Loading...
Minutes 05-25-82MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD HELD AT CITY H~LL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, TUESDAY, MAY 25, 1982 PRESENT Simon Ryder, Chairman Lillian Bond Ezell Hester Ronald Linkous Robert Wandelt Simon Zive Carmen Annunziato, City Planner ABSENT Garry Winter, Vice Chairman (Excused~ Chairman Ryder called the meeting to order at 7:30 P. M. He welcomed everyone to the meeting and introduced Members of the Board. Chairman Ryder announced that Vice Chairman Winter was in the hospital. He then introduced the City Planner, Recording Secretary, and acknowledged the presence of Mayor Walter "Marry" Trauger, Councilmember Patricia Woolley, and Councilman Joe deLong in the audience. MINUTES OF~ APRIL~ 1~3, 19'82 Mr. Wandelt moved, seconded by Mr. Hester, to approve the minutes as presented. Motion carried 6~0. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Annunziato said all Members should have received a letter announcing the workshops that Dr. Bartley, Professor of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Florida, ~was going to perform. Mr. Annunziato announced that Dr. Bartley-~ould be performing two workshops: one for the Planning and Zoning Board in connection wi~h the City Council, dealing with 'planning and zoninq matters and in particular the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. The second will deal with the Board of Adjustment and will concern their duties as they relate to the State Statutes and the impact of variances on zoning and what it means to the COmprehensive Plan. Previously, Mr. Annunziato had offered four three day dates, but Dr. Bartley informed him that he would not be able to make one of the three day dates, which left three three day dates for the two Boards to choose from. It appeared the two dates most appropriate for the Planning and Zoning Board and the City Council were June 16 and 17. Mr. Linkous asked what days they would be. Mr. Annunziato replied Wednesday and Thursday, Mr. Annunziato said the Members of the Board would receive additional information. COMMUNI CAT ION S None. OLD BUSINESS None. MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MAY 25, 1982 PUBLIC HEARING: 7:30 P. M. VARIANCE REQUEST Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: Description: Sunshine Square Shopping Center Itamar J. Goldenholz, Architect 'Ronald Linkous, Trustee 1625 So. Federal Highway Variance from Sections 5~141(ei and 5~143(n), (o), (b), (k), and (p) of the Parking Lot Ordinance. As it was apparent that there was quite a conflict .of interest between a Member of the Board and the applicant, Mr, Linkous was not expected to take part in the deliberations of the Board, He, therefore, joined the audience. Five Members remained on the Board, Chairman Ryder informed %he Board that this was a request for variance relating to two ordinances which the~City recently promulgated. He said the ordinances were recently adopted and attempt to improve the conditions of the various parking lots that are in the City. Chairman Ryder told Members that they would find that in some parking lots that have been around for a while that when you enter, either by foot or automobile, you do not know your where you belong and stand a chance of being run over (in many cases).. In addition to providing guidance for traffic and pedestrians in the new parking lots, Chairman Ryde~ said the new ordinances attempt to improve the situation with regard to drainage, provide landscaping etc. Chairman Ryder further informed the Board that the applicants are anxious to make improvements along the lines outlined in the ordinances. He stated it was apparently a question of time, and it was something that certainly should be a necessary improvement, so, therefore, they were able to arrange to have the meeting tonight. Chairman Ryder read from page 4 of Ordinance No. 82'8, as follows: "This ordinance attempts to minimize the negative impacts of parking lot construction, operation and maintenance by incorporating various energy-conscious techniques, The benefits of reducing the dimensions of energy-intensive asphaltic paved areas are recognized." In other words, Chairman Ryder adv±sed, each stall now will be 9x18 in contrast to 10x20. He continued reading: "So, too, ~re the effects of-vegetation .and-landscaping which serves to reduce heat, glare, runoff, noise and air pollution. In addition to r~moving carbon dioxide and particulate matter from the air, trees and shrubs also help absorb and reflect solar radiation which allows the dissipation of energY by evaporization that would otherwise heat the air and adjacent buildings." Chairman Ryder then read 'from 'S'ec. 5'~'t'3~8 ' S'c'~pe of said ordinance: - 2 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MAY 25, 1982 "These regulations shall be applicable to all parking lots constructed or reconstructed in the City of Boynton Beach." In other words, Chairman Ryder explained, these ordinances are not confined to anything new that may come along in the future but do affect existing parking lots. He continued reading, as follows: "In the instance of a pa~king lot serving an existing building ~r group of buildings where said' building or group of buildings this Article." Chairman Ryder then read "'Sec. '5'-~139. O~bject~ive~'', which is attached hereto and made a part hereof~'(see page 3a). Chairman Ryder then read from page 6 of said Ordinance: "(i). Variance: A variance is hereby defined as a relaxation of the te~ms of this krticle where such variance will not be contrary to the public interest and where, owihg to the conditions peculiar to the property and not a result of the actions of the applicant, or his predecessors, a literal enforcement