Loading...
Minutes 08-13-85MINUTES OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING HELD IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ON TUESDAY, AUGUST 13, 1985 AT 7:30 P. PRESENT Simon Ryder, chairman Walter "Marty" Trauger, vice Chairman George deLong Marilyn G. Huckle John Pagliarulo William Schultz, Alternate Norman Gregory, Alternate ABSENT Robert Wandelt (Excused) Garry Winter (Excused) Carmen S. Annunziato, Director of Planning Tim Cannon, Senior City Planner Jim Golden Assistant city Planner Chairman Ryder called the meeting to order at 7:32 P. M., welcomed everyone, and introduced the Members of the Board, Mr. Annunziato, Mr. Cannon, Mr. Golden, and the Recording Secretary. He recognized the presence in the audience of Councilman Ezell Hester; Councilman James R. Warnke; Councilman Carl zimmerman; Peter L. Cheney, city Manager; James Rhoden, Fire Chief; Dale Hatch and Peter Mooij, Members of the Community Redevelopment Agency; Owen A. Anderson, Executive vice President, Greater Boynton Beach Chamber of Commerce; Ralph Marchese, Member of civil Service Board; Kipp Friedman, Boynton Beach News Journal; and Rebecca Theim, Sun Sentinel. MINUTES OF JULY 9, 1985 Mrs. Huckle moved, seconded by Vice Chairman Trauger, to approve the minutes as submitted. Motion carried 7-0. ANNOUNCEMENTS Chairman Ryder announced that Mr. Wandelt and Mr. Winter are on vacation. COMMUNICATIONS The communications pertained to matters on the agenda, and Chairman Ryder said they would be read when those items come up. MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 OLD BUSINESS SUBDIVISIONS (Tabled) PRELIMINARY PLAT Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Mariner's Way Ivan K. Olsak, P. E. C. Wendall Collins N. E. 12th Avenue, east of U. S. 1 Request for approval of construction plans and preliminary plat which provides for the construction of infrastructure improvements to serve a 32 unit townhouse development After some discussion at the last meeting, Chairman Ryder recalled that it was determined that the applicant was not present. Because there were some questions Members of the Board wanted to ask the applicant, and no one was there to indicate that the applicant approved of the staff comments, it was decided to table the hearing. Vice Chairman Trauger moved that the matter be taken from the table, seconded by Mr. Schultz. Motion carried 7-0. The Members of the Board did not think it was necessary for the Planning Department to make a presentation again tonight, as they made one at the last meeting. Mr. deLong reminded Chairman Ryder that the Board had decided the MIA appraisal was not necessary since the contract spelled out the value of the property. Ivan K. Olsak, P. E., Olsak & Associates, 308 Greymon Drive, West Palm Beach, Florida 33405, came forward. Chairman Ryder asked Mr. Olsak if he understood why the Board had to table the matter and wondered if he was aware of the stipu- lations made on behalf of the City. Mr. Olsak understood what the stipulations were and had no problem with them. Chairman Ryder drew attention to the question raised by Mr. Schultz on page 13 of the minutes of July 9. Mr. Schultz just wanted a clear cut decision on what happens to the previous Mariner Village when they block the roads with fences. He thought this was in the preliminary and had not been spelled out. Mr. Annunziato answered that this is a separate development from Lake Worth Mariner Village. This is Mariner's Way. Therefore, the blockage of roads with fences were not an issue. MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Mr. Schultz did not think it was necessry to renew the previous situation the City had. He thought it was a disgusting situation and hoped it was clarified a lot better in the preliminary plan than it was the last time. Vice Chairman Trauger asked if the ownership of the property extended down to Lake Worth or if it cut off at the little point that showed beyond the cul-de-sac. Mr. Annunziato replied that the ownership of the property goes to the right- of-way of the Intracoastal Waterway. The land limit is the line which varies as you go from west to east. Vice Chair- man Trauger observed that there was no land left beyond where the line was cut from the cul-de-sac. Mr. Schultz interjected that the line to the applicant's property goes to the right-of-way of the Intracoastal at a zero point. Mr. Annunziato referred to the overlay and said the line which runs basically north and south on the easterly end of the plat is the right-of-way of the Intra¢oastal Waterway, which is in Lake Worth. Mr. Olsak disaglreed, saying the property goes to the Intracoastal Waterway on the east side. Tihey are building a cul-de-sac on the mean high water line and are going to put in a five foot pier and sea wall. Mr. Schultz told Mr. Olsak he was putting a sea wall from what is called the "Intracoastal Waterway's mean high tide", and the applicant owns zero footage there. Mr. Olsak advised that it would be five feet from the cul-de-sac. Mr. Schultz went to the overlay and indicated a location where the applicant owns zero footage. Mr. Olsak agreed, saying they did not own that land. Mr. Schultz asked if they were putting a sea wall there, all the way down. Mr. Olsak replied it would be coming north to the property line. He disagreed with Mr. Schultz' statement that they were putting a sea wall down the entire length. Vice Chairman Trauger asked what would happen to the property between that edge and the lake. Mr. Olsak replied that there is an existing concrete wall. Mr. Schultz informed the Members that was property owned by the realtor on the corner that went over onto this property. As he now understood it, Mr. Olsak was going to leave the sea wall. Chairman Ryder asked what the condition of the existing sea wall is. Mr. Olsak answered that the existing sea wall will be on the north side and will continue southeast, this side of the mean line. Mr. deLong asked if they were implying that the existing sea wall is in bad shape. Mr. Schultz replied that it is not in what you would call good shape. Mr. Olsak informed him it is not on their property but on the north property line. - 3 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 vice Chairman Trauger asked how many lots were between the applicant's property and the Intracoastal. Mr. Olsak replied that there are about two lots. Mr. deLong commented that the applicant does not own anything beyond the sea wall they are going to put in. Vice Chairman Trauger wondered what would happen to the other piece of property and if they would be left "high and dry". Mr. Olsak replied that they will keep the existing sea wall to prevent erosion. Mr. Schultz informed the Members that there is one home on the Intracoastal and two empty lots. Mr. Olsak will put a sea wall on the applicant's property on that line. Mr. Schultz asked Mr. Olsak what he will do on his property line on the north side. When there is a big storm, Mr. Olsak said they are losing ground. They lost about 14 feet already. Chairman Ryder asked Mr. Annunziato if there was any question with regard to the existing sea wall at the Technical Review Board (TRB) meeting. Mr. Annunziato replied that there were no questions. Mrs. Huckle assumed the 22 foot road met City standards. When she drove down Mariner Village, it seemed like a narrow street, and there is no escaping from the street except by one diagonal road to the south. Mr. Schultz commented that this road will be a deadend cul-de-sac. Chairman Ryder thought the Board had alerted the TRB to it if there is any question. When the permit is drawn, perhaps the Building Official can throw more light on this. Mrs. Huckle inquired what the length of the road is down to the cul-de-sac. Mr. Annunziato replied that it is about 920 feet. Mr. deLong moved to approve the preliminary plat as submitted, subject to the comments of the City Engineer, except for the M.I.A. appraisal, which is not required. Mr. Pagliarulo seconded the motion, and the motion carried 7-0. NEW BUSINESS PUBLIC HEARINGS chairman Ryder announced that the Board had a series of public hearings for rezoning. Because of the turnout, he thought he should outline the procedure. In each instance, there have been public notices, and people have been informed MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 of the proposals. Chairman Ryder said the Board would first hear the report and analysis from the City Planning Depart- ment, then the applicant's presentation, those in favor and then those in opposition to the proposal. Following that, the public hearing would be closed, and the Board would deliberate on the matter and vote. Chairman Ryder told the audience this is an advisory board, and the Board's decisions are in the form of recommendations to the City Council. The City Council will meet next Tuesday, August 20, 1985, and final action will be deter- mined by them. Chairman Ryder announced that the first four public hearings have the~same applicant. Three are in one general location, and one is in another location. LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT AND REZONING Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Golf Plaza Kieran J. Kilday Round Table Group, Inc. Northeast corner of Congress Avenue and Golf Road (S. W. 23rd Avenue) Request for an amendment t© the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan from Public and Private Institu- tutional/Governmental to Local Retail Commercial, and rezoning from R-1AA (PUD) to C-3 Community Commercial for the pur- pose of allowing construction of a retail shopping center Martin Perry, Attorney for the Petitioner in this application, as well as the next three applications, 501 South Flagler Drive, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401, requested that the Board grant them a postponement of thirty days on the hearing of this petition, based on the fact that they had been primarily concentrating on items 2, 3, and 4 of the agenda. During the past week, they made an effort to meet with people relative to item 1, and met with two people that are affected. Attorney Perry said they would like to have an opportunity to meet with the majority of the people in an open meeting on their terms and asked that the Board grant their request for that purpose. He believed the two people they met with were present. One was Walter Kies, 2109 S. W. 22nd Street, and they discussed with him the fact that they MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 would request a postponement so they could be given the opportunity to meet with various homeowners and homeowners' associations that are affected. Mr. Annunziato said it was up to the Board Members to post- pone the matter. It could be postponed to the meeting on September 10, 1985, or the Board could conduct the hear- ings. Mr. Schultz said he would just as soon give them thirty days. Vice Chairman Trauger called attention to the fact!that this was tied in with the other three applica- tions, and he thought they should be heard in the sequence in which they were being presented. The time had been set, and people were ready and prepared. Mr. Pagliarulo felt the same as Vice Chairman Trau~er. Mr. Schultz clarified that he meant if Attorney Perry had one application postponed, all four of them should be :postponed. Chairman Ryder pointed out that the people were here tonight, and the Board had letters. When it is postponed, you do not see the people again. Mr. deLong thought it would be a great inconvenience to the people interested in this. Mr. Gregory suggested they ask how many people in the audience were here because of this particular petition. Chairman Ryder asked Mr. Walter Kies if he had any feeling on the matter. Mr. Kies, representing the Homeowners' Association, was present to oppose the proposal. Mr. Gregory repeated his question of how many people were in the audience with regard to Golf Plaza. There was a large number of hands. Although the same petitioner is involved in all four appli- cations, Attorney Perry said this particular petition was not tied to the other three petitions, was separate, and at a different location. The other three petitions went together. Mr. Golden read the memorandum dated July 31, 1985, from Carmen S. Annunziato, Planning Director, to the Chairman and Members of the Planning and Zoning Board. He also read that the proposed use of the property was for a 35,100 square foot shopping center, including an 8,000 square foot drug store, and a 2,400 square foot banking facility. With reference to the first issue on page 3 of the memo, Mr. Golden said the applicant submitted a traffic impact analysis that concluded the project will create a significant impact on a link of Congress Avenue, which has existing volumes in excess of its capacity. - 6 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 The report further noted that Palm Beach County has plans to widen Congress Avenue in the upcoming fiscal year, which will coincide with the development of the proposed project. With the reconstruction of Congress Avenue, this project would be classified as a "Category B" project under the Palm Beach County Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance. Accord- ing to the Ordinance, a Category B petition may be approved under certain cOnditions. Mr. Golden informed the Members that the applicant's traffic impact analysis concluded that the proposed project met all of the performance criteria for a Category B project. As to the second issue on page 4 of the memorandum, Mr. Golden told the Members the market analysis submitted by the applicant concluded that adequate spending power of resi- dents in the defined trade area would help with the existing lack of competitive facilities along Golf Road and Congress Avenue. It is capable of providing the necessary primary market for floor space for the proposed Golf Plaza. In addition, potential secondary support markets, ie., visitors, currently exist which are capable of adding from the primary residential marketplace. Visitors are defined as being occupants of vehiciles traveling through the area. According to the analysis, Mr. Golden said residents' buying power will account for 85% to 90% of the retail sales generated, while the remaining 10% to 15% will be generated by visitors in the area. The analysis further concluded that Boynton Beach Mall would have relatively little impact on the demand for space at Golf Plaza due to the differences in re~ail activity and target markets. Mr. Golden concluded by reading the "Conclusions/Recommenda- tions'' from page 5 of the memorandum, which stated that the Planning Department recommended that the application be denied. The City received four letters in opposition to the rezoning, which Mr. Golden said were from: 1) Walter D. Kies, President, Boynton Leisureville Community AsSOCo, Inc., 1807 S. W. 18th Street; 2) John A. Farrell, 2204 S. W. 21st Terrace; 3) S. A. Foreman, 2204 S. W. 21st Terrace; and 4) Quessell N. King, Vice President of Boynton Beach Community Association, 2102 S. W. 24th Street. Basically, Mr. GOlden said the four people objected to the proposed Land Use Amendment and rezoning. Chairman Ryder drew attention to paragraph 4, page 5 of the memorandum and read: ". . .The Comprehensive Plan encourages MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 commercial development at arterial and collector intersec- tions and discourages strip commercial development." He asked if S. W. 23rd Avenue is considered a collector. Mr. Annunziato replied that it is. Chairman Ryder undestood that the city felt shopping centers belong at the intersections of major arterials and was not aware that S. W. 23rd Avenue was considered a collector. Mr. Annunziato explained that it is functionally classified as a collector, as it does, in fact, connect two communities: Boynton BeaCh, Palm Beach County, and several neighborhoods. It is shown as a collector on the Comprehensive plan. Kiernan J. Kilday, Agent, Kilday & Associates, 1551 Forum Place, Bldg. 100, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401, said his firm was the land planning firm that filed the applica- tion and the site layout. He said the property is a bit of an island that has been sitting at this intersection for some time. While certain things can be done to the property, Mr. Kilday thought, because of some of the surrounding uses (the fire station to the north) and it being at a highly traveled intersection and in many ways a short cut type of intersection, the property has tended to sit there, and no use has yet come or been approved for the site. What they were proposing was a neighborhood commercial type center. Mr. Kilday said the Urban Land Institute breaks down the commercial centers into three major types: regional, like the Boynton Mall; a community center, like Boynton Beach Boulevard and Congress Avenue (Congress Avenue has two community centers); and a neighborhood type of center. A neighborhood cent.er is roughly about ten acres and usually has 50,000 square feet of floor area. This is slightly less than five acres and has 31,500 square feet of floor area. Mr. Kilday said they reduced the floor area in order to create a better buffer situation around the perimeter of the site. An updated plan was submitted to staff this past week showing an increase in the buffer area. Basically, Mr. Kilday said a neighborhood center should serve a 1/2 mile radius population of 4,000 to 8,000. The population currently exists in existing units in the area. Mr. Kilday thought the 1/2 mile radius was the most critical point of consideration tonight. The prime reason for a neighborhood center is to allow a place where immediate needs can be within a short walking or driving distance of neighborhoods to service needs without the need for a person to always get in a car and head to a major community shopping center. - 8 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Mr. Kilday called attention to commercial zoned areas within 1/2 mile of the property but said those areas are primarily offices, and a major office at that. Then there is the large C-3 property to the north, which is a home improvement center or single use type area. This proposal calls for a mixture of an anchor (small drug store) with retail shops coming around on the north and west and a bank with two drive-in tellers located at the intersection. Mr. Kilday emphasized that they were talking about a scale down thing as compared to a large scale shopping center. He thought they had to look at it in terms of the size they were talk- ing about and in terms of what the immediate use would be. In terms of compatibility, Mr. Kilday thought compatibility could be governed through the City site plan and the Community Appearance Board's process of review. In addition, the developer would be willing to limit uses as part of a private deed restriction with surrounding land owners. Mr. Kilday knew the City could not do it. They would limit certain things such as hours of operation, trash pickup, and servicing. If those items could be controlled in some sort of manner, Mr. Kilday thought a center could be put in. When talking about a 1/2 mile radius and the home improve- ment center on the corner, Mr. deLong asked what the distance of the Winn-Dixie shopping center and the Boynton Plaza is from this location. Chairman Ryder estimated it would be a mile. Mr. Kilday expressed they would not negate the 1/2 mile center, as this is another type of center. In his figures, Mr. deLong noticed Mr. Kilday had not included in the market analysis the additional retail space that has recently been constructed where nine movie theaters are going in (Forum Shoppes). Mr. Kilday replied that he could not answer correctly. ~e said he was familiar with the project, but the thrust of a major movie theater is to provide a far