Loading...
Minutes 03-10-87MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING HELD IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, PLORIDA, TUESDAY, MARCH 10, 1987 AT 7:30 P. M. PRESENT Walter "Mart¥" Trauger, Chairman Garry Winter, Vice Chairman Marilyn Huckle John Pagliarulo Simon Ryder Robert Wandelt William Schultz, Alternate ABSENT Leonard Mann, Alternate (Excused) Carmen Annunziatot Director of Planning Jim Golden, Assistant City Planner Chairman Trauger called the meeting to order at 7:30 P. M., recognized the presence in the audience of Vice Mayor Carl zimmerman, Councilman Ezell Hester, and Owen Anderson, Executive Vice President of the Greater Boynton Beach Chamber of Commerce. He introduced the Board Members, Mr. Annunziato, Mr. Golden, and the Recording Secretary, and then requested that Mr. Schultz leave the audience and sit with the Board. MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 10, 1987 Mrs. Buckle moved to approve the minutes as submitted, seconded by Mr. Wandelt. Motion carried 7-0. ANNOUNCEMENTS None. COM/~UNICATIONS None. OLD BUSINESS Chairman Trauger pointed out that the preliminary plat and site plan of Boynton Lakes Plaza were tabled at the meet- ing of February 10, 1987. The Board concurred with his suggestion to leave these items on the table until a repre- sentative of Boynton Lakes Plaza could arrive at the meeting. See page 11. MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 NEW BUSINESS A. PUBLIC HEARING PARKING LOT VARIANCE Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Legal Description: Description: Cusimano Office Building Cape International, Inc. Margaret Jo Voltz South Seacrest Boulevard Avenue, southeast corner at S. E. 23rd Lot 1, HIGH POINT, a subdivision in the City of Boynton Beach, according to the plat thereof on file in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Courtr in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, recorded in Plat Book 23, Page 225. Request for relief from Section 5-141 (g) (3) ~Dri:veways'' of the Parking Lot ReguIations Mr. Golden showed the location of the subject parcel on the overlay and said S. E. 23rd Avenue and Golf Road are to the north, and Seacrest Boulevard is on the west side. The applicant was requesting two driveways: One onto S. E. 23rd Avenue at the northeast corner, and one onto Seacrest Boule- vard at the southwest corner. The Technical Review Board (TRB) recommended that the variance be approved in par~ and denied in part for the reasons set forth in Mr. Annunziato's memo of March 4, 1987, addressed to the Board. A copy of said memo is attached to the original copy of these minutes in the City Clerk's Office as Addendum A. Angel Goitia, Architect, Cape International, Inc., 2137 10th Avenue North, Lake Worth, Florida, asked for the Board's support. In looking at the site, he saw a potential problem at the outset in terms of identifying the zoning criteria of the 180 feet. It was clear they did not have it. Mr. Goitia stressed that the potential problem was the recommendation of the TRB that they eliminate the Seacrest Boulevard driveway. He stated the applicant was well aware of the potential conflict of cars coming across. In all fairness, Mr. Goitia said traffic signs, as well as traffic markings on the road are not enough for people, and they - 2 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 come across anyhow, even though it is a left turn lane at that point. He added that they are within 100 feet of a clearly designated left turn lane, and the markings will be a double line. If they cross that double line, it would be grounds for a moving violation. Mr. Goitia did not deny the TRB's point that a potential conflict was there but contended and offered as a consider- ation the fact that a single entrance would create more of a problem at that one area than the two entrances working together in tandem. Mr. Goitia offered a second consideration as to why the Seacrest Boulevard driveway could be looked at as a possi- bility to provide access to and from the site, which was a channelization of that driveway. He had prepared a small sketch to show the Members in graphic what he was referring to. Mr. Go~ta stressed that it would be difficult for a person coming south to turn in, and he said the less traffic- able entrance would provide for relief to the S. E. 23rd Avenue driveway. Mr. Goitia offered a right turn in and a right turn out. Therefore, those vehicles would be alleviating a potential traffic conflict. Mr. Ryder asked whether Mr. Goitia was certain nobody would try to make a left turn in at Seacrest, and he pointed out that the possibility is there for people going southbound to make a left turn. Mr. Goitia showed his sketch and explained that they will have curbing. Mr. Ryder said that will not stop the left turns. Mr. Goitia responded that it is a 15 foot wide exit and added that there are certain things he can and cannot do. Mr. Ryder pointed out that they had so many movements one place in contrast to another place, explained the problems, and said this would only make it worse. He emphasized that this is a problem corner now. If you are coming west and want to go south, you cannot because there ~s no access for a right turn. The problem is there right now, so this constituted quite a problem. Mr. Ryder continued that the timing is such that there is a backup and by the time you get to the corner, you cannot go any further. He did not see Mr. Goitia's proposal as any possible, reasonable solution because it was possible for people to make a left turn. Chairman Trauger asked how they get in there now. Mr. Goitia replied that now, it is a single family residence with - 3 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 a totally illegal curb cut. Mr. Ryder drew attention to the fact that it is also very close to the crosswalk going across the Boulevard. Mr. Schultz thought the turn the TRB approved was worse than the one they did not approve. He makes that turn coming west and going south three or four times a day. If they have an exit on S. E. 23rd Avenue, the whole thing will be messed up. They would have a two lane road with three lanes trying to go on it (one going east, two going west, one heading south, and 6ow they want to exit there). Mr. Ryder replied that they not only want to exit there, they also want to enter there. Mr. Schultz really thought the diffi- culty was worse in the solution the TRB gave than in the opposite that they denied. Mr. Goitia stated that was precisely his concern when he saw the TRB's recommendation of part approval and part denial. He thought they really needed to look at the two working as a tandem and as a channel driveway. Mr. Goitia was concerned also about this being the only driveway. He wanted to discuss what he had seen there, how he saw traffic patterns develop, and offer his views. Mrs. Huckle noticed there was not too much detail in the presentation, and she asked what size building they were talking about. Mr. Goitia answered that it will be approxi- mately an 8,800 square foot professional office building with under building parking. Mrs. Huckle wondered how many physicians' offices would be in the building, and she questioned whether it was to be a clinic. When the application was first filed, Mr. Goitia said two possibilities were included. They are not very far from Bethesda Hospital, and the owner was looking at that market as a potential target. Mrs. Huckle did not think it could result in a very large facility because the lot is small, and she knew the house would be moved out. Mrs. Huckle asked how much traffic was involved. Mr. Annunziato answered, "100 trips a day." Mr. Wandelt wanted to see what was going in there first before making any recommendation. Mrs. Huckle and Chairman Trauger agreed. Mrs. Huckle questioned whether they were talking about C-1 zoning. Mr. Annunziato answered affirmatively. Mr. Wandelt agreed with Mrs. Buckle that this was "awful sketchy" for the Board to make a decision. - 4 - MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 Mr. Annunziato explained that the problem the applicant has is that the site plan might cost a sizable amount of money, and the applicant will not know how the Board will react to the variance request. The variance request may end up dic- tating the configuration of the building and dictating what the site plan will look like. Mr. Annunziato elaborated. Mr. Schultz asked what the m~asurements were from the inter- section, going south, and how close the applicant was to being legal. Mr. Annunziato answered that it was about 176 feet, ~re or less, from the intersection of rights-of-way lines to the applicant's south property line on Seacrest Boulevard. The driveway ne app±lcant was proposing was 113 feet from the intersection. Mr. Schultz suggested the applicant could cut a.parking space to 2½ feet, and they w~uld be closer to being a l~gal driveway on Seacrest Boulevard. He was suggesting they close S. E. 23rd Avenue. Mr. Annunziato thought there was an understanding that the further away you get from an intersection, the safer it is. The problem with the driveway on S. E. 23rd Avenue is that southbound traffic on Seacrest Boulevard will be in direct conflict with northbound traffic on S. E. 23rd Avenue in the turn lane, and ther~ Was no way to overcome that. Mr. Schul~z emphasized that they w~ould be in conflict with traffic on S. E. 23rd~Avenue to the southbound turning. Mr. Annunziato did not think they would be in conflict, but would just be waiting in the turning lane. Mr. Schultz said he would have a right turn only exit. Mr. Ryder advised that it would not work. Chairman Trauger interjected that the Members were not to be Engineers tonight and redesign driveways. They should either accept or deny what they had. Chairman Trauger asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of the request. There was no response. Chairman Trauger asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition to the request. There was no response. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Mr. Ryder moved to accept the recommendation of the TRB and approve the request for variance, as outlined in Mr. Annunziato's memo of March 4, 1987. Vice Chairman Winter seconded the motion. Mrs. Huckle stated that she would not want to vote in favor of the motion or the applicant's request without additional - 5 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 information as to the circulation and some sort of site plan, so they would know what they are trying to get into to address. She was not for any motion in favor of the project. Mr. Pagliarulo and Mr. Schultz felt the same. A vote was taken on the motion, and the vote was 3-4. Mr. Pagliarulo, Mrs. Huckle, Mr. Schultz, and Chairman Trauger opposed the motion. The variance was DENIED and was not granted. Stephen R. Cusimano, 1467 S. W. 25th Place, Unit D, asked how they could give a site plan when they do not know which way there driveways will be going. It was "kind of impossible" to do. Mr. Cusimano said they are going to spend thousands of dollars to design a building. Mr. Pagliarulo did not thiuk they had to design a building. The Board was asking for some site work and site information. Mr. Annunziato advised it may not be necessary for them to complete a site plan for a site plan application. He thought perhaps they could give the Board enough information for the Board to know how they think the building will lay out on the land, given the configuration of driveways they want. Mr. Annunziato suggested that perhaps they should employ a Traffic Engineer to estimate the impact on the adjoining rights-of-way. He thought that information would help the Board make a decision. Mr. Cusimano asked if they could get some assistance from the City. Right now, they have a footprint of the building on the site. Mr. Annunziato replied that the City can only tell the applicant what the Ordinances are but cannot assist them in the design. Tom Scott asked the Board to table this until the next meeting, so they could prepare additional information. Mr. Annunziato advised that the motion was denied, and that was final action. Mrs. Huckle interjected that the applicants could come back with another presentation and asked them to understand that the Board would want more information on such an odd shaped lot and important intersection. Mr. Annunziato advised that it would require another appli- cation. Mrs. Huckle asked whether there would be a waiting period. Mr. Annunziato answered that it would have to be advertised. He explained that the motion to approve the variance was denied. Failure to approve the motion resulted in a denial of the applicant's request for variance. At this point, there was nothing more to talk about° - 6 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 Mr. Cusimano remarked that they will have to spend $400 more on another application. Mr. Scott interjected that they requested a variance, and the TRB suggested some changes to that. There was a motion to accept the TRB's recommendations, which was denied, but the basic variance request was not voted on. Chairman Trauger advised that the variance was denied. The Board considered the request of the TRB and denied the variance. Based on the additional information that was requested, Mr. Goitia said he met with the Assistant Planner when they made the application for the TRB and the variance proceeding. At that t~me~ he was told to provide this level of information. Mr. Golti~ drew the Board's attention to an outline of the building, which the Members had seen, and he asked what additional information they were looking for in terms of a facility on the site. Mr. Goitia added that the building does no~ touch the ground but is on columns. He worked with the facility for the parking to blend with that underneath. Mr. Goitia could identify with what Mr. Annunziato mentioned as to car trips, etc. but wondered what additional informa- tion the Board wanted. Chairman Trauger replied that the Board wa~ looking for the intensity of the use, such as the number of offices, makeup of 'staff, etc. Mrs. Huckle thought the Board made a motion; the applicant received some direction; and if they wanted further informa- tion, they Should go to the Building Department. Mr. Pagliarulo stated that they may have been in error in the motion. He recalled that the motion was for approval of the staff's recommendation that the variance be approved in part and denied in part. However, Mr. Pagliarulo wondered what the Board did with the applicant's request. Chairman Trauger answered that the Board denied it. Mr. Pagliarulo argued that there was no motion to deny the initial request for relief, which the Board did deny. ~owever, he thought they still had a loophole. Chairman Trauger advised that they did not, and he wished to continue with the agenda. There was discussion about the number of stories and the height of the building. Mr. Goitia said it will be similar to the building on Boynton Beach Boulevard, east of 1-95. - 7 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 B. SUBDIVISIONS PRELIMINARY PLAT Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Legal Description: Description: Cross Creek Centre Kevin McGinley Land Research Management, Inc. Steven Rhodes, Trustee D. R. Associates West Boynton Beach Boulevard at L.W.D.D. E-4 Canal, northwest corner See Addendum B attached to the original copy of these minutes in the Office of the City Clerk Request for the approval of the construction plans and preliminary plat which provides for the construction of infrastructure improvements to serve a 35,000 sqaare foot retail-office complex in connection with a previously approved Planned Commercial Development (PCD) Mr. Golden informed the Members that to the west is the Villager Shopping Center; to the north is the L-24 Canal; to the east is the E-4 Canal, and to the south is West Boynton Beach Boulevard. The property was recently rezoned from R-3 to PCD by the City Council. The TRB recommended approval of the site, subject to staff comments attached to the original copy of these minutes as C-1 through C-6. Eugene Lawrence, Architect, of The Lawrence Group, Chartered Architects and Planners, 205 Worth Avenue, Palm Beach, Florida 33480, told the Members the Engineer was present if they had any questions. The owner of the property was also present. Mr. Ryder asked why the City needed this and expressed that it has hard for him to give it his blessing. Mrs. Huckle moved to approve the construction plans and preliminary plat, seconded by Mr. Schultz. Motion carried 6-1. Mr. Ryder voted against the motion. C. SITE PLAN Project Name: Agent: Owner: Cross Creek Centre Kevin McGinley Land Research Management, Steven Rhodes, Trustee D. R. Associates Inc. - 8 - MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 Location: Legal Description: Description: West Boynton Beach Boulevard at L.W.D.D. E-4 Canal, northwest corner See Addendum B attached to the original copy of these minutes in the Office of the City Clerk Request for site plan approval to construct a 35,000 square foot PCD consist- ing of a 20,000 square foot commercial building and a 15,000 square foot office building on 4.715 acres Mr. Golden said the approved master plan in connection with the rezoning provided for the commercial building and office building. The proposed site plan conforms to the master plan. The row of parking stalls in front of the commercial building has been removed, and parking has been provided along the front and sides of the buildings. Mr. Golden continued by saying driveways are provided onto Boynton Beach Boulevard, across from existing curb cuts, and there is a left turn stacking lane at both curb cuts to provide for the left turn movement. There is also a proposed connection to the Villager parking lot to the west. The architecture and design of the center were similar, so Mr. Golden just showed the commercial building. The appli- cant applied for a metal and glass store front with a stucco fascia and wood and stucco trim, highlighted by a fabric awning. Mr. Golden said the proposed color scheme is Irish Linen for the parapet and stucco fascia; White Opal for the stucco trim; Driftwood Gray stained for the wood trim; and yellow for the fabric awning. From this color scheme, it seemed the building would stand out in relation to surrounding structures, and Mr. Golden suggested it may be something the Board will want to consider. The TRB recommended approval, subject to staff comments. Chairman Trauqer asked if Mr. Golden was inferring this would be in bright colors, which would make the adjacent buildings rather drab. Mr. Golden replied that the Villager is to the west; to the south, across Boynton Beach Boulevard, are the Leisureville condos, which are white stucco. To the rear are single family homes in Venetian Isle. Mr. Schultz drew attention to the plan of the building and noticed they put a mansard on both sides and in the front of - 9 - MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 it, but he said the people living behind the building will get the garbage, trash, sound of the air conditioners, and everything else. Mr. Schultz moved that there had to be a form of screening on the back side of the building as high as the highest compressor, air conditioner, etc. that they are going to put on the roof. Mr. Lawrence pointed out that there are three sections in which the air conditioning units will be placed but emphasized that they will have absolutely no problem stipulating that there will be a one to one screen on the north side of the building. He