of this Article would result in .an unnecessary and undue hardship." Chairman Ryder read "Variances Authorized" from page 14 of the ordinance: "Sec. 5-144. Variances to this Article (a) Variances Authorized - The Planning and Zoning Board of the City of Boynton Beach is hereby authorized to grant variances to any section of this Article after conducting.a public hea~ing at which any party may appear in person or through his duly authorized agent to give testimony. Such variances may be granted only when the granting of same will not be contrary to the public interest, and where, owing to special conditions, a literal enforcement of the provisions of this krticle would result in an unnecessary hardship, not created by the applicant or his predecessor in title, use of possession." Chairman Ryder said that one of the requirements is that the objectives and the proposed plan and request for variance be studied by the City's Technical Review Board, which Mr. Annunziato would go into. Mr. Carmen Annunziato, City Planner, stated that one of the requirements of the variance section of the ordinance is that the Board receive, for the record, the recommendation of the Technical Review Board. When the ordinance was drafted, it was felt that the Planning and Zoning Board would benefit from the expertise of the various staff members. Because of that, Mr. Annunziato forwarded a comprehensive memorandum to Members of the Board which summarized the responses that he received from the ~Techriic~lReview Board at two meetings. - 3 - Sec. 5-139. Objectives. ~The objectives of these regulations include but are no~ limited, to the ~ollowing_~ a) _= a ma×imum~deg~ee of safety and' protection for the public through the orderly design of par~kin~ (b) To provide~..a standard .for construction which results_ in a relatively durable an.d nuisance freep.arking :c) To reduce the n'~_.ative impacts which may.. result fr_om, parking .lot construction; To provi_d~e_.for storm water retention on-site; e)-~_~_provi.,de for parking lots which are constructed in such .a manner that the physicatly~ handicapped are not, discriminated a~ainst; and, ~_(f) To-permit the land owner to benefit from hi:~ ownershi b- ,_rovidin~ for orderl-__ :arking lot. design and construction consistent with the public health, saf.e~y and We!fsre - 3a- MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MAY 25, 1982 Mr. Annunziato said his memorandum forwards to the Board the request for variances, the Technical Review Board.~s recommenda- tion on the request for variances, their recommendation on the site plan approval, and their recommendation for the joint alloca- tion of parking, which is a new aspect of the off street parking regulations, Mr. Annunz±ato read from page 2 of his memorandum, as follows: "Recon~endation Of Variances The TRB members are generally in favor of rec~uL~nding that the Board grant the requested variances: however, as noted in the memorandum fr~n Bert Keeb~ to the City Planner titled Variance ~ Sunshine Square, dated May 18, 1982, which acc~panies this correspondence, the recc~mendation is not unanimous," Mr. Annunziato felt it was important to discuss' the recommendation because there was a lot o'f discussion that went into the recommenda- tion. He read from pages 2 and 3 of his memorandum, ~Discussion of TRB Recormnendation", which is attached hereto and made a part hereof. (see page 4a) Mr. Annunziato explained the variances were two types, The first type is a request to not be required'to submit information which costs money to produce, such as traffic impact studies or drainage studies. Mr. Annunziato said there were two variances which were variance requests from the technical aspect of this Code, One concerns retaining the drainage requirement. Mr. Annunziato said there was a dra±nage requirement which probably has net been met but he did not know. He said the City knew the situation had been improved upon. Mr. Annunziato said perv±oUs areas are being created but the extent to which they go towards meeting the ordinance has not been forwarded to the City~ Mr. Annunziato said the second ~co~cerned variances from the Land~ scaping Code, and they are being addressed by the Community Appearance Board under separate appliCation. Chairman Ryder thought it would be helpful to point out important recommendations which would enhance the operatiOn here, Mr. Annunziato preSented the overlay. To the north is Woolbright Road, to the east is U. S. Highway ~1, to the west is the railroad track, 'and to the south is the rear of the shopping center, Mr. Annunziato pointed out, Mr, Annunziato noted !in his memorandum that the plan proposed by the applicant ~ould result in a tremendous improvement, The improvements are landscaping, for example. Mr. ~nnunziato said the plan complies with the current Landscaping Code exqept for two items: The requirement for a hedge along the westerly property llne, which is the railroad, Secondly, the requirement for a hedge along the southerly boundary separating the paved area from undeveloped land, As Mr. Annunziato mentioned, thoSe are being forwarded to the Community Appearance Board. - 4 - Discussion of TRB Recommendation by the TRB members in. this regard are: Ail of the'TRB members present agreed that the plan proposed'by the applicant will result in a tremendous improvement over the existing~.Conditions at the shopping~center. Among the i~ems to be. improved are landscaping, facade changes, site traffic control, emergency access, parking lot lighting and drainage; however, the issue-raised.which caused most TRB dis- cussion coDcerned the basis for granting these variances. As noted in the'April '27 letter from Mr.. Goldenholz to Chairman Ryder, the applicant~states that the basis for these variance requests is monetary in nature. The applicant cites a pro- hibitive rent structure plus~needed maintenance improvements which when added to the cost of the proposed improvements may result in making the 'project not financially feasible. The questions raised . . 