greater drawing power than something of this size. Other than the drug store, this would have no major attractor to pull people in outside of the immediate neigh- borhood. Mr. Kilday said people will probably stop here on their way home. Mr. deLong asked what the square footage is of the additional retail and office space that has been put in there by the Kessler operation. Mr. Annunziato replied that it is about 20,000 square feet of retail. Mr. Cannon advised that the square footage of the office building was about 70,000 square feet. - 9 MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Mr. deLong noticed Greentree Plaza was cited in the market analysis and asked if there is also another plaza there. Mr. Kilday answered that an office plaza is immediately west of Greentree. Mr. deLong asked how much office space, (which was eliminated from Mr. Kilday's analysis), is in that plaza. Mr. Kilday estimated it would probably have about 20,000 square feet. Mr. deLong commented that there is significantly more office than retail space available. Mr. Kilday agreed and said the big Boynton Center at Wool- bright Road with considerable office space is "within spitting distance" of this site. If the neighborhood center gets an office user, it will be more in the terms of a local real estate office. Vice Chairman Trauger noted in the statistics there were 17 banks and wondered if we need another one. Chairman Ryder questioned whether Mr. Kilday was aware that north of the mall, on the corner of Congress Avenue and 22nd Avenue, there will be a shopping center. Mr. Kilday did not see their drawing power going north of Boynton Beach Boulevard. That one would probably serve the area north of the mall, and this one would serve the south. They are very limited in terms of their drawing power. Chairman Ryder said it was a matter of the concept of having strip centers and having centers that make for arterial highway connections. The Comprehensive Plan generally does not like strip centers because it means they are interspersed between residential developments. Mr. Kilday did not think the city staff's report felt it would be a strip center. Chairman Ryder thought Mr. Kilday's report called it a strip center. Mr. Gregory observed that the staff's report concerned itself with the ultimate build out of Congress Avenue and asked when ultimate build out is expected. He also asked that the 16,000 trips be explained. Mr. Gregory questioned whether it was computed as a going and coming trip. Ken Rogers, Traffic Engineer, 1495 Forest Hill Boulevard, West Palm Beach, asked Mr. Gregory to show him where they were talking about 16,000 trips. Mr. Gregory thought they indicated there would be an increase of 16,000 trips at ultimate build out. Mr. Rogers referred the question to the city staff. In answer to the second part of Mr. Gregory's question, Mr. Rogers said they were talking about single, directional trips Mr. Gregory asked if ultimate build out on the major arterials was expected in a five or ten year period. Mr. - 10 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Annunziato answered that the design for that section of Congress Avenue is occuring now, and he suspected it would be under construction within a year. The construction will be for a four lane section with the potential of expanding to six lanes. Six lanes would probably occur at the build out of the thoroughfare system, which could be in the year 2000 or 2010. The four lanes Will probably be in place two years from today. Mr. Rogers said they had to be somewhat careful when talking about volumes as to levels of service in roadways. They are trying ito design to a level of service C. Mr. Rogers would not define that but said as Traffic Engineers and Planners, they try to achieve that level. One way of defining a level to service C is through the number of trips that would be going bY that road counted in a 24 hour period of time (average daily traffic). Another way of defining the level of service C is more definitive. That is going to the intersection where you have two major streets crossing, such as Congress Avenue. and S. W. 23rd, analyzing the traffic that be goinlg through in a peak hour period of time, and ~ '.ng if there is enough through lanes and turning lanes to handle the triaffic that is going through at that time. In its report, Mr. Rogers said the City staff was consistent and was using the average daily traffic method of determining whether or not a developer meets the level of service C. It was their analysis that the immediate plan of four laning Congress Avenue and the improvements that they planned for the intersection will accommodate the existing traffic, the traffic proposed from the project proposed, and the traffic proposed in the immediate future of the build out in this general area. When Congress Avenue is widened to six lanes, Mr. Rogers said there will be further addi- tional widening of the intersection of Golf Road and S. W. 23rd at Congress Avenue. Using the intersection analysis approach in determining whether they will be around a level of service C classification, they feel at that time this project!will not significantly impact the volumes going through the intersection to an extent that would bring the intersection over the level of service C. Mr. Rogers concluded that they do not feel the additional traffic being generated by this project will cause any major conce~rns to the capacity of the intersection and, therefore, did not feel the traffic, as an issue for the proposal before the Board tonight, was really an issue that should be used to tu~rn in a negative recommendation to the City Council. MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Mr. deLong pointed out that, apparently, the report the Members had from the Planning Department directly refuted what Mr. Rogers just said. He read from the 3rd paragraph under "Issues/Discussion" on page 3 of Mr. Annunziato's memo of July 31, 1985," At build out, under the existing zoning in the vicinity, it is expected that Congress Avenue will be carrying 38,000 trips per day and Golf Road will be carrying 12,0!00 trips per day. Thus, Congress Avenue will be operating at about 2:,000 trips per day over its capacity. The proposeed C-3 zoning would add 1,500 to 1,750 trips per day to Congress Avenue, which would aggravate the congestion which will occur on Congress Avenue, even with the existing zoning." Mr. Rogers said there are two ways of determining whether or not a roadway is over capacity. One is a very generalized method, which is determining the average daily traffic that is going by that road. The level of service C for a six lane road is 36,000 trips per day. More realistically, if they can break that 24 hour period of time down into one hour and analyze the number of vehicles that can go through the intersection in a peak hour of the day (when the majority of cars go through) and design the intersection to handle that volume of traffic, then they can take care of the other 23 hours of the day. The analysis during the peak hour is the more defined analysis and is more true as to whether or not you are actually at capacity. Mr. Rogers gave an example of a roadway carrying 36,000 trips per day and having 1,800 vehicles per hour 24 hours a day. Each hour is exactly the same, and Mr. Rogers said in that instance they would be designing a two lane roadway to handle the 36,000 trips per day. Depending on how high the peak hour is in relationship to the other hours during the day will determine whether or not the intersection is at capacity or over capacity. Congress Avenue is a major road. Fewer cars going on S. W. 23rd, east and west, will have less interference with the vehicles going north and south on Congress Avenue. They could, therefore, have a side road that had two intersec- tions, one with 8,000 trips a day going east and west, and one with 15,000 vehicles per day going east and west; have the through road at 36,000 vehicles a day and have one intersection operating at level service C and one intersec- tion operating at below level service C or at level service D. Mr. Rogers emphasized that it is the design of the intersection that controls the capacity. Approximately 36,000 vehicles per day is that capacity. However, depend- - 12 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 ing on the number of vehicles from the side road, that actual capacity could either go up or down a little bit. Mr. Rogers concluded by saying their analysis, based on projections, was that the proposed improvements with the existing traffic, proposed development in the area, plus the additional traffic that would be generated, would be adequate. From the standpoint of traffic, Attorney Perry thought, as far as the experts were concerned, it was a matter that could be handled. He asked the Members to look at the four acre piece of land bounded on the north by the fire station. At the rear of the fire station and down to the other side, on the east, there are single family lots. Attorney Perry did not think they were built, but they will be built at some point. He asked the Members to look at the intersection. Catty-cornered from it, you have a setback from the inter- section which allows some distance for those homes. He told the Members they could see what appeared to be buffering or water in there so the single family lots are set back some distance from Congress Avenue as well as the intersection. Attorney Perry said the commercial use proposed at this intersection is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan. He drew attention to pages 4 and 5 of Mr. Annunziato's memo and said the Planning Department went to some length to point out that commercial development of properties at this intersection would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Attorney Perry said their market study indicated that there would be a need for commercialization at this corner, in terms of the additional dwelling units that would be built in the area. If the C-3 use requested bothered the Board, he said that was not a problem for them because they could go to C-2. As again recognized by the City staff in the memorandum from Mr. Annunziato, Attorney Perry stressed that this is not a strip center but is intended to be a neighbor- hood type of situation that would be a convenience to the area. The most critical thing Attorney Perry said he would ask the Board to consider was, if they were going to talk in terms of a change, that it was shown on the Comprehensive Plan for public or private institutional use. At one time it was considered for a church and was owned by the church, but it never happened, and the property has been lying dormant for some period of time. Staff says you can put 30 single 13 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON B~ACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 family lots in there. Attorney Perry asked the Members if they would want to live in one of the 30 single family lots. They were talking about locating 30 homes right at the point of a major thoroughfare where it intersects with another thoroughfare. Attorney Perry asked for the postponement, as he would have liked to have the opportunity to sit with the people of Golfview Harbour because he did not know what they would like to see on the corner. If they talk in terms of resi- dential use, it would have to be, as staff indicated, some higher density use. Even then, Attorney Perry did not think it was conducive for that purpose. From a commercial point of view, it can be well buffered as to the residences (nine or ten that circlelthe property). Attorney Perry continued that they are proViding for a wall and ten feet of buffer area that can be heavily landscaped. That could be extended even further and is not a problem. Attorney Perry thought the question was, "What makes sense for this intersection?" Attorney Perry said they could labor all night long as to whether this would create a precedent and whether the other piece that is blank on the south side will come in and ask for Commercial. (He understood that was a bone of contention that had been presented to the Board before.) From the standpoint of precedent, Attorney Perry suggested that the other piece of property does not have a fire station located right next door to them. When the Board makes its recommendation, Attorney Perry asked the Members to consider: 1) They have a small parcel of four acres at the heart of what is going to be and what already is a major intersection. 2) It has the fire station next to it. 3) Is that the type of place the Members would want to live in, because that is what they would be con- demning that parcel of land to if they decide against the application. Attorney Perry asked the Members for their favorable consideration. Chairman Ryder suggested they look at the intersection. Quail Lake, on the westerly side, is right opposite it, and is under construction. He asked Attorney Perry if he felt people going there were making a mistake. As they could see from the map, AttOrney Perry said Quail Lake is a signifi- cantly larger tract of land that can provide substantial buffering. That is a lot different than trying to deal with four acres located strictly at the intersectiono Directly across, at Cranbrook Estates, Chairman Ryder said there are high priced homes. The development has been there - 14 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 for a long time, and he asked Attorney Perry if their values would be enhanced by having the shopping center. Attorney Perry said that was a point they could debate all night long, but he did not think it would decrease the value. Chairman Ryder agreed that the southerly side has been a bone of contention. Efforts have been made throughout the years to rezone that to commercial. He asked how the City could turn down any future requests for Commercial there if they go along with this. Attorney Perry replied that was a problem the City would have to wrestle with. He suspected the man who owns that piece of land will come back in again, regardless of whether this application is apprOved. If Attorney Perry understood the staff's recommendations, they were saying it made sense to have some form of commer- cial at the intersection in terms of the Comprehensive Plan, which is consistent. Staff was saying they did not think it needed to be that, and it could be residential. Attorney Perry was saying that the way that physical piece of land lays out, it is not very useable for the purposes staff is projecting. The other pieces are much larger. As the Members could see from the one that is catty-cornered, they have what appears to be a canal or some type of buffering that runs down along Golf Road and swings around the inter- section some distance. Vice Chairman Trauger noted the owner's name ("Round Table Group, Inc.") and asked Attorney Perry to identify some of the principals of the group. A man in the audience came forward and identified them as Clyde Worrell, John Mills, and Ken Crenshaw. Attorney Perry added that all of them are Boynton residents. He wished an opportunity to respond to comments by the opposition. Chairman Ryder asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of the application. There was no response. Chairman Ryder asked if anyone wished to speak an opposition to the proposal. The Vice President of Golfview Harbour Association said in 1984, Golfview Harbour Association voted to oppose any rezoning other than single family residential. That was on the southeast corner of Congress and Golf Road. At this time, it was their intention to reaffirm their position. The Vice President of the Association said the only thing they would consider on either side, north or south, would be single family residential. Walter D. Kies, President, Boynton Leisureville Community Association, Inc., of 2109 S. W. 22nd Street, presented the 15 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Board with 536 signatures of residents in opposition to the rezoning and said the people of Leisureville feel they do not need retail stores abutting their property. They have a four story office building going up, which will abut the northwest corner of their property, a huge commerce center abutting their property, and do not feel any more commer~cial zoning should abut their area. To explain the one month's delay that was requested, Mr. Kies said the owner's agents asked Monday if they could meet with Leisureville's Board of Directors on Monday, which they did. They made their presentation, and Mr. Kies recalled they were told at that time they should have come six or eight weeks ago. Leisureville would have had an open meeting for them; they could have addressed the residents, and the people could ask questions. Mr. Kies reiterated that they would be willing to have an open meeting with the residents, using Leisureville's clubhouse, if the applicant was willing to~ make a presentation. He said it would not be necessary for the Board to read his letter. Mr. Gregory asked if Mr. Kies would be amenable to the Board tabling this so the petitioner would have an opportunity to sit with the people of Leisureville. People in the audience asked what he meant and referred to all of the signatures. Mr. Kies replied that they should have done it six or eight weeks ago, but they would have a meeting if the petitioner wanted to meet with them. Mr. Ben Uleck shouted from the audience that the people do not want the meeting. H. Peter Mooij, 1341 S. W. 25th Avenue, Golfview Harbour, felt the staff did an outstanding job. In October of last year, Mr. Mooij said a petition was submitted with 350 names of residents in Golfview Harbour, Silverlake Estates, and Leisureville, which is on record with the City. They still stand by that petition, specifically, that they are opposed to any rezoning from single family residential to any commercialization whatsoever. One of the pet peeves of the 15 petitioners that went around the neighborhoods Mr. Mooij mentioned was that the developer had the opportunity to table or withdraw his request after all of the sweat and tears, pounding of the pavements, meetings, and discussions the petitioners go through. It takes days and weeks, and Mr. Mooij commended the Board for not honoring the request of the developer. Don Fenton, 2556 S. W. 23rd Cranbrook Drive, who also owns property at 2720 Yale Lane (across the street) said he is in - 16 MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 the catty-corner and is also in Golfview Harbour, so he is affected both places. Mr. Fenton is paying taxes of $1,107 for the privilege of living in a residential area and guessed that would be an average price for the other 168 residents of Silver Lake. Speaking for himself, he wanted to maintain the property as a residential area and thought it would be an adverse impact on the residential area. Regardless of all of the studies taken, Mr. Fenton defied anyone to go out from the Woolbright Corporate Center at 4:00 P. M. any day and try to turn north. The only way you can is to go up a meandering road, go back westv and come back on Woolbright Road. In the season, it is busy all of the time. It is already a hazard for vehicular traffic, and every corner dOes not need a shopping center. Mr. Fenton said the Board has to draw a line somewhere. Ralph Marchese, 1901 Roma Way, said the residents came to the City and bought property zoned R1AA with no traffic impact whatsoever. In seven years, he wondered where the traffic came from. He said he would hate to hear the noise that will go on. Mr. Marchese reiterated that the residents bought residential and deserve the Board's support. As no one else wished to speak, Chairman Ryder declared that the PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Chairman Ryder said there seemed to be a question about traffic but what they had to be aware of was that during the last two years, the City has had unprecedented commercial and industrial growth, but they have been confined to areas zoned for that purpose. In addition, residential growth has also been moving. When you consider changing the zoning to accommodate a commercial enterprise, Chairman Ryder said they had to be concerned about the fact that they will be impacting on residential areas. As Mr. Marchese mentioned, he thought that was an important factor. Communities have been established around this entire area, and the impact on that by adding a commercial enterprise cannot help but pose problems and depreciate values. Mr. deLong called attention to the multitude of stores and retail outlets commercially convenient in the area and expressed that he thought they picked the wrong area to impact. He did not think the residents wanted to be without services and did not mean to imply that. If you are prag- matic and go along that particular area, Mr. deLong said you can see that it has been inundated already with all kinds of stores, office buildings, and banks. Mr. deLong recalled at - 17 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 the last meeting, Vice Chairman Trauger brought up the fact that the City should have more R1AA zoning. Mr. deLong felt the City should have more C-3 and C-4 but did not feel this was the area for it. He agreed with Mr. Marchese that the Board had to keep faith with the people of Leisureville. Mr. deLong did not look favorably upon the petition~for rezoning. Chairman Ryder said the Board had a number of letters in opposition and only one letter that was in favor of the request. The Board also had a letter from Robert Wandelt, Member of the Board, 1134 S. W. 25th Avenue, which indicated he was in opposition to the proposed change. Vice Chairman Trauger moved that the request be DENIED, seconded by Mr. deLong. Motion carried 7-0. There was applause from the audience. As the next public hearing would take 1-1/2 hours or more, CHAIRMAN RYDER DECLARED AN INTERMISSION AT 8:55 P. M. The meeting resumed at 9:05 P. M. Because items 2, 3, and 4 were so interrelated, Mr. Annunziato said it was the Planning Department's desire to combine the presentation into one, if the applicant would also desire to do so. This way one could get a feeling as to how one application impacted on the other. However, Mr. Annunziato said each hearing would have to be addressed separately, from a public hearing point of view, and motions would have to be made separately. Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Woolbright Place PUD Kieran J. Kilday Jonathan Kislak, J. K. Fields Estate, George Elmore, First Baptist Church of Boynton Beach, Housing Capital Corporation North of Woolbright Road between S. W. 8th Street and the Seaboard Airline Rail- road tracks Request for an amendment to the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan from Local Retail Commercial, Moderate Density Residential, and High Density Residential to Medium Density Residential and rezoning from C-2 Neighborhood Commercial, R-lA Single Family Residential, and R-3 Multiple Family Residential to PUD (Planned Unit Development) with a Land Use Intensity of 5.0 18 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Woolbright Center Kieran J. Kilday Jonathan Kislak, J. K. Fields Estate, First Baptist Church of Boynton Beach Northeast corner of Woolbright Road and L.W.D.D. E-4 canal Request for an amendment to the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan from Local Retail Commercial and Moderate Density Residential to Office Commercial, and rezoning from C-2 Neighborhood Commercial and R-lA Single Family Residential to C-1 Office and Professional Commercial for the purpose of construction of an office and bank buildings Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: The Shoppes at Woolbright Place Kieran J. Kilday Jonathan Kislak, First Baptist Church of Boynton Beach North of Woolbright Road, West of Seaboard Airline Railroad tracks Request for an amendment to the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan from Moderate Density Residential to Local Retail Commercial, and rezoning from C-2 Neighborhood Commercial and R-lA Single Family Residential to C-3 Community Commercial Mr. Golden pointed out the three areas on the overlay. Mr. deLong asked that the complex housing the drug store, bank, and Torchio's meat market be pointed out. Chairman Ryder stated that it was to the west and bordered on 18th Street. Pylon Interstate Park is across the street. Presentation by Mr. Cannon Mr. Cannon described the surrounding areas, as outlined in the memorandums dated July 31, 1985, addressed to the Board from Mr. Annunziato. Another single family area to the north of the PUD, zoned R1A, is a developed portion of the Lake Boynton subdivision and is developed down to about 4th Avenue (the last east/west street going south before you get to the PUD). To the east is the Seaboard Airline Railway tracks and a narrow M-1 zoned strip. Several acres owned by Seaboard Airline Railway are to the south, and to the south of that, there are nine acres that are owned by Mr. Bill Winchester. MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Presently, the only paved access to the M-1 property is from Ocean Drive. There are various local streets that dead-end at the railroad. As part of the PUD, those local streets would be abandoned. To the south of the three zonings (Woolbright Road), there is a C-3 zoned parcel presently vacant, which is about nine acres. Mr. Cannon said they understand from the developer that it will be developed into a hotel. To the west is a C-1 parcel that is part of the Pylon ~Interstate Park, which is currently half developed. An office building is there, and another office building just like it will go up next to it. West of the E-4 Canal, there is also another existing vacant C-1 district, which was zoned from residential to C-1 about a year ago. Currently, the majority of the PUD and also the proposed commercial zoning is zoned R1A, which is the single family zoning district. Mr. Cannon said the R1A zoning will allow about 350 single family homes to be developed. The current zoning regulati current subdivision requirements are for a 60 foot right-of-way. All of the rights-of-way the Members saw were 50 foot rights-of-way. The R-3 zoning strip along the SAL tracks could be developed for about 130 apartments, taking into consideration that the rights-of-way that dead-end at the track would be abandoned. There is C-2 zoning for a depth of about 400 feet along Woolbright Road, which currently occupies about 7-1/2 acres of develolpable land. If this C-2 zoning district were develope~ under our current zoning regulations, about 125,000 square feet of retail could be built, and about 230,000 square feet of office. As far as the current ownership and platting, Mr. Cannon said the Members had the Planning Department's reports. There are three major owners in the vicinity: 1) The Janet Knox Field Estate owns a strip of lots along the western portion of the property; 2) Mr. Kislak owns a majority of the remainder of the property along the east and north side; 3) First Baptist Church owns a parcel somewhat centrally located in the property at the south side. There are also two individual lot owners. As stated before, Mr. Cannon said this is part of the Lake Boynton Estates subdivision except for an out parcel which the Members could see in the center, east of the property, and also an unplatted portion along the E-4 Canal. This was platted for 50 foot lots and 50 foot rights-of-way in the 1920s, which do not conform to the current zoning or subdivision requirements. MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 The master plan for Woolbright Place PUD was shown, and Mr. Cannon said the applicant was proposing 800 dwelling units. The surrounding land uses and zoning were indicated on the overlay. The master plan the applicant was proposing would allow for two story multi-family units along the parcel west of the collector road which runs up through the middle and would allow for up to three story multi-family units on the remainder of the parcel. The applicant proposed a 110 foot buffer on the west side. The width of the buffer would include the abandoned right-of-way of 8th Street. The applicant was showing a 25 foot buffer along the north side, and the Planning Department was recommending that it be increased to 40 feet for two story dwelling units and to 100 feet if the units along the northern perimeter go up to three stories. The applicant was also showing a buffer on the east side which, if there is a drainage easement running along the railroad tracks, would have to be increased to 50 feet. The master plan for the PUD also included a church and school, which was the rectangular parcel in the southeast corner of the PUD. The plan stated it will be a 1,200 foot church, a 500 maximum student school, and also a meeting hall. The church site will occupy 15 acres. Access to all three of the parcels will be by a single 80 foot collector going through the center of the project. It would be a public road. A signalized intersection will be where the collector right-of-way will intersect with Wool- bright Road. Along the west side of the property, the applicant has proposed a buffer strip, and this would include the abandoned right-of-way for 8th Street. Since So W. 8th Street abuts properties in Leisureville, Mr. Cannon said it could not be unilaterally abandoned by the applicant. It was assumed by the Planning Department that the applicant w:ould join with the residents of Leisureville in abandoning the property, and the applicant stated to the Planning Department that they would be willing to take over the main- tenance of that strip even if half of the right-of-way is abandoned to the property owners in Leisureville. Staff also recommended that the applicant provide an 80 foot right-of-way along the south end of the PUD or along the south end of the proposed C-3 zoning in order to provide access to the M-1 zoning, which lies to the east across the railroad tracks. On the master plan which the applicant MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 submitted, he was showing access to this industrially zoned property at the northern end of the property. City staff found that to be unacceptable for two reasons: 1) That access would cause truck and industrial traffic to go through a residential neighborhood. 2) That access would create an extremely long cul-de-sac going down the M-1 strip to the south, and the cul-de-sac would exceed the maximum allowed in the City's subdivision regulations. The Planning Department's position was that if the appli- cant wanted to have the access as the only access to that M-1 strip, they would have to get a variance on that require- ment of subdivision regulatiOns. Mr. Cannon continued that the applicant submitted a new recreation plan and was requesting 1/2 credit against the Parks and Recreation dedication requirements, based on the recreation facilities they were providing on site. The applicant also submitted a site plan. Three recreation sites were shown. One would be along the collector street and was marked "Parcel A." Recreation site B was along the eastern, central part of the property, and there was recreation parcel C located in the southeast corner. All residents of the PUD would have access to the three recreation sites. In order to meet the remainder of the park dedication requirements, the applicant is going to provide or dedicate a 7.3 acre public park at the northwest corner of the property. Six acres are required, and the applicant proposes a swap for 1.3 acres (Poinciana Park) which would be added to the six acres for a total of 7.3 acres. Mr. Cannon said the C-3 zoning district would occupy 18 acres. The applicant represented that he wanted to build approximately 146,000 square feet of retail, and that included four out parcels along the collector road. The Planning Department figured out that the applicant could put about 175,000 square feet on the site. Also, under the C-3 zoning, the applicant could build up to four stories. The C-1 zoning is for 8.2 acres to the west of the collector right-of-way, and the applicant represented that he is going to build about 67,000 square feet of office and banking facilities on that parcel. Chairman Ryder asked that Mr. Golden point out the C-1 and C-3 development to the people. Mr. Cannon continued that the staff compiled a table summarizing the impact, based on the maximum square feet 22 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 allowed by the zoning. The water and sewer impact would be significant upon the PUD. The water and sewer demands would both increase by about 63% on the parcel. There would not be a significant increase for water and sewer on the commer- cial parcel. They also noticed that the increase in the water and sewer demand on the PUD would be about equivalent to an additional 264 dwelling units compared to what the existing zoning allows. The traffic would not increase significantly for the PUD but would probably go down slightly. The traffic would increase by about 1,000 trips per day for the proposed C-1 district and about 5,800 trips per day for the proposed C-3 district. With respect to the increase in traffic, Mr. Cannon said the Planning Department found this would cause some aggravation on the anticipated traffic levels at build out. When Woolbright Road is six lanes at build out, it will ha~e a capacity of about 36,000 trips a day. Kimley-Horn, County Traffic Engineer, at this point is projecting it will be carrying.about 40,000 trips per day so it would already be about 4, day over the capacity. Mr. Cannon advised that the Department was projecting that these rezonings would add about 5,000 trips per day. The applicant submitted traffic impact statements for each rezoning, and the Planning Department recommended that if the Board and the City Council approved the rezonings, that they be approved subject to the improvements that are required on the traffic impact statements. The staff also was asking that the applicant provide a revised statement, which would include all of the rezoning, including the rezoned property in the background traffic. The Staff's finding in respect to the market analysis sub- mitted by the applicant was that it supported C-3 zoning on the parcel. However, it had a much weaker conclusion with respect to the demand for the C-1 zoning, since there is somewhat of a "glut" of office buildings in the area. Staff also found that commercial zoning at this location would meet the City's Comprehensive Plan criteria since it is in proximity to major intersections (I-95 and Woolbright Road). They also found since commercial zoning is already established in the area, commercial zoning on these two particular parcels would not constitute spot zoning. Each rezoning was analyzed by the Planning Department with respect to its compatibility to the surrounding zoning, and Mr. Cannon said they found the PUD would generally be MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 incompatible with the surrounding single family neighborhood They also had some questions about the use of the strip which extends north along the SAL tracks. The applicant did not indicate exactly what use the strip would be put to, and staff thought it could create a general nuisance if it is not maintained as part of the PUD. Mr. Cannon said staff was asking that the applicant either state what the use of the strip will be or withdraw that parcel from the rezoning application. Mr. Golden showed the location of the strip, and Mr. Cannon informed Mr. deLong that the strip would be part of the PUD. From what staff could gather, it would simply be used toward the densities the applicant was asking for. With regard to the density on the PUD, the applicant was asking for medium density residential on the parcel to the east of the collector. They propose to take what is an existing moderate density area and high density area along the track and redistribute those two density categories to a new medium density, which would be in between the modern high density. The area west of the collector would remain under the exist- ing moderate density category on the Land Use Plan. As far as their findings with respect to compatibility, Mr. Cannon said C-1 zoning would be compatible with the proposed C-3 zoning. However, staff thought C-3 would cause an intrusion into the single family neighborhood and would have a significant adverse impact on the residents of Leisureville that are on the west side of the E-4 canal. In fact, they would be creating the row of offices which could extend out to 25 feet or even to 30 feet. C-3 zoning on the 18 acres in the center would not create a land use conflict if it were to be developed as a one or two story shopping center. However, Mr. Cannon said staff felt there could be a potential for conflict if it was developed into a four story commercial center. Primarily because of the Land Use Conflict, the Planning Department recommended C-1 and PUD zoning. They also found that the water and sewer impact would significantly increase on the PUD. Because of this increase, the PUD was also unacceptable. The market for the C-1 uses would be weak, and Mr. Cannon said the Planning Department found that to be an argument against the C-1 zoning. The market analysis supplied by the applicant probably was valid in that C-3 zoning probably could be built out without adversely affect- ing the other shopping centers in the city. - 24 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 The primary advantage, from the rezoning before the Members, is that the property is currently under five owners (three major owners and two minor owners). This probably represents a unique opportunity as far as the planned development of the entire parcel. Mr. Cannon said they believe the property is developable with the existing zoning. About 50 single family houses have been built to the north within the past five years, and staff thought it was reasonable to assume the sinHle family development could continue south- ward. If the Planning and Zoning Board and City Council decide to approve any or all of the rezonings, Mr. Cannon said staff would recommend they be approved, subject to the staff comments and the memorandums of the Planning and Zoning Department, and that the comments be attached. Woolbright Place PUD Mr. Cannon said there were comments from the Building, Engineering, Utilities, Planning, and Recreation Departments, Office of the County Engineer, and the City Forester/Horticulturist. Three traffic impact analyses were submitted, and the requirements in those impact statements would have to be attached to each rezoning. The impact studies have been reviewed and approved by the Palm Beach Engineering Depart- ment. Vice Chairman Trauger asked if it had been resolved how Mr. Winchester will get into his piece of property. Mr. Cannon replied that the Planning Department had made a comment. Vice Chairman TrauHer knew they made a comment but wondered if that would be in the agreement with the developer. Mr. Cannon thought they would have to ask the developer if he would go along with it. Chairman Ryder asked that Mr. Golden point where the M-1 area is located (between the railroad and 1-95, extending all the way up) and said the entrance would have to be from the Woolbright entrance and would have to cut across to the east to get to the M-1 area. He said the Board had letters to the effect that the owners of the M-1 area are opposed. As to accessing the property east of the Seaboard Airline Railroad, Mr. Annunziato said this presents real difficult policy issues for the public. The way the configuration of unimproved streets (avenues that run east and