the
development and the time it will take until it is finally
finished, Mr. Ryder said it will probably be pretty permanent.
Mr. Swable said they were looking at two to three years.
Mr. Ryder was talking about the entire development.
Mr. Swable said the property is worth far more than the
sales office is worth. They are spending $50,000,000 just
in the development, and when they were looking at a total
~nvestment of $300,000,000, $250,000 or $300,000 was a drop
in the bucket.
Mr. Annunziato apprised the Members that the decision to
locate the sales facility to their office building had not
been made and may not be made. His last conversation with
the principals was that they probably will not locate the
sales force into their office building, so this is the build-
ing that will be occupied by the sales force for many years.
According to the site plan, Mr. Swable said this is a prime
piece of property. The main thing is the location for access
- 33
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MAY 12, 1987
to the site and to have the sales office there. Mr.
Annunziato asked if Mr. Swable wanted the Board to remove
the relationship of this as a temporary structure.
Mr. Swable drew attention to the memo dated May 6, from Don
Jaeger, Chief inspector, Building Department. (See Exhibit
J-1 attached to the original copy of these minutes in the
Office of the City Clerk.) He had no problems with comments
1 through 4 inclusive. With reference to number 5, Mr.
Swable said he has not found the Black Olive trees on N. W.
22nd Avenue. Mr. Annunziato referred him to the plans, and
Mr. Swable said nothing was there.
Mr. Swable also had no problem with the comments in the memo
which were for his information. Under "NOTES", Mr.
Annunziato advised that number 1 applied if it is treated as
a temporary building. Mr. Swable wanted note 1 removed, and
wanted the agreement that they go with the temporary water
and temporary septic tank until' that is installed and they
tie into it. Mr..Annunziato said that was something he
would have to talk to the Building Department about, and he
explained.
Chairman Trauger asked what the objection was to the bond.
If it is not a temporary building, Mr. Swable wondered why
he should give a bond. There wereI comments and disagreement.
Mr~ Annunziato said the application was brought to t~e Board
as a. temporary facility, but he did not think the TRB asked
that it be called a temporary facility. The applicant was
calling it a temporary facility.
Mr. Swable said the basis of calling it a temporary facility
was the zoning rules, which said a temporary building. He
went to Med Kopczynski, Deputy Building Official, and he was
told it was temporary, so they called it a temporary build-
ing. It did not matter to Mr. Swable. He read the second
note in Mr. Jaeger's memo and said it should be struck. Mr.
Annunziato thought he had the right to request that.
Mr. Swable read the third note in the memo, and Mr.
Annunziato advised that was City policy. If it is a
temporary facility, Mr. Swab!e asked if that was a require-
ment. Mr. Annunziato answered that there is no desire on
the part of this City to grant building permits for ~ny kind
of facility prior to filing a final plat. The position of
the City is that the final plat guarantees service to the
facility in terms of roads, sewer, water, paving and drain-
age as access for fire purposes.
34
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
Mr. Swable showed the rendering of the temporary sales
trailer that was approved by the City and read the following:
"After complying with all staff comments and receiving the
signatures from the relevant Technical Review Board Members
on the enclosed sign off. form, the plan should be submitted
to the Plans Review Department for structural, electrical,
plumbing, and air conditioning review, along with the signed
a~d sealed plans and complete application form. A plans
filing fee must accompany submittal. A permit will be
issued for the temporary trailer facilities, which will
ex~ire in one y~ar and is renewable on written reques~ for a
one year extension." Mr. Swable asked the Members to look
at the picture and tell him if that was a trailer.
There were comments, and Mr. Annunz~ato said it was the
policy of the City not to issue permits for permanent
structures until a plat is recorded. He believed the plats
would be recorded within thirty days.
Assuming it will be a permanent building, Mr. Swable
if it was true that a permit could not be issued unti
plat is issued. That was the policy Mr. Annunziato ~
told. With regard to a building permit, Mr. Swable a
what the rules were on the rendering. Mr. Annunziato
that Mr. Swable would build the building to look exac
it was depicted on the rendering. Mr. Swable~ asked ~
make that decision. Mr. Annunziato answered,~ "The Bu
Department, and if the Building Department cannot mak~
decision, some of the City Staff will have to~ make a
minination.
~sked
the
~ked
replied
:ly as
~o would
.lding
that
leter-
Mr. Swable questioned what the basis of the determination_
was. Mr. Annunziato said the Building Department will have
his rendering on file and will take it out to the sit~ and
compare. Mr. Swable said to suppose the colors are not
eXactly what is there. After some remarks, Mr. Annunziato
salid the City Staff was going to do the best it could to
en~force the policy as best it could, which was to provide
f~r the P&Z Board, th~ Community Appearance Board, and the
City Commission. If it would look close to that, he ~id not
suspect there would be a problem. If it does not look like
that, there will be a problem.
Mr. Blanchette said a rendering was nothing more than an
artist's conception of the building. Mr. Annunziato
disagreed, saying "Not any more." Mr. Swable wanted to know
what to go by. Mr. Annunziato just told him what to go by
and said the City Attorney made this determination. Mr.
- 35
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MAY 12, 1987
Swable said he talked to the City Attorney, who did not make
that determination and could not tell him.
Chairman Trauger alluded to colors having numbers and said
the final building should be approximately that same shade.
Mr. Swable concurred with him and agreed with the intent.
His problem was when he leaves here. Mr. Swable makes his
living by getting certificates of occupancy and when he has
to deal with somebody making a determination of whet~er that
s right or wrong, he wants to know the rules golng in. Mr.
Annunziato said t~e rules are the City will inspect his
building, based on that rendering, the colorings, and that
design. He repeated prior statements.
Mr. Swable stated that then the Building Department and some
other section of the City would make the determinatiqn. Mr.
Annunziato responded that those were the conversations they
had with the City, Manager. ~te did not think there was any
intent to cause harm. Mr. Swable said he has been building
another project i~ the City for a year, and his experiences
around here, as far as interpretation goes., could blgw your
mind. He wanted to.do it right but wanted to know what the
rules are.
Mr. Annunziato said the applicant was removing his request
that this be considered as a temporary building and ghat
comments related to temporary buildings and structures are
not applicable.
With regard to the sewer and water, Mr. Swable said this is
a City where the utilities are not available. They ~pplied
and got permission from the Health Department and Wa~er
Management to provide a well and put a septic tank in. Mr.
Swable was told septic tanks are not allowed in the City
and did not want to get into a situation where they gould
not build a permanent facility because they do not have
water and sewer.
Mr. Annunziato suspected the answer to that question was as
long as the plats are recorded, there will be service to
that structure during the life of the bond, and at t~at
point, there will be a requirement to convert from t~ose
systems to public systems. It is not an unusual situation.
Mr. Swable said they designed in a conversion, and he wanted
to make sure. Mr. Annunziato said that was not up to the
P&Z Board to decide, but was a matter for the Building
Department.
36
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
Mr. Blanchette moved to approve the site plan, subject to
staff comments (Exhibit J through J-3). Mr. Golden
interrupted to ask about comments from the Police and Fire
Departments. He determined that they decided they did not
need to respond in any written form, and those departments
should be deleted as part of the staff comments. Mr. Ryder
seconded the motion,
Mr. Blanchette changed his motion to read that the request
be approved, subject to staff comments with the exception
of the Fire and Police Departments. Mr. Annunziato asked if
the motion subjected the building to be treated as a
permanent building. Chairman T~auger and Mr. Ryder agreed
with Mr. Annunziato that all comments relating to temporary
structures were ~deleted. Mr. Ryder seconded the motion.
Mrs. Huckle asked if that would cover the three items that
were noted. Mr. Annunziato thought it did but said it was
up to the Building .Official to make that determination. Mr.
SWable a~ked if'~he~e was any chance they could get dn the
r~cord that ~r. jaeger's notes 1, 2, and 3, or at least 1
aqd 2 we~ with ~eq~rd to the temporary building. Chairman
T~auger s~id tha~ ~as why temporary building was deleted in
the ~oti6h.
Mr. Swable pointed out that notes 1 and 2 did not say
anything with regard to temporary. It could be const=ued by
the Building Department that he still has to post a bond and
that he has to give them a length of time. Mr. Annunziato
thought his recommendation that the building be treated as a
permanent building would solve that. There was further
discussion.
A vote was taken on the motion, and the motion carried 7-0.
Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Legal
Description:
Description:
Smith Office Building
John D. Conway/Jay Colestock
Dr. J. R. Smith
South Federal Highway at S. E.
northwest corner
5th Avenue,
See Exhibit K attached to the original
copy of these minutes in the Office of the
City Clerk
Request for site plan approval to allow
for a 1,724 square foot expansion and the
renovation of the existing structure for
the purpose of constructing a medical
office building consisting of 3,558 square
feet on 1.126 acres
37
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MAY 12, 1987
Miss Heyden said the former Gulf service station exists on
the site. Properties to the north and west are vacant.
Across S. E. 5th Avenue to the south is Benson's Restaurant,
and Sterling Village lies across South Federal Highway to
the east.
On January 13, 1987, Miss Heyden said the P&Z Board.granted
a variance to the parking lot regulations. The variance
requested by the applicant permitted a 20 foot driveway onto
South Federal Highway to be located a distance of 82½ feet
from the intersecting right-of-way line between South
Federal Highway and S. E~ 5th Avenue, and it wa~ granted
subject to the installation of a no left turn sig~ at the
exit on South Federal Highway.
Miss Heyden said the variance request was necessary to allow
for the proposed expansion of the former Gulf service
station, and she explained. The site plan proposes to add a
new addition onto the northeast corner of the former station
and to renovate the existing structure into a medical office
building. ~Parking is provided on the southeast side of the
building with access onto S. E. 5th Avenue and South Federal
Highway. Utility extensions will be made from the existing
utilities on site.
Miss Heyden called attention to the renderings provided by
the Architect and said the proposed building will be
constructed to a height of 22 feet. The exterior will be
white textured stucco with platinum gray stucco colunu~s and
bands. The roof will be cement tile.
Mrs. Huckle recalled when the Board granted the variance on
the parking lot, Mr. Ryder questioned whether they could do
all of this for under $100,000. Jay Colestock, of Jqhn D.