1. whether or not money or the lack of it forms a Iigitimate basis for granting a variance particularly in this instance since the owners have owned the property-since 1967, 2. will basing this request for variance on 'monetary considerations set a precedent - that. is will all similarly situated property owners be ~ treated equally, 3. is the ordinance too~ restrictive as it applies to minor, expansions, and 4. does a request for a variance relieve a TRB member from his responsibility to bring to the ~attention of the Planning and.Zoning Board existing or potential problems~ In order.to provide some difinitive answers to the questions raised, the TRB suggests that the Planning and Zoning Board solicit from the applicant additional information as follows: 1. a drainage study performed by a registered engineer Go determine the extent to which the applicant is damaging the public with storm water run-off, the effect of the landscaping on storm water r~tention, the degree of compliance with the current code and -the cost to comply with the current code if in fact -the public is being damaged; and 2. proof of financial hardship. This solicitation of information is suggested to the Board in order to provide for the Board a better understanding of the basis cf this variance request. - 4a- MINUTES --PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MAY 25, 1982 Provided in the terms of landscaping are the f£~e foot landscaping barriers adjacent to the~'highways and landscaping on site. Mr. Annunziato asked Members of the Board~to notice that the traffic pattern has changed completely, and there are some areas which are striped and some which are unstriped. He said the unstriped areas are proposed to be landscaped. The striped areas are proposed to be painted pavement. Chairman Ryder asked if the landscaped areas would be curbed. Mr. Annunziato replied that the landscaped areas would be curbed consistent with the requirements of the ordinance, He said they have created a landscape a~.ea which identifies the major entrance to the shopping center, which was one of the other things he noted - "site traffic control", Mr. Annunziato said several important things happened concerning traffic, and it has always been a problem for him when he shops at shopping centers. That is, there is no required traffic control on the site. Mr. Annunziato said you can go almost anywhere at any time, He said that changes, as two driveways are being eliminated consistent with the plan. Mr. Annunziato pointed to the driveway, which was to the north of the north/south driveway, which is adjacent to Fountain's, and said it was being eliminated. AlSo, the driveway, which is east of Chapp's, will be removed. Mr. Annunziato said they will be removed, landscaped, the sidewalk recreated, and the curb recreated on the highways. Getting back to Fountain's, Chairman Ryder could see there was no parking, He asked if there was no driveway~ Mr. Annunziato replied that the driveway was there but there was no parking, He said he would get to that. Mrs. Bond pointed out that there is another entrance on the north end. Mr. Annunziato showed the entrance that remains and the central entrance %0 the park±ng~ He said it would be modified substantially in that~ ~t will be reduced in size. Mr. knnunziato said a 100 foot major driveway will be constructed where no parking or access aisles will interfere with the storage of traffic, so you can get on or off at one Yery clear point. Mr. Annunziato told Members ~of the Board it is landscaped and will be very attractive. Another thing impacting site controlis a result of the curb stops, which are placed at each'parking stall, You can no longer laterally move through the parking lot. You have to go through the driveway and then enter or exit at the side. Mr. Annunziato. further informed the Board that the applicant pro- poses to change the way the front of the building looks considerably. In connection with the facade change, there will be a new siding program. Emergency Access: Mr. ~nnunziato .sa~d there 'is now parking, perpendicular to the fronts of all the stores. The ordinance requires that the applicant provide~ for a fire lane or emergency access lane. Mr. Annunziato said the applicant has accommodated that be removing all of the parking adjacent to the front of his building. -- 5 MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MAY 25, 1982 Parking Lot Lighting - Mr. Annunziato told Members of the Board that the applicant is proposing to~r~/ify~theexisting non-energy efficient lighting to one which will be energy efficient, either sodium vapor or the metal halide. Drainage - Mr. Annunziato advised that there currently is no drain- age storm water retention on site. The staff fully acknowledges that by locating landscaping at the perimeters and in the interior at certain locations, the impact of storm water runoff is going to be mitigated to a certain extent, the degree to which they do not know. Mr. Annunziato said they~know how much~'landscaping is being constructed but have not had any Drainage. Engineer tell them how much storm water runoff is going to.be m~tigated as a result of the landscaping, Mr. Annunziato suspected it is going to be substantials, Mr. Annunz~ato added that there is an existing problem of storm water runoff at the intersection of W~olb~ight and U, S. 1. With regard to the landscaping along Woolbright and along U. S. 1, Chairman Ryder asked if the