west) are, Mr. Annunziato said staff's position is that it is not a problem at this point and time but is really a matter of the - 25 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 property owner on the east side of the railroad track negoti- ating with the railroad and improving one of the rights of way to improve the property. If this zoning is superimposed over that situation, the problems become more significant. It now becomes incumbent upon government to continue to pro- vide access to that property and is required in our sub- division regulations that we have streets project into unplatted properties to serve those properties. Mr. Annunziato told the Members they would hear a presenta- tion from the applicant that at best, the access to Mr. Winchester's property is going to be very dangerous, if not impossible, with the alternative being to extend through an easement for a right-of-way south from Ocean Drive that would have some policy ramifications with respect to direct- ing more industrial traffic over the Ocean Avenue exit onto Boynton Beach Be by 7th Street, which has been a problem. Mr. Annun concluded that it is a very difficult issue, and hle did not think it could be resolved at this point. However, staff's position was that right now it is not a problem. If, by the applications, it becomes a problem, then it will !become the applicant's problem to solve. Mr. Schultz asked if Mr. Cannon said the cul-de-sac link was prohibited. Mr. Annunziato replied that our subdivision regulations preclude cul-de-sacs in excess of 1,320 feet. The access they are proposing north of their PUD (3rd or 4th Avenue) would still result in an inconsistency with the sub- division limits because from that point south to the southerly limits of Mr. Winchester's property, you would exceed 1,320 feet and would be in violation. Mr. Annunziato informed Mr. Gregory there would be a potential for a variance with the result that the variance would push industrial property into the Ocean Drive area, which is already heavily impacted with industrial traffic. Mr. Gregory noticed Mr. Annunziato said it would have to be a problem between the individual owner of the M-1 and the proposed owners of this particular piece of property. He questioned whether they could get permission from Seaboard Airline Railroad and if Seaboard would allow a cut over to the M-1 property. Mr. Annunziato replied that Seaboard is very reluctant to allow additional crossings at their rail- road rights-of-way, and he thought it would be very difficult. However, at this point, Mr. Annunziato said it is not a public problem. - 26 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Presentation by Applicant Attorney Martin Perry appeared before the Board to repre- sent the applicants in items 2, 3, and 4. They tried but were unable to present a slide presentation. Attorney Perry said Ken Rogers, Traffic Engineer, and Bill Wantman, Wantman and Associates, 2328 South Congress Avenue, West Palm Beach, would comment on some of the issues already discussed, such as the railroad crossing and the M-1 access problem. Presentation by Mr. Kilday Mr. Kilday had graphics to explain what they are trying to do. The first graphic showing the five various property owners was a key consideration they wanted the Board to make in considering the PUD property. Woolbright Road was on the left side of the drawing. North was to the right. The yellow bordered area is owned by the major land holder, who owns all of the C-2 zoning along Woolbright Road, as well as the bulk of the property to the north. The First Baptist Church owns the large red piece, which was held back from Woolbright Road by the C-2 zoning that was made up into a bunch of lots. The Field Estate was the long blue area, which abuts the E-4 canal and goes north along 8th Street. Two small individual lots that were out parcels were picked up (Housing Capital Corporation and the Elmore property). The green square was a 1.3 acre platted park named "Poinciana Park", which was dedicated by plat to the City as a public park. Mr. Kilday said they have been able to put all of these ownerships under contract so that an overall plan could be developed to service some of the owners such as First Baptist Church, as well as to try to pull together what has been an amount of properties that has grown over the last fifty years into these different ownerships. Attorney Perry interjected that it has taken 15 to 16 months to piece all of this together, with all of the different ownerships involved. In order to acquire various parcels, it was necessary to also acquire various parcels of Lake Boynton Estates, which proceeded all the way up to Boynton Beach Boulevard. The next drawing showed the master plan of the residential portion. Mr. Kilday said five major portions are coming in as part of the PUD and commercial request: 1) the church site (church and school); and 2) the residential areas. (The - 27- MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 one on the west side of the road abuts existing Leisureville and the E-4 Canal and has been held to the moderate density recommended by the plan. The area on the east side of the site, which would be the area that currently has some high density and some moderate recommendation, would be developed at medium density and would run toward the railroad tracks which abut the east side of the property.) The 3rd element of the plan was recreation. The four recreation parcels were shown on the drawing. The top parcel with 7.38 acres would be dedicated to the City for development as a public park site. The site would be made up of six acres,.which Would be the dedication of the developer and 1.38 acres would be a relocation of the park. Areas A and B were intended for the two major residential parks, and area C was located adjacent to the church. All recreation facilities would be open to all members of the PUD. Using the literal interpretation of the Code, Mr. Kilday said they submitted the C-1 parcel as part of the PUD. (Element 4)i. Upon meeting with staff, it was decided, and Mr. Kilday ~assured the Board that they recognize, that the market for this project will be other than just the people who live in the PUD. That was why it was a separate peti- tion. The green area along the canal is a buffer area, which is part of the overall buffer system of the PUD. Mr. deLong asked how wide the buffer area is. Mr. Kilday replied that it is 50 feet beyond the canal, which he believed was 150 feet. The last element of the Woolbright Place project was the shopping center, which they located east of the office complex and immediately west of 1-95. As previous petitions proved, residential uses do not want to be up against commercial~ They tried to take their most intense commer- cial and surround it by the PUD. In doing that, Mr. Kilday said they will make sure it is properly buffered from surrounding uses. Because it will be at the entrance of a major residential project, they will want to make it attractive, Mr. Kilday said the elements altogether form Woolbright Place. The next graphic showed a single story, Colonial style shopping center, which would be on the C-3 parcel. Mr. Kilday emphasized that it would not be a four story shopping center. The front elevation would be Mediterranean, and the back side illustrated the buffer area around the perimeters of the PUD. - 28 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 The next drawing was a blow up of the three privately owned recreation parcels and a concept of the pools intended on the facilities, fishing piers, and such that would be permitted. In addition, a jogging trail they plan to put within the fifty foot buffer area and certain portions of the PUD was shown. Mr. Kilday then showed a drawing of the entrance, as it is intended off of Woolbright Road. The whole concept of the plan, and the reason they asked that all three petitions be presented together, was that they wanted to have a community that would take into account the commercial area, the church, the residential, and have an identity so that any one of the elements are identified and unified. Mr. Kilday also showed a planned view of the kind of entrance treatment to the project they would want to put on S. W. 8th Street, off of Woolbright Road. Mr. Kilday told the Members that they did three cross- sections showing the relationship along their west border with' the residential Leisureville development. The top one would be the northerly cross section, and he drew attention to a house in Leisureville, an open area (which was 8th Street coming through on the north end of the project), a 25 foot buffer area before you get to the dedication to the City fOr the park site. Mr. Kilday continued that the middle one would be further down, where their residential use abuts Leisureville's resi- dential use. In that case, he said you would have the house again and the backyard. The open area was S. W. 8th Street, which would be abandoned, subject to staff's request, and the buffer would begin on the far side of that 8th Street. Two story units were shown there to show the relationship. The bottom one had the PUD, which would be the Cl zoning area that would abut Leisureville on the other side of the E-4 Canal. It showed the 150 foot wide canal, the 50 foot wide buffer, which would be a raised berm and planting area, and the two stories, which would be the maximum height of any of the three office buildings proposed on that parcel. Mr. Kilday said everyone could see a lot of concern had gone into this so all of the pieces of the puzzle would fit together to create a community that had an identity and which will fit into a part of Boynton Beach that, for some reason (probably because there were so many different owners), has sat there while the rest of the City has grown around it. - 29 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Mr. Kilday informed Mr. deLong that Cl is restricted to two stories. Presentation by Mr. Rogers Ken Rogers, Traffic Engineer, referred to the staff comments and said the three projects had three individual traffic impact analyses. In talking to staff, originally, the ques- tion was asked, "How do you want the traffic reports pre- sented?" Mr. Rogers said the indication was, "In accordance with the County's standards." He talked to Charles Walker, Director of the County's Traffic Division, and Mr. Walker wanted three individual traffic analyses. Mr. Rogers said they heard of the staff comments last week and had been try- ing to piece together the three reports so they could present one combined analysis. Unfortunately, he did not have anything written for the Board this evening. Mr. Rogers said he could tell the Board what his work so far had done, and that was that the only impact of combining the traffic from the three different projects would be to S. W. 8th Street and Woolbright Road. In addition to the require- ments stated in his report, Mr. Rogers said there would be three additional requirements: 1. There would ultimately be a need for a dual left turn lane on S. W. 8th Street so that two lanes of traffic could turn east going towards 1-95. 2. The right turn lane on Woolbright Road turning into S. W. 8th Street would have to be lengthened. 3. The left turn lane on Woolbright Road, turning into S. W. 8th Street would have to 'be lengthened to accommodate the impact for all three projects. Mr. Rogers said they looked at the other intersections in the area, and the combining of the traffic will not require any other roadway improvements as a result of considering all three projects at the same time. Again touching on the capacity at level of service C for Woolbright Road, Mr. Rogers commented that they were looking at a planning number of 36,000 vehicles per day. That was not absolute, but he felt confident that after the alternate development of Woolbright Road (when all the projects and corridors are developed, the traffic is there, and Woolbright is six. laned with the improvements at the intersection), the traffic will work. - 3O MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Across the road is the Commerce Center, and Chairman Ryder wondered if Mr. Rogers was aware of the commitments that had already been made on the part of the city with regard to that development. He added that what they could see there was far from the finished product because the Commerce Center has approval for four multi-level office buildings besides that. Chairman Ryder asked if Mr. Rogers took into account that westbound cars have to cut in there, and they would be in the same direction as they would be enter- ing Woolbright Road on this development. Mr. Rogers replied that the intersection of S. W. 8th Street has been aligned purposely with~the driveway into the Pylon Industrial Park. He felt the eventual signalization of that intersection, plus the turn lanes he just outlined to the Board Members, would be adequate to handle the traffic at that intersection. At the present time, Chairman Ryder said they have ware- houses and offices, the newly completed office building, will have several multi-level office buildings in the future, and possibly a hotel down by the railroad and Woolbright. He stressed that all of these things are factors, and it usually does not occur very readily that Woolbright would go to six lanes before these things happen. Mr. Rogers replied that the main impact between the three projects before the Board tonight and the industrial park to the south is between the intersection of S. W. 8th and 1-95, which is only several hundred feet to the east. Once you get past 1-95, the impact drops off dramatically. Mr. Rogers said they feel the design of the interchange at 1-95 and Woolbright Road, plus the proper signalization and turn lanes at this intersection, is adequate to handle the traffic. Chairman Ryder asked Mr. Rogers if he was aware that a four story office building is going up to the west, on Woolbright, next to the Sun Bank, before you get to Congress Avenue. Mr. Rogers did not realize it would be a four story build- ing. When you get to Congress Avenue, Chairman Ryder informed him there would be Woolbright Center with twin four story buildings. North, there is a three story building on the west side of Congress Avenue. At Boynton Beach Boule- vard, there will be an office building at the Forum Shoppes. Chairman Ryder read that there is an office "glut" in Palm Beach County. If all that traffic was coming down Woolbright Road to those projects in front of this project, Mr. Rogers said there - 31- MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 would be a lot of trouble, but those projects have to also be served by the growing community west of Boynton Beach in the Military Trail and Jog Road area, where the County has some strict zoning requirements. Those developments would not be allowed in the Jog Road area. Traffic would be coming from all directions. Mr. Rogers emphasized that they feel the ultimate growth has been addressed, and Wool- bright Road will not be sufficiently impacted to cause the rejection of the project being presented on the grounds of traffic impact. Mrs. Huckle asked if Mr. Rogers could roughly estimate the distance, in terms of feet, between the peak height of 1-95 to the S. W. 8th Street intersection where he said it would go through signalization. She was wondering how much room there would be for back up. Mr. Rogers was not exactly sure but estimated that there was approximately 1,100 feet. He assured the Members that there was adequate separation between the interchange and this intersection to allow for the proper signalization. Mrs. Huckle asked if he was certain of the signalization at the intersection and if he had reason to believe that signalization will be put there in the future, in spite of their project. Mr. Rogers believed iit was a requirement of the Pylon Industrial Park and said they are also recommending it as a condition of the approval of those projects. Mr. Annunziato interjected that the City has requested and, through the procedure, has required that developments bond a proportionate share of the traffic signals. The develop- m~nt to the south has bonded its proportionate share of that traffic signal. There was no doubt in Mr. Annunziato's mind that whatever develops on the north side of Woolbright Road will end up bonding the remainder of the traffic signal. When it is determined that it is warranted, it will be constructed, and it will be a signalized intersection. Backing up from a signal onto the off ramp of 1-95 was what had concerned Mrs. Huckle. Mr. Rogers reiterated that there is adequate stacking distance in both directions and adequate separation for that. Presentation by Attorney Perry During the staff presentation, Attorney Perry noted a ques- tion was raised relative to the little green peninsula jetting up to the north. Because of its narrow size, there is little that can be done with that piece of property by way of housing, etc. They propose to utilize it for some MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 type of passive recreation area that could be used for addi- tional jogging trails, picnics, a nature area, etc. The maintenance would be borne by the condominium association of this PUD, so they would not be looking at anything that would become an eye sore. Attorney Perry continued that it lies along the tracks and provides a buffering to potential residences which are and will be constructed to the west of it. The M-1 area has been of some concern to them from the time staff indicated a need existed for providing access to the area. Attorney Perry said they have had discussions with representatives of the railroad, and he hoped Mr. Schroeder and/or Mr. Winchester would be here this evening. He did not think they were present but had a copy of a letter from Michael A. Schroeder, Attorney at Law, 1 Lincoln Place, Suite 301, 1900 Glades Road, Boca Raton, Florida 33431, Attorney for Bill R. Winchester and Elsie Winchester, his wife. Attorney Perry also had a letter from John T. Alderson, Jr., Assistant General Solicitor, Seaboard System Railroad, 500 Water Street, Jacksonville, Florida 32202, dated August 9, 1985, copy of which is attached to the original copy of these minutes. In his letter from the railroad, Attorney Alderson wrote that it was understood that Attorney Perry's client owns property located to the west of Seaboard System Railroad's right-of-way and would propose to develop same in a manner that would preclude construction of a grade crossing to serve parcels 701 and 703 located to the east of their tracks and right-of-way. A copy of Seaboard's policy statement was attached to the letter, and Mr. Alderson believed it would demonstrate Sea- board's strong desire to avoid the creation of new grade crossings whenever possible. Seaboard likewise tries to discourage the opening of public grade crossings. The letter also stated that they sometimes permit grade crossings to be opened, but their efforts try and focus on an ample demonstration of necessity. With reference to Seaboard's letter, Attorney Perry commented that it will be extremely difficult to get approval from Seaboard for any additional grade crossings in there. Sea- board currently has one on Ocean Avenue, which they use to access their own property. The Winchester piece has a problem in the sense that the railroad blocks Winchester's - 33- MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 access to Ocean Avenue, but Attorney Perry said Seaboard was saying they could provide that. He thought they were getting down to the fact that a public safety issue is involved. If they create a grade crossing, no matter how this property is developed, it will be developed as residential property. Attorney Perry said you are going to have M-1 industrial traffic if they have a grade crossing going through