Conway Architect, Inc., 6194 North Federal Highway, Boca
Raton, Florida 33431, talked to Don Jaeger of the BUilding
Department and said the cost was either r~ght on or close to
$100,000, so they decided to come through.
Chairman Trauger asked where the current canopy is. Mr.
Colestock informed Rim that it is gone, and he explained.
Mrs. Huckle asked how many offices there would be. Mr.
Colestock answered, "Just two." Dr. Smith's office will be
in what is now the gas station, and the additional part will
be rented out. Chairman Trauger was informed that Dr. Smith
is a family physician.
- 38
MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
Mr. Colestock had no objections to the staff comments and
accepted them as presented. Mrs. Huckle did not see any-
thing about handicapped spaces. Mr. Annunziato said they
were addressed on the site plan.
Mr. Ryder moved to approve the request, subject to the staff
comments. (See Exhibit L attached to the original copy of
these minutes in the Office of the City Clerk.) Mrs. Buckle
seconded the motion, and the motion carried 7-0.
3. Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Legal
Description:
Description:
Hunters Run Guardhouse
(north entrance)
Charles N. Gilbert
Summit ~Associates, Ltd.
West side of South Congress Avenue,
between the LWDD L-28 and L-30 canals
Tract K, Hunters Run, Sec. 6, Twp. 46,
Rge. 43, as in Plat Book 46, Pages 15 and
16, Palm Beach County, Florida Public
Records
Request for site plan approval to construct
a new guardhouse at the north entrance to
the Bunters Run Planned Unit Development
Miss Beyden said the applicant is proposing to construct a
guardhouse at the north entrance similar to the existing
guardhouse at the south entrance. The proposed guardhouse
is to be constructed of stucco with tinted glass windows.
The roof will be wooden shingles to match the existing guard
house.
Mrs. Buckle recalled that it called for handicapped parking.
Mr. 81anchette noted it also had to be accessible to the
handicapped, but he did not know why. There was discussion
that there could be a handicapped guard. Mr. Annunziato was
sure there was a good reason for it.
Charles N. Gilbert, Architect, Summit Associates, Ltd.,
3500 Clubhouse Lane, came forward. Mr. Annunziato said the
biggest issue here was the recommendation that the applicant
provide a parking space behind the building similar t~ the
one at the south entrance. Mr. Gilbert said they had it.
Mr. Golden explained that at the south entrance they have
like a little gap in the median that allows enough room to
park security vehicles and personal vehicles for the guards,
etc.
39
MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MAY 12, 1987
Dr. Jackier asked if this was a duplicate of the building at
the south entrance. Mr. Gilbert replied that it is a smaller
version. Mrs. Huckle asked if the parking space was not on
the plan now. The comment was made, and Mr. Annunziato was
wondering if it was on the plan. Mr. Golden said it was
hard to te~l, based on the detail, whether or not they were
accomplishing a sufficient parking area for the guardhouse.
Mr. Annunziato agreed with Mr. Walshak and said if they
comply with the staff comments ~ttached as Exhibit M to the
original copy of these minutes in the Office of the ~ity
Clerk, the issue will be resolved.
With regard to the parking area, Mr. Gilbert said the~ pro-
vided a similar thing to what they have at the main gate,
just behind there, 22 feet wide, s? it should meet that. Mr.
Annunziato told him to make sure his plans are very clear.
Mr. Gilbert asked if the handicapped was still a vali~
request. Mr. Annunziato was sure it was. Mr. Gilber~
questioned why it was being callea for, and he ~nfor~ed Mr.
Btanchette that it was not required on the south building.
Mr. Annunziato could only assume that it was a Buildihg Code
requlremento
Mr. Gilbert asked if this was classified as a commercLal
building. Mr. Annunziato was not that familiar with ~he
Building Codes. Mr. Gilbert said they are being aske~ to
submit energy calculations as if it was a commercial )uild-
ing. Mrs. Huckle read a portion of comment 2 from th.~
Building Department's memo, "comments for the applica lt's
information", "if the proposed structure is to be hea~ed or
cooled." (See Exhibit M-2). If that was the determi ation,
Mr. Gilbert could understand, but if it was a commercial
building, that he could not understand. He stated they were
told it was because it was a commercial building. Mr..
Annunziato stated that he told Mr. Gilbert he did not know.
Mr. Gilbert assured Mr. Annunziato that it was not Mr.
Annunziato that told him it was a commercial building.
Mrs. Huckle moved to approve the request, subject to staff
comments. Vice Chairman Wandelt seconded the motion, and
the motion carried 7-0.
- 40
MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MAY 12, 1987
SITE PLAN MODIFICATIONS
Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Description:
Access Cable at Boynton Beach Distribution
Center
Kent Ewing
Ewing and Shirley, Inc.
Boynton Beach Distribution Center Master
Association, Inc.
High Ridge Road at Miner Road, southeast
corner
Request for approval of an amended site
plan to permit the construction of ~ new
satellite dish
Miss Heyden called attention to a letter from Kent W. Ewing,
P.L.S., Ewing and Shirley, Inc., 3767 Lake Worth Road, Suite
118, Lake Worth, Florida 33461, dated May 11, which asked
that the application be removed from the agenda due to the
need of their revising the site plan.
Mrs. Huckle moved to remove the application from the agenda,
at the request of the applicant, until a later date. Dr.
Jackier seconded the motion, and the motion carried 7-0.
Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Legal
Description:
Description:
Hunters Run Tract K - The Oaks
Charles N. Gilbert
Sum~nit Associates, Ltd.
West side of South Congress Avenue,
between the LWDD L-28 and L-30 canals
Tract K, Hunters Run, Sec. 6, Twp. 46,
Rge. 43, as in Plat Book 46, pages 15-16,
Palm Beach County, Florida
Request. for approval of an amended site
plan to permit the construction of
screened enclosures/porches and Florida
rooms
Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Legal
Description:
Description:
Hunters Run Tract L - The Woods
Charles N. Gilbert
Summit Associates, Ltd.
West side of South Congress Avenue,
between the LWDD L-28 and L-30 canals
Tract L, Hunters Run, Sec. 1, Twp. 46,
Rge. 42, Palm Beach County Florida
Request for approval of an amended site
plan to permit the construction of
screened enclosures/porches and Florida
rooms
Dr. Jackier said item numbers 5 and 6 were the same. Mr.
Annunziato thought they had to evaluate whether the comments
41 -
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MAY 12, 1987
were the same. After checking, he suggested they would make
one presentation and then the Board could act on them.
Miss Heyden said the original site approval did not provide
for the construction of screened enclosures and patios.
Colored renderings were not submitted, and the applicant
felt they were not needed at this time. Chairman Trauger
asked how the Board felt about colored renderings. The
Members were in agreement that they were not necessary.
Charles Gilbert, Architect, drew a~tention to the second
comment in the memo from the Building Department, dated May
5, 1987. (See Exhibits N and O are with the original
minutes of this meeting in the Office of the City Clerk.)
Mr. Annunziato advised that it was a comment by the Chief
Inspector, and he thought Mr. Gilbert better take it up with
the Community Appearance Board. Mr. Annunziato told Mr.
Gi!b~rt the City staff will always recommend that applicants
submmt renderings because those are the instructions they
have.
Mr. Gilbert commented that he did not know what would be
built there. Dr. Jackier interrupted to explain that the
enclosures will be individually built and may not be the
exact thing. Every time a request is made, a rendering will
be submitted. They cannot give a general picture at the
moment.
Mr. Annunziato was surprised to hear Dr. Jackier say that, in
that the individual associations will not have preset
standards. Dr. Jackier advised that there are preset
standards but one family may want to build an enclosed
screen; someone else may want a Florida room, and those
things are permitted. Mr. Annunziato asked how many
different Florida rooms would be built. Dr. Jackier replied
that the Florida rooms will look the same, and the screened
porches will look the same. Mr. Gilbert disagreed, saying
none of them will look the same, and that was untrue.
Mr. Gilbert stated that the application is not correct.
The application shows the owner as Summit Associates, and
the owner is not S~it Assoc.iates, but the individual
condominium association.
Mr. Walshak asked if each one will require an individual
permit. Mr. Annunziato answered affirmatively. Dr. Jackier
commented that each individual condominium associatio9 does
requlre uniformity, but Tract K may be different than Tract
- 42
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MAY 12, 1987
L. Mr. Annunziato said that was why the City was surprised
that renderings could not be made available. He did not
think it was as necessary here as maybe in other pla~es. If
there were only three or four different kinds of construc-
tion, like one is a screened room and one is a Florida room,
the City more or less assumes that the associations would
limit the designs to say one or two. Dr. Jackier said that
is what they have done in the past, and he was sure they
would do that in the future.
Mr. Annunziato said that then the comment Mr. Jaeger of the
Building Department made was appropriate, and it was up to
the CAB. Dr. Jackier stressed that the Condominium Board
will enforce that to see that they are uniform within their
particular enclave. There was discussion.
Mr. Gilbert saw nothing wrong with each of the staff comments.
Motion as to Tract K
Dr. Jackier moved that the request be approved, subject to
staff comments (Exhibit N). Mr. Walshak seconded the
motion, and the motion carried 7-0.
Motion as to Tract L
Dr. Jackier moved that the request be approved, subject to
staff comments (Exhibit 0). Mr. Walshak seconded the
motion, and the motion carried 7-0.
OTHER
Mr. Golden said the PID zoning regulations require that the
P&Z Board approve all uses within the PID zoning category.
To date, the only other approved use at Quantum Park was
warehouse and distribution use for Publix.
1. Request for use approval of day care centers at the
Quantum Park of Commerce Planned Industrial Development
Mr. Golden called attention to his memo dated May 4,
addressed to Mr. Annunziato, and Mr. Annunziato's memo of
May 5. (See Exhibits P-1 and P-2 attached to the original
copy of these minutes.) It was recommended that the use be
approved only to offices, commercial or club uses. As the
project builds out, he thought the Members would see more
and more need and requests for day care centers at Quantum
Park.