trees were in a cont±nuous strip, Mr. Annunziato replied, "Yes, It is a five foot landscaped pervious strip with trees every forty feet," Mr. Annunziato said the plan meets the Landscaping Code except for, as he mentioned, a hedge on the west and a hedge on the south. Mr. Annunziato told the Board those were some of the prima~ry features of how the plan meets the Code. He added that even though the plan does not meet the new parking lot regulations 100%, he believed the ordinance was being too restrictive. Mr, Annunziato said that was a question that came up, In Mr. Annunziato's opinion, Mr. Annunziato did not think the CitY was being too restrictive. He thought because off.the Ordinance, there was substantial compliance. He did not think the City would have had this design, which benefits the public, without the ordinance, To that extent, Mr. Annunziato believed the ordinance has been successful. Chairman Ryder referred to the entrance off of Woolbright, and asked if that roadway was delineatedbycurbing on either side. Mr. Annunziato replied, "With curbing and landscaping." Chairman Ryder asked if it was curbed· where it was landscaped. Mr. Annunziato answered, "Yes. The Landscaping Code requires that, and this Parking Lot Construction Code requires that where you have landscaping not protected by a curb stop, that it has to be curbed with a six inch concrete curb." Chairman Ryder asked if there would be drop curbs on either side when you get to the entrance to the theater. He pointed out that it is "accident prone" because you have one sidewalk in front of Publix and then you have another one going along Fountain's. Mr. Annunziato wished to refer that question to~the applicant. Chairman Ryder said they would ask the applicant. He thought if you did that, the motorist would realize ±t is a crossing, - 6 - MINUTES -~ PLANNING ~AND ZONINGBOARD MAY 25, 1982 Mr. Annunziato wished to expand on the few object-ions that the Technical Review Board made. He said that several of the variances requested are requests to not be required to submit technical data. Mr. Annunziato pointed out that these requests left the City Engineer, Tom Clark, in a compromising position. He literally could not comment on the drainage because the applicant was asking to be permitted to not provide technical data such as ele~aticns and calculations. Therefore, you have the basis for comment No. 4 under "Discussion of TRB Recommendation" in Mr, Annunziato's memorandum. Mr. Annunziato told the Board that Mr, Tom Clark, City Engineer, feels strongly about his responsibilitY as City Engineer. He read: "4, does a request' for a variance relieve a TRB member frcm his responsibility to bring to the attention of the Plsnning and Zoning Board existing or potential problems?~ Mr. Annunziato reminded the Board that the City knows this park- ing lot contributes to storm water runoff, Under the old plans, when the parking lot was constructed, it was permitted to drain off site, Chairman Ryder asked if there were catch'basins. Mr, Annunziato replied that there were no catch basins, and it was a permitted design, He said the City does not know the extent to which the landscaping mitigates the storm water problem. Secondly, looking for a basis for granting the variances, Mr. Annunziato said, as noted by the applicant, financial-hardship was the base for the granting of the ~aria. nces, Howe~er, he called attention to the fact that no proof of financial hardship was submitted. Mr. Annunziato said this made some of the staff members a little uncomfortable in that~without really knowing, they sort of compromised. However, Mr. Annunzia~o did not think there was any one on the Technical.Review Board who did not think this was a tremendous improvement. Mr. Itamar J. Gotdenholz, Architect for the Applicant, of the architectural firm of Goldenholz and Fischer, 800 West Cypress Creek Road, Suite 510, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, came before the Board, Mr, Goldenholz thanked the Board for having the special meeting tonight, due to the pressure of time that they-~ad, He also thanked ~ery, very much Mr. Carmen Annunziato, City Planner, who helped them all along to produce the technical~data, .as they had to swim through the maze of' ordinances and requests and recommenda~ tions. When they were called by their client to look at the shopping center and put their recommendation for renovation, Mr, Goldenholz said the original intent was' primar~ily facade. Mr, Goldenholz told the Members of the Board that the word "facade" ranges from creativity to a paint job. Fortunately, Mr. Goldenholz commented - 7 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND, ZONING BOARD MAY 25, 1982 they have a client that has the vision to realize and recognize Boynton Beach's expansion and good neighborhood, and he wanted to spend a little more money than just a paint job and attract and continue to have a nice shopping center. Mr. Goldenholz continued by saying the original budget which they have started more than tripled itself since they originally met. As he said, Mr. Goldenhot~z repeated that the owner of the shopping center wanted to have a facade and apparently_opened a "Pandora's Box." Nobody talked about a site plan; nobody talked about land- scaping per ordinance in no way, Mr. Goldenholz told the Board, When they met Mr, Annunziato, City Planner, at the City, in read- ing through the ordinance, they had to sit down, Mr.'