called attention to a six foot high wall with planting in front of it all the way down the north side of the building. Mr. Schultz asked, "What if you get a butcher market in there, and they start putting refrigeration units on the roof?" He wanted something in the minutes which would say the screening will be on a one to one to the highest thing put on the roof. Mr. Lawrence agreed with Mr. Schultz 100% and wanted to also see that, as a matter of record. Mr. Lawrence said there was apparently no stipulation in the PCD Ordinance for signage, and he read comment %9 from the Building Department's memo and comment %2 from the Planning Department. (See Addendum D attached to the original copy of these minutes.) Mr. Lawrence stated that they were more than willing to submit the signage to the City, but since there are no tenants yet, there is no way they can submit signs for those tenants in the normal procedure. As another alternative, he said they would be glad to stipu- late to any established sign criteria the Board would like. Mr. Lawrence stressed that they were more than willing to do anything the Board would like. However, there was no way they could say to the Community Appearance Board (CAB) immediately and then to the City Council that these are the s~gns, because they do not know who the people will be. They have designed the signs for the Centre. Mr. Annunziato thought the applicant would have to detail a sign area and sign material as a standard in connection with the site signage and then come back with a site plan modifi- cation, because the City does not have regulations for sign- age in a PCD. He explained that the City is not asking the applicant to come back every time an office changes, and he gave examples. Chairman Trauger asked Mr. Lawrence if that was all right. Mr. Lawrence answered affirmatively and concurred with all other staff comments. - 10 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 Mr. Schultz moved to approve the site plan, subject to staff comments and his recommendation re screening. He also agreed to add that the CAB should look at the colors for the aesthetic appearance, as suggested by Mrs. Huckle. Mr. Pagliarulo seconded the motion, and the motion carried 6-1. Mr. Ryder voted against the motion. OLD BUSINESS A. PRELIMINARY PLAT Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Boynton Lakes Plaza (Tabled 2/10/87) Reikenis and Associafes Edge Equities, Inc. North Congress Avenue at Hypoluxo Road, southeast corner Request for the approval of the construction plans and preliminary plat which provides for the construction of infrastructure improvements to serve a 137,833 square foot shopping center Mrs. Huckle moved, seconded by Mr. Pagliarulo, to remove this item from the table. Motion carried 7-0. Mr. Golden said to the west is Congress Avenue; to the north is Hypoluxo Road; to the east is Boynton Lakes Boule- vard; and to the south is Plaza Lane. Meadows Square Shopping Center is across the street, to the west. Mr. Golden told the members this was a revised preliminary plat. The original site plan was approved in March 1985, and the property was sold to Edge Equities~ Inc. The TRB recommended approval, subject to staff comments. Mr. Ryder questioned whether Plaza Lane coincides with the entrance to Meadows Square Shopping Center. Mr. Golden answered that it does, and he confirmed that it is in direct line with the entrance. Mr. Ryder asked what the City knows about the out parcel. Mr. Golden believed it was owned by Lennar. As far as he knew, there was still no intent to do anything with that property. Mr. Ryder asked what specific changes there were now from the original submission. Mr. Golden replied that it was basically an inside plan. With the new developer, they essentially designed a new site plan of the property. Mr. Ryder questioned whether the movie houses had been changed. - 11 - MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 Mr. Golden answered that they were originally going to put in a supermarket, but the supermarket had some difficulty. He was not sure whether it was the same cinema or not. Craig Livingston, Architect, Siteworks Architects & Planners, Inc., 1301 North Congress Avenue, Suite 9320, Boynton Beach, Florida 33435, read the staff comments and had no problems with them. Mr. Pagliaruto moved to approve the construction plans and preliminary plat, subject to staff comments attached to the original copy of these minutes in the City Clerk's Office as Addendum-E. Mr. Schultz seconded the motion, and the motion carried 7-0. B. SITE PLAN Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Boynton Lakes Plaza (Tabled 2/10/87) Siteworks Architects ~and Planners, Inc. Edge Equities, Inc. North Congress Avenue at Hypoluxo Road, southeast corner Request for site plan approval to construct a 137,833 square foot shopping center including an eight screen (1,820 seat) cinema with a shared parking allocation, an 18,952 square foot nursery with an out- door storage area, a junior anchor store, a drugstore, and two leased outparcels on 11.63 acres Vice Chairman Winter moved to take this item off the table, seconded by Mrs. Huckle. Motion carried 7-0. Mr. Golden said outparcel A has 4,000 square feet, and out- parcel B has 5,775 square feet. Access to the shopping center is by four driveways (Plaza Lane, Congress Avenue, Hypoluxo Road, and Boynton Lakes Boulevard). There is an outparcel still owned by the Lennar Corporation The shared parking allocations submitted addressed the requirements of the zoning regulations, including the 10% buffer at the peak time of use. The peak time of use will be Saturday at 2:00 P. M. for the entire center. Mr. Golden showed a rendering of what the shopping center will look like and said it will have an aluminum and glass - 12 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 door front with a beige stucco fascia and a green metal roof. The TRB recommended approval of the site plan and shared parking allocation, subject to staff comments. Mr. Ryder referred to the "excluded corner" and asked if there was enough distance east/west and north/south to permit access within the current requirements. Mr. Golden showed where they could place a driveway on the west frontage onto Congress Avenue. They would need a variance on the north side. Some of the Members noticed one option would be for them to go through the parking lot. Mr. Golden said the developer of the shopping cen~er could arrange for access onto Hypoluxo Road by possibly going over the Lake Worth Drainage District's canal. Mr. Ryder remarked that variances begin to become a habit. When that happens, you might as well scrap Ordinances. Had the outparcel been configured so that no driveways were available, Mr. Annunziato said the Board probably would not have seen a recommendation to approve the request. An agent for Lennar was present at the meeting, and Mr. Annunziato thought they were receiving notice that they probably will not receive favorable consideration on the variances. It was Lennar's own doing because they sold the parent tract. Mrs. Huckle read comment 91 from Don Jaeger, Chief Inspector, Building Department, and asked for an explanation of what it referred to. Mr. Annunziato replied that it probably had to do with the Fire Safety Codes. He did not think there was anything unusual there and explained. Mrs. Huckle wondered if they had to give additional safeguards for fire safety. After discussion, she noticed it was also talked about in Mr. Jaeger's comment ~2. Mr. Livingston said some of the comments covered in the Building Department's memo will be addressed once they have prepared the construction documents, and he elaborated. He added that the buildings will be fully sprinkled, and they will address those comments. Chairman Trauger asked if there were any changes in the usage of the stores. Mr. Livingston confirmed that they are the same companies and advise~ that Frank's Nursery is to the north; then there is Fox Cinema; and Best Buy Drugs will be on the west. Mr. Schultz pointed out that they were very vague regarding the rear of their building, and he questioned whether they - 13 - MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 had a mansard or protective screen to screen what they intend and what will be on the roof and on the ground. Mr. Livingston replied that the air conditioning units them- selves will be located on the roof, set back from the front of the building. You would not see them from the back, as there will be a slight parapet in the back. They also have a significant landscaped wall and buffer. Mr. Schultz said the back of the building will look like the back of a building. If they get a meat market in, they will put refrigeration units on the roof, and he wanted something in the minutes that they will be screened on a one to one elevation. Mr. Livingston replied that was no problem. Mr. Annunziato interjected that it might make sense to not make that an "if in the future" item. If there was a desire among the Board Members, for whatever reason, to have the applicant provide a parapet wall to the rear of his building for noise or aesthetics, he asked if the applicant would provide a parapet wall now. Mr. Livingston asked if they could not say to provide proper screening to hide the capital equipment. Mr. Annunziato and Mr. S~hultz answered, "No." Mr. Annunziato explaine~ that would mean to screen where the air conditioning units are. He repeated the question of whether Mr. Livingston would agree to provide a parapet wall now in the rear of the roof. Mr. Schultz stated that they are doing it now on the two sides and in the front for beautification. The initial idea of a mansard was to shade air conditioning units on the roof, but developers are not doing it on the rear. Usually, the rear is against a residential