- 43
MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD
BOYNTON BEACh, FLORIDA
MAY 12, 1987
Mr. Annunziato told the Members approximately 13,000 people
will be working at Quantum Park, and the need for more than
one day care center is likely to occur. As the project
builds, the surrounding uses will be more of an issue, and
he explained. The recommendation was made with an eye to
the future.
Mr. Ryder moved to approve the conditional use of day care
centers with the stipulation that the use be restricted to
office, commercial and club areas. He agreed with a
suggestion by Mrs. Huckle and added, "and restricted from
industrial areas" to the motion. Mrs. Buckle seconded the
motion, and the motion carried 7-0.
2. Request for use approval of a newspaper distribution
facility at the Boynton Commercenter
Mr. Golden
subject
the
review
admi!
a
Fire
eve~
said the
' r
· Wo ks,
~tment recommended approval,
environmental review due to
the storage that may
does the environmental
the Planning Department
~to clarified that it is
Engineering,
es Departments. It covers
Mrs. Huckle moved to approve the request, subject to environ-
mental re3iew, because of the combustibility of the news-
papers, Vice Chairman Wandelt seconded the motion, and the
motion carried 7-0.
ADJOURNMENT
Ther~ being no further business to come before the Board,
the meeting properly adjourned at 11:15 P. M.
Patricia Ramseyer ~[
Recording Secretary,/
(Four Tapes)
- 44
MEMOPJ~NDUM
May 6, 1987
C
TO:
Chairman and Members
Planning and Zoning Board
FROM: Carmen S. Annunziato
Planning Director
RE: LOpezMedical Office Complex-Parkinq Lo~ Variance
Section~ 5-144(~)(4) of the Code of Ordinances requires that when
a variance to Section 5, Article X, Parking Lots is requested,
the Technical Review Board must forward to the Planning and
Zoning Board a recommendation, and that the recommendation
forwarded is to be made part of the public hearing ~roceedings.
To that end, this memo is forwarded consistent with 5-144(c) (4).
Nelson Lopez, M.D,, property owner, has requested avariance to
Segtion 5-141(e) "Drainage" of the Parking Lot Regulations, which
requires that storm water be retained on-site ara capacity o~
not less three inches-of rainfall in one hour. The subject
parcel is the south Eide of S.E. 23rd Avenue,
330 feet west of the right-of-way for the Florida
Coast Railroad, and includes lots 9 and 10 of'the High Point
~ivision (seeattached surveys and site plan). In this
instance, the applicant is requesting that the existing storm
water flow onto S.E. 23rd Avenue be aIl~wed to continue. Fo~ an
· of the Code requirement, the nature of the variance
justification, please~refer to the
Hearing and applioation.:.
On , May 5, 1987, the Technical Review Board (TRB) met to
plans and documents 'submitted, and to formulate a
~ regard to the variance requested. After
follows:
S.E. 23rd Avenue in the vicinity of the subject parcel is
c~rrently prone to flooding during periods of heavy rainfall,
and the storm waterrUn_off from the Lopez property would
further exacerbate this situation.
2. The parking lot is being expanded to provide for additional
parking and therefore, should be subject to all of the
requirements of the Parking Lot Ordinance, including the
requirements for on-site storm water trearnuent and
containment.
EXHIBIT A
if
then the
feet
A surplus of three (3) .~p~r~ih-~ spaces exists which may be
eliminated in favor of increased landscaping an~ swale areas
to accommodate the storm water run-off.
addition, the TRB applicant be advised that
the Planni~g ~
to dedicate fifteen (15 } -
to Palm Beach Count-~
~45). days-of variance approval.
CSA:ro
cc ~Cify~'Manager~
.'Technical. Review Board
'Central File
FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT.FOR
COUNTy, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS
lAST NAME--FIRST NAME--MIDDLE NAME NAME OF BOARD. COUNCIL. COMMISSION. AUTHORITY. OR COMMITTEE
BLANCRETTE,HAROLD LAWRENCE PLAN~-ING and ZONING BOARD'
THE BOARD, COUNCIL. COMMISSION. AUTHORITY. OR COMMITTEE ON
WHICH t SERVE IS A UNIT OF:
-~IAILINO .¢OORESS
905 Misaion Rill Road
CITY
y,n, ton Beach, Florida
XCITY COUNTY OTHER LOCAL AGENCY
NAME OF POLITICAL SLUBDIVISION:
City of Boynton Beach, Florida
MY POSITION IS:
! ELECTIVE X APPOINTIVE
WHO MUST FILE FORM 8B
use by may person serving at the county, city, or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board,
commission, marhority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non-advisory bodies who are presented
conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. The requirements of this law are mandatory; although
use of this parricnhr form is not required by law, you are encouraged to~.use it in making the disclosure required by law.'
Your responsibilities m-~der the taw when faced with a measure in which you have a conflict of interest will vary greatly depending
on whether you hold anei~tive or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form
before completing ther~-~erse side and filing the form.
_iNSTrUCTIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION t'12.3t43, FLORIDA STATUTES
ELECTED OFFICERS:
A person holding electi~ecounty, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which inures
to his special ' ~ ; -
pnvar,, gain. ~ach local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the special
gain of a principal (onh,~ than a government agency) by whom he is retained.
In either case, you shoukl disclose the conflict:
PRIOR TO THI5 VOTE BEING TAKEN by publicly stating to the assembly the nature of your interest in the measure on
which you are abs~ning from voting; and
WITHIN 15 DAYS Aim'FER THE VOTE OCCURS by completing and filing this form with the person responsible for recording
the minutes of*.he meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
~APPOINTED OFFtCE~..S:
A person holding appointive county, municipal, or other local public office MUST ABSTAIN from voting on a measure which
inures to his special.,ate gain. Each local officer also is prohibited from knowingly voting on a measure which inures to the
special gain of a Ird_'ncipal (other than a government agency) by whom he is retained..
A person holding an appointive local office otherwise ma3' participate in a matter in which he has a conflict of interest, but must
disclose the nature of the confltct before making any attempt to influence the dec s on by oral or written communication, whether
t .~made by the officer or at his direction.
~iIF YOU INTEND TO MAKE ANY ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION PRIOR ,
,-~,s ~ TO THE MEETING AT WHICH
iTHE VOTE WILL Bt: TAKEN:
· You should complete and file this form (before making any a~tempt.to influence the decision) with the person r~sponsible for
recording the minutes o~f the meeting,, who will incorporate the form in the minutes.
.! A copg of the form ~hou!d be provided immediately to the other members of the agency.
:' The form should be re'ad publicly at the meeting prior to consideration of the matter in which you have a conflict of interest.
EXHIBIT B PAGB !
1FYOU MAKE NO ATTEMPT TO INFLUENCE THE DECISION EXCEPT BY DISCUSSION OR VOTE AT THE MEETING: /
· SY~o~ sko~ld disclose orally the nature of your conflict in the measure befoi'e participating.
· ,You should complete the form and file it within 15 days after the vote occurs with the person responsible for recording the minutes
-of;:t~.~e meeting, who should incorporate the form in the minutes.
DISCLOSURE OF STATE OFFICER'S INTEREST
Harold L. Blanchenpe , hereby disclose that on May 12 , 1987~ :
L -
(a) A measure came or will come before my agency which (check one) 1
~ ~i.nured to my special private gain; or
inured to the speeial gain of by whom I am retained.~
(b) The measure before my agencyand the nature of my interest in the measure is as follows:
i personally ~o~ked on prepa~ing ther,pla~s ,for Neiso,n L-op:ez,MD : :
( O~fi~e renova-~ien and revised SiCe' Plan located on SE 23rd.
Avenue Boyn~on Beach, Florida.)
May 12,1987
Date Filed Signature
.NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317 (1995), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED
;'D,LSCL~O'SURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING:
.I.MPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT DE.MOTION, REDUCTION IN
SALARY. REPRIMAND. OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $5,000.
PAGE2
MEMORANDUM
4 May 1987
TO:
FROM:
RE:
Chairman and Members
Planning and Zoning Board
Carmen S. AnnUnziato
Planning Director
Walter Dutch - Land Use Amendment
and Rezoning Request
SUFE4kRY: Walter Dutch, propertyowner, is requesting that a .08
acre parcel be rezoned from R-IA (Single-Family Residential) to
C-2 (Neighborhood Commercial) and that the Future Land Use Plan
designation for this parcel be amended from "Low Density
Residential" to "Local Retail Commercial". The subject parcel
occupies 50 feet of frontage on the west side of N.W. 7th Court.
Currently, the property is vacant. The proposed use of this
property, if rezoned, would be to combin~ it with the vacant C-2
zoned parcel to the south !under the same property ownership) in
order to develop it for Neigb_borhood Commercial land uses.
location ~): To
parcel are 1 residential
~tructures on a .37 acre parcel which have been converted for use
as a dental cli//ic. This property is zoned C-2, Neighborhood
Commercial. Abutting the subject parcel to the_west and
northwest' isa vacant .46 acre parcel zoned C-1.
Office/Professional, which is under the same property ownership
as the dental A .~ ~ has been submitted to the City
proposing office building on
this S~ject parcel to ,the north is a
which is in good condition.
parcel to the east is a 50 foot wide
.W. 7th Court. To the east, across N.W. 7th
court, is a
condition.
further to 'the
the northeast corner of
Court is a .
is a .21 acre
zoned R-lA which is in fair
on N.W. 7th Court,
~rom fair to good. At
Beach Boulevard and N.W. 7th
Ct2, whichis owned b~ Walter
te the east is a Wendy's drive-thru
the subject parcel to the south
under the same property
to the south is the
Boulevard. Further to the south,
1
EXHIBIT C
across Boynton Beach Boulevard,
zoned C-2.
is the Gateway Shopping Center
PRESENT ZONING: Under the present R-IA zoning, the property
would be undevelopable without a variance from the Boar~ of
Adjustment. Approval of ~ variance from the Board of Adjustmen~t
would allow for the construction of a small, singte-f~ily home.
Otherwise, the R-iA zoning requires a minimum 7,500 square foot
lot with a 60 foot frontage.