~Goldenholz continued. They called their client, met again, and restructured their thinking and plans, and theist client approved as much as they could go with the ordinance of the City and maintain the original facade, Mr. Goldenholz informed the Board that their client increased the budget more than double at the time While they continuedto work on these drawings and collect b~ids and information, Mr. GoldenholZ said a "bomb" showed up 'tlhere, They got calls from the shopping center that the roof .is lin trouble. Mr. Goldenholz further informed the Members of the Board that there was another budget that immediately had to be allocated of' twice the amount of the original budget %hat they had for the shopping center to do a facade, As Mr~ Goldenholz said, his client came down to have a facade put on the shopping center and ~ound up with a whole ordinance and requirements etc. Mr, Goldenholz explained that the facade is primarily taking the existing structure c~nopy, which is there now, and providing a new facia up front in line with the existing columns, encasing the steel columns which are there now with concrete which will allow them to provide more of a scale to it, adding coloration by putting colored tile at scale heig.ht to human being, and providing lighting by the columns or the column capitals of the heads. Chairman Ryder asked if ~the steel cOlumns were being enclosed, and Mr. Goldenholz replied, "Yes." Chairman Ryder asked if the above would be true of. every column and Mr. Goldenholz replied "Yes, that is the intent." Chairman Ryder asked if the lighting ~ould be beneath the canopy or on the outside of the canopy. Mr. ~oldenhOlz answered'that it would be on the outside of the canopy. Mr. Golder consisten~ said it~ we Gotdenhol~ From that told Memb, before, wi squeeze i~ they redu( .holz continued by saying they would go through and do a · sign program, not as the rendering was showing~ He ~uld be a sign program consistent throughout. Mr. said they would be introducing some landscaping, Mr. ~GOldenholz said everything started to erupt. He ~rs of the Board that they saw. the plans on the board ~ich they have tried to comply with as much as they could ~to their budget. Mr. Goldenholz informed the Board that ~ed some items from that facade, not the form of it but they had ~iome additional lighting which they gave up to introduce some more landscaping %o comply with the ordinance. - 8 - MINUTES .PLANNING AND ZONING BQARD MAY 25, 1982 The variance which they have requested is by nature, primarily, budget, Mr. Goldenholz explained. The proof of hardship is such that, as Mr. Goldenhol.z said, it is an arbitrary number to start with as a budget but very quickly you arrive at the point that you cannot increase the rent above it to substantiate or to work with to increase the budget. Mr. Goldenholz stated that they would love to do all kinds of things, but the tenant cannot afford to contribute into that program beyond a certain point. Right now, they believe they are stretching the point a bit. Mr. Goldenholz wanted to go through the items that went through the request for variances. Again, he was going back to the idea that they ~re looking for facade, but they are being thrown into the parkil~g sit~[ation. Mr. Goldenholz said they were not going according recOnstru( not doing with, but the facad~ Mr. Golde] ordinance standpoin~ that it i: of comply~ Mr. Golde] there is ~ that is ti told the enlargeme] Again, Mr based on parking 1 the point said it w~ toor( any p they is c, ~holz that of p goin, ng wi ~holz ~ny en let e ~ember . Gold ~nla~g )t fha about ~s eitl ~inance and were not going through any parking He said they were going with a facade and were .anning on any of these things. They will comply not need it, and they .do not want it as far as )ncerned. :tared that they are'~ecognizing very'much the new :he City has adopted'is a ~ery g~od one from the .arming. They have been 'able to convince their client I to helP the center; the traffic is better because :h that, so they do need that, ;aid they were not-enlarging the building. If .argement, it is. insignificant for the whole amount :hat section of 3,000 square fleet), so Mr. Goldenholz of the Board that they are not looking for any of it or behind,of' it, Either one would do; they problem o~ havi~g traffic going through the ailed,. continued~ / ' All of th~ variances are based on the budget, Mm~ assured the Members of the Board. nholz, reiterated that the variance requeSt was not .ng the .building; it w-as not based on changing the they will not like to do. They took int'o account the drop curbs by the theater. Mr. Goldenholz ~er drop curb or they would have speed b'~tlmps in front are aware of %he Mr. Goldenholz Goldenholz Chairman lyder ~oted some parking stalls had been delineated and asked if :hey w~re being striped. Mr. Goldenholz replied, "Yes." Chairman Ryder ~sked if they had bumpers in front of each stall, According to th~ ordinance request, Mr. Goldenholz said that they did. ChaLrman ~yder commented' that-it was ~ery important because otherwise~ traf[ic would be going every which way. Mr. Goldenholz assured 'C~airma~ Ryder that they have been provided,. With regard| to the drainage, Chairman Ryder asked to what extent Mr. Goldenholz had looked i~fo it to see what they could do. He recalled back in April there was a hea~y storm, and they had a lake out there, Chairman Ryder realized without catch basins and positive drainage and pitching so the water goes where it belongs, - 9 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MAY 25, 1982 the water becomes quite a problem. Mr. Goldenholz rePlied that the extent of it is that they are. aware of the problem and are also answering it in a minor way, Mr. Goldenholz said "minor" because when there is a storm going on there, 'they cannot, at this point, create a retention basin in there but their landscaping as shown on the plan should help the situation. -Mr. Goldenholz said they woUld have to do a study on it, but they were not prepared