area, which he felt should be more important than people coming to the store. Mr. Schultz explained and then informed Mr. Livingston he could just put scuttle holes out or down spouts. He said Mr. Livingston did not have %o do away with the mansard because he drains off the back of the building. Mr. Schultz elaborated. Mr. Livingston advised that it would add a significant cost to the building itself, and he wanted to speak to the developer before making a commitment. Rowever, Mr. Livingston was willing to make every effort to screen the capital equipment. Mr. Schultz wanted his request in the require- ments because he thought it would benefit the surrounding people, which was important. Mrs. Huckle pointed out that Mr. Schultz was talking about every one of the buildings. Mr. Schultz suggested that - 14 - MINUTES PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 they take the mansards off the front and put them on the back. Characteristically, Mr. Annunziato said the Board made that comment where shopping centers abut residential neighborhoods. There were further comments. has Mr. Ryder asked if Mr. Livingston had any problem with the comments of Mr. Don Jaeger, Building Department. Mr. Livingston answered, "No." and added that those items would be addressed as they go through the Building Department. Mr. Ryder asked about Mr. Annunziato's comments about future traffic signals on Congress Avenue, Plaza Lane, and Hypoluxo Road, and Boynton Lakes Boulevard. Mr. Livingston had no problems and reiterated that he had no problems with the staff comments. Mr. Schultz did not think the Board could act on this because Mr. Livingston said he had to speak with the developer. Chairman Trauger asked if the owner or developer was present. Bill Norton came forward. From a development standpoint, he had two concerns. There has been a big evolution. Everybody said they should go to flat roofs, and that they have single ply roofs which do not leak. Mr. Norton said they do leak. You want water to run off a roof if it can. If they can get 1/4 or one foot of slope in a roof, they can eliminate a lot of problems that would necessitate the possibility of putting a gutter and down spouts in the back. The sooner they can get water off the roof, the fewer problems the tenants and they will have. Mr. Norton agreed with Mr. Schultz that looking at unsightly utilities on a roof is a bad situation. He referred to Mr. Schultz mentioning a meat market, grocercy store, or what- ever, and said when you get those types of occupancies, the tendency today is to get that equipment down on the ground. It is too exp~nsive to put it on the roof. Mr. Norton wanted to think there was a way they could screen something acceptable to the Board so they would not see mechanical equipment, but he did not like the idea of a parapet wall. Mr. Norton stated if there was a compromise that could be worded that mechanical equlpment would not be seen from the neighborhood and it would be properly screened, he would agree with that and have no problems with it whatsoever. Mr. Schultz responded that maybe six days after they get their certificate of occupancy (C.O.), they would sell it. What would go in there would not have a screen. If a mansard - 15 - MINUTES ' PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 is required on construction, they will whatever goes on there in the future. comments. screen a good bit of There were other Mr. Norton did not want to commit to a solid parapet wall for purposes that they will drain water off of the buildings. He knew they would get a lot of water on them, and they will leak. Mr. Annunzlato did not know that the Board was the proper vein to argue construction techniques. Looking at 1,000 feet of roof from the back, an addition to mechanical equip- ment, aesthetically, would leave much to be desired. Mr, Annunziato said they were not just talking about screening noise but a visual solution. Mr. Schultz suggested they put it on pilings slx inches high and two feet above that. Mr. Norton said they could put a continuous screen of some sort two feet high, abov~ their gutters, in back of the building, without any problem. Mr. Annunziato recommended three feet. Mr. Norton stated he had no problem with screening it three feet above the gutters. After discussion, Mr4 Schultz noted that now they would have a slx inch opening over the whole roof and two feet above that. Mr. Annunziato commented that this was done at Gateway. Mr. Norton had no problems with that. Mr. Wandelt pointed out that Mr. Schultz said two feet, and they were saying three feet. Mr. Schultz stated he would go along with Mr. Annunziato's recommendation. Mr. Schultz moved to approve the request for site plan approval, subject to staff comments attached to the original copy of these minutes in the City Clerk's Office as Addendum F, and with the comments of the Board for a screening on the back side of all buildings. Mr. Wandelt seconded the motion, and the motion carried 7-0. SITE PLAN MODIFICATIONS Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Legal Description: Description: Boynton Lakes Jeff Hopper/Don Elliot Lennar Homes, Inc. East side of North Congress of Hypoluxo Road Avenue, south Plats 3, 3-B, 3-C, Boynton Lakes Request for approval of an amended site plan to allow for screened porches - 16 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 There was no overlay on this request. Mr. Golden said Plats 3, 3B and 3C are located south of the L-19 Canal. The applicant was proposing to allow for the option of a solid aluminum insulated or not insulated room as an alternative to the screen room at the rear of the townhouse units. The proposal will affect a portion but not all of the townhouse models, as the original site plan included a model where the porch was enclosed with an existing roof. The proposal will affect only those models where the enclosure projects 3'8"x12' outward from the main structure. Mr. Golden continued by Saying they were approved as screen enclosures. They wish to put a hard cover over that 3'8" 12' protrusion from the rear of the building. Mr. Ryder read from the memo of Don Jaeger~ Chief Inspector, Building Department, that "no permits will be issued to erect solid walls on these structures," and wondered if that would preclude another finished room. When the Association takes over, Mr. Golden replied that they will always have the option of presenting a site plan modification, and he explained. Jeff Hopper, Lennar Homes, Inc., 15127 Carter Road, Delray Beach, Florida 33446 had not seen the staff comments. Mr. Schultz thought the way Mr. Jaeger was now presenting his memos was very good, and he Called attention to comment $2. Mr. Schultz said it will require a lot of work to put a roof on a screened enclosure if they remove the 3-5/8" slab of concrete they have. Mr. Hopper advised that the developer was making the request to be consistent with previous approvals granted by the Planning and Zoning Board. In Boynton Lakes, Phase 1, approval was granted for the addition of a solid roof to screened enclosures 13 to two years ago. Several homes have been sold and the title transferred in Plats 3B, 3C and 3. Obviously, the question has been asked as to why they do not have solid roofs on their screened enclosures similar to those in Phase 1. The developer physically did not provide the enclosures but, as an option, sells a 10'X12' solid screen enclosure. Mr. Ryder asked who would put in the roof. Mr. Hopper answered that if homeowners choose to have a roof put on, they contract with a company that specializes in that. Mr. Annunziato advised Mr. Ryder that most of the people that do the contracting know the requirements. - 17 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 Mr. Hopper had no problem with the staff comments. Mr. Pagliarulo moved, seconded by Mr. Wandelt, to approve the amended site plan to allow for screened porches, subject to staff comments attached as Exhibit G to the original copy of these minutes. There were several people from Boynton Lakes in the audience, and they applauded. One woman told of five people who already have their roofs on, and they were told by the City that the roofs must come down. Mr. Annunziato explained that the roofS were installed illegally. Perhaps they can get a retroactive permit and a penalty, but that was not related to this Board, but to the Building Department. Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Manor Care Personal Care Facility Bernard Kelly Manor Care, Inc. South Congress Avenue at Charter Drive, northwest corner Request for approval of an amended site plan to allow for the addition of ten parking spaces The TRB recommended approval, subject to staff comments attached as Addendum H to the original copy of these minutes. No one was present to represent the applicant. Mrs. Huckle moved, seconded by Mr. Schultz, to approve the request, subject to staff comments. Motion carried 7-0. Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Mega-Mini Self Storage None Doug Long East of South Congress Avenue, between the L.W.D.D. L-28 Canal and S. W. 30th Avenue Request for approval of an amended site plan to allow for the addition of two new storage buildings consisting of 18,053 square feet of floor space Mr. Golden said this project is located in Lawson Industrial Park, almost directly east of Manor Care. Building J is proposed to be located at the east end of the complex. Building K will be located in the northeast corner of the complex, parallel and adjacent to the L-28 Canal. The two buildings will be single story structures. Additional park- ing and landscaping will be provided. - 18 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 NO utility extensions are proposed as the new buildings are solely to provide storage. The TRB recommended approval, subject to staff comments attached as Addendum I to the original copy of these minutes. David Zelch, Zelch and McMahon Architects, Inc., Fort Lauderdale, Florida, reviewed the comments and had no real negative comments about them. However, he wished to have discussion on comments 5, 7 and 9 in Mr. Jaeger's memo. With reference to comment 5, Mr. Zelch said the structure of Building J (the building running in a north/south direction) is fdentical to the building adjacent to it on the west side. It is identically dimensioned and petitioned. Mr. Jaeger's comment was that if they exceed 200 square feet of t~nant space, exit doors must be provided from all tenant spaces. The requirement of an exit door would mean a swinging door or man door. Mr. Zelch was not the Architect at t!he time, but the building to the west received a C.O. this past April. The sam~ issue was brought to light regard- ing this situation, a~d he understood it was overruled by someibody f~om Tallahas~ee. The roll up doors were allowed with. an access swing door for exiting. Mr. Annunziato interrupted to say the issue was related to the 'Building Code. Even though Mr. Jaeger placed this in his comments, Mr. Annunziato did not think it was within the purview of this Board to react to it. If Mr. Zelch had a disagreement with the Building Code requirement, he would still have to go before the Building Official to discuss his disagreement. That pertained to comment 7 as well. Mr. Annunziato said comment 9 was a Code requirement. Mr. Zelch stated that the curb the City was requesting was obviously a new Lasdscape Ordinance that was not in effect when this was passed a year ago. There is no curbing, and they have to put the curbing in, but it is adjacent to exist- ing landscaping where no curbing had to be provided. They will be happy to put a curb in on the additional 85 feet. Mr. Golden informed Mr. Annunziato that nothing was discussed about the curbing at the TRB meeting. Mr. Annunziato advised Mr. Zelch to get a clarification from Mr. Jaeger. Other than these interpretations of the Code, Chairman Trauger asked Mr. Zelch if he had any objection to any of the staff comments. Mr. Zelch answered, "No," and then added that the other thing would be the comment from W. D. Cavanaugh, Fire Department. He wondered if there was - 19 - MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA MARCH 10, 1987 a reason for having the hydrant outside of the fence on previous approvals. Mr. Cavanaugh was asking that the exist- ing hydrant be placed inside of the fence. Mr. Zelch wanted to be sure they would not be creating another problem. Mrs. Huckle asked if the existing hydrant was on the applicant's property. Mr. Zelch answered affirmatively. Mrs. Huckle moved to approve the request, subject to staff comments. Mr. Pagliarulo seconded the motion, and the motion carried 7-0. COMMENTS BY MEMBERS Blowing of Sand There was discussion about sand blowing. Chairman Trauger thought somewhere in the City's permitting process, a bond- ing must be put up to stabilize the soil after it is stirred up. Mr. Annunziato promised to bring that to the attention of the proper officials. Board Mr. Ryder observed that this was the last time the present Board was meeting as a composite. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 9:05 P. M. (Two Tapes ) - 20- MEMORANDUM 4 March 1987 TO: Chairman and Members Ptan~ing and Zoning Board FROM: Carmen S. Annunziato ~ Planning Director RE: C~s~no Office Building - Parking Lot Variance Section 5-144(c~(4) of the Code of Ordinances requires -that when a variance to Section 5, Article X, Parking Lots is re~dested, 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 proceedings. To that end, this memo is forwarded, consistent with 5-t44(c)(4)~ Stephen R. Cusimano, applicant, is requesting a variance to Section 5-141(g)(3) "Driveways" of the Parking Lot Regulations which requires, among other things, that no driveways m~y be constructed closer than 180 feet to the intersection of the rights-of~way lines on collector and arterial roads. In this instance, the applicant is requesting to be per~itted~-to provide driveways onto S.E. 23rd Avenue and Seacrest Boulevard in connection with subsequent site plan approval to-allow fo~ the construction of a new medical office building. ~T.here is an existing one-story single-family home on the property which is proposed to ~be moved to another location. The driveway onto S.E. 23rd Avenue is proposed to be 25 feet wide and wo~d be located 21 feet from the eastern property boundary. The~driveway onto Seacrest Boulevard is proposed to be 27 feet wideand wo~ld be located at a distance of 21 feet from the.southerR property boundary. The property in question is located at-~he southeast corner of S.E'. 23rdAvenue and Seacrest Boulevard~ For an explanation of the code retirement, the nature of the variance requested, and the vazia~ce justification, please refer to the attached Notice of Public Hearing and application. On Tuesday, March 3, 1987 the Technical Review Board (TRB) met to review the plans and documents submitted, and to formulate a recommendation with regard to the variance requested. After review and discussion, the TRB recommended that the variance be approved in part and denied in part. With respect to the recommendation for approval, the TRB made findings that the ADDENDUM A appIicant would be unable to access his property if re_cuired to not have a driveway within 180 feet of the intersection of the rights-of-way lines of S.E. 23rd Avenue and Seacrest Boulevard. Therefore, the TRB recommended that the applicant be allowed to have one driveway onto S.E. 23rd Avenue located a distance of 2.5 feet from the eastern property boundary. Section 7.5-35(e) of the Environmental Regulations requires that a 2.5 foot ~n~scape strip be provided between a driveway and a common lot line. However, the request to provide for a second driveway onto Seacrest Boulevard was recommended for denial. The rea~on~ for this recommendation are as follows: ._ 1. It is the policy of the City to allow for one d~iveway in situations where the access provisions within th~arking Lot Regulations would otherwise deny any access to ~given parcel. ' -' - ~ 2. It was recommended to allow for a driveway ont~ S.E. 23rd Avenue rather than Seacrest Boulevard, as khe middle turn lane on Seacrest Boulevard adjacent to the applicant's property serves as a left-turn stacking lane northbound for Golf Road, and allowing for a driveway onto Seacrest Boulevard at this location would promote a conflicting left turn movement for vehicles traveling southbound~ entering the middle lane on Seacrest Boulevard to makea le~t turn into a driveway at this location. '~-~ In addition, the TRB requested that the applicant be advised to provide for the removal of the existing curb cuts onto Seacrest Boulevard and S.E. 23rd Avenue (which serve the--existing single-family home) at the time of site plan approval. /bks E?,HI~IT ~ '~"0%'54" l~est n dtstaIl~- ~l ~ '. ~_.. ,~ ~a r,t: I t~.D.D. Canal E-4.~AI~'~ lt~ tile ]~ke ~ I:,ail-' ........ . . ,. ,~ P ..... ~ ~-24. STAFF COMMENTS CROSS CREEK CENTRE SITE PLAN Building Department: EngineeringDepartment: Utilities Department: Planning Department: Foreste~ ~Horticulturist See attached memo. See attached memo. See attached memo. 1. It is recommended t~at a note be placedo~ the ----- lighting plat that be-~ ~ directed away from~the ak~tting residences. _ 2. As from the Building Dep=£~,ent, signage ~n PCDs is-not regulated by the City's sign .ordinance. Therefore, all Proposed $ignage should be submit~ted to ~ City as a subs~ent~site~3~_ modification. S~ attach~ m~2 ADDENDLIM C-1 MEMORANDUM Carmen Annunziato Planning Director Don Jaeger Chief InSpector Building Department March 3, ~9875 !9~ PLANNING DEPL Site.Plan App~nv~l~ Cross Creek Centre As a condition of site plan approval, the following comments' should be incorporated intb the related documents by thm 1. The free-s.tanding sign is shown in a drainage easement.- Please clarify this detail. 2. The buffer wall, as presently shown, is ~e Lake Worth Drainage District easement in the mort of %he property. Their written approval of this r~quired prior to permitting this wall. 3. Parking stalls should be double striped in accordance with City Codes. Handicapped stalls require double striping, ~four feet in width; 1.5 - 2 feet for normal stalls. Wheel s~ps isho~!d be two zeet from the end of an 18 foot stall. City Code requires curbing around all landscaped areas, adjacent to parking?sta -]fts~ 4. Landscaping adjacent to the right-of-way must be~'J6 inches at the 5. .Side walks in the right-of-way must continue through th~ turn out and be ramped for handicapped ac'cessibility. - 6. Ail documents prepared by design professionals f~ public record .. must be signed and sealed. 7. Sidewalks shou!.d be provided to encourage safe pede'str~ circulaz tion from the right-of-way into the site. _:.~ 8. The 15 foot alley behind the commercial building should be de.sig- mated 'one-Way' ~rom west t° e~st to allow for's~fe~garbage pick up and vehicular travel.. ~ ~ 9. .There are no provisions in the current Sign Ordi~e. f~r signage .zn .PiC..D...Zoning Districts. All anticipated sign~areas :s~mould ~e- zne£u~e~ in the present plans for Community Appe~.i~.._nce Board, Planning and Zoning Board an~ City Many of these comments are being made for the third'~me. The following information is for the applmcant s mnfor~at~on:~~ In order to facilitate the building permit ~review process, the following information should be provided, in duplicate, at the time of plans submittal: 1. Copies of the South Florida Water Management District approval and Lake Worth Drainage District approval for site construction. 