REZONING: Rezoning to C-2, Neighborhood Commercial, would permit
a cOmmercial building up to two stories, which could include
business or medical offices, a bank, restaurant, drugstore o~
any other use permitted under the C-2 zoning
by,bothparcels combined
-under the Dwnership). Assuming frontage on
.~ C-2
th~
the 100 foot depth
~ rear.and east side
be 30 feet abutting the
~ remainder of the east side
zoning distri=t. A six-foot
along the rear
where
yard
[be 15 f~et for-both
request
t under the
3,100 square
the parcel
An analysis of
provided inthe
a~t, would be
· ~t as
The property in
Land Use Element as
to the Future Land Use
requested by the
following Comprehensive Plan
request:
a suitable living environment in all neighborhoods." (p.
"Preserve the present stock of sound dwellings and
neighborhoods." (p~ 6]
"Provide a range of land use types to accomodate a full range of
services and activities~" (p. 7)
2
."Eliminate existing and potential land use conflicts." (p. 7)
"Encourage the development of complimentary land uses." (p. 7)
"Encourage the.development of commercial land uses where
accessibility is greatest and where impacts to reside~ai uses
are minimized." (p. 7)
Encourage the development of clustered neighborhood and
commuriity commercial centers at arterial and collector
ntersect~ons. (p. 39)
parcel abuts anarea to the west which is designated
PtanEvaluation and Appraisal-Report as an
=onflict (Area 36). This area
at the intersection.of Old BoYnton Road and
Boulevard, west of the Deierl'Park
the subject parcel abuts this area of land
policies_pertaining to
property in question. The
· appears onP-131 of the
Area 36
Residential Parcels in Vicinity of Old Boynton Road and New
Boynton Road, between Interstate 95 and Congress Avenue.
As stat.ed on page 37 of the current Comprehensive Plan, due
to the increased traffic which will be drawn to the Boynton
BeachMatl, there will be pressure to rezone these parcels
from residential to commercial. Other than minor
a ~ustments to the ex~stlng zoning d~str~ct boundaries
commercial zoning should not be allowed to extend westward
along Old Boynton Road and Boynton Beach Boulevard [see the
paragraph be'low, however). Extending commercial zoning
along these thoroughfares would cause serious traffic
congestion and degr~dethe residential envirornnent in the
ad3acent neighborhoods. In particular, commercial zoning
should not beallowed on the residentia~ lots and small
parcels which lie along Old Boynton Road to the northwest of
the FPL-substation.
The implications of the Area 36 policies zth respect to the
property ~n questign will _be, discussed in the following section
entitled Issues/Discussion .
ISEUE~/DIECUSSION:
l~'/Whether development ~f this p~operty for commercial uses will
have an adwerseimpact on surrounding residential properties.
Since the subject parcel abuts single-family zoP~ng to the
north and east, the. potential exists ~or an exacerbation of
existing land-use conflicts that currently exist kn the
immediate vicinity. More specifically, the single-family
parcel which lies to the east, across N.W. 7th Ccur~ (Lot 2),
is currently bordered on the south and east by the C-2 zoning
district. The Wendy's drive-thru restaurant abuts this
parcel to the east and is representative of an existing land
use conflict. Rezoni~g the subject parcel to C-2 would
result in a situation whereb~ Lot 2 would be enveloped on
nearly three sides by commercial zoning (see attached
location, map and survey).
With respect to the single-family, parcel which abuts the
subject parcel to the north, this parcel is currently
bordered on the west by a C-1 zoned parcel. Although
current been submitted tc the City
which professional office
~parcel. In addition to the
commercial ~ would be created on the east side
of N.W. impact Lot 2, rezoning the
similar envelope that would
immediately to the north,
~f its four property
The effect on the overall
the commercial zoning and
be to create a 50
the R~lAzoned
attached zoning map).
Currently, the subject parcel serves as a buffer between the
which lies to the north and the existing
south. Approval of the rezoning
separation between the
'home and a future building on the C-2
minimum of 92.1 feet under
42~1 feet under the
the ..
"s zoning regulations would require the
of a six-foot concrete block wall along the
residential and commercial zoning
connection with the development of the C-2 zoned
parcel~ activities taking place at the rear ~f a future
cOmmer~ ' noise from trucks, loading and
of dumpsters, odors from
lot lighting, trash and litter
would be
uses. As
many of these adverse impacts and land-use
~ certain degree as a result of
zoning pattern. Approval of the applicant's
would further exacerbate this situation.
Whether the property in question is physically and
economiCally developable for a single-family home.
4
As previously noted, this property could be developed for a
small, single-family home if the Board of Adjustment was to
approve a variance, upon submission of an application from
the property owner. No conclusion has been reached regarding
the economic feasibility of developing this parcel for a
single-family home, but it is unlikely due to the small
parcel size, the prox.imit~ to neighboring developed and
undeveloped commercial-zoned parcels, as well as the
proximity to West Bo~nton Beach Boulevard.
the 2 zoned parcel under the same
in size to permit the
rcial land uses.
The .21 acre C-2.zoned parcel, under the same~property
requirements of-the C-2 zoning
of a
with a maximum size of
approximately 2,000 square feet. F~rtherrmore, it sho~td also
be parcel at the northeast corner of
West and N.W. 7th Court, which is
also owned by Walte~ Dutch, can be utilized for a parking lot
to serve a future b~lding at the northwest corner of West
Boynton Beach Boulevard and N.W. 7th Court.-
Commercial zoning of this property Would be
~ Comprehensive 'Plan policies for the location
=ommercial uses.
Commercial zoning of the subject parcel wou%d be both
consistent and inconsistent with Comprehensive Plan policies
for the location of and access to commercial uses. The
encourages the development of clustered
commercial centers at arterial and
· The proposed rezo~ng would be
policy as it would represent a 50 foot
~ extension cf C-2 zoned district at the
Boulevard and Old
classified as
Ls~clas~ified as a collector
ClassificatiOn in the
of the Comprehensive Plan.
, would also.be consistent,
in "development of
greatest and
uses are minimized". The
with the accessibility
~subject parcel and the larger
~vailabte by way of N.W. 7th
to seek a variance for a
Beach Boulevard. The Parking Lot
180 feet of the
lines on arterial roads. The
C-2 zoned parcel falls
within 180 feet of the intersecting rights-of-way lines of
West Bo!rnton Beach Boulevard and N.W. 7th Court. Rezoning
tthhe would not be consistent with
atsubjeCtportionparcel'of the ho.w?Ver,~policy encouraging development of
commercial land uses where impacts to residential uses are
minimized" and would result in further deterioratio~ of the
residential enclave imm'edi~tely to the north.
As previously outlined under the section entitled
abuts an area
~ and Appraisal
Area 36).
Report a~ this area, -c~rtain provisions
Area 36 can be construed to
including the ~.
zoning
the 'provision that
in the vicinity
is to
It can be
approved, will
neighborhood
· to further
lie to
of Lot 11 ),
the
feet of ~
a
parcel would set a
of neighboring ·
· commercial rezoning of the
~further ,,piecemeal"
~ark subdivision,~particularly the
· to the no~th (the north 45
to the east
These two p~atted
(Lots 2 and li) currently
"within the C-2
and plat maps). The
if approved, would result in
into this R-lA zoned pocket·
for future C-2 rezoning of the
~udes the north 45 feet of
of Lot 2 in the Deiert Park subdivision. The
off the C-2/R-1A zoning
northern property boundaries of
, platted. This scenario of
would exacerbate the problem for
6
' ~r~xte~d~d-periOd ~' time~-~In'6rder~tb avoid piecemeal
rezoning~~the_~Planning~and-Zoning_Board and. City Commission
~hould3-censider?a land ~e'amendm~nt~and'rezoning in this
aJ~ea ~nly'.if it inclRdes~alt-parcelswhich are similarly
threatened by~dommercial~encr~ackment.~ ~This would again
~ludee-~llao~ Eots'~2randk~13in~the~-Deierl~'Parksubdivision
as~-o~igi~allynplatted~-.~-×~s- ~- ~ ..... '
.CONCLUSIONS/RECOMMENDATIONS:--~. Rezoning.-ofthe~subject parcel
woutdbe inconsistent, in part,~with respect ~o Comprehensive .-
Plan{policies for of 'commercial land uses. The"
significant ch~ngein-the
impact
extended
also be
Potential Land
r~quest is
and
all Of
off the
the
If it is
that'this
R-lA zoned
amendment
more
the
is
11,in
/bks
cc: City Manager
~Technical Review Board
Central File
Walter Dutch
7
May iO, 1987 ~~
Planning & Zoning Board & City Council of the City of Boyntcn Beach:
~e tb~ undersigned, .resident owners of NW?th Cou~c, object to the propomed
rezoning of Lot [! (Plat Book 23, l~e 23~)"fz~ rsmidenttal to C-2.
NW>?th C~ is a dea~-end mtl-ee~ with & pheno~n~l amount of tu~-n-a~ound
We ~ve a ,D~ ~" ~d "CN~ ~YING" ~a at t~ ~e
which ~ i~d or go. ~se~. With ~ ~ftion of ~Y'S
inc~ t~endou~ ~ once ~ef~ nei~ho~ ~s
from neglect, litter
p~llutiom, caused by these
ii ham been neglected in spite
the. lot mowed and cte~rsd of debris. Ne
'.t~ ~ollect wrappers,
at 306 ~ ?th Court,
year and also
which
The h~se prowides shel%er for home-
:ity, via telephone, to enfo~e the ordinances
~e ~espectfully request
~o eliminate these eyesores and disturbing
situations befo~ we consider .the rezoning of Lot ii.
~e need to know that-the City of Boymton Beach is concerned about the
~nditions of it'S neighbe~hoods and that "people", not "business",
are the p~iority~
~--~ ~ ~ Sincerely,
3~ NW 7th Court // 317'~ 7th Court
WILLIAM HAYS
404 NW 7th Cou~
ROBERT and ~ PANUCCtY
409 }F~ ?th Court
C PL~RLES HOLT
415 NW 7th Court
' ' t
.:E~HIBIT D
MEMORANDUM
4 May 1987
30:
Chairman and Members
Planning and Zoning Board
.FROM:
CarmenS. Annunziato
Planning Director
Holiday Inn and C. L..Leemon, Inc.