a resi- dential area, whether the staff recommendation is adhered to or whether the Board grants their request, so that is a problem. It was the same problem staff indicated where the applicant referenced a possible grade crossing at the northern end of their, project, which would create industrial traffic through the residential area of Lake Boynton es. Attorney Perry saw it as a problem all the way thr gh and thought they were ultimately looking at perhaps a variance from the subdivision requirements that would allow the WinChester parcel access from Ocean Avenue through the railroad property, which they indicate they are willing to grant. Beyond that, Attorney Perry said they have a problem which they (as the applicant), Winchester, or the City would not have any control over. It lies within the purview and control of Seaboard System Railroad, and there is not an easy answer to it. Any access has to go through residential property, no matter what you do. In addition to that, the closer you get to Woolbright Road, you have a problem, because there you have a very narrow strip, elevation problems, and, from an engineering point of view, it is almost impractical, if not impossible. Attorney Perry wanted to touch on that because Mr. Winchester had written, through his Attorney, and made the objection. An additional aspect they are still looking into is that land (going back to the late 40s when the right-of-way was originally taken for what was then State Road 9) which became 1-95. Although Attorney Perry could not currently prove it and was still researching it, he hoped to have an answer by the City Council meeting. He thought that land was originally compensated for and was condemned and taken. As the State does in many cases, where they had no use for all of the land, they gave it back to the property owner. Attorney Perry did not know that was true but suspected it was the case. He was not sure what bearing that would have on it and said perhaps City Attorney Vance would have to comment on it. - 34 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 In terms of the overall project, Attorney Perry thought it was important to also note the linkage here between Wool- bright Avenue to what will be S. W. 8th Street. You can see a winding through the project, the realignment which staff is even supporting, and the abandonment which will ultimately go up and connect with Boynton Beach Boulevard. All of Boynton Beach Boulevard is being realigned to intersect at the intersection on S. W. 8th Street. What you have now is a major, alternate north/south route other than 1-95 to get from Woolbright Road all the way to the new Boynton Beach regional mall on Congress Avenue and Old Boynton Road. Attorney Perry thought it would alleviate problems that Leisureville is experiencing by people taking a short cut from Woolbright to the shopping centers on Congress Avenue. He thought this alternate route, which would be a much better way to get north would be utilized over that, and the Leisureville people should experience some benefit from that. Unlike the Golf Road petition, which they did not have much luck with, Attorney Perry said in this case, they spent a great deal of time meeting with people and talked to in excess of 200 people preceding this meeting. A good many of them were present, and Attorney Perry believed they were affiliated with the First Baptist Church. A great deal of negotiations have between the petitioner and First Baptist Ch ~lative to setting up an area accept- able to the church, and that is why the church is located in the PUD. Attorney Perry informed the Members that they made a slide presentation to the congregation of the First Baptist Church a week or so ago. In addition, they met with the Board of Directors of the Leisureville Association most closely related to them. He was not sure of their response, but the comments vocalized were not adverse. Questions were raised as to S. W. 8th Street and Ocean Avenue and how traffic would impact them. Because S. W. 8th Street will become the major north/south route to Boynton Beach Boule- vard, Leisureville will not be adversely impacted. Attorney Perry pointed out that every effort was made to present a plan of development that has been designed to buffer the Leisureville residents from both the C-1 commer- cial, which would be no more than two stories, with a 50 foot heavily landscaped buffer strip, in addition to the canal right-of-way, which would provide significant distance. Attorney Perry said they discussed with the Leisureville Board of Directors the area where S. W. 8th Street will be - 35 MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 abandoned in part. Obviously, that will require the cooper- ation of 20 homeowners in Leisureville. If the abandonment is effected, those 20 homeowners, more or less, will have gained 20 feet of the 40 foot right-of-way. 20 feet will go to the applicant. There was concern about the maintenance. Since the appli- cant will have to maintain its 20 feet, Attorney Perry said it would not be that significant a difference to have their condominium association take care of the other 20 feet. If they had the cooperation of the 20 lot owners, they could utilize that area for a park. Attorney Perry suggested families would be in their development, and a proposal was made to fence the 50 foot buffer so children would not be passing over into Leisureville's side to make use of the park. Attorney Perry said their desire has been to try to set the project up in a way that they can be a good neighbor. From the standpoint of the C-3 area, they believe the market study demonstrates the need. They are at a major intersec- tion of 1-95 and Woolbright Road, which is where that type of commercial should be located. It has good access from Woolbright and 1-95 and makes good. sense there. In terms of trying to anticipate problems they would have in connec- tion with their negotiations with the church, Attorney Perry said they sat with Pastor Brannon and worked out a list of deed restrictions, which were voluntary on the applicant's part. Mr. deLong asked how the deed restrictions could hold up. Attorney Perry replied that they could make the deed restric- tions in favor of the residents of their community and in favor of the church, which is what they assured the church they would do. In terms of enforcement, their entire community could come in to enforce that, as well as the Church which will make sure it is adhered to. With regard to the small strip by the tracks that will be left there, where the PUD is, Mr. deLong requested Attorney Perry to confirm, for the record, that the homeowners of the PUD will be responsible for the maintenance and it will be a passive recreation area. Attorney Perry confirmed this and also confirmed Mr. deLong's statement that the developer will put in the improvements such as a jogging path and picnic area. Attorney Perry said they could come up with a detailed statement with reference to that. Vice Chairman Trauger was worried about the landlock and asked if the developer would be willing to dedicate a right- - 36 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 of-way to the City, following Woolbright, to get Mr. Winchester into the applicant's access road. Attorney Perry had no objection to working with Mr. Winchester and said he has represented Mr. Winchester and is a friend of Mr. Winchester's lawyer. Attorney Perry said it is not their intent to leave Mr. Winchester in a posture where he has no relief. They did prepare a plan and showed it to Mr. Annunziato. Attorney Perry alluded to along the south side along Woolbright and said if the Board wanted to impose that condition, they would live with it. What he was saying was somebody will ultimately have to make that decision, and they did not know whether it woUld be made favorably. Ultimately, the City may have to consider a variance from that subdivision requirement that limits the length. Attorney Perry stated that they will work with anybody on that issue. Vice Chairman Trauger remarked that they will leave Mr. W~nchester landloCked. Attorney Perry emphasized that it is not their intent to hurt anybody. Those in Favor Chairman Ryder asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of any of the proposals. Rev. Charles E. Brannon, representing the fellowship of First Baptist Church of Boynton Beach, 301 North Seacrest Boulevard, gave five "good, positive" reasons of why their fellowship was in favor of the project: 1. It is an asset to the community to have a unified development rather than having five owners coming in at separate times in the future developing the site. 2. The Church intends to build an outstanding church on the site to serve the community and the entire city. They have been working on the project a number of years in building a new church and feel it will be a positive asset to the entire area. 3. It is a residential area as well as commercial. Families will be there, and it will be an open community for every age group, which is a very positive thing. 4. The commercial uses of the site have restrictions. Rev. Brannon had a list, which they negotiated very carefully with the applicant, regarding what will be and what will not be on the site in the commercial area. He thought the Board - 37- MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 brought up a very good point about how they would enforce this and said it was discussed at grea% length. The church feels that it can be done and will be done to control the site. Rev. Brannon added that the church is willing to do whatever is necessary on its part to make certain that it happens. 5. Buffers have been provided to surrounding property in a beautiful fashion to protect the neighbors around the area. Rev. Brannon concluded that the church is in favor of it and asked the Board to give a favorable reaction to it. He felt the problems mentioned tonight could be resolved. H. Dale Hatch, 1211 S. W. 1st Street, owner of Western Auto and Member of the Community Redevelopment Agency, appeared as a member of First Baptist Church. He has been a member of First Baptist Church for 28 years and most of those years, they have looked forward to building a church for the city. He thought this project would be a step forward for the Church in that direction. Mr. Hatch thought the project had a very good mixture. The commercial would be something everyone could live with, and residential is needed in this area. He urged the Members to vote favorably for the plan. A. Clyde Worrell, 2668 S. W. 23rd Cranbrook Drive, has been a member of the church for almost 30 years and is a Charter Member of the Building Committee for the construction of the new church. The Church owned four acres on the corner of Congress Avenue and 23rd, but that site was too small, and they bought this 18 acres at Woolbright Center. Mr. Worrell said the Church has worked with this group and has seen the pros and cons of how to develop this site in so many ways that they feel the highest and best use was shown to the Board tonight. He urged the Board to approve the project, including the church site, for the betterment of the community. Tim Wood, Member of the church, is not a resident of Boynton Beach, but said if the project goes through, he is considering buying in the development. - 38 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Those in Opposition As no one else wished to speak in favor of the proposal, Chairman Ryder asked if anyone wished to speak in opposition. Fran Silver, Leisureville, had no objection to the project but called attention to the fact that S, W. 8th Place is parallel to S. W. 8th Street, which is being buiilt and will be a public street. She emphasized that it will definitely destroy the peace and quiet of Leisureville. Mrs. Marion Peirano, 120 S. W. 8th Place, was not against the church. When they had Bass Creek North.taking over, that was OK. She was told, when she first came to Boynton, that this was a bird sanctuary and R1AA zoning. Now she is told it is R1A. Ms. Pirano asked that it be left R1A. Lowell Y. Bennett, 400 S. W. Golfview Terrace, a Director of the Palm Beach Leisureville Community Association, did not want to arouse anyone's anger because the Association, as a whole, did not oppose the development. However, they were deeply concerned about the traffic situation that appeared to them would develop as the program grows. There are only two outlets (one at the north on Ocean and one at the south on Woolbright). They are not primarily concerned with Wool- bright, although they do foresee a problem there. Mr. Bennett asked that they look at the Leisureville commun- ity and visualize the new S. W. 8th Street, as drawn, which he understood will be four laned and come to an end on Ocean Drive, as it now exists. S.W. 8th Street will subsequently cross Boynton Beach Boulevard and run into the Old Boynton Road. He was informed that S. W. 8th Street, going north off of Ocean Drive, would remain a two lane road. If that was correct, then Mr. Bennett said they would be going from a four lane road into a two lane road, which would create a bottle neck. If you look at Ocean Drive and the development of the Forum Shoppes, going east on Ocean Drive from Congress, Mr. Bennett said the City has already designated a portion of that four lanes to provide entrance and exits from the Forum Shoppes. Ocean Drive then reduces back to two lanes. If you continue east on Ocean, it dead ends up by the railroad track. Mr. Bennett pointed out that what they will have will be an exit onto Ocean Drive, which is almost bound to fan out in different directions. It seemed to Mr. Bennett that they were getting caught between the newly built entrance that now exists, going into - 39 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 the Forum Shoppes, and the exit coming out of this develop- ment and turning west on Ocean Drive. It sounds good to say the people will take Old Boynton Road and go out to the mall, but that does not take care of the people that are going to the Forum Shoppes and the nine movie theaters. Mr. Bennett could foresee an intolerable traffic probI~m on Ocean Drive as it goes through Leisureville. He could also foresee the City wanting to four lane Ocean Drive all the way from Congress Avenue to S. W. 8th Street. Mr. Bennett said his Association would oppose that.bitterly. Mr. Bennett drew attention to the 800 homesites and stressed that two entrances, 180 degrees apart, are "pretty marginal" to provide safety (fire, police, and ambulance service). No matter where you go, he said you always end up back on either Woolbright or Ocean Drive. Mr. Bennett continued by saying the Association thinks the proposal is reasonable and is a well planned program. It will be developed some day, and they would rather see it be residential. However, they are very disturbed by the potential traffic problem. When S. W. 8th Avenue is rerouted and they create a strip of land approximately 20 feet wide, which will revert back to the adjacent lot owners as a community association, Mr. Bennett said they are not excited about having the property given to anyone as it will create problems for them in main- tenance, increased costs, and will contribute nothing to the community as a whole. If the developer wants to develop and maintain the property, he will have the blessings of the Association, but the Leisureville Community Association does not want to assume it as an obligation. Vernon H. Allinson, 1100 S. W. 7th Avenue, Leisureville, said Ocean Drive now has more traffic than it did when he moved there five years ago. Children use Leisureville Drive to go to Congress Middle School, ride their bicycles, and walk to Ocean Drive. There is no way this will not become an increased hazard and no way Ocean Drive can be increased to four lanes. More consideration should be paid to Ocean Drive. Margaret Roberts, 112 S. W. 8th Place, lives at the point where the dog leg finishes. If they cannot get out on Wool- bright to 1-95, they will certainly go through here. Mrs. Roberts said the church is fine. They moved to Boynton - 40- MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Beach for peace and quiet, and Boynton was lovely. is going "Straight down." Now it As no one else wished to speak in opposition, THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Further Comments by Attorney Perry and Mr. Annunziato Attorney Perry pointed out that S. W. 8th Street is not proposed to be a four lane road. The exhibit showed four lanes or more at the entrance, but it tapers down to two lanes and remains two lanes until it gets to Boynton Beach Boulevard unless the City wants it to be four laned. Attorney Perry said there was no cause for it to be four laned. Whether this project is approved or not, Attorney Perry said they will end up with S. W. 8th Street and will have signifi- cant traffic. Based on the analysis by their Traffic Engineer of what the staff's recommendation is as to exist- ing zoning and uses, what they are proposing only amounts to about 400 or 500 additional trips if they use the existing uses. Attorney Perry also thought it was important that the people from Leisureville appreciate that from the applicant's point of view, their original intent was not to utilize S. W. 8th Street but was to use 7th Street. It was brought to their attention by Mr. Annunziato that the City has gone to some length relative to bringing Old Boynton Beach Boulevard at the intersection of S. W. 8th Street. It made more sense, from the City's point of view, to route it onto S. W. 8th Street. Because S. W. 8th Street will be signalized at Boynton Beach Boulevard, Mr. Annunziato said S. W. 8th Street will be the dominant exit from the Lake Boynton Estates area. However, the condition that determined S. W. 8th Street was based on approximately 400 additional homes and seven acres of neighborhood commercial, not 800 homes, 18 acres of retail/ commercial and approximately six acres of offices. Mr. Annunziato informed a man in the audience that quite possibly, trucks will go through there. He added that S. W. 8th Street does exist on paper, adjacent to Leisureville, as a 60 or 80 foot right-of-way. - 41 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Discussion by Board Members Mr. deLong referred to the south edge of the property, where the office complex is proposed, and asked how deep a distance it is zoned C-2. Attorney Perry replied it is about 350 feet. The immediate zoning behind it is R1A. The C-2 commercial zoning which was placed on the land was intended to serve the single family area to the north. Chairman Ryder said the Members heard that in each instance the Planning Department recommended denial, and they heard from the applicant. He said the Board was faced again with something similar to what they were faced with before, and that was additional traffic. More important, they were faced with the impact on a long established, residential area. Chairman Ryder thought the fact brought out by Mr. Bennett about the impact on Ocean Drive was very important and said they had to remember that Ocean Drive is no longer a collector. Once the railroad crossing was shut off, it became a local street, and it will physically remain that way. The impact on Ocean Drive will be considerable, as it will not only affect Leisureville but the entire surrounding area because you cannot go east but will have to go west and will go through Leisureville. Chairman Ryder did not think the proposal was good here. Since he owns a home at the subdivision itself, Mr. Gregory thought he was adversely affected. He took a personal analysis and found out that the neighbors are ecstatic over the fact that they will have a shopping center to the south of them, will not have to fight the traffic going out to Congress Avenue, and will have a north/south