2. Copies of signed and sealed soil tests and State Energy Code compliance forms. ADDENDUM C-2 Memo to. Carmen Annunziato RE: Cross Creek Centre March 3, 1987 Page Two 3. Complete sets of the construction documents and plans, signed and sealed by the relevant design professionals. 4. Acrylic skylights must comply with Section 2605-of the Sttamdard Building Code. 5. Copies of the Department of Transportation turn out perm,'t_ 6. Details on the fences adjacent to the office"bUilding. NOTE: Separate permits are required for paving, drai~ag~~ excavation, fill and signs. The plat must be recorded przor to the` issua~'~':iOf.bZ~din~ The applicant's prompt compliance with the preceding/~ommen~ will insure a timely permitting process. Don Jaeg~ M E M O R A~N D U M March 5, 1987 TO: FROM: RE: Mr. Jim Golden Planning Department Tom.Clark City Engineer Preliminary Plat and Site Plans Comments: - ~eel stops are not acceptable as a_si~bstitute for raised curbs.at the edge of asphaltic ~om2re~. A cost estimate for bonded improvements is required. A memo from Bill Flushing dated March 2, 1987 is included herewith. ~:' ':~ Tom, Clark Attach ADDENDUM TO: FROM: Tom Clark Bill Flushing Cross Creek Centre. ~.ANNn~G DEPT. The following discrepancies should be noted~ Detail on cross-section o~ catch basin i~ ~equired and should show the inlet grate elevati;~- to be equat to lowest adjacent pavement (about ~ or more inches above swale invert}. 2m The catch basin detail should show th.e 18~ hole in bottom covered with a 1/2 inch mesh. The cavity below the mesh shoul,d be wash rock. Bill Flushing ADDENDUM C-4 1 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH MAR 6 Z987 PLANNING DEPT. MEMORRNDUM Da%e= Hatch 5, t98:"/ Subject= TRB Revieu - Cross Creek Centre Ue can approve this project, subject to the ~ollouing 1. Correct the detail o{ the ~ire sprinkler line ind~e a Da*e valve uhere said line ~ees Z. The en~Pa~ce sign and 811 light poles mu~ be constructed ou~side o~ ~he 1~oo~ u~ili*y easemen~ across ~he ~on~ o~ the ~cel. 3. Provide a hold harmless a~ree~en~ ~or a11 lands~'i~ ~DDENDUM MEMORANDUM Planning Director Forester/Horticulturist March 5, ~R 5 i~,..ANNING DEPT. Cross Creek-~=auer Site Plah The following is in reference plan for the above project: Kevin J.~Hailahan " KJH:ad to the submitt.ed i-~mdsc~pe' The hedge material abutting Boynton Beach BdU,~d~ar~ must be 36" in height at time of plant~ng-. ~::~. All interior parking lot trees must have a ci~a~ ~k of 5' at time of planting. ADDENDUM C-6 STAFF COMMENTS CROSS CREEK CENTRE SITE PLAN Building Department: Engineering Department: Utilities Department: Planning Department: Forester/Horticulturist See attached memo. See attached memo. See attached memo. ~ 1. It is recommende~T_hat a note be placed on the lighting plan indicatin~ that lighting is to be directed away from the~butting residences. 2. As noted in the memorandum from the Building Depa~t, signage in PCDs is not~ec/ulated by the City's sign ordinance. Therefore, all propose~signage should be submitted to ~Cit~ as a subsequent site pt~~ modification. - See attached memo. ADDENDUM D-1 MEMORANDUM Carmen Annunziato Planning Director Don Jaeger Chief Inspector Building Department March 3,~987~ PLANNING DEPt. Site .P~n Cross Creek Centre As a condition of site plan approval, the following comments be incorporated into the related documents by tR~ applicant: 1. should The free-standing sign is shown in a-drainage easement. ~tease clarify this detail. 2. The buffer wall, as ~resently shown, is encroaching in~o =he Lake Worth Drainage District 'easement in the northeas~section of the property. Their written approval of this condition is ~uired prior.to permitting this wall. 3. Parking stalls should be double striped in accordancaw~th City Codes. Handicapped stalls require double striping, fou~ feet in width; 1.5 - 2 feet for normal stalls. Wheel stops should be two feet from the end of an 18 foot stall. City Code requires curbing around all landscaped areas, adjacent to parking stat~s. 4. Landscaping adjacent to the right-of-way must be 36 inches at the time of planting. - .... 5. Side walks in the right-of-way must continue through the turn out and be ramped fo~ handicapped'accessibility~ 6. Ail documents prepared by design professionals for public record must ~e signed and sealed.' 7. Sidewalks should be provide~ to encourage safe pedestrian circula- tion from the right-of-way into the site. 8. The 15 foot alley behind the commercial building Should be desig- nated 'one-way, ~romwest to east to allow for safe garbage pick uP and vehicular travel. 9. There are no provisions in the cufreDt Sign Or~i~nce fo~ signage in P.C.D. Zoning Districts. All anticipated szgn'-a~eas should he ~?clu~ed in the lpreseng ptan.s for Community. Appearance B~rd, rAannzng and Zoning Board and City Council approvall Many of these comments are being made for the third Oime. The following information is for the appli6ant's info'mention: In order to facilitate the building permit review process, the information submittal: following should be provided, in duplicate, at the time of plans 1. Copies of the South Florida Water Management District approval Lake Worth Drainage District approval for site construction. 2. Copies of signed and sealed soil tests and State Energy Code compliance forms. and ADDENDUM D-2 Memo to'Carmen Annunziato RE% Cross Creek Centre March 3, 1987 Page Two 3. Complete sets of the construction documents and plans, signed and sealed by the relevant design professionals. 4. A~rylic skylights must comply with Section 2605 of the Standard Building Code. 5. Copies of the Department of Transportation t~rnout pez-~it~ 6. Details on the fences adjacent to the office building. NOTE: Separate permits are required for paving, drainage~ excavation, fill and signs. The plat must be recorded prior to the issuance of bz~Ltding permits. The applicant's prompt compliance with the preceding comme.~s will insure a timely permitting process. DJ:bh M E M 0 R A,N D U M TO: Mr. Jim Golden :¥~R $ !~°8'' Plaru%ing Department ~_ FROM: Tom Clark ~FL~f'~,~ D~-~, City ~gin~r "' ~: Preliminary Plat and Site Plans for"C~oss Cr~Centre Comments:- 1. Wheel stops are not acceptable as a.substitut~ for raised curbs.at the edge of asphalti~ com2rete. A COSt estimate for bonded improvements~is req-c~red. A memo from Bill Flushing dated March 19.S7 is included herewith. TAC/ck Attach. T~m~ Clark ADDENDUM D-2 TO: Tom Clark FROM: Bill Flushing RE: Cross Creek Centre. The following discrepancies should be noted: 1. Detail on cross--section of catch ba~in i~ ~-equired and should sho~ the inlet grate e~¥~ti~ to be equa! to lowest adjacent pavement (about ~,~r more inches above swale invert). The catch basin detail ~hould bottom covered with a 1/2 inch m~sh~ Thm cavity below the mesh should be wash Bill Flushing CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH ~DDENDUi~ D-L DEPT. MEMORRNDUM From: D~e: Carmen Rnnunzia~o. Planning O~ree~or John R. ~uidry, Oirec%or o{ Utili~ie March S. 1SE? Subjec%: TRB Revieu - Cross Creek Centre We can approve ~his project, subjec~ to the follouing 1. Correc~ %he de~ail o{ ~he {ire sprinkler line Fonnec~io~z~L- indicate a gate.valve uhere said line tees in~o ~he 2= The entrance sign and all light poles mus~ be Cons~ruc~u~side- ~ ~he 10-~oo~ u~ili~y easement across the ~ron% ~. Provide e ~id harmless agreemen~ ~or all landscaping ADDENDUM D- 5 Ca~men S. Annunziato Planning Director Kevin J. Haltahan Forester/Horticulturist MEMORANDUM ~ 5 ~287 1987 ~LANN1NG DEPT. Cross Creek-~=er SitePlah The fellowing is in reference to _plan for the above project: the submitted 1. The hedge material abutting Boynton Beach must be 36" in height at time of 2. All interior parking lot trees must have a ~te.ar t~qmnk of 5' at time of planting. Kevin J. ADDENDUM M E M 0 R A~ D U-M March 4, 19~7 TO: Mr. Jim Golden Planning Department FROM: RE: Tom Clark City Engineer Boynton Plaza Plat and Construction Plans Comments:- Cost estimate for all bonded improvements is required. Included in bonded improvements would be utilities, roadway improvements, drain.age and the improvements required for Hypoluzo Road, according to the County Traffic Engineer. 2. Is the sidewalk on the north side of Plaza Lan~ shown in the right place? Working drawings-for the construction in the p=btic right-of-way are required, ie., materials, cr~ss-sections, etc. 4. Comments from Bill Flushing are included in a~emo dated January 30, 1987 attached hereto. TAC/ck Attach. Tom Clark ADDENDUM E-1 TO: Bill M E M O R A N D U M Tom Clark Bill Flushing Boynton Lakes Plaza Plat Plat items not corrected tha~ ~an. 50 memo are: 7. South property line shows and 8~1.57 ft. in legal. 00nstructi~-~lans. were ,- list~=~ on the 861.6i ft. ~n plat 12. There is no identification of P.R.M.'s or P.C.P.'s r Required construction plan correction~ are as follows: j a. Section AA is not shown on shee~ 5 o~ B. bo A detail should be provided sho~i~g the storm catch basin inlet grate elev~iions and the swale invert elevation at that pc~int. The grate elevation should be 15.00: ft~ and the swale invert elevation should be~!2.5 ~t. FluShing CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH RE iVED MEMORANDUM MAR 6 ]..,987 PLANNi~,~G DEPT. To: From: Date: Subject= Carmen Rnnunziato, Planning Oirector..~ John R. Guidry, Director of UtilitieS. March S, 1987 -- TRB Review - Boynton Lakes Plaza Ge can approve this project, subject to the {ollo~ing condiff-ons: 1. Meter boxes will not be permitted in sideualk _areas. Provide a detail o~ the water main crossing under the ~ZZ, speci{ying the clearance betueen the water main and the Change the manhole cover detail to re~lect this dapar~men%'s double ring standard. .4. Correct the sanitary profiles on sheet 4 of 8 '~-agree uith the plan view. S. Rdd gate valves at hydrants numbers t. Z and ~. Rlso add isolation valves in the 8' water main at the locations ~tiecussed Sample points ~e not permitted o~. O~ hydr=n~s~-,;? 