Land Use Amendment and Rezoning Application
S~¥: Charles B. Bland, Jrt, P. E., agent for c, L. Leemon,
Inc., property owner, and the Holiday Inn, lessee, is requesting
that a .4498 acre parcel be rezoned from R-IA (Single-Family
Residential) to C-3 (Community Commercial), andthatthe Future
Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan designation for this
parcel be amended from "Low Density Residential" to "Local Retail
Commercial". The property lies at the southwest corner of N.W.
1st Avenue and N.W. 4th Street, adjacent to the right-of-way for
Interstate 95, and occupies 152 feet of frontage on N.W. 1st
Avenue and 117 feet of frontage on N.W. 4th Street...The property
was originally platted as a portion of Beverly Hills Addition No.
3 and is cUrrentlyvacant. The proposed useof th~s' property, if
rezoned, would be to constr~ct a parking lot on .it to provide
additional parking fcr the Holiday Inn hotel. Proposed access to
the rezoned, would oceur by. way of the existing
parking Beach Boulevard. In addition
t¢ rezoning r~equest, the
the abandonment of ~he 50 foot wide
N.W. Which separates the existing
hotel property in question.
$_URROUNDING LAND USE AND ZOOmING(See attache~ Location MaD%-
Abutting the subject pa~Celto the north an~ northeast is'~
existing HOliday Inn ~otel zoned C-3, Communit 6o~merci
Y a . To
the east, across N~/W~ 4th Street, is a single-family home in
fair condition on ~ one-half acre parcel zoned R-lA. Abutting
the subject parcel to the south, at the Corner of Ocean Avenue
and N. W. ~ta Street, is a single-family home zoned R-lA under
the same ~ropert~ownership (Leemon). Also abutting the sUbject
parcel-to the south, between the corner lot and 1-95, is a
single-family home zoned R-lA. Both this home and the home at
the corner of Ocean Avenue and N.W. 4th Street are in good
condition. The single-f~miIy homes el:~where in the vicinity are
generally in good_COndition. Abutting th~ subject parcel to the
west is the right of-wayfor Interstate 95.
EXHIBIT E
i.
PRESENT ZONINg: The.present ~-IA zoning would allow for the
d~vel~pment of-two single-family homes on the vacant land. The
R~iA zoning requires a minimum 7,500 square foot lot with a 60
foot frontage. Access would be provided by N.W. 1st Avenue and
N. W. 4th Street.
~?~ng to C-3, Community Commercial, would permit
llalngs to four sto~ies high, which could include
business and medical-offices, banks, restaurants, nursih~ homes
and hotel~. Assuming frontage Onto Boynton BeachBoulevard, if'
~he =ezoning an~ abandonment are approved, and this parcel is
incorporated as a part of the existing hotel site, the setbacks
on th~south an~ east sides abutting the residential-zoned
~, a six~foot high
[ would be reqUired property lines.
· and this project-
, with frontage onto N.W..4th Street,
on the
feet~ith.a six-foot conc
prope~t~ line. It is the applicant's desire not to de~etop this
it fom but rather to pave it and use
- Inn hotel. However, no
metho~ ~ whereby this rezoning request can be
approved t's proposal to use this
Approval of this rezoning
~or lo~ment of any use permitted'
under ~he C-3 A maximum of about 4,500
sguare feet of reta2 space could be built on the parcel
under the City's current d~velopment regulations. Approval of
this-rezoning request w?utd also set a pre?eden~ for the rezoning
of the two adjacent residential parcels which lie to the south.
COMPreHENSIVE PLAN - FUTURE LAND USE MAP: The property i~
ques=lon ~s currently shown On the Future Land Use Element as'
"Low Density Residential", so an amendment to the Future Land Use
Element to "Local Retail Commercial", as requested by the
applicant, would be necessary.
CO.M~.R~.HENSIVE P~LAN - TEXT: .The following Comprehensive Plan
po±lc~es are relevant tothis rezoning request:
"Provide a suitable living environment in all neighborhoods.,'
6)
-"Preserve t~present stock of sound dwellings and
neighborhoods.,, (p. 6)
"Provide a ~ange of land use types to accommodate a full range of
services and activities." (p. 7} '
"Eliminate existing and potential land use conflicts." (p. 7}
~'Encourage the development of complimentary land uses." (p. 7)
"Encourage the development of commercial land uses where
accessibility is greatest and where impacts to residential Uses
are minimized." (p. 7)
"Encourage the development of clustered neig~hborhood and
community commercial centers at arterial and collector
intersections." (p. 39)
Whether development of this property for commercial uses will
have an adverse impact on surrounding residential properties.
Si$ce the propertyin question abuts two single-family
residences to the south and a single-family residence across
N.W. 4th Street to the east, the potential exists for a
serious land use conflict to occur. This would s~ill be the
case after taking into consideration~that one of the
properties to the south is under the same property ownership,
requirenr~nt for 30 and rear-y~rd s~tbacks adjacent
to the residential- Of Partic~ar Concern
would e actlvltzes place~ to the rear of a future
~sOe~e~rc~al bulb.ding. (,in the .ev.ent that this property is not
u zor a par.King -o~. as orlglnally proposed). ~ctivitiss
that would be incompatible wit~ nearby residentia~ uses~would
include noise nozse from loading and unloading
of dumpsters, odors glare from pa~king lot
lighting, trask and li~ter accumulation, and the unpleasant
aesthetics that ar~e for'the rear of a commercial
building. If the
of these impacts
existing patten
N~W. 1st
commercial uses corner
Boynton Beach Boul
lots to the south. However
requ~s~ would only ser~e to exacerbate this
furthermore, it would serve as a
~C-3 zoning dist/~ict into
situation whereby this parcel wauld be
zoning on two of its four sides.
95 and
.famil~
and
of the
creating a
by residential
Whether there is an adequate supply of vacant C-3 ~oned
property in the vicinity.
At present, the supply of vacant C-3 zoned property in
the vicinity is limited. Those parcels that are vacant are
not in the immediate vicinity of the existing hotel.
Therefore, the use of any of these parcels for additional
hotel parking is impractical and~ in addition, would not be
permitted under the City's Zoning Regulations, as the parking
cannot be located more than 300 feet distant as measured
along the nearest pedestrian walkway (Section
ll-I(2) of Appendix A, Zoning).
Whether the property ~n question is physicatl~ and
economically developable for single-family residences.
As outlined in the section entitled "Present Zoning", the
property could be developed for two single-family homes.
Access would have to be provided by way of N.W. 1st Avenue,
which is currently u~improved west of N.W., 4th Street, as the
fronts of the homes would have to face northtoward this
right-of-way (as opposed to N.W. 4th Street) in order to
provide for the 60 foot frontage required$~ the R-iA zoning
regulations. No conclusion has been reached regarding the
this location,
but itwould appea~ tc given adequate buffering
from the hostel parcel and 1-95.
Whether commercial zoning of this property would be
Consistent with comprehensive Plan policies for~the location
of and access tO commercial uses.
Commercial zoning of the subject parcel W°u~d be both
consistent and inconsistent with Comprehensive Plan policies
for the location of and access to commercial uses. The
Comprehensive Plan encourages the development of clustered
neighborhood and community commercial centers a~ arterial
and collector intersections. Without approval of the
~bando.nmen~ request, the proposed rezoning would be
lnconSzstent with this p~ticy as it would create a .4498 acre
C-3 zoned parcel that would be separated from theexisting
C-3 zoned district at the southeast corner of Boynton' Beach
Boulevard and 1-95 by the 50 foot wide right-of-way for N.W.
1st Avenue. If the r±ght-of-wav f~ ~ ~ ~
ij.~ ~=zuy is a~a/%~oned An connection with approval of
~s.r~zo~lng ~equest, t.hen the proposed,rezonin~ would be
~nslsten~ with this policy, as it would ~epresent a 179 foot
southerly extension C-3 zoned district
southeast, corner of Boulevard ~nd 1-95.
Commercial z( th~ property would also be both
consistent and
"development of policy of encouraging
uses where accessibility is
greatest and where impacts to residential uses are
minimized.., If the ~roDo~e~ -~--.
along with th? abandonment of N.W. tst Avenue, the 'rezoning
would be consistent with the accessibility provision as
access to the property would occur by way of the existing
hotel driveway onto ] Boulevard. If the request
for abandonment of N.W. l~t is denied, then the
proposed rezoning wo~ld be with the
accessibility provision, as ~ss to the property would
occur by--way of NiW'~'rtst'Avenue-and N~W. 4th Street, and it
would.not be-appropriat~ to_allow commercial, traf'fic~in a ....~..
residential-neighborhood-~ ........ .~ ....... :
Rega=dless Ofrthe"aband~nm~nt-issue, the proposed rezoning
would not be consistent with that portion of the Dulicy
~encouraging.'d~velopm~nt~of. commercial land uses ~wh~re
impacts~t61resldential"land uses'are'minimized, ~ it would
have an adverse impact on 'the environment in the Surrounding
neighborhood,.and this .problem would be_further exacerbated
in;that ~approvat.~.of-..the rezoning request'would set a
precedent-for-.furt-her.?commercial r~zcnings, as previously
If the~
with
hotel~
applicant. However,
the character of
impact
woul~ aTso Se~
the chang~in
this-
it is ~
~If~the-abandonment~application.cannot
:grezonin~fte~uest, commercial
inconsistent with
to location and access.
can be approved, however,
would be consistent
with respect to location and
of the existing
Boulevard as proposed by the
a significant change in
and would have a negative
uses. Rezoning this_~=operty
commercial zoning of the two
this property to the south, whi=h
'of this neighborhood. Whether
!is the ~nderlying issue in
It-is the Planning Department's
the character of the neighborhood from
a~d that the Droperty
zoning. Therefore,
Shoul~
C--3p
and that the
Use Plan to "Local
"Community Commercial, ,,
/bks
CC:
City Manager
Technical Review ~oard
Central File
Charles B. Bland
-ROAD ABANDONMENT
N.W. IST AVENUE - BOYNTON
A PARCEL OF LAND FOR ROAD ABANDONMENT LYING IN THE PLAT OF
BEVERLY HILLS ADD. NO. 3, AS RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 13, PAGE
OF THEPUBLtC' REk. ORDS~ OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA. SAID
LAND BEING DESCRIBED AS:
BOUNDED ON THE 'NORTH BY THE SOUTH LINE OF LOTS 31 THRU 36,
BLOCK 73; BOUNDED ON THE EAST BY THE NORTHERLY EXTENSION OF
THE EAST LINE OF BLOCK 72: BOUNDED ON THE 5OUTH BY THE NORTH
- 'L~U ,. BLOCK 72 AND BOUNDED ON THE ~EST BY ?H~_
LINE OF LOTS i iH~ ' ~'. ·
EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD I-':)5, ALL LAND LYING IN THE
SUBDIVISION OF BEVERLY HILLS ADD. NO. 3.