at this point. Mrs. Bond asked if they wo~ld do it at a later time, Mr. Goldenholz answered that they have no intention at this time. Mr. Wandelt felt that the owners~and-Mr. Goldenholz recognize the fact that they do have to make this improvement with the oncoming of the deBartolo shopping center, and Mr, Wandelt could not see where there was any monetary problem involved-iR this. Surely, Mr. Wandelt pointed out, nobody wants to spend' money-they.do not h~ave to, He thought the Parking Lot Ordinance was a very good ordinance, and he could not see varying'the parking. Mr. Goldenholz could see where an individual could not see the budget as a problem with the exception that they have a choice. Mr. Wandelt c~lled.attention to the fact that Members of the Board d© too. Mr. ~oldenholz explained that Mr. wandeit was saying there Was nO ~eason f°r budget, and he could put numb!ers in' front of them, He paid they started with. an or!gina!"%udget of One Hundred and $~me Odd Thousand Dollars. Right now, Mr:. Goldenholz said they were looking at close to Half a Million Doll~rs~ which is very difficult to swallow at this point. Mr. Hester asked if they had any idea about the ordinance before they approved their budget or ~he variance that they need? Mr. Goldenholz replied that they were not aware that if they were go- ing to put a facade on a building, they were going to wind up changing the parking lot, changing lighting, and PUtting a ~arietyof items that they included which would more than double their original budget. That was not thei~ intent. Whatever the amount of money is, Mr. Goldenholz said ~t doubled. Mr. Hester pointed out that before they could do anything, they had to get approval from the City. Mr. Goldenholz replied, "Yes." It looked to Mr. Hester that before they approved any budget at all, they should have looked into what it might cost or what the changes would have to be before they could .e~en do the facade. Mr. Goldenholz remarked, "Correct." Mr. Goldenholz said they went into preliminary drawings at the time and got the preliminary budget when they learned about the additional requests~ so they regrouped at the time. That was why they did not go up front and ask for a building permit i.mmediately, They did that type of homework where they have learned about it, and they have decided to go and request the City for a variance for these items, which they~hope to get, Mr. Goldenholz reiterated. Chairman Ryder asked if the shopping center is fifteen years old, Mr. Goldenholz thought it was about eighteen. Chairman Ryder - 10 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MAY 25, 1982 said this is the first instance where an attempt is being made to improve it. Mr. Goldenholz said, "As far as we know. Maybe there was one we are not aware of. We are recently on the scene." Chairman Ryder thought Perhaps 'it was coincidental that here they come up with something that everyone agrees is long overdue, and that is the ordinances on parking. They make a lot of sense and give direction by telling people exactly What they have to do. Chairman Ryder said where you have no direction, cars go all over the place. He used Causeway Square as an example, Having the bumpers, even though the stalls are delineated and striping rather, than curbing.seems to be helpful~, Chairman Ryder cor~mented, He thought Members of the Board should consider that the improve- ment here would be substantial and they should consider that it would certainly be in the public's interest, Chairman Ryder could not see where the Board would be setting a precedent. If they have, and they probably will have requests in the future with regard to existing shoPping lots, he thought each one would have to be considered on its own, Basically, what Chairman Ryder thought they had to consider (and he thought the ordinances were great) was whether they had to approach them at this time particularly with an existing installation. As Chairman Ryder uses this area- a lot, he had asked about the entrance to the movie theater. He said at the present time, veHy little guidance or direction is g~ven because.when you go in there with your car, you do'not know where you belong~ Walking is even worse. Chairman Ryder thought, to that degree, this was going to help, He was not too concerned about the fact that the Board was establishing~ a precedent. He did not see that happening, Chairman Ryder felt the Members of the Board-had an~opportunity to consider something that is long~ overdue, and he felt it was in the right direction. Chairman Ryder also pointed out that in the future what they are trying to do with the new ordinances is the right way to go. Chairman Ryder would have liked to see an improvement in drainage because i% is so important, Usually, the only time you think about drainage is when it happens. You. get the flood and you have the inconvenience; then it goes away, and you are back to where you were, Chairman Ryder observed. If the alternative was going to be not having anything done there, Chairman Ryder could not see that Members of the Board~had much choice, He saw a substantial improvement which was really needed and warranted. He said it was also in the interest of the public and of their safety and not just a matter of appearance or what it might do to the store owners. Chairman Ryder felt Members of the Board had to compromise or whatever if the alternative is that either they get this or they get nothing. He could not see any other choice. Chairman Ryder continued by saying Carmen Annunziato, City Planner, pointed out that the Technical Review Board generally is in favor - 11 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MAY 25, 1982 of recommending approval of the granting of these