7. Hatn~a~n a ~in~u~ I~-~oo~ separation ~ro~ ~he 8~[nch ~ ~o ~he ~oo~er around the nursery s~or~e area. 'Change ~ eesamen~ location ~o re~lec~ 8. Relocate ~he nor~h-sou~h uater ~ains in ~he cen~er oF ~he and e)o~ ~he east side o~ the p~cel ~n a ues~u~d direction so - as ~o shorten ~he ua~er services [o ~he nursery and ou~pa~cel. Re-direc~ ~ire hydr~n[s as needed ~o accom~odate~th~s cha~e. . ADDENDUM E- 2 Carmen Annunziato Planning Director Don Jaeger Chief Inspector BUilding Department MEMORANDUM March 3, 1987 Site Plan Approval: Boynton Lakes~Iaza As a condition of site plan approval, the following comments should be incorporated into the related documents by t_he applicant: 1. The Cinema will be classified as an Assembly 0C6upancy mhd will require a Threshold Inspector. The structure exceeds ~ ~.llo~.ahle~sqUa.re ~fo~ot area for the proposed .type of co-~sc-ruction. ne Zzve zoot buizding separation from the Ci{/e~ to ~ Local "D" Building will not allow for exit doors into thi~ ~coz~id~rr in accordance with Table 600 of th~ Standard Building Cage (SBC). The projection rooms must comply with Section 404~1t, Standard Building Code. The floor slope of the Cinemas~must comply with State Handicapped Codes. 2~ The entire southern section of the Plaza; Locmi "A", Local "B", Local "C", the junior anchor store and the drug stome; exceeds the allowable square foot area required by Table 400, ~Standard · Building Code for the proposed type of construct.ion. ~ese structures must be separated by ~our hour walls-~zn compliance with Chapter Four, Standard .Building Code. 3. The outside storage area must be adequately scr*eened. 4. The buffer wall ~long the emtire ~astern perimeter of the property Lake Worth Drainage District will approve the wall in their easement. 5 Large trucks, . outszde storage area, do not ]move an 6. Concret, extend through the turnouts am~-be ramped sibility. Show theS~detaits on the ~ ~ 7. Show details construction:~ 8. should the sidewalk along H~polux~ Road ongress Avenue sidewalk~ _ The following ' ' ': ' · - ms for the applzcant s znformatlon: ' In order to facilitate the building permit review process, the following informatiOn should be provided, in duplicate, at the time of Plans submittal: , -. 1. Health Department approval is required for food handling establishments and for the theater concession. 2. County turnout permits are re'quired for driveways on Hypoluxo Road and Congress Boulevard. - 3. Submit soil tests and energy compliance forms for each st.ructure. 4. Submit copies of the South Florida Water Management Distrzct approval and the Lake Worth Drainage District approval. ADDENDUM F-1 Memo to Carmen Annunziato RE: Site Plan Approval: March 3, 1987 Page Two Boynton Lakes Plaza 5. Submit complete sets of the construction documents and the plans, signed and seated by the relevant design professionals. No~e: The applicant's prompt compliance with the insure a timely permitting process. Permits must be secured prior to erecting construction ~=ailers on site Separate ~ermits are required for: e~ch out parcel b~i/~ing, each portmon of a building i~cI~ded wmthin the four ho~fi~e wal~s, all signs, drainage, paving, excavation, fire an~ lawn sprinklers, and ~uffer walls.. The plat must be recorded prior to receiving bu~]4ing permits. preceding~comme~ts will DJ:bh XC: E. E. Howell Don Jae~ ' MEMORANDUM MAR PLANNtr~G DEPT. To: Carmen Rnnunziato, Planning Director From: John R. Guidry, Director oq Utilitie Da~a: March S, 1587 Subject: ~RB Revieu - Boynton Lakes Plaza ---~ - Ue can approve this project, subject to the ~ollouing 1. Meter boxes uill not be permitted in sideualk areas._ Z. Provide a detail of the uater main crosszr~ under speci{ying the clearance betueen the uater main-and the ~ooter. Change the manhole cover detail to re{lect th~s depart~a~s double ring standard. Corract the sanitary profiles on-sheet 4 o~ 8 t°~agree ~i~h the plan v~eu. S. Rdd gate valves a~ h~rants numbers 1. Z and 3. Rlso isolation valves ~n ~he ~" ua~er ~ain a~ ~he lock,ohs ~ssed Sample points ~re no~ p~mi~ed oqq oq Maintain e ~ini~u~ I~-{do~ sepaba~ion {ro~ ~he to ~he {ootep around ~he nursery storage area. ~ange easement location to re{~ect ~his. Reio~e ~he nop~h-sou~h ~er maids.in ~he ce~ep~ ~he p~cel and alo~ ~he eas~ side o{ ~he parcel in a ~stu~d direction es ~o sh~en ~he uater services ~o ~he ~uPsepy and Re-dipec~ {ire hydrants as needed ~o accommodate ~his ADDENDUM F-2 MEMORANDUM Jim Golden Btdg. Dept. Lt. Dale S. Hammack Police Dept. March 3, 1987' Boynton Lakes Plaza As per our discussion at the T.R.B. meeting on 3 March, 1987, I am_~acommending the following: 1. Parking lot lighting to 'be 'photocell activated. DH:a~ ADDENDUM F-3 4 March 1987 TO: Chairman and Members Planning and Zoning Board FROM: Carmen S. Annunziato Planning Director RE: Boynton Lakes Plaza - Staff Co~m~ents Please be advised of the Planning Department's comments in connection with theabove-referenoed request for site Dian approval. 1. Site plan approval is contingent upon securing the proper permits from the Lake Worth Drainage District. 2. As per the previous site plan approval, it is recommended that the developer post a bond for future traffic si~ls at the following intersections: a. Congress Avenueand Plaza.Lane 'b. Hypotuxo Road and Boynton Lakes Boulevard 3. As per the previous site plan approval, it is recom~ended that this project be approved subject to the attache~comments from the County Traffic Engineer. However, it is r~ended that these comments be qualified.as follows, as the c~n~truction of Hypoluxo Road as an arterial is scheduled in the budget year. If the applicant is substantially ahead of the CCunty~his development program, he shou%d be responsible for constructing HypoluxoRoad as previously mentioned. In this'instance, credit against road impact fees is recommended except for the~est-bound left turn lane at Hypotuxo and .Boynton Lakes Boulevard,.m~hich is site related. If the County proceeds with the construction of Hypotuxc Road, relieving the applicant of this responsibility, then the appli- cant should pay road impact fees and pay to the County, the cost of constructing the turn lan~ at Hypoluxo Road and Boynton Lakes Boulevard. In all-instances, approval by the County Traffic Engineer is required. 4. It is recommended that Boynton Lakes Boulevard be constructed as an 80 foot wide collector from Hypoluxo Road to Plaza Lane ADDENDUM F-4 including right:and left turn stacking lanes at the eastern shopping centeza~driveway and a left turn'stacking lane at Plaza Lane. Engineering plans for these improvements are to be submit- ted to the City ~ngineer for approval prior to permitting. 5. An~- ~h~nge i~parking lot layout and design in the vicinity of the outparcets or an increase in square footage beyond that which hasbeen~a~proved for either outparcel will require a site plan modification. 6. The ~rm/m i0% buffer required by the Zoning regulations for shared parking m~-St be maintained upon incorporation of staff comment~ ..... ·.: : --- CARMEN S. ANNUN~fATO /bks cc: Cit~Manager- TecknicatReview Board Craig Livingston ~ g_~cn T. January 8, ~985 Mr. Carmen S. Annunziato Director of Planning Citl of Boynton Beach 120 N.E. 2nd Avenue Boynton Beach, FL 33~35 SUBJECT: Proposed Shopping Center - Southeast CorneFL~~-L Hypoluxo Road and Congress Avenue Dear Mr. Annunziato: The Traffic Division has reviewed plans for the sublet[ pro~eet .and has the -- following comments: =- -. 1) This project should be limited to right turn only/ingress ad egress on Bypoluxo ~oad and Congress Avenue. ~.. Z) Plans should be modified to.accurately reflect Con:gress A~enue as a four-lane facility across the prolect's frontage, with--a lef~ ~--urn lane at Plaz~ L~ne. ~) ~is pro3eet should be required ~o exte~ the fourq/anin~ ~ ~ypoluxo throuEh the in~er:eetion of Boynton Lakes Boulevard, ;ith pm~ioffi for adequate tef~ turn storage on H~luxo Road at the ~) ~is project ~houlfl be .required %o pay the ~air Sh~ l~gt Fee rot Improvementa. -- '- · - ~ ~ .ropr:ate for credit to b[~':~-iven ~inst the impae~ fee for the construction on Hy~luxo ~oad ' -~-- If you have any question~ or require additional not 'hesitate ~ contact this office~: OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ENGINEER Charles R. l~alker, Jr., P.E. Director., Traffic Division CRW:ASB:ks cc: Hr. Jim Peters, Permit Section - Land Development Division BOX 2429 WEST PALI~~. BEACH, FtO.qlOa ADDENDU~I F-5 MEMORANDUM 4 March 1987 TO: Chairman and Members Planning and Zoning Board FROM: Carmen S. Annunziato Planning Director -- RE: Bo!rnton Lakes Plaza . . ~ Site Plan - Shared Parking Allocation'~- ~ Section 11-H(13) of the Zoning Code contains the~ll~g recently-amended provision for shared parking: .-~!~i_ 13. Parking spaces required in this Ordinance fol one use or structure may be allocated in part or ih whole !or the required parking spaces of another use or structure if quantitative evidence is provided showing ~hat parking demand for the different uses or structures-would occur on different days of the week or at different~ours. Quantitative evidence shall include but not be 14mired to the following: .(a) Field studies and traffic counts prepared b~ a traffic' consultant experienced in parking studieseS' ~. (b) Adjustments for seasonal variations.-.~'~'' (c) Estimates for .peak'parkin~ demand based~-on s~tical All data furnished must be statistically addition, a minimum bu{fer of 10%shall be~provide~to ensure that a sufficie~ number of parklngspaces are available at times of peak hour use. Saidlbuffer is to be calculated based on the~following 1 surplus shared parking Buffer on-site+ shared parking provided2"~ 1Shared parking spaces not required by the Cityof Boynton Beach zoning regulations for the proposed use. 2parking spaces required for the p~oposed use as per the City of Boynton Beach Zoning RegUlations. 