CONTAINING 0.17 ACRES: MORE OR LESS AND SUB3ECT TO EASEMENTS
AND RIGHTS OF %rAY OF RECORD.
~EPRESENTATION OF A SURVE-'YMADE
OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELI~~.
-' IN ~C~,J'""~DANCE WITH UNrI'ED STATES STANDARD.
SKF TCH OF PROPOSED
,ABANDONMENT
REGISTERED NO. ~
.a~[N',"jR ~S O~: RECORD: SURVEY SHOWN
=~ SURLY R~ 21H~.~ ~AT~NS ~ ~ ~E ~ ON N.O.S. DA~M
frO,AD
( PALM BEACH COUNTY FLORID`A)
T~ HOLIDAY INN has applied for a zoning chan~e in our n ighborhood. /~~
The' plans ealI for using the empty lot on NW First Avenue and Fourth Street as
LW you ~eoall, o~r .neighborhood association went to a hearing on May 8, 198~ when this
p~operty was owned by- the Arenado Family and they wanted to change the zonilag for a_
comdOm~nima complex.
At ~hat time, the Zoning. and Planning Board agreed with a~_~ ~uppOrted ou~ group and
VC~ED ia our favor to allow us to remain a SINGLE FAMILY RESZDENTAL area.
Oa~ feeling is that c.b~ging the present zoning to Comme~clal w~mtd be most detrimental
to oUr residental area and wish to protest this request for spot zoning.
WE, the undersig~e~ ask that you give consideration to our petition and we, as property
ovners, ask that ther~ NOT be a reversal of what the Zoning and Planning Board agreed to
back on Hay 8,' 1984.
STAFF CO~.~ITS
BLUMPLAT (LAKESIDE)
Building Department:
Planning · DeRart~ent:
Forester/Horticulturist:
Pr~LIM. I},~ARY PLAT
See attached memo
S~e attach, ed memo
a~ ~at~e to be set at $20,408.16/
-acre.~-for parks and recreation dedication
See. attached m~o
EXHIBIT H-1
Carmen Annunz±ato
Don Jaeger'~
~Chlef I~spector
Building Department
MEMORANDUM
'M~y 5, I987
Preliminary Plat Review:
BlumPtat
As a condition of -~el4-~ .... ~ . :~ '
· ~ ~a£y pict approval ·
should-be incorporated iht ~ , the ~ollowzmg comments
~ o ~.,e related documents by the
re'~ "--~---"~ w~n ~ne.u~ty zoning 0rdinanc~
~-~o wtt~e ~ne corner lot fo .... ~'~- ~' ~*~ or~znance
· , ~=~ ~ ulzrerent street than the
r~n~ng lo~s zn t~e bI~ckg then the front setback shall be
mazntalned on both streets.
2. Coaaaon areas must be landscaped in compliance withth~ City
Landscape Code with plans approved by the Community Appearance
~ BOard.
3. Sidewalks must be ramped at corners for handicapped accessibility.
4. Sidewalk details should indicate
gauge welded wire mesh. reinforcement with 6 x 6,
5, South Florida Water Management District approval is required fo~
the project. Finish floor elevations must comply with the minimums
established by the agency°
The applicant's prompt compliance with the preceding comments will
insure a timely permitting process.
} DJ:bh
~ E. Howell
XC:
E.
EXHIBIT H-2
M E M 0 R A N.D U M. _
May 7, 1987
.i~'~:.f i~'::; rJ~:, TO:. ~.,-2_Mr~ Jim Golden
....... Planning Department
FROM: Tom Clark
~ity ~ngineer t'.-: ; ......
RE:
Blum Blat '
--L_ _. ~ .:.L,. '- ~. '- .... -
Cozmnents- -.; .~ ~-~ ~.
1, The subdivfsion requirement that storm water run-off
....... ........... mustinto disckarge t~Lry':grassed _areas ;prior 6o disc.barge
retentiOn/detention ponds must be obseJ~ed,
'* :*-' :'-:' '- no *direc~ ~ischarge-~from gutter -into -inlets.
2. Catch basin detail is not aCceptable Use standard
D,O,T, T.~:>e C detail, '
3. A four to one slope is required for the lake bank to a
depth of two fee~, Grass sod should be shown for
stabilization.
4, A Water Management District perr~t may be roquired,
5. A note stating~ th:at street lights will be planned and
beinStalledadded tobyplans.F'P'& L. Co. s~bject to .City approval m~st
6. A legend should be added to the Pavin~ and Drainage plans
to Clarify the elevations Shown 'on the *'gutters.
7. Note No. 2, on Sheet 6 is not clear a_nd inoomplete.
8. See Bill Fluahing,s memo dated April 30~ -1987 included
herewi-lh ,.
TAC/ck
attachment
EXHIBIT H-3
Tom Cl~rk
Bi!'l Flushing
Blum Plat, Preliminary Plat
7.
8.
r_/.
be dedicated to the Home Owners Association°
The land description is inadequate- Plat book 7
page 20 'will nmt meet the intent of chapter 177. A
~etes and bounds description ~il! be required.
A re~erence is required to a sectimn corner or 1/4
The plat must be dated.
Areas for seals are required.
The section number d~es not appear in the title.
In ~he lower ~i.ght corner, "Sheet 2 of 8" should be
remove,d. '"
The ~enter ~in~ mn N.W. B Court should be shm~no
The deficiencies in the subject z~evelopm~ent plans are as
1. : Valley gu~t~rs shmutd~be interrupted every 25 feet~
with a header type section ~o allmw d~inage to
~low intm the swales. The gutters should not be
broken a~ the inlets.
with a header~ not a rally gutter as shown°
-.ITY OF B-mYNTON BEACH
EXHIBIT H-4
Sidewalks should be extended to the roadway
pavement at the intersections.
Sidewalks to he'.located mt the property line so as
to provide the ma×imum swale area.
The 15 inch opening in b~o~tom of catch basin should
be covered with a one half inch screeo mesh.
Stop signs, Stop Bars, and stree~ signs are
required. Show location and provide detail.
A dead end sign is required for NoW. 5th-~ve.
The !mke design does not comply to S.F.W.MoDo
requi~ements~ see 5.2.4.4 (p~ge
Drainage cmlculations .are required~
and 100 yr. storms.
A heade~ detail is required.
Bill Flushing
~ITY O~ BOYNTON BEACH
MEMORRNDUM
To.'
Carman Rnnunziato. Plarming Director._
~ohn R. Guid~y. Director oF Utiliti
Subject: TRBRevieu .- Blul~Rlat
can approve thi~ pr'oject, subject to the Follouing'conditions:
I. The existing right-oF-uay containing the I&" {orca main cannot be
abandoned until a nea .rtght-o{-uay is dedicated, and the replace-
Z. Loop the ~ater main through the entire cul-de-sac, ~ith appropri-
ate varying.
-3~ .~dd an additional manhole in N.~. gth Ct. to allou turns oF nO
less than B~degrees.
¢. The ~orce main connection is incorrect as shoun. The 16" ~orce
main must be extended along Old Boynton Road.
dmt
Peter Mazzella
EXHIBIT H-5
MEMORANDUM
CA~REN ANNUNZIATO ~
PLANNING DIRECTOR
KEVIN ~i B~T.T.AHAN
FOI~STER/HORTICULT~RI ST
MAY 6, 1987
WILt
· u.J,~, BLUM PROPERTY [LAKESIDe)
PRELIMINAR~ FLAT
THE APPLICANT MUST PROVIDE FOR A LTTTOPJ~L ZONE PLANTING PLAN FOR 'I'HE.
LAKE AREA. THIS PLAN SHOULD ADHERE TO THE REQUIR~W-ENTS OF THE
REVISED COM~P,E~EN$IVE PLAN MARCH 15, I987.
K~VIN J. ~ALLAHAN ~
KJH: ad
EXHIBIT H-6
STAFF CO_~/~NT S
QU~-NTUM PAP~K PLAT NO. 1-A
PRELIMINA~Ry PLAT
Building_ Department:
Engineering Department:
Planning Department:
Forester/Horticulturist:
See attached memo
S~e attache~ memo
To be distributed at meetL~g
Landsca~Ding in medians to
be reviewed'by the Co~uni~-
AppearanCe Board as a Dart
of. the master landscap~ Dla/~
for the ~ights-of-way wi~hi~
the Quantum Park Planned
Industrial Developmen=
See attac~ed memo
EXHIBIT I-1
MEMORANDUM
Carmen Annunziat o
Planning Director._
Don Jaeger "
Chief Inspector
Building Department '
May 5, 1987
~reIiminary Plat Approv~l:.
quancum Park Plat No. 1 A
As a condition of preliminary plat approval, the following comments
should be incorporated intol the related documents by the applicant:
1~ Landscaping on common property and within the rights-of-way
must comply with' City ordinances and be approved by the Co~=nity
Appearance Board.
2. S~dewalks must be ramped at intersections to allow for handicapped
ac'cessibility. -
The applicant's prompt compliance with the preceding comments will
insure a timely permitting process.