variances except in one instance, which is the matter of drainage. Apparently, Chairman Ryder said, members of the City staff feel that improvement here will be substantial. He noted that Carmen Annunziato, City Planner, had already indicated that. Mr. Annunziato said the basis for requirement to comply with this Code is the fact that the applicant is proposing to add approxi- mately 3,000 square feet to the shopping center. Even without the Parking Lot Code, modifying the facade would have required the landscaping change based upon the Landscaping Code. Mr. Annunziato wanted the Board to be very clear about where these requirements are coming from. Mr. Annunziato said the second thing was that the Technical Review Board suggested two additional ±rems of data ill'the Board felt they needed more data to make these considerations (more drainage information and..some proof of financial hardship). Mr. Ahnunziato said those were the staff's suggestions and very clearly they said that they.~were suggestions without saying that they should be provisos on the approval or disapproval of the plan, He said staff ~us~~- thought the Planning and Zoning Board would be better informed if they had this information. Chairman Ryder agreed that there was no question about the fact that drainage would, be expensive~because it meant tearing up the place, and installing pipes and catch basins, He thought the pavement generally was ~fa±~ly good shape.~ Mr. Goldenholz said that it was. Once you dig trenches, install the boxes and the catch basins, Chairman Ryder pointed out, it is an entirely different picture, and-you would have to repave the entire area. Chairman Ryder repeated that the cost would be substantial, He did not know whether the City could, really try to insist on that because of the fact that it might be proh±b±tive~ Mr. Wandelt pointed out that it was a public hearing. Chairman Ryder asked if anyone else wished to appear in support of the application. He po±nted out that under the existing ordinances, the Planning and ZOning Board normally is an advisory board, makes recommendations, and passes the final decisions on to the City Council. In' this case, Under the new ordinances, Chairman Ryder said the Planning and Zoning Board is authorized to grant these variances without any further consideration. He again asked if anyone wished to speak in favor of the application. Mayor Walter "Marty" Trauger, 702 S. W. 28th Avenue, Boynton Beach, appeared before the Board. He complimented the architects and the owners of the property, As most of you know, Mayor Trauger commented that the downtown development is trying to improve the appearance of dOwntown Boynton Beach and that he had made a comment that the shopping centers were rather d~G~P~[ which is well known. On the other hand, Mayor Trauger felt this was a major improvement to our area. As Chairman Ryder has stated, Mayor Trauger told Members of the Board they had the alternative of granting the variances to a - 12 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MAY 25, 1982 reasonable degree, or just having the buildings painted and a general deterioration of the shopping center with no improvement to downtown Boynton Beach. Mayor Trauger pointed out that they speak of the economics of it, but that the Members of the Board must figure out when they were rented a good many years ago and the rent today and of the volume of these stores that can pay a premium over and above the separant by percentages in most lease contracts, Looking at it, Mayor Trauger did not see it from that viewpoint. $o they have an economic hardship, he commented, and ~hat is.what they are oppressing. Mayor Trauger asked, "How much can you put 'in?" He admitted they would recover a profit but asked how many years~ then reducing the net to this, Mayor Trauger thought they had gone a long, long way and it would be a considerable improvement to Boynton Beach'.s downtown area and to the shopping. He did not want to cut them off, astir had been recommended that they do, because ~then the City womld have a paint job and a deteriorating shopping center which they would h~e to live with for a long, long time. Mayor Trauger thought the considerations of Carmen Annunziato, City Planner, as~.Chairman Ryder mentioned, were quite valid in this area. Mayor Trauger reminded Members of the Board that the shopping center had been built ten or fifteen ~years ago. I'f they were being built from scratch, he thought it would be one thing, but to improve (just like modernization of a house), you tear out the foundation again but you try to ~dd to it. That is what Mayor Trauger believed the architects and owners of the buildings were trying to do. He believed they were within their economic perimeter right on the margin, Chairman Ryder asked if anyone wished to appear in opposition to granting the public hearing. There was no response. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Mr. Annunziato referred the Board to page 15 of Ordinance 82~8. He said if it was the Board'~s desire to grant the variance, there were certain findings that the Planning and Zoning Board had to make in connection with their granting of the variance. Chairman Ryder said they were dealing with several sections~ He said with regard to the aspects of granting the variances, the Board could relate to all of them at one time. Mr. Annmnziato agreed. Chairman Ryder read from"Gr'an'tin~'v'arian~c~-s~~ Requi~e~n'ts" from the Ordinance. ~ copy of the. Requirements is attached hereto and made a part hereof (see pages l3a & b$. After Chairman Ryder read through paragraphs (!) through (13) of paragraph (c), "Granting Variances, Requirements", Mr. Wandelt commented that his only question was the drainage because he hates walking through a parking center shopping lot with a lot of water. That was his only objection to the whole thing. Mr. Hester pointed out that Mr. Annunziato said most of it would be taken - i3 - (c). Grantinq .Variances, ,Requirements - Before qrantinq a variance as authorized by .thi, s .Arti. cle: ,the Planninq.