1 ADDENDUM' F-6 ~ ~ Evidence foz joint allocation of required space shall be- submitted to the Technical Review Board, and approval of joint allocation of required parking, spaces shall be made by.he Council, after review and recommendations by the Planning-an~ Zoning Board. With respect to the above, Siteworks Architects andPt~ers, agent for Edge Equities, are requesting approval of a sbmled parking allocation for Boynton Lakes Plaza. The shopping center is to be located at the southeast corner of. North Congres~Avenue will consist of 1,820 seats and will occupy 29,B20squarefeet of floor space. ~ The site plan for Boynton Lakes Plaza provide~Lf~r 92,507~-200 = 463 spaces. The for the nursery outdoor storage area is 15, 4. /The cinema parking requirement is 1,820 seats~ 4 Therefore, the total ' code would be 9221 plan ~ On-si~e Parking spaces whiCh would meet the code the retailfloor space and the remaining ~ces being allocated to. theici~ema. The required-for the 1,820 seat According to Associates, Inc., the pe~khour demand for center ~and the cinema combined would at ~ 2:00 p.m. This ~ based on worst case both the fetal1 portion combined would occur at 2:001 p,m. with a ~ of r the cinema as On-site parking allocated to cinema =~281 _1 to = The above analysis indicates that sufficient parking i~available at peak hour use to meet the zoning code requirement for the cinema (455 spaces) leaving a statistical surplus of 45 parking spaces to be allocated toward the calculation of the required 10% buffer as follows: 2 45 x 100% = 10% 281 + 174 Therefore, given the worst case scenario of total parking accumulation (Saturdays at 2:00 p.m.), the shared park/~ allocation for Boyn~on Lakes Plaza would still allow for a statistical surplus of 45 parking spaces. On Tuesday, March 3, 1987 the Technical Review-Board met at which time they recommended approval of the shared par.king allocation as submitted. It was the consensus of the ~RB that the proposed shared parking~allocationwas prepared and documemted~ accordance withcode requirements an~ exists for shared parking to occur on-site, in the proposed shopping center. -~ MEMORANDUM Ca~men Annunziato Planning Director Don Jaeger Chief Inspector March 3, 1987 P~'NIhG DEPT. Site Plan Modification: Boynton Lakes Plats 3, 3-B, 3-C (Screened Por~s) As a condition of site plan approval, the following comments sImould be incorporated into the related documents by the applicant: 1. On Plats 3-B and 3-C, Sheet 1 of 1 (Revised 1-15-87), indicate all building foot prints and the foot prints of the propose~ screen porches. Indicate model numbers for the existing structures and setbacks to the proposed screen porches from the .side ~ ~-ear property lines. 2, Solid roof screen porches require a larger footing thmn shown for the screen enclosures. The specifications for this foci/rig must be indicated on each submittal for a building permit. The following information is for the applicant's informatio~--~ In order to facilitate the permitting process, the follow~nE doguments ~ should be submitted to the Building Department for review a~ the time permits are desired: _ ~ ~,~- ~-%--f:/: ~ , _ 1. A copy of the blueprints for the structure with a current approval stamp from the Palm Beach' County Building Code Advisory Board or bluep~ints signed and sealed by a registered engineer or architect in the State of Florida attesting to the fact that the structure meets or exceeds all design criteria for Boynton 'Beach, These blueprints or copies must be legible and all pertinent.~Ietails must be color coded or circled. '~¢' 2. A plot plan showing all setbacks to the propert5 existing and proposed structures and easements. 3. A layout and erection plan for. the proposed structure ~g 4. NOTES: 1. The Building Department would like to recommend tothe applicant that any anticipated modifications to these screen enclosures be addressed at this time. No permits will be issued to erect solid walls on these structures without an additional site plan modification approved by the Planning and Zoning Board and City Council. 2. No construction will be permitted in dedicated easements. The applicant's prompt compliance with the preceding comments will insure a timely permitting process. DJ:bh ADDEMDt~M G 'MEMORANDUM Carmen'Annunziato Fianning Director Don Jaeger Chief Inspector March 3, ~ 4 ~87 1987 PI~,NNh't~ D,-PI. Site Plan ModiZication: Manor Care Personal Care Facility As a condition of site plan approval, the following commen:s should be incorporated into the related documents by Che applicant: The site plan indicates that a total of 134 parking spaues are proposed for the site. This would require five handicapped parking stalls. Indicatethe location of these stalls on the site plan in close proximity to building entrances. The site plan Shows a 3og in the driveway area toward the retention pond in the southwest corner of the propertsr~ Neither the landscape plan nor other previously approved site plans show this condition. Please clarify. Where 16 foot parking stalls are provided, all landscaping must be set back an additional two feet to allow for*he vehicle's overhang. The applicant'.s prompt compliance with the preceding comments will insure a timely permitting process. - on Ja~ger~ ADDENDUM H-1 MEMORRNDUM t987 DEPT. To: Date: C=rmen Rnnunzia~o.. Planning Otrector John h. Guidry, Oirectop o{ Utilifies~ March S, TRB Revieu - Manor Cape We can approve this project, subject to the follouing c~nditl~m~ Provide appropria%e easement documents ~or %he existing se~er utilities on this site. By copy o{ this memo, ye are requesting the City Engineer to ~i~o[~--- release o{ any bonds on %his project until said documents ar~¢eceived. d~ cc: Thomas Clark, Ci%y E~gineep ADDENDUM H-2 Car~en Annunziato Planning Director Kevin J. Hallahan Foreste~jHorticulturist March 5, 1987 ~LANNING F~cility Site Plan Modification The following is above project: in reference to the landscape plan for ~e Thirty (30) percent of all native vegetation. landscape material must~e Developer should be aware that he will not be abl~o use city-treated water for the irrigation systems fkkr landscape areas. K~vin JjHallahan KJH:ad ADDENDUM H-3 Carmen Annunziato Planning Director Don Jaeger Chief Inspector MSMORANDUM March 3, 198%iAR 4 ~87 PLANNING DEPL Site Plan Modi~-~ic~t~on~ Mega-Mini Se~Storage As a condition of site plan approval, the following comment~ should be incorporated into the related documents by the f~plicant: 1. Classify the proposed type of construction for the strnctzzr~s in conformance with Section 601.1.1 of the Standard Building Code (SBC). 2. The allowable building area must comply with Table 400 of the Standard Building Code for the type of construction andproposed occupancy. In.dicate on the site plan the total square foot areas for each proposed structure. Any structure with a grea~er square foot area than allowed by Chapter Four, Standard.Buildir~ Code must be separated by four hour walls. 3. Table 308.2 of the Countywide Amendments to the Standard Building Code requires 7 handicapped parking spaces when 216 parking spaces are provided. 4. Show the setback from the property line along ~he Lake Worth Drainage District L-28 Canal to the proposed structure. 5. Section 1103.2 of the Countywide Amendm~Dqs to the Standard Building Code allow an exception to the requiremen[ for a side swinging egress door providing three conditions are met. The proposed condition in these ~tructures does not meet the requirement o£ a maximum of 200 square feet per tenant space. Exit doors must be provided from all tenant spaces. 6. The minimum length of a parallel parking stall must be 25 feet. 7. Handicapped accessibility should be provided for ~hese nnits in compliance with the State Handicapped. Law. The plans indicate a step up from the parking area of 1~5 inches for eA%h unit. State law requires that this be reduced to a maximum of O~5 inches. 8. Show details on the type of proposed exterior lighting. 9. Parking areas must be ~triped i~ accordance with B0ynton Beach Codes an~ curbs must be ir~talled ~djacent to all landscaped areas. ~he following information is for applicant's information: In order to facilitate the building permit review process, the following information should be provided, in duplicate, at the time of plans submittal: 1. Copies of the South Florida Water Management District approval for the site. 2. Soil tests. 3. Complete sets of the construction documents and plans, signed and sealed by the relevant design profesBionals. NOTE: Separate permits are required for Paving, Drainage, and Excavation work. ~emo to Carmen Annunziato RE: Mega-Mini Self Storage Mamch 3, 1987 Page Two The applicant's prompt compliance with the preceding comments will insure a timely permitting process. ~ DJ:bh Don MEMORANDUM March 5, !~87 TO: Mr. Jim Golden Planning Department FROM: Tom Clark City Engineer RE: Mega Mini Addition CoE~ents: - 1. Drainage overflow elevation to be increased from 12.5 ft. to 13.00 ft. 2. Filter fabric is recommended on all four sides of the exfiltration trench. 3. Catch basin detail should show'the to be covered with.a ½ inch mesh. ~le in- bottom -TAC/ck Tom C~£ark ADDENDUM I-2 Grayarc- REPLY MESSAGE FROM --1 REORDER iTEM # F269 ;UBJECT: PLEASE REPLY .TO ' · SIGNED REPLY DATE: SIGNED _ADDENDUM I- 3 MEMORANDUM Ca~men S Annunziato o.T, March 5, 1~8~: .... -, ' PLAt'~,m~ DFkF. Planning Director .~.- Kevin J. Hallahan ~,,~,e, Mega Mini S~]f Storage Forester/Horticulturist Site Plan ~odification The following is in reference to the submitted [tf~ndscap~ for the above project: ' - : - The t~pe of sod ased should be specified. K~'vin J. ~qallahan ~ KJH: ad ADDENDUM I-4