Don Jaeger
DJ:bh
XC: E. E. Howell
EXHIBIT I-2 : '
MEMORANDUM
May 6, 1987
TO: Mr. Jim Golden
........ Planning Department
FROM: Tom Clark
City Engineer
RE':~-~ 'Quant~um..Park; P!at 1-A
Comments :-
1. See Bill Flushing's memo of May 4, 1987.
TAC/ck
attachments
Tom Clark
EXHIBIT I-~
TO: Tom Cta~k
FROM: Bi!l F-lushing
R~: QuantUm Park Plat
The subject plat deficiencies are as follows:
1. The City o~ Boynton Beach name to appear in title.
2. No PRM's are sho~n.
5. No PCP's ar~ shown.
The deficiencies in the subject development plans are as
follows:
The planned turn--outs are being partly constructed
off--site, on unplatte~ land.
2f
Water and sewer mains are shown in the same 10 foot
Easement documents are required ,for the
water and
4. A Stop Bar is required on entrance road.
B; ~ 1 F{ushi~g
EXHIBIT I-4
CAP.~E~ ANNUNZIATO
PT_~ANNING DIRECTO~
KEVIN J~ FALLAHAN
FOREST.~ /HOP. TIC%~TURIST
MEMORANDUN
MAY 6, 1987
QUANTUM PARK PLAT NO.1-A
PRELIMINARY PLAT (ROADWAy}
THE ROAD R.O.W. ~ MEDIAN AREAS-SHOULD BE LANDSCAPED AND IRRIGATED BY '£~1~
APPLICANT SINCE THE ROAD IS PRIVATE. EVENTUALLY, AI~ OVERALL LANDSCAPE
PLAN FOR THE PROJECT ROADS SHOULD BE REVIEWED BY THE COMMUNITY APPEAR-
ANCE_~BOARD. IF POSSIBLE, THE CITY MAY WANT TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT TO
PROVIDE IRRIGATION AND /OR LANDSCAPE MATERIALS FOR THE MEDIAN AREA ON
CONGRESs AVEIqUE NEAR THE ENTRANCE TO THE PROJECT.
KJ~: ad
EXHIBIT I-5
To: Carmen flnnunzJa%o, PIanning
From~ ~ohn fi. Gu~dry, O~reCto~ ~n~
Da~e: May ?, I987
Sub, eot: TRB R~v~eu-.Quantum Park - Plat
Ue can approve this project. ~ubJect to the ~ol~oui~g conditions:
!. Water main~ must have a.m~n~mum
Z. U~e the ground ~ater ~ lake-~ed ~rr~oatton system ~o~ th~
medtens.
dmt
xc: Peter Nazze11~
EXHIBIT I-6
' 'STAFF COFI~W~NTS
QU~IT~ Fgl:~ S~ES FACILI'I~
-" SITE PLAN -
Building Department
Fire D~partr~ent::"
Engineering Department:
Police Department:
Ftanning Department:
Forester/Horticulturist:
See attached memo. ~
To be distributed at meeting.
See attached memo.
~To be distributed at meeting.
-Landscape plan to reflect
site plan with respect to
dumpster location and berms.
See attached memo.
EXHIBIT J
MEMORANDUM
Carmen Annunziato
Planning Director
May 6, 1987
Don Jaeger
Chief Imspector
Buildimg Department
Site Plan Approval:
Quantum Park Temporary
Sales Facility
As a condition of site plan approval, the following commerces should
be incorporated into the related documents by the applicant:
1. All plans submitted for public record, including site plans
prepared by a registered professional in the state of Florida,
must be signed and sealed.
2. The building-must be accessible to the handicapped.
3. Light standards must be designed to withstand a fastest wind speed
of 120 m.p.h, in accordance with Chapter 12 of the Standard Building
Code'.
~. Sitel'zghtzng' must be energy efficient and photo cell activated.
4. ~roposed signage should be submitted for community Appearance Board
review.
5. The black olive trees along N.W. 22nd Avenue should be moved back
out of the 15 foot utility easement
The following comments are for the applicant's~formation:
In order to facilitate the permitting process, the following documents
should be submitted in duplicate to the Building Department for review
at the time permits are desired:
1. Complete sets of the construction documents and ~lans, signed and
sealed by the relevant design professionals.
2. Soil borings with the soil engineer's recommendations for
obtaining the necessary soil bearing values.
3. Signed and sealed energy forms in compliance wit-h the State
Energy Code.
4. Health Department approval of the well and drain field.
5. South Florida Water Management District approval.
1. The City will require that a~.bond he posted for-the removal of
the building and parking area.
2. Astatement should be submitted indicating the proposed length Of
time this temporary facility will be on site.
3. The plat must be recorded prior to the issuance of building permits.
The applicant's prompt compliancewith the preceding comments will insure
a %imely permitting procesS.
DJ:bh
XC: E. E. HoWell
Don Ja~r
EXHIBIT J-1
MEMORANDUM
May 7, 1987
TO:
FROM:
RE:
Mr. Jim Golde~
Planning Department
Tom Clark
City Engineer
Quantum Temporary Sales Facility
Comments:-
1. Additional information is required prior to getting
a building permit for this construction as follows:
(a) Radius for roadway turnout at N.W. 22nd Ave.
(b) Lighting
(c) A cross-section showing the Parking lot construction
including the decorative stone.
TAC/ck
Tom Clark
EXHIBI% J-2
~ ANSVd~Z IATO
PLANNING DIRECTOR
MEM ORANDUM
· ,',T. MAY 6, 1987
FORESTER/HORTIC~3LTURIST
THE LANDSCAPE PLAN-FOR THIS PROJEC~ IS ADEQUATE EXCEPT:
QUANTUM PARK TEMPORAR~ SALES
FACILITY -- SITE PLAN
r
1. T~- H~DGE MATERIAL SCREENING THE PARKING LOT FROM iTW 22n_~d AVENUE
MUST BE 36" HEIGHT AT TIME OF PLANTING.
ALL AREAS ON T~fE CLF-2LRED SITE WHICH ARE NOT LANDSCAPED MUST BE
Sm'~nED AND IRRIGATED TO PREVENT SAN/) BLOWING. THE GRASS -SEED
SHOULD BE COMPATABLE WITH THE SS~ROUNDIMG GRASS SPECIES.
KJfI: ad
EXHIBIT J-3
EAST t22 FEET OF LOT 21 IN BLOCK "A".-OF PENCE SUBDIVISION NO. 1,
IN THE TOWN OF BOYNTON, FLORIDA, ~.AS DE'CRUiSED IN.PLAT BOOK 1,
PAGE 33, IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT IN. AND
FOR SAID COUNTY, LESS THE EAST ]8. FEET AND LESS A STRIP OF LAND
OVER, THROUGH AND ACROSS LOT 21 SAID STRIP OF LAND LYING WESTERLY
OB', ADJACENT TO, AND CONTIGUOUS WITH TIlE F~IMTING. WEST RIGtIT OF
WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 5 AND MEASURING 0.64 OF A FOOT ALONG THE
NORTt{ LINE OF SAID LOT' 21 AND' 0~56 OF A F~K~T ALONG T~E SOUTH' LINE
OF SAID LOT. 23.,. .
ALSO: ~ '
EAST 122 FEET OF LOT 20, IN BLOCK "A" OF PENCE SUBDIVISIO-~-N-d~-~ %,
-IN THE TOWN OF BOYNTON, FLORIDA, AS DESCRIBED IN P~AT BOOK l,
PAGE 33, 1N THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF T~E CIRCUIT COURT IN AND
'-FOR SAID COUNTY, LESS THE EAST ]8 FEET AWD LESS A STRIP OF LAND
OVER, TttROUGH, AND ACROSS LOT' 20, SAID STRIP OF ~A~D LYING
WESTERLY OF, ADJACENT OT, AND CONTIGUOUS WITH' THE EXISTING'WEST
RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF STATE ROAD 5 AND MEASURING 0.7~ OF A FOOT
ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT 20¢ AND 0-64 OF A FOOT ALONG.THE
SOUTh{ LINE OF SAID. ~OT 20. . .
EXHIBIT K
STAFF COMMENTS
SMITH OFFICE BUILDING
SIT~- PLAN
Building Depar,tment:
Engineer~Department:
Utilities Department:
Police Department:
Public Works Department:
planning Department:
Forester/Horticulturist:
See attached memo.
See attached memo.
To be distributed at meeting.
-Sign needs to be moved back
so it will not obscure vision in
the s~tdistance area.
If dumpster gates are provided
then drop bars will be required.
Site plan to accurately reflect
pavement edge on southeast corner
of survey.
See attached memo.
EXHIBIT L-1
MEMORANDUM
Carmen Annunziato
Planning Director
May 6, 1987
Don Jaeger
Chief Inspector
Building Department
Site Plan Approval:
Smith Offic~ Building
As a condition of site plan approval, the following comments should
he incorporated into the related documents by the applicant?
1. The proposed structure shows a roof overhang encroaching into
the rear 20 foot setback area. This is not permitted by the
City Zoning Code.
2. Construction:plans indicate a six inch step up into the building.
Both offices must be accessible to the handicapped from the
parking area.
3. The survey indicates an existing finish floor elevation of 9.08
feet while construction documents show the proposed elevation
to be 8.8 feet. Please correct this discrepancy.
4. A coping beam is required for the dumpster enclosure.
~. The free-standing sign encroaches into the required sight area
at the corner of S.E. 5th Avenue and So.. Federal Highway.
The following comments are for the applicant's information:
In order to facilitate the permitting process, the following documents
should be submitted in duplicate to the Building Department for review
at the time permits are desired:
2.
3.
NOTES:
1.
2.
Complete sets of the construction documents and plans,
sealed by the relevant design professionals.
Soil borings with the soil engineer's recommendations
obtaining the necessary soil bearing values.
Signed and sealed energy forms in compliance with the
Energy Code.
D.O.T. turn ouu permit for work in the Federal
signed and
for
State
Highway right-of-way.
Existing fuel tanks must be removed prior to construction.
Separate permits are required for paving, signs and site
lighting.
The applicant's prompt compliance with the preceding comments will
insure a timely permitting process.
DJ:bh
XC: E. E. Howell
Don Jaeger~
EXHIBIT L-2
MEMORANDUM .....
.......................... Planning Department ...................