arterial going from Woolbright Avenue north to Boynton Beach Boulevard. From his observation, Mr. Gregory said there was really no objection to this project from the 250 residents that live there now, so he was going to vote in favor of the proposal. There was applause. Mr. deLong disagreed with Chairman Ryder's comment that they had the same situation here that the Board had before. In this instance, he thought it was a completely different look- ing area insofar as commercial impact is already there (Boynton Commerce Center across the street, the established stores there now, and the fact the front piece is already zoned C-2). Mr. deLong thought the bulk of the opposition was towards the increased impact of the PUD and probably the high rise - 42- MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 condominium type of "pigeon holes" Vice Chairman Trauger talked about at the last meeting. Mr. deLong thought that was a more significant problem than what they were proposing to do here, which he found to be fairly aesthetic. One key issue Mr. deLong thought they should consider was that in the hands of one developer, they would probably avoid the hodgepodge of picture puzzle type development. Overall, he thought the proposal and presentation make a lot of sense. Vice Chairman Trauger was not against the church but in look- ing at the whole property under the control of one developer, he was looking for an R-1AA single family home with a lot, not high rise and living on top of each other, and was hoping they would find a developer who had the foresight and ability to develop it into single family with the lake, brims, recreation around it, and the church in the middle. He said they were going to high commercial, high density duplexes, and condominium types. Mr. Pagliarulo has been building in this area since about 1972 and saw the area start to move and fall back again. Little homes went up here and there, and people tried to improve their neighborhoods. What he saw now was a plan that would bring more homes into the area and improve it, which Mr. Pagriarulo thought was definitely needed. Whether or not they put 800 units of single family homes, multi-family homes, or whatever, there will be density in the area and traffic will be created. Mr. Pagliarulo did not think they could avoid that issue, but he felt the City would have some control of what would happen in the area. After seeing the failures of people trying to do something there, he thought they found something that would be posi- tive. As far as the appearance, Mrs. Huckle thought it was a nice development and the intent was to develop it for a multiple level, but it seemed much too intensified to her. She expressed that the residential part is too dense, the traf- fic too great, and the demand for water services will be too great. Motion - Woolbright Place PUD Mr. Annunziato read the Planning Department's recommen- dation for denial of Woolbright Place PUD from page 6 of his memorandum dated July 31, 1985, and said if there was a - 43 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 decision to approve the PUD, it should be made subject to the staff comments contained in the memorandum. Mr. Schultz moved that Woolbright Place PUD be approved, subject to staff comments. Mr. Pagliarulo seconded the motion. A roll call vote was taken on the motion by Mrs. Ramseyer, and the motion carried 4-3 with Chairman Ryder, Vice Chairman Trauger, and Mrs. Huckle voting against the motion. There was loud applause. Motion - Woolbriqht Center Mr. Annunziato read the Planning Board's recommendation for denial from his memo dated July 31, 1985. Mr. deLong moved that the application be approved as sub- mitted, subject to staff comments. Mr. Gregory seconded the motion. At the request of Chairman Ryder, Mrs. Ramseyer took a roll call vote on the motion. Motion carried 4-3 with Chairman Ryder, Vice Chairman Trauger, and Mrs. Huckle voting against the motion. Again, there was applause. Motion - Shoppes at Woolbright Place Mr. Annunziato read from his memo of July 31, 1985 the Planning Department's recommendation that the request be denied. Mr. deLong asked if the deed restrictions would be a part of this motion. Mr. Annunziato did not see how the local government could impose deed restrictions. Attorney Perry confirmed that was correct and added that they are dealing in good faith with the Church. It is a voluntary matter on their part. Mr. Pagliarulo moved to approve the request, seconded by Mr. Gregory, subject to staff comments. Mrs. Ramseyer took a roll call vote on the motion, and the motion carried 4-3 with Chairman Ryder, Vice Chairman Trauger, and Mrs. Huckle voting against the motion. There was very loud applause. Mr. Schultz was excused from the meeting at 10:55 P. M. THE BOARD TOOK A RECESS FROM 11:05 P. M. UNTIL 11:10 P. M. ABANDONMENT Project Name: Agent: Blum Property Street Abandonment D. M. Ambrose Associates, Inc. - 44- MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Owner: Location: Description: Peter Blum Intersection of Old Boynton Road and N. W. 8th Court, northside Request for the abandonment of a 30' street right-of-way (N. W. 10th Street) Mr. Annunziato said the property is at Old Boynton Road as you go west on Boynton Beach Boulevard. It is currently undeveloped. A church is to the west of it, and Skylake is to the west of that. The issue of the abandonment is an old Palm Beach Farms Plat road for N. W. 10th Street, which parallels the western boundary, more or leSs, of the Blum property. Mr. Annunziato said the 30 foot street enters at the intersection of Old Boynton Road and N. W. 8th Court. The applicant is proposing to realign N. W. 10th Street by coming south from where it currently exists at the north, putting a 90 degree turn in it as you come south, and then turning 90 degrees again and entering N. W. 8th Court about 150 ~feet east of the intersection with Old Boynton Road, which the City feels is a much better way, trafficwise, to address the issue. Mr. Annunziato said the staff's recommendation, as noted in the memo dated August 8, 1985 from Tom Clark, City Engineer, was to approve, subject to comments from Florida Power & Light Company, who has distributiOn facilities on the north side of Old Boynton Road which would have to be accommodated in easements. Otherwise, they had no objections. Southern Bell and Florida Public Utilities Company had no objections. There was also a memo from Perry Cessna, Director of Utilities, concerning a 16 inch force main that would have to be relocated. D. M. Ambrose, P.E., D. M. Ambrose Associates, Inc., 6190 North Federal Highway, Boca Raton, Florida 33431 and Mr. Bernie Kulavic, Paler's Development Corporation, 2900 North Federal Highway, Boca Raton, Florida 33431 were present to represent the applicant. Mr. Ambrose had no comments. They were able to go along with the conditions and will submit copies to Florida Power & Light, Southern Bell, and the other utilities as they go forward. Mr. Ambrose was sure they would be able to take care of their requirements. Mr. Annunziato said Mr. Clark recommended to the Council that this not be finally approved until a final plat is recorded. At the time the final plat is recorded, there can - 45 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 also be a Resolution. Mr. Ambrose advised that there is a letter on file in Mr. Cessna's office that the applicant agreed to relocate the 16 inch sewer force main in the pro- posed public highway. Chairman Ryder asked if anyone wished to speak for or against the abandonment, and there was no response. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Mr. deLong moved to approve the request for abandonment, subject to staff comments, and Florida Power & Light's letter. Mr. Gregory seconded the motion, and the motion carried 6-0. SUBDIVISIONS PRE-APPLICATIONS Project Name: Agent: Owner-. Location: Description: Blum Property D. M. Ambrose Associates, Inc. Peter Blum North of Old Boynton Road, East of N. W. 10th Street Twenty-four lot, R-1AA Single Family Subdivision Mr. Golden said the Technical Review Board recommended approval, subject to staff comments. The applicant proposes to provide a .5 acre retention basin for on site water management. The proposed subdivision will be surrounded by proposed and existing single family residences. Access will occur by proposed N. W. 9th Court, which replaced N. W. 10th Street if the abandonment is approved by the City Council. Proposed N. W. 9th Court is situated approximately 185 feet from the intersection. Adequate utilities are available to serve the proposed sub- division, including the existing six inch water mains and eight inch sanitary storm mains located on N. W. 8th Court. The abandonment of N. W. 10th Street is part of the reloca- tion of a 16 inch sanitary storm drain to proposed N. W. 9th Court, and Mr. Golden drew attention to a letter to that effect from Mr. Ambrose, dated AugUst 7, 1985. Mr. Golden read the staff comments from the Building, Fire, Engineering and Utilities Departments. Mr. Ambrose agreed to all of the stipulations of the Technical Review Board and had no further comments. Vice - 46 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Chairman Trauger asked if this would be developed by the developer building the houses on the sites, a homeowners' association at completion, or if each one would stand on his own. It was Mr. Ambrose's understanding that the developer, Mr. Blum, intends to develop this and will perhaps build the homes on the lots. The water management area will become part of the home owners' association. Vice Chairman Trauger asked what the marketing price of a completed home on a lot would be. Mr. Kulavic replied that it would probably be $90,000 to $95,000. Vice Chairman Trauger moved to approve the pre-application of the Blum property, subject to staff comments. Mr. deLong seconded the motion, and the motion carried 6-0. Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Colodny Property (Costa Bella) D. M. Ambrose Associates, Inc. Les Colodny North of Old Boynton Road, West of N. W. 10th Street Thirteen lot R-1AA Single Family Subdivision Mr. Annunziato advised that this is directly north of the last subdivision the Board just approved. Mr. Golden said the Technical Review Board recommended approval, subject to staff comments. The proposed sub- division is located across N. W. 10th Street from the Blum property. The area of the site is approximately 3.9 acres and is covered by 2-1/2 feet of muck, which requires demuck- ing. The developer plans to provide a 23 acre storm water retention easement located to the rear of Lot 7 for water management purposes. The developer plans to coordinate the infrastructure improve- ments from the Colodny property and the Blum property so those properties will be developed simultaneously. In the event the Blum property is not developed prior to or at the same time as the Colodny property, the developer has made provisions !for developing the Colodny property. There are two means of access available to the property. The first is proposed N. W. 9th Court through the Blum property. In the event the right-of-way is not abandoned for N. W. 10th Street, that would also be a means of access. The second is N. W. 8th Avenue, which extends eastward and runs into N~. W. 8th Court and N. W. 8th Street. - 47- MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Utilities are available to service the development, including a six inch water main on N. W. 8th Avenue and an existing 16 inch sanitary sewer main on N. W. 10th Street. Mr. Golden said this is the main that will have to be relocated due to N. W. 9th Court when the Blum property is platted. There is an existing lift station abutting the eastern property boundary, across from the point where N. W. 8th Avenue intersects N. W. 10th Street. Mr. Golden read the staff comments from the Building, Fire, Engineering, and Utilities Departments. D. M. Ambrose, P.E., D. M. Ambrose Associates, Inc., 6190 North Federal Highway, Boca Raton, Florida 33431, representing the applicant, said Mr. Colodny and Wesley L. Bomfa, Architect, Coral Gables, were present. Mr. Ambrose understood and agreed to the staff comments. A letter is on file with Mr. Cessna concerning the water and utilities on the site. Prior to the Blum project, Mr. Ambrose said Mr. Bomfa is responsible for making this a self-supporting facility. Mr. Annunziato asked what occurs with respect to the construction of roads. In the lower left corner was alter- nate A. If N. W. 9th Court is not brought up through the Blum property, Mr. Ambrose said the entrance will be off of N. W. 8th Avenue, and they will have a double cul-de-sac there until other developments take place. Mr. Annunziato asked about the extension of N. W. 10th Street. Mr. Ambrose replied that N. W. 10th Street would not go forward in this phase but would terminate in the cul-de-sac. Some utilities might be developed there, but the only entrance would be off of N. W. 8th Avenue. Mr. Annunziato thought staff would want to reserve the right to further analyze that with the master plan. Mr. Ambrose added that the property to the northeast is not developed at this time and is vacant land. Vice Chairman Trauger was informed that the developer will develop homes. Mr. Colodny advised that the price range will be $95,000 to $105,000. Mr. Gregory moved, seconded by Mr. Pagliarulo, to approve the pre-application subject to staff comments, including the right of staff to further analyze N. W. 10th Street and N. W. 8th Avenue with the master plan. Mr. Ambrose under- stood the reservation made by staff. A vote was taken on the motion and carried 6-0. - 48 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Boynton Beach Distribution Center Replat Ewing and Shirley, Inc. Boynton Beach Distribution Center Associates Southeast corner of Miner Road and High Ridge Road Request for a replat of a previously platted industrial subdivision to allow creation of condominium tracts. Mr. Golden said the Technical Review Board recommended approval of the application, subject to staff comments. The subdivision is located on the southeast side of Miner Road, just west of the Seaboard Airline Railroad tracks. Access is provided by way of Commerce Park Drive, out through Industrial Way, to High Ridge Road. Each building will be marketed as a separate condominium, and all of the common areas will be underlthe jurisdiction of the master condominium association. Mr. Golden read the staff comments from the Building and Engineering Departments. Vice Chairman Trauger asked if Miner Road is an actual road in there. Mr. Annunziato answered that Miner Road is still a paper road and does not exist yet. It is to the north of Florida Pneumatic but only on paper. The buildings and sub- division exist. When they decided to market this, they decided to do it in condominium form, which superimposed property across property lines which was determined to be a violation of subdivision regulations. Mr. Annunziato explained that this is a replat creating lots, which are the buildings, and everything else is common property. All of the buildings, roads, and utilities are in place. They are just talking about legal descriptions here. Kent W. Ewing, P.L.S., Ewing and Shirley, Inc., Land Surveyors and Planners, 3767 Lake Worth Road, Suite 118, Lake Worth, Florida 33461, said the only reason they are going through this is to meet the City's requirements for their marketing. He had no problem with the staff comments. Mr. Pagliarulo moved to approve the replat of Boynton Beach Distribution Center, seconded by Mr. deLong. Motion carried 6-0. MASTER PLAN 4. Project Name: Agent- Boynton Beach Distribution Center Ewing and Shirley, Inc. 49 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 Owner: Location: Description: Boynton Beach Distribution Center Associates Southeast corner of Miner Road and High Ridge Road Request for a replat of a previously platted industrial subdivision to allow creation of condominium tracts Mr. Golden stated that this was essentially the same as the above replat. Mr. Annunziato recommended that the Board just move on it. Mr. Golden advised that the staff comments were the same as in the pre-application. Mr. Ewing had no problem with the comments for the master plan. Mr. deLong moved to approve the master plan, subject to staff comments. Mr. Gregory seconded the motion, and the motion carried 6-0. PRELIMINARY PLAT Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Boynton Lakes Plat 6 Rick Rossi, P.E. Lennar Homes, Inc. East side of Boynton Lakes Boulevard, south of Hypoluxo Road Request for approval of the construction plans and preliminary plat which provides for the construction of infrastructure improvements to serve 231 dwelling units in connection with a previously approved Planned Unit Development Mr. Golden said the Technical Review Board recommended approval, subject to staff comments. Plat 6 is located in the northwest portion of the Boynton Lakes PUD. The northern boundary abuts the L-18 canal, and the western boundary coincides with the eastern right-of-way line of Boynton Lakes Boulevard. There were three overlays for the plat. Mr. Golden showed the southern most portion of the proposed plat and said a lake has been provided. Mr. Golden indicated Boynton Lakes Boulevard and said the developer plans to bridge the L-18 canal to Hypoluxo Road at proposed Paxford Lane, which is approximately 1,000 feet east of Boynton Lakes Boulevard. Mr. Golden read the staff comments from the Planning Department, and Mr. Annunziato said the Planning staff calculated that the developers owe the City the equivalent - 50 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA AUGUST 13, 1985 of .486 acres of land or value in dollars. Mr. Golden also read the comments from the Building, Fire, Engineering, and Utilities Departments. Vice Chairman Trauger inquired about the density. Mr. Cannon replied that there has been a change to the master plan at various times from townhouses to single family dwelling units. The overall number of dwelling units has not changed. However, there is a higher parks and recrea- tion dedication requirement for single family units as compared to multi-family units. It is .018 acres per dwell- ing unit for single family detached as opposed to .015 acres. Enrico Rossi, P.E., Rossi and Malavasi Engineers Inc., 1675 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard, West Palm Beach, Florida 33409, read and heard the comments, accepted them, and said they will comply with them. Mr. deLong moved, seconded by Mr. Pagliarulo, to approve the preliminary plat, subject to staff comments. Motion carried 6-0. OTHER Report from Building Department on Glass Buildings Mrs. Huckle had requested this report. In his memo dated July 22, 1985, Bud Howell, Building Official, said "glass may be used on the exterior of any building under the same conditions as other material, that condition being all exterior walls are subject to 120 mile per hour wind load." ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting properly adjourned at 11:45 P. M. - 51 MEMORANDUM ~3! July 1985 TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD FROM: CARMEN S. ANNUNZIATO PLANNING DIRECTOR RE: WOOLBRIGHT PLACE PUD REZONING/LAND USE AMENDMENT AND REZONING APPLICATION _Su__m_mar_]~_ Kieran J. Eilday, agent, for Tradewinds Development Corporation, is requesting a series o~ rezonings and land ose amendment/rezonings in order to create an 88.7 acre PUD near the northwest corner of Interstate 95 and Wool bright Road. --'Pr,esently, the property is zoned R-lA, R-3, and C-2. The proposed zoning wo~tld be to a PUD with a Land Use Intensity of 5.0. The master plan which has been submitted as part of the rezoning application proposes 800 multiple-~amily units along the northern and western portions of the property., with a gross density of 9.01 dwelling units per acre. A-- church and school, which are allowable uses in a PUD, are also proposed, on a 15 acre site at the south end. of the PUB~ The Futur'e Land Use Plan would also be amended, ~rom "Moderate Density Residential", "High Density Residential", and "Local Retail COmmercial" to "Medium Density Riesidential", on the eastern 70.76 acres. The western 17.97 acres ~oul'd remain in the curr~nt "Moderat~e Density Residential" category. Current Ownersh_i_p~. Land_Us_e~_aDd__P_l_a_ttin_g: The property i.s presently vacant, except ~or a vacant model, which was built in 19~-9~s-part o~ the abandoned Bass Creek project. The majority o~ the site was platted in the 1920s as Lake Boynton Estates. Lake Boynton 'Estates consists primarily o~ 50 X 120 ~oot lots ¢6,000 square ~ee~), accessed by 50 ~oot wide rights-o¥-way. The current req~tirement ~or 'the R-lA zoning distric~ is a 60 ~oot wide lot with a 7,500 square~oot lot area. The current subdivision requirement ¥or local stre~s is a 60 ~oot wide right-of-way. The p'roperty is presently u~nder three major ownerships, as well as two individual lot owners. Surroundinc! Land-Use and Zonin~ (see attach~d_~erial location map): To the west o~ the proposed PUD is a sin~le--~amily section o~ Palm Beach Leisureville, seperated ~rom the subject parcel b~y. the L.W.D.D. E-4 Canal-on the southernmost 540 ~eet. This section P~ Palm Beach Leisureville is zoned R-1AA (PUD) and is shown on the Future Land Use Plan as-"Moderate Density Residential" To the north o~ the proposed PUD is an R-lA (Single-Family Residential) zoning district, which is also shown on the Future.Land Use Plan as "Moderate Density Residential". This R-lA district i~_ develop~d_ _ ~or page single-family housing in the $60,000 to S70,000 range, ~cmpt for the lots immediately abutting the proposed PUD, which are va~a~t~ The median income in these two neighborhoods is about 92% oW t~ median income for the city. The median value of '~the housing in~ ~eSe~Cwo neighborhoods is about 57. higher than the median value ~r_~.~ entire city. To the east is the Seaboard Airline Rail~ay tracks and a narrow M-I (Light Industrial) zoned strip. This M-! zoned str~p i-s largely vacant, although the northernmost 4 acres are developed, ~i~ih ~access from Ocean Drive. Further to the east is Interstate 95. T~ 'the south ~here is an 8.2 and an. 18 acre parcel., both of which are ~r~sentl¥ zoned C-2 (Neighborhood ~ommercial) and R-lA. These two ~par~cets are the subject of separate rezoning requests to C-1 (Office-~-and- Professional Commercial) and C-.3 (Community Commercial). ~u~rther to the south is Woolbright Road, and the commercial_ and ~ind~strial developments known as Pylon Interstate Park (zoned C-1 and C~) and Boynton Commercenter (zoned PID). Rezon{Bg~ The proposed master plan shows a total of 80~ multiple-family units--130 two-story units on the westerns17.97 acres, and 670 two- and three-story units on the eastern 64..67 acres. No representations have.been made on the master plan as to- ~n~ther this housing would bm rental or condominium, and no representa~cions have been made as to the type of building construction or architecture. A 1,200 seat church, 500 student school, and a meeting hall would also be located on this portion of the PUD, on a 15 acre parcel lying in the southeast corner. An additional 6. i acre parcel, lying between the two above--mentioned parcels, would.be occupied by an 80 ft. wide collector ro~d. This road would be a public right-of-Way, running from Woolbright Road to Ocean Drive, and aligning with S.W. 8th Street on the no~=tb end. All' other rights-of-way within the _project would be abandonm~ with the exception of S.W. 8th Street. Since S.W. 8th Street alsoc~smrves about 20 lots on the east side of Leisureville, it coul~d not'-b~nilaterally abandoned by the .applicant, where it abuts those lots. recommended that this segment of S.W. Street be abandoned~ ~owever, either through a joint application on the part o¥ the ap~!d~_~ant and residents of the abutting lots, or by an application b~ Boynton Beach. In any case, S.W. 8~h Street should not .-~bt~llowed to continue as an unused right-of-way, since it will become~-~aintenance problem for the City, and a nuis.ance to the surrounding owner s = The City staff is also recommending that a collector right--of-way be provided at the southern end of the project, to allow ac~es~ to the industrial-zoned p~operty which lies to the east. Presently this property could be accessed by any of streets which dead--end at the S.A.L. railroad tracks. The access shown by the applicant at the northern end of the project is unacceptable for two reasons~ (1) This access Shown would route truck traffic along local streets, through a ~esidential neighborhood; (2) The access shown would .require a cul-de-sac longer than -1,320 feet on the i~dustrial property. This length would exceed the maximum--allowed -~or a cul-de-sac in the subdivision regulations. · page The applicant's traffic impact analysis has been reviewed/2b~ the Palm Beach County Traf¥ic Engineer and the City Engine~.~ T~e=~al.m Beach County Traffic Engineer recommends that atil roadway impr~em~ts proposed in the applicant's traffic impact statement be-c~-~ructed. A list of these improvements is attached to this report ~a~-should be included in any decision to rezone the subject property. Since there are three rezoning applications in the vicini~y~ and each application was accompanied by a seperate traffic impa~l statement, it also is recommended that the applicant resubmit a traffic i~mpact analysis, for approval by the staff and County Traf~i~c Engineer, which encompasses ~l~ o~ the proposed rezonings~ if approved-b~ ~e City COuncil. This will be necessary because the road improvements for the -three projects together may be greater than for the'-thr~e~ g~ojects ~onsidered seperatety. . The Recreation and Parks Director has reviewed the project's recreation plan and has made the several comments~ contained in two memorandums~ which are attached to this report. The appi£can~ has submitted a revised recreation plan to the Recreation and~Parks Director which should be included as part of the master ~lan. The revised recreation plan shows a 7.5 acre public park to be-dedicated at the northwest corner of th project. This public park would include acreage exchanged for P~inciana Park--an existing 1.5 ~c~e publ~ R~rk site which is located in~ the center of the project. The'remaining 6.0 acres in the proposed public park would be required to be dedicated, by the subdivision regulations. The applicant has also submitted conceptual plans for private recreation, whi'ch would be sufficient to allow one-half credit against the acreage required for park dedication. The 6.0 acres menti6ned above reflects this-one-half credit. --~°-m~-re-h~=onsi-v---e----P;lan---Fu. ture__L__aod_~_~i The Future Lan~d~ ~e Plan ~shows the majority of the proposed PUD under the "Moderate-.Density Residential" category (7.26 dwelling units/acre maximum). The row o~ blocks along the S.A.L. tracks is currently shown as "Hi~b ~Oensity Residential ~ (I0.8 dwelling ~units/ acre maximum). The southeast corner of the proposed PUD is currently shown~as~ ~cal Retail Commercial". The applicant is Proposing to distribol+~e the densities ~shown on the Land Use Plan for the portion east ~_~¥ the proposed collector road, in a new "Medium Density Residen~ai~ category (9,68 dwelling units/acre maximum). The overall m=~imum density for this portion of the proposed PUD., however, would, not change. The remainder of the proposed PUD--lying to the ~'est of the proposed collector"road---would remain in the "Moderate Density Residential" ~ategory. ~m_prehensive Plan--Te:~t: The following ComprehensiVe Plan Policies ere relevant to this rezoning request: -~"Provide and adequate range of housing choices." ~ -. page 3 "Provide a suitable living environment in all nei~i~boods," 6) "Preserve the present stock of sound]dwellings and neighborhoods." (p. 6) "Provide for land uses capable of being served by avail,able resources." (p. 7) "Eliminate existing and potential land use conflicts." (p. 7) "Provide for efficient and safe movement within (p, 7) "Encourage the preservation of si~ngle family neig:hb~or.~hoods and discourage conversion to higher densities." (p. "Centralize and cluster high density residenti.~l d~w~-lopment around 'activity centers' created by arterial cros~oads and other areas of high accessibility." (p. 59) I_~sues: -1. Whether the Subject property is physically and econo~ically developable under the existing zoning. The property could be physically developed for about ~.00- single-fam'ily units on the R-lA zoned portion, 130 apartments on the-E~5 zoned portion, and for either 55.,00 square feet of retail flo~rspace or 100,000 square f~eet of office sp~.ce in the C-2 zoned por-t~on. Since the beginning of 1983, approximately 50 single-family houses have been built in Lake Boynton Estates, in the neighborhood northZof the proposed PUD. Furthermore, 16 duplex units have been b~!~t in Lake Boynton Estates, along Boynton Beach Blvd., and along t,P~e~eaboard Airline Railway tracks. It can be inferred from this d~opment activity that the subject property couid reali, stically b-e~veloped' for single-family housing in the R--lA zoned portio~and~Ed be developed for duplexes or multiple-f, amily housing in the B--~ zoned port i On. 2. Whether the tra¥~ic and utility impacts created the.~-oT~o~ed PUD would be substantially higher than if the property were .to. developed under the existing zoning (please see attached If the property were to be developed under the current zoning., about 7.,077 trips would be generated on an average daily basis. The proposed PUD would 'generate 6,361 trips per day--so traffic would actually decrease by 716 trips per day. Woolbright Road cu~rently carries about 12,600 trips per day .and has a capacity (del-tried as ,, o 000 level of service C") of ~4, trips per day. At build out, Woolbrigh~ Road will probably carry about 40,000 trips per day, and ~ill have a capacity (when 6-1aned) o~ 36,C~00 trips per day. Thus, Woolbri.ght Road will be-operating at 4,000 trips per day above Level of Service "C" at buil.d out, under the existing zoning. The proposed PUD would alleviate this congestion slightly, as compar~ to page 4 development under the existing 'zoning. .~ Water demand would increase from 181,150 gallons per d~.y.~,~r~r ~he' existing zoning, to 296,500 gallons per day under the Pr~-d zoning---an increase of 115~570 gallons per day. The exi~st~ !6 inch' water main in Woolbright road and 10 inch water main in-Ocean- Drive would be able to accomodate this increased flow. It can-.be-assumed, however, that since the overall water supply in the City is being designed to accomodate the established Land Use-Plan and~Zc~Iing~ that this increased water demand (equivalent to 264~singie~f~m~ly houses) would have to be subtracted-from other portions of the wed~e~service area. -. ~ewage flows would increase from 145~0~6. gallons per day-under the existing zoning~ to 237~200 gallons per day under the groposed zoning--an increase of 92,104 gallons per day. The li{t stations and force mains in the vicinity would be able to accomod~tetbe increased sewage flows. As with water demand~ however, it can be assumed that this increased sewage flow will subtract from the capacity, elsewhere in the system. 5. Whether the proposed 'PUD would be compatible with ~he-existing residential land used in the vicinity. The proposed PUD would place 2 story apartment buildings.along the west side 'of the subject property, and 5 story apartment buildings along the north side of the property. The master plan shows a 50 foot buffer along the west property line, which together with the 60 foot right-of-way for S.W 8th street, would create a 110 foot buffer between these apartments and the rear property lines of Leisureville. The master plan proposes a 25 fo~t buffer along the north', property line, however the Planning Department is recommendi'ng that this setback be increased to at least 40 feet, since it can b.~-assumed that the abutting lots to the north wiii be developed for sln~i~ family housing. It would also be desirable to limit the height ~f the buildings along the north property line to 2 stories; o-t~qe~wise, the setback along this property line should be increased to 10~ feet. Regardless of the setbacks and height limitations, it cou~ 5e anticipated that placing multiple-family housing at thi~ !,o~ation would have a substantial adverse imkpact on the environment o~ the surrounding single-family neighborhoods. This impact in t~n,-would probably tend to lower property values both i~ Leisurevili~e and Lake Boynton Estates. Since Leisurevile is operated as a homeowners' association, it is unlikely that property maintenance woulo decrease in this subdivision. A decrease in property values could, however, lead to a more s~ri~us problem of neighborhood deterioration in Lake Boynton Estates. For this reason, it is recommended that if this PUD is approved, that not only the buffers and height limitations follow the recommendations made above, but also that the applican{ state for ~he record whether the project will be rental or condominiun. ~urthermore, the applicant should'be required to submit, as Part of the maszer plan, elevations showing the type of architecture and type of construction that will be used in the project. · page 5 One additional issue which should be addreSsed is the. u~ of the 150 ft. by 900 ft. strip which extends north of the main projm~ area, along the S.A.L. tracks. The applicant should state for .--~b~. record what the use of this parcel will be, or wi. thdraw this pa~c~i from the application. In any case, this parcel should not be per-m~']t~ed as an open space tract for the PUD. The isolation of this strip rmlative to the remainder of the PUD would probably lead to a low level maintenance., and would create a nuisance for the single ~amil¥ homes which lie to the west. Conclusions/Recommendations.- The proposed PUD would havm's~stantially higher water and sewer impacts and would have a substantia! adverse impact on the surrounding single-family neighborhoods. T~e steady development of the portion of Lake Boynton Estates north ~ the proposed PUD is evidence that the subject property developable under the existing zoning. It is the 'Rt'annin~· Department"s recommendation., therefore, that the ~Land Us~ ~Amendments and Rezonings-which are requested be denied. A decision _to approve the PUD howevers, should be subject to the comments made i--n~ 'this memorandum and the attached staf~ comments. page 6 MEMORANDUM · 51 July 1985 TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD FROM: RE: CARMEN S. ANNUNZIATO PLANNING DIRECTOR WOOLBRIGHT CENTER REZONING/LAND USE AMENDMENT AND REZONING APPLICATION Summa_Eib.' Kieran j. Kilday, agent for Tradewinds Development Corporation., is requesting a rezoning and a land use amendment/rezoning for an 8.16 acre parcel near the northwest corner of Interstate 95 and Woolbright Road. Presently., the .property is zoned R-lA (single-family residential) on the northern ao-~ western 6.3 acres., and and C-2 (Neighborhood Commercial ) on the southern 1.86 acres (see attached survey). The proposed zoning is C-I (Office and--~ Professional Commercial). The Future Land Use Plan would-.also be amended., .from "Moderate Density Residential" on the northern and western 6.55 acres, and from "Local Retail Commercial" on the southern 1.86 acres, 'to "office Commercial". Proposed use of the parcel would be office and banking facilities. ---_-___.Current Ownerships__ _Land____Use~_and .... ~!~Ogl The property=~i~s presently vacant, although the northern portion was partially clea~- as part of the abandoned Bass Creek ~project. There are also two v.ac~t houses at the northern end, which were built as part of Bass Cree~ The eastern half of the property was platted in the 1920s as Lake Boy~on Estates. Lake Boynton Estates consists primarily of 50 X 120 foot ~ts (6,000 square feet), accessed by 50 foot wide rights-of-way. ~T~,e~-urrent requirement for the R-iA zoning district is a 60 foot.wi-de tot with a 7,500 square ~oot lot area. The current subdivision requirement for right-of-way width is 60 ~eet. T-he property is pr~esently ~der'two ownerships. _SuEr_ou_nd_i_ng_La_nd Use and__~_on_i_n_g_~s_e~_a.ttached aerial i~hotooraoh and loc_ati_on___mao_)_: To the west of the subject parcel is the L.W..D.I). E-4 Canal and a single-S'family section of Palm Beach Leisurevitle. This section of Palm Beach Leisureville is zoned R-1AA (PUD) and is shown on the Future Land Use Plan-as "Moderate Density Residential-'. To the north of the proposed C-1 district is an R-lA (Single-Family Residential) zoning district which is also shown on the Future Land ~Jse Plan as "Moderate Density Residential",, and which is the subject of a seperate rezoning request to an 800-unit F'UD. Further to the north, thi=~ R-lA district is developed for single-family housing in the $60.,000.to $70.,000 range. Immediately to the east is a proposed · page 1 collector right-of-way which would serve the abovementi~,d PUD and would also serve the subject parcel. To the east of thi~ ~roposed right-of-way, is an 18 acre parcel., also zoned. R-lA and C.-~.~' and which is the subject of a seperate rezoning to C-3 (Community Co~,~mercial). Further to the east is the Seaboard Airline Railway tracRs~=m narrow M-1 (Light Industrial) zoned strip., and Interstate 95. Bordering the property along ~the south is Woolbright Road. To the sou~h., across Woolbright Road., are the commercial and industrial develop~ents known as Pylon Interstate Park (zoned C-1 and C-3) and BoyntonCommmrcenter (zoned PID). Rezoning would create a C-I zoning district with a north _--~. outh dimension of approximately I.,000 feet, and an east-w~es~.-~mnsion of about 350 feet. Commercial zoning has already been?est~!i_shed in the vicinity, and there is a 2.86 acre parcel immediatety'~to-t~he south which is al. ready presently zoned C-1. Therefore.~ it can ~ concluded that C-1 zoning of the subject parcel would n~__t consitut~-~pot zoning. _~pr~ehens!~. Plan--Future Land_Use Ma~ The Future Land-Use Plan shows the northern and western 6.35 acres as "Moderate Density Residential" category (7.2& dwelling units/acre maximum)~ The southeastern 1.86 acres are shown as "LoCal 'Retail Commercial". A Land Use Amendment to "Office Commercial,, as proposed b~ the applicant, would be necessary. ~ -~ ~om~rehensivePlan--Text:__ --~--------___. =_ The following Comprehensive~.~ian Poli'cies are relevant to this rezoning~request: "Provide a suitable living envir~onment in ail neigbb~h~oods.- (p ~) - "Provide for land uses capable of being served by-av~]able resources." (p. 7) "Eliminate ~existing and potential land use conflicts~ {p. 7) "Provide for e~ficient and safe movement within the ~iy." (p. 7) "Discourage the expansion of strip commercial develop~t,. 59) "Encourage th~' development o~ clustered neighborhood and community commercial centers at arterial and collector crossroads·" (p. 59) "C~n~ralize and cluster high density residential development around 'activity c~nters' created by arterial cnossroads and otper areas, of high accessibility.,, (p. 59) · page 2 Issues.' 1. Whether the subject property is Physiqally and econom~a~T developable under the existing zoning. The property could be physically developed for about -'0 sing~ e~-~ami 1 y units on 'the R-lA zoned portion, and for either 17~000 square~ ~eet of retail floor space or 55,000 square feet of office space in ~he C-2 zoned portion. Since the beginning of 1983, approximate!