May 6, 1987
-FROM:- Tom-Clark
City ~ -- - ~ng~neer ~ -
RE.-... r~Smith Of-~&ce~B.u. itdin~-
~ Co~ents: ~
.j~.:~,_ D~9~gse_~a$cu~gns ass~e sand sub-soil. This
....... '.. sh9¢~¢::~ ~y~[if~d vi~ "6~¢Si~}-ih~e~gat~o~.'
~2 ~ils~ ~e~%~' are req~ire~' fo~ the dry ponding
areas
3. The handicap r~p should be shown in'~he Paving ~nd
Drainage drawing and a detail provided.
4. The new sidewalk must be raised 8 inches ~ove the
pavement and must conn~t to the sidewalk on U.S.
5. A '~triping detail is required for parking stalls.
6. Lighting for parking lot must meet code requirements.
What does Al,3 mean? Show lighting i~tensity on plan.
7. Traffi~ control devices to. comply withL.MUTCD.
8. Based on pavement elevations shown,.it appears that
water will be trapped within paved areas.
TAC/ck
Tom
EXHIBI%
CARMEN ANNUStZ IATO
PLANNING' DIRECTOR
FORESTER / HORTICULTURIST
MEMORANDUM
MAY 6, 1987
SMITH OFFICE BUILDING
SITE PLAN
THE FOLLOWING IT~qS SHOULD BE ADDRESSED BY THE APPLICANT RELATIVE TO THE
LANDSCAPE PLAN.
TREES DESIGNATED TO HAVE A CLEAR TRUNK OF 6' MUST BE LARGER THAN
8 ' .OVERALL HEIGHT.
2. F~FTY P~RCENT OF THE TREES MUST BE NATIVE SPECIES.
3. THERE SHOULD BE FOUNDATION LA/~DSCAPING PROVIDED AROUND THE BUILDING.
4. THE DUM~STER IS SHOWN PROTRUDING INTO THE 5' LANDSCAI:E STP~IP WHICH IS
PROHIBITED.
~K~IN J. H~LAH~/g ~
IfJ~: ad
EXHIBIT
MEMORANOUM
To:
Oa~ec
Subject:
Carmen, Rnnunztato, Planning Oirector~ [.v/
TRB Review --Smith Office Building
~e can approve this project subject to the foilowing changes to thw
plans: _
1. Install a cleanout at the property line if.none exists,
Z. Shou ~11 ~ire hydrants ~ithin Z~ ~eet of the building. Frovide
~dditionat hydrant if required.
ge reco~end the water service be relocsted northuard to the land-
scaped area.~ This department will be uilling to tap the asbestos
cement pipe if the developer egreea to this relocation and provides
excavation plus restoration.
Note that City uater is not to be used for irrigation.
xc: Peter Mazzella
EXHIBIT
STAFF COMMENTS
HUNTERS R%~ GUARDEOUSE
SITE PLAN
Building Department:
utilities Department:
Planning Department:
See attached memo.
To be distributed at meeting.
A parking area°is to be provided
for guardhouse employees and
security vehicles similar to
that which has been provided for
the guard house at the south
entrance.
EXHIBIT M-1
Carmen Annunziat o
Plann~ng Director
D~
ding ~6gar tmeng ........
MEMORANDUM
1987
FILE
· ,,~ SiCa:~Ian Approval:-
Hunters Run Guardhouse
As a condition of site plan approvaI,z~he following -comments'should
be incorporated into the related documen~s.~y th~applicant~.-.~_u:
The structure must b.e handicapped accessible.
2. An automatic sprinkler system must be provided for landscape
material.
3. A parking area must be provided for employee parking.
4. Elevations of the road crown for Summit Drive,must be provided.
The. following comments are for the ~pplicant's information:
In order to facilitate the permitting process, the following documents
should be submitted in duplicate to the Building Department for review
at the time permits are desired:
1. Details of the proposed automatic gates.
2. Energy calculations in compliance with the State Energy Code if
the proposed structure is to be-heated or cooled.
3. Complete sets of construction plans and documents, signed and
sealed by the relevant design professionals.
The applicant's prompt compliance with the preceding
insure a timely permitting process.
comments will
Don Jae er
DJ:bh
XC: E. E. Howell
EXHIBIT M-2
- MEMOR~NOUN
From:
Oa~e:
Carmen.~nnunziato, Planning Director
John A. 6uidr¥, Director o{
Hay ?, 1987
Sub3ec~: TRB Revie~J - Hun~er'~ Run Guard Building
We can approve this project, subject ~o the following conditions:
1. Provid~ details on the sanitary and w~ter services.
The sanitary service ~lI1 .be private, and extend ~o ~he bottom
o~ the manhole.
Peter Mazzella
EXHIBZT M-3
ST-AFF COMMENTS
HU~TERS RUN TRACT K - T~E OAKS
~'' '~ ..... SITE PLAN MODIFICATION
Buitd~.'.~g ~D~ar'~.~ ~t~..~ i. ~ ..... See ~ttached memo.
Utili~'~.'D~a~t~ent:~ ~" NO construction is
......... ~ ..... ~.- easements.
allowed in
EXHIBIT N-Z
MEMORANDUM
Carmen Annunziato
Planning Direct. or
Don Jaeger
Chief Inspector
Building Department
May 5, 1987
Site Plan Modification:
Hunters Run Tract K - The Oaks
(Enclosures/Porches)
As a condition of site plan approval, the following comments should
be incorporated into the related documents by the applicant:
1. Ail plans submitted for public record, including site plans
prepared by a registered professional in the state of Florida,
muse be signed and sealed.
2. Approval of this modification by the Community Appearance Board
requires the submittal of typical building elevations for the
Board's review.
The following comments are for the applicant's information:
1.
Additions and porches for these structures n~st comply with Table
600 of the 1985 Edition of the Standard Building Code for distance
between buildings as it relates to the fire rating of exterior
walls and the percent of allowable openings. This section applies
to both structures, the proposed and the existing.
Building permits'are required for construction of all enclosures,
porches, walls, trellises and patios.
Structures cannot encroach into platted easements.
The applicant's prompt compliance with the preceding comments will
insure a timely permitting process.
DJ:bh
XC: E. E. Howell
EXHIBIT N-2
From:
Da~e:
Carmen .~nnunziato, Planning Director
John R. Guidry. Director o; Ut~litie~
May ?, 1987
Sub~ec~: TRB Revie~ - ~unter'~ Run'Guard Building
Qe can approve ~hts pro~ect, sub~ect to the roliou~ng conditions:
1. Provide details on ~he s~ni~ary and uater services.
The sanitary service uill be private, and extend to the bottom
o~ the
EXHIBIT N-}
S~AFF COMFORTS
HUNTERS RUN TRACT L - THE WOODS
~ ~"- Si~E PLAN MODIFICATION
Building Department,.-
Plannzng Department:
See attached memo.
No construction will be allowed
in easements.
Unit type label IV needs to be
changed to VI on the site plan.
EXHIBIT 0-t
Carmen Ar~aunzzato
Planning DireCtor
Chief
. f ~:.~.'i-J ....
.... .MiEMO RAN D U M
May 5, 198,7
-c'='e '"~;~z':'E[~tevz~'~ian Modification:
.... Huntars. hun .?~ract L -~ ~e Woods
As condition of site plan approval,.--the-fo~I6~ing c'om~,ents should
be incorporated into the related documents by the applicant:
1. All plans submitted for public record, including site plans
prepared by a registered professional in the state of Florida,
~ust be signed and s~aled..
App~ova~ of this modification by the Community Appearance Board
requires the submittal of typical building elevations for the
Board's review.
The following comments are for the aDDlicant's ~{ormation:
1. Additions and porches for these structures must comply with Table
600 of the 1985 Edition of the Standard Building Code for distance
between buildings as it relates to the fire rating of exterior
walls and the p~rcent of allowable openings. This section applies
to both structures, the proposed and the existing.
Building permits are required for construction of all enclosures,
porches, walls, trellises and patios.
3. Structures cannot encroach into platted easements.
The applicant's prompt compliance with the preceding comments will
insure a timely permitting process.
DJ:bh
XC: E. E. Howell
Don Jaege%
EXHIBIT 0-2
MEMORANDUM
MAY 4, 1987
TO: CARF~EN $. ANNUNZ!ATO, PLANNING DIRECTOR
FROM: JAMES J. G~LDEN, SENIOR CITY PLAbFNER
RE: ~A¥ CARE CENTER A~ QUANTUM PARK
With respect to the letter submitted byGeor~e Zimmerman, Vice
President of Development for Deutsch-Ireland Properties,
of a day care center use at'the Quantu~Park
of 115 of the Comprehensive Plan Evaluation
notes the increasing need for day care
centers,city-wide. It can be anticipated that the future
projected emploFmentfor the Quantum Park development will
substantially increase the need for such a facility on-site.
zoning ¢
Currently, day care centers are listed-as a permitted use,
subject t? Conditional Use Approval, in the following zon~ ....
districts° R-2'] R~3, C-1~ C-2, C.3, C-4, and CBD. Day care
centers are i~ the PCD zoning category, and are
not' Approval if shown on the Master
Plan require~ as part of the ~submismion for rezoning t-o PCD.
Based on the above, it~ recommended that day care centers be
listedas an.~ cf Commerce PI/),
=, consistent with similar
'multi-family, and commercial
the day care center use should
designated on the Mas~er Plan for
an~shoUtd be restricted from
These
selection and design.
JJG: ro
cc Central File
SAn~ Jf GOLDEN
· EXHIBIT P-1
MEMORANDUM
5 May 1987
FROM:
RE:
Chairman and Members
Planning and Zoning Board
Carmen S. Annunziato, Planning Director:
Day. Care Centers at Quantum Park PID ....
Attached is a Memorandum from Senior Planner, Jim Golden
concerning use approval for day care centers atthe Quantum Park
of commerce Planned Industrial Development. With respect to Mr.
Golden's Memorandum, it is recommended that day care centers be
included on the list of permitted uses, subject to Conditional
Use approval, and be confined to those parcels designated on the
Master Plan for office, commercial or club uses~
y
CARMEN S. ~NUNZIATO
/bks
Attachment
EXHIBIT P-2