~ 50 single-family houses have been built in the Lake Boynton the neighborhood north of the proposed PUD. It can be'infra-red ~rom this development activity that the R-iA zoned portion of~-~e~subject property could be realistically developed for single~family ~ousing. It is also worth noting that the unplatted strip of property along the E~4 'Canal was the subje~t of a subdivision pre-applicat£o~ .{under the current R-lA zoning) that was submittted to the Pla~Oing 4~nd Zoning Board in ~November of 1984. 2. Whether there is sufficient commercially-zoned acr~a~ elsewhere in the vicinity ~or the uses proposed by the applicant. Currently, 'there'are about 508,000 square feet of office~ioor area which have either been approved or are under construction in the nearby.Pylon Interstate Park and Boynton Commercenter. Furthermore;-- there are 9.4 acres of C-5 zoned property at the southwest corner 1-95 and Woolbright Road. Further to the west, at the ~ntersection of Wool-bright Road and Congress Avenue, 250,000 square feet-~f office space have either .been built recently or are under construction. From this information, it can be concluded, that there is probably an adequate supply of office ~loor space in the vicinity. 5. Whether the parcel meets the Iocation criteria for_c~mercial uses as set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan recommends that commercial developm~t be located at major intersections, and that str£p commercial ~elopment be avoided. The 'proposed C-1 zoning district, when Considered as a Part of the cluster of commercial deVelopments that .are lo~ated at !-95 and Woolbright Road, ~Ou!d meet these location 4. Whether the traffic ao.d utility impacts created the P~Oposed PUD would be substantially higher than if the property were to be developed under.-the existing zoning (please see attach=d_ If the property were to be developed u~der the~current R-lA and zoning, ~,4 169 trips per day'would he.generated on an average daily basis. The proposed C-1 zoning would allow about 150,000 square ~f office floor space which would generate 3,265 trips p~=~r day---a difference of 1,096 trips per day. Woolbri'ght Road currently carries about 1~,600 trips per day and has a capacity (defined am level of service "C') of 24,000 trips per day. At build out, Woolbright Road will probably carry about 40,000 trips per day, and will have a - page capacity (when 6-1aned) of 56,000 trips per day. Thus, ~Wpotbright Road will already be operating at 4,00c') trips per day ~bx-?~_~ Eevel of Service "C" at build out, even with' the existing zoning._~ ~t can be anticipated that the Proposed C-1 zoning~ will slightlyt~ravate the congestion which will occur od Woolbright Road at build~u~ paricularly on the approach to the I-~5 Intersection. The applicant,s traffic impact analysis has been reviewed by 'the Palm Beach County Traffic Engineer and the City Engineer. The ~Palm Beach County Traffic Engineer recommends that all roadway improv~ts proposed in the applicant,s traffic impact analysis.be coo~slructed. A list of these improvements is attached to this report ~d should be included in any decision to rezone the subject property_ Since there are three rezoning applications in the vi'cni~t~yz and each application was accompanied by a seperate traffic impact.$~atement, it also is recommended that the applicant resubmit a t~af~i~pact analysis~ for approval by the staff and County Traffic E~neer, a traffic impact analysis which encompasses all of the Pro~sed rezonings which are approved by the City Council. This will be necessary because the road improvements ~or the three together may be greater than ~or the three projects cons~ed seperatel y. Water demand would increase from 11,815 gallons per day under the the existing zoning, to 15,000 gallons per day under the proliosed zoning--an increase of 3,185 gallons per day. The existing 16 inch water main in Woolbright road and 10 inch water main in ~Cean Drive would be able to accomodate this increased flow. This in~reased water substantial,demand (equivalent to 7 single-family houses) would not_be considered Sewage flows would increase from 9,465 gallons per day~t~r the existing zoning to ~ , 1~,00'0 gallons per day tinder the pro~sed zoning--increase of ~ ~ ~,~ gallons per day. The lift sta~i~n.s and force mains in the vicinity would be able to accomodate.b,e~'~.creased sewage flows. As with water demand, the increased sewage ~!.ow that would be created by the proposed C-1 zoning would not be ~tantial. 5. Whether the proPoSed C-t zoning would be compatible wiJ~h other land uses in the vicinity. If the subject property wgre to be zoned and developed in-~junction with the proposed C-ii zoning to the east, little or no advers.m impact would be anticipate~d to the rest of Lake Boynton Estates. ~¥ the proposed C-5 zoning were not approved, then rezoning of the subject parcel to C-1 would create an intrusion into the R-iA lltstrict. DeveloPment of the subject parcel for 2-story Offices would have a ~ubstantial adverse impact on the single-family houses which lie to ~he west o~ the E-4 Canal. Office development along-the Canal would be detrimental to the residential character of this neighborhood, s~nce these offices could be located within 180 feet of the rear lot lines in Palm Beach Leisureville. Under the current R-lA zoning, this · page 4 canal front'age would be occupied by single-family houses, and, would ofnot the be Cana,l.expected to affect the r~esidential character on t~.e-~est .side Conc 1 usi ons/Recommen dar i on s: ............................ The proposed C-I zoning wouid slightly aggravate the congestion which is anticipated on Woolbright Road at build-out. The most significant impact, however., Would be the impact on the residential character of the neighborhood on the we_~.t side of the E-4 Canal. The development of Lake Boynton Estates-~,or single-family housing to the north is evidence that the R~1A zoned Portion of the subdect property is in fact developable under-the existing zoning. It is the Planning Department,s recommu=nd~Zion, therefore., that the Land Use Amendment and Rezonings which are ~equested ~or Woolbright Center be denied. . . page 5 MEMORANDUM July 1985 TO: FROM~ RE: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD CARMEN S. ANNUNZIATO PLANNING DIRECTOR THE SHOPS AT WOOLBRIGHT PLACE REZDNING/LAND USE AMENDMENT AND REZONING APPLICATION ~d~E~ Kieran J. Kilday, agent, for Tradewinds DeveI'~p~ent Corporation, is requesting a rezoning and a land use amendment/rezoning for 18 acres at the northwest corner-~r~ Interstate 95 and Woolbright Road. Presently, the property is zoned-R-iA _(single-family residential) on the northern 12.2 acres~ and C-2 (Neighborhood Commercial) on the southern 5.8 acres. The proposed zoning is C-5 (Community Commercial). The Future Land Use Plan would also be amended, from "Moderate Density Residential,, to ~'Local Retail Commercial,, on the northern 12.2 acres. The southern 5.8' acres would remain in the current "Local Retail Commercial,, category~ Current Ownershi~ Land Use~ and Platting: ' ..................................... The property is presently vacant, although the northern Portion was partially clea~ed as part of the abandoned Bass Creek Project. The site was platted--i~ the 1920s as Lake Boynton Estates. Lake Boynton ~states consists=l~arily of 50 X 120 foot lots (6,000 square feet), accessed by 50 ~ wide rightsJo~-way. The current requirement for the R-IA zoning-district is a 60 foot wide lot with a 7,500 square foot lot' area. ~ current subdivision requirement for right-of-way width is 6'0 ~e~t~ The property is presently under-three major ownerships.. ...... ~- .... =~-_ un= w~S% o~ %~ ~ . i. ~--~ ..... ~h_~ e =u~ject Parcel is a vacant ~-~ and R--iA zoned parcel, which is the subject o{ a separate application to C-1 (Offic~ ,and Professional Commercial). Further to the west is the L,W.D.D. E-4 canal and a single-family section o~ Palm Beach Leisurevil!e.~ This section ~4 Palm Beach Leisurevil!e is R-IAA (PUD) and is shown on the Future Land Use Plan as "Moderate Density Residential', To the north and east o~ the prop~d C-5 district is an R-lA (Single-Family Residential) z~ning ~strict which .is also' shown on the Future Land Use Plan as "Moderate Density ~esidential-, and which is the subject m{ ~ seperate_rezmnSng request to a 8~O-unit PUD. Fur:ther to the north, this R-lA district is developed ~or single-family housing in the $60,000 to $70,_000 range. FUrther to the east is the Seaboard Airline Railway tracks and a narrow M-1 (Light Industrial) zoned strip. This M-1 zoned strip page largely vacant., although the northernmost 4 acres are dev~-~ioped with access from Ocean Drive. Further to the east is Interst~_._~5 Bordering the property along the south is"Woolbright Roadi.. To the south across Woolbright Road. are the commercial and developments known as Pylon ~nterstate Park (zoned C-1 and~ C,J) and Boynton Commercente~ (zoned PID). ~E~O~OQi Rezoning would create m compact C-J zone of 1,8 ~res. The applicant has submitted a preliminary site plan sho~in~-a 'I~000 square foot shopping center~ although under the City,s ~e-~topment regulations, about 175~00 square {met o~ retail ~loor'spa~ ~cOutd be constructed. 'Commerciml zoning has already been establ~ in the vicinity, and there is a ~.4 acre parcel, imme.dimtely~to thm~south which is presently zoned C-5. Therefore, it cmn be conci~ded that C-~ zoning of the subject Parcel would 0~ constitute .~e{_ ComQr~hensive Plmn--Future Land Use Ma~: ..................................... The Future Lm~, Use PI an shows the northern "Moderate Density Residential,, categ~ (7. dwelling units/acre maximum) on the northern 12.2 acres mhd "Local Retail Commercial,, on the southern 5.8 acres. An amendm~t to show the residential Portion as "Local Retail Commercial,,~ a~s ~oposed by the applicant, would be necessary. Comprehensive PI an--Text: ........................ The following Comprehensive Plan' Policies are relevant to this. rezoning request: "Provide a suitable living environment in ail neighborhoods.- (p. "Provide for land uses capable of being served by a~:lable r.esources. ,, (p. 7) "~liminate-existing and POtential lend use con{licks (p. 7) "Provide {or e~{icient..and safe movement within 'the ~itv.,,. (P. 7) "Discourage the ~xpan.sion o{ 5~) strip commercial devet~nt' ,, (P- "Encourage the development of. clustered neighborh'ood community commercial centers at arterial end col!ec~ crossroads. ,, (p. 5~) - "Centraliz~'a~d clu~ter high d~nsity resi'dmntial devei~ment around 'ac:tivity centers- created by arterial crossroads and ~th~r areas ~4 high accessibility.- (p. 39) -'Issues: 1. Wh~ther the subject property is physically and developable under the existing zoning. economi cai 1 y The property Could be 'physically. developed for about 58 s~-gle-~amily onits in the R-lA zoned portion., 'and for either 55.~000 ~-__=_ fee~ of retail floor space or 100~000 square feet-of office in .t>e.~C~2 zoned portion. Since the b~ginning o~ 198~,. approximately ~O~gi~_family~. ~+. · houses have been built in Lake Boynton Estates in the neighborhood . north of the Proposed PUD. It can be inferred from this activity that the R-lA zoned portion of the subdect pro~r~y..cOuld be realistically developed for single-family housing. In ~h~ ~ast years, about 550~000 square feet of office ~loor space has~ be~ built along Woolbright Road. It can thmre~orm be asmomed thmt the parcel is developable at least for office use, under the ~isting zoning. The ~ize and depth of the o~ C-~ zoned Parcel-~i-~ Probably dimProportionate to t,he limited number of retail uses 'a~-l~ed under ~2 zoning. It may be more appropriate, however, to,ame~=the Permitted uses in the C-~ di~tric~, ' ' district which is incompatible wi~ networ W. road ~ Whether there is ~of~icient commercially-zoned acrea~ m -Isewherm .~. in the vicinity for the uses proposed by the applicant~ aod whether .the proposed shopping center would creatm an oversupply ~'~retail · loor space in the vicinity. There is a vacant 9.4 acrm C-~ zoned parcel immediately ~o the south o~ the sub.~mct ParceI~ at the mOuthwemt corner, of I-~5 aod Woolbright Road. This parcel could accomodate a shopping center o~:--~bout 9~,000 ~quare ~eet. By comparimon~ the applicant im proposing a-146~000' square ~oot shopping center. Current information from t~~ ~ner this ~.4 acre parcel indicates,, however, that this parcel-~wiil be develop~ ~or m hotel and o~ice building. Therefore, i~can be concluded that this parcel will not be available ~or sh~i.~g center development. ' ~ Parcel .C°mmunityThere ~reTheseShoppingnO other center,sites avai i mble,~or iease°f the siz= requir~ ~? ~ ~'ed other Sites woOld be immedimtely~north o--~ Blvd. ~ on Congress Ave. where are already two comp~-i.ty~'°n ~ eac.hthere Shopping centers and a regional mali: the other site woui~ to the south, along Congress Avenue, in {ron~ o~ the Hunters- devel oPmen t. · - Typically~ in Boynton Beach, community shopping centers a~ one to two miles apart, depending on,the total square ~ootmge at intersection. The.shopping centers closest to the sub]ec~_ Parcel are Sunshine Square and Causeway Square, both o~ which arm located 1 mile to the east~ and Boynton Plaza and Leisurmviil~ Plaza, .toe,-ted about mii~s to-th~ north and west. Vacancy r~tms are iow in ali o~ these ~hopping centers, and significant residential growth is e:'~eCted in ~he are~ west o~ 1--95. There~ore~ it is rmason~bl~ to e:~p.ect thmt the 'i~h°pPing center proposed by the applicant could be supplied by the surrounding market area without causing a signi{icant loc.tease in the vacancy-rates ~o~ existing shopping centers. The applicant has supportsSUbmittedthisa marI~etconclusion.anmiy~is., attached to this memorandum,_ which. 4. Wh~ther the parcel meets th the location c~riteria that are set forth in COmprehensive_ for Plan. Ltses The ~omprehensive Plan recommends that commercial developed'hr b~ located at major intersections, and that strip c°mmercial-d~elopment be avoided. The proposed C-I zoning district, ~when cOn~d~r~d as a par~ o~ the cluster of commercial development~___ 1-95 and Woolbright ROad, Would meet the locationthatcri~teri-~a_are ~atedfor at commercial uses. PUDS' woulWhetherd bethesubstantitra~ic and utility impacts created b / '~ ally higher than i .~ ...... /zY Proposed ~ .... w~up~zy~e to be developed under the existing zoning (please see at.tach~.~able). 4~750 I~ the property would werebe tOgeneratedbe developed under the current ~i-g~n trips on an average daily basis~ The about proposed C-5 zoning would allow a 175~000 sq. {t. sh~ppi~ng which would generate 10,570 trips per day--a difference o{~ 5,840 trips per day. Wo~lbr~ght R~ad cUrrently carrimSserviceab~ut,,C,,)i2~600 ~rips per day and has a ~apacity (defined as level Road°f will o{ ~ ~oo~,'"--- trip~._ per day. At build out, Woolbright Probably_ carry 40,000 trips per day, and will have a capacity (when 6-taned) ~6,000 trips per day. Thus~ W~otbrighto~ ~ServiceR°ad will. c..already be operating at 4,000 trips per day above Levelat bui'd-out,1 under the existin~ z~n~ng. The Proposed sh~pping centmr wmuld add about 5,000 trips per day to Woolbright_ Road. T~ere~ore~~.. even anticipated that the PropoSedonC-~ zoning= -w°uldRoad seriou.st~ ~gravateit could thebe congestion which will occur ~Woolbriohe at ~ zio The a~--_an~-sOn~~ traffic impact analysis has been reviewed~ the Ralm · Beach Oounty Traffic Engineer and the City Engineer. ~b~iCalm Beach listC°[~nty Traffic Engineer recommends that impact all roadway impro~nts proposedof thesein the apPlicant~s~ istra~{ic statmen~ be~cO~ructed. improvemen_s attached to this report and ~ould be included in any deci~sion to rezone the subje~t property;- A Since there ar~ ~hree rezoning applications separate in the vici~it~y and each alsoapplicatiOnis recommended was accompaniedtha~ thebY a ~raf~ic impact s~ /ement, applicant resubmit a traf~i_c impac~ ' analysis, ~r approval by'th~ 'sta{{ and~Countyi{ Tra{~ic Engineer, which encompasses ~[! of the proposed rezoninos, approved by ~the City Council' This ~ll· be necessary b~cause the r~ad impr'ove~n~s f~r the three projects together may b'e greater than for the three projects considered seperately. ~he City staff is recommending that a Collector right-of-way be ~rOVidedallow accessatthistheto northmrnthe or southern end o~ the subject parcel~ indL~strial-zonedcould be property which lies to the east. Present'ly property accesse~ by any o~ the streets which dead-end at the S.A.L. railroad tracks. The access shown by the applicant at the northern end o~ the propose~ Woolbright PUD is page 4 unaccepatable for two reasons: (1) The access shown w traffic along local streets, through a residential neighborhood; (2) The access-shown 'would require a cul-de_sac longer than !~.0 on the industrial property. This length would exceed the maximum~llo~ed ~or a cul-de-sac in the subdivision regulations. Water demand would ~ncrease from 26,61~ gallons per day 'under ~the existing zoning, to 31,781 gallons per day under the proposed zoning--an increase of'5~I68 gallons p~r day. The~existing 16 inch water main in W'oolbright Road and 10 inch water main in O~an Drive would be able to accomodate this increased, flow. ~his increased water demand (equivalent to 12 single-family houses) would not be considered substanti al. Sewage flows would increase from 21~290 gallons pe~.~day_~u~der the existing zoning~ to 25~75 gallons per day under th~ zoning--an increase ~ 4,085 gallons per day. The li~t s~ations and ~.orce mains in the vicinity would be able to accomodmte the increased sewage flows. As with water demand, the increased sewage. ~low that would be created by the proposed C-~ zoning would not be~substantial. ~- Whether the proposed C-~ zoning would be compatible with other land uses in the vicinity. A one- or two-story shopping center could be built on the site without adversely affecting surrounding properties~ i~ the Proposed C-5 zoned parcel were to be developed in conjuction with the proposed RUD to the north~ and the proposed C-I Parcel to the west. It is POssible, however, that under the C-5 zoning, a four story building could be constructed. If all three rezonings are approved at the same time, the only significant impact to the nearby residential ne!.g~borhoods would be the increased tra~i~c that would be drawn thro~ ~ake Boyntoo Estates, along S.W. 8t.h Street. If the surrounding properties are not rezoned as request~.__~ the applicant, then C-5 zoning of the subject parcel would crea~, an intrusion into the surrounding R-lA zoned property. C'5 ~'ning in such case would place the back o~ a shoPping center immediately up against single-~ami!y lots to the north and to the east. 'Riacing zoning immediately next to single-family zoning would crea~e~ a continuing land use conflict, since the back o~ a shopping center would be facing these singl~e_~amily lots. C°nclusions/Recomm~ndations.. The proposed C-5 zoning ~ould create. substantially higher traf¥ic compared to the e.~isting zon~ngo This increased traffic would aggravate the congestion which wou. E~d be anticipated on aboutW°°lbright800 additional Road, ev~.n without the C-~ zoning_ ~urtherm°re' .trips per day would be d~awn through -~the residential neighborhoods to the north. The on-going development of the .portion of Lake Boynton Estates north of the proPosed zoning is evidence that the R-I~ zoned portion of the suoj~ect property is in fact developable under the existing zoning. There is Substantial evidence that a shopping center COuld be supported at this ~aqe_ 5 location, without significantly harming exi sting s~o-pi~n-ers. However, the propertYwith anC°UldexpandedalS° be developed under ~he~:_~x~_s~ing zOning~ perhaps list' of permitted uses zoning district, It is the Planning Depar'tment's recommen:d':~t~on, primarily because of the unacceptable traffic impacts, th-a~ the Land Use Amendment and Rezonings which are requested for the Shoes at Woolbright Place be denied. page 6