& Zoning Boa,rd. shall, make, f%n~inqs as fo llows: (1) That the re~uire~e~nts- ..for a public heari, n~ ~. ha~e.been met~ (2) That the reasons .s,e,t .forthr. in the application ~justif~ the qrantinq of the variance, ,and that the v. ariance is, ~the~_..m,inimum variance, that, make., p, Qssible the reasonable use of the land,, or s~ructure; (3) That the, qrantinq of the variance wil.! be. in harmony w~ith the qeneral intent an~ D~rpose of this Article, ,wi, ll not be injurious to the neiqhborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfar, e; and~. (4) That a recommendation has been forwarde, d frcm the Technical Review Board as coDstituted in - 13a- ~ADDendix C, Article.~T Definitions of the Code of Ordinances of the Cit~ of Bo~Bea~.h__ and that the recom~uendation has been made a part of the public record° ~..(.d) Conditions - In qrantinq a v~'riance,~ the Planninq...=:-. and zoninq Board may presc~ribe, a~Dproprimte condi- tions and safequards in ConformitV with this Article. Vio!at!on,.o.f such conditions..~and sa.fer gugrds, when, ma.de a part of ~th,e ter~. s .,under. which the variance is qra,nted, ,shall result in causinq the variance to be null and v.oid~ · 13b - MINUTES ~ PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MAY 25, 1982 care of by the landscaping., Mr. Annunziato clarified his statement by saying that he did not say "most" but that to some extent, the storm water would be alleviated. He said they did not know how much. Chairman Ryder continued reading the rest of the portion from the ordinance. Mr. Zive moved to approve the granting of the variances, as they made the findings required in paragraph Lc}, Granting Variances, Requirements, of OrdinanceNo. 82~8 and found! that it~ fOllows the general intent of the ordinance and is pr±marily in compliance with the ordinance, Mr. Hester seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-0. Mr. Goldenholz thanked Members of the Board and introduced the owner of the shopping center, Mr. John K. Moore, 800 Market Street, Chattaaooga, Tennessee 37402. He thanked everyone for their consideration of'the matter and the time they invested and expressed their appreciat±on. M~. Moore said it was good to see Mayor T~auger and .he looked forward to meeting him, as well as the others. Mr. Moore guessed that his buSiness has owned the shopping center since 1967. He said they were a department store that happens to own shopping centers as well, Mr. Moore told Chairman Ryder that he was President of the building company which-is their real estate corporation. Last year, they lost John Moffitt and Earl Osburn, who had been managing the p~operty until Mr. Ronald Linkous came with them. At that time, Mr. Moore became more involved. Mr. Moore stated he may .have flown from Tennessee but Mr. Goldenholz and Mr. Don Fischer, Architects, drove all the way from Fort Lauderdale, He introduced his business associate, Mr. Ray Marlin, who also came especially for the me~ting~ Mr. Moore admitted that for 15 years perhaps they had not done their fair share. He said he had been President of The Building Company of Chattanooga, Tennessee for about nine years but was presuming all along that things here were in good order. Mr. Moore stated that before they became aware of deBartolo, they had plans to improve the shopping center for the welfare of the entire community. He said the economic feasibility of i% was virtually not there, Mr. Moore said their feeling is they are going to be there and are going to hold onto the shopping center. They do not expect to improve it and sell ~t because it is not going to increase its net worth by spending 1/2 Million Dollars on the premises, His philosophy is that it ~s a businsss entity, and it has to stand on its own. Mr, Moore said they expect it to do that, Mr, Moore commented that they had been advised by others in the last few months, through the press and from other places, that - 14 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MAY 25, 1982 this community needs a shot in the arm. Mr. Moore concluded by saying their intent is to improve the center, not only from a traffic flow point of view, the drainage point of view, and all of these things the Board voted for in the way of ordinances, but also from the point of view of beautifica- tion which they hope the entire community will benefit. Chairman Ryder thought if Mr. Moore felt the City officials afforded him undue consideration, it was probably because they feel the need is there. site Plan ~pproval Project Name: Agent: Owner: Location: DesCription: Sunshine Square Shopping Center Goldenholz & Fischer, Arch±tects Ronald Linkous, Trustee 1'625 South Federal Highway 2,913 Sq. Ft. expansion, reconstruCtion of park- ing lot and request for a joint allocation Of required parking As noted on the agenda, Mr. Carmen Annunziato, City Planner, said the request for site plan approval concerns 2,913 square feet of expansion. He said the final form of that expansion is not known, and the applicant will have to come forth with the site plan approval in the future to solidify that request, and the configuration of the 2,913 square feet may change, Basically, Mr. Annunziato said there are two areas where the. applicant is asking to expand the shopping center, One to the rear of S & H Green Stamps and another, an expansion to the bank facilities which sit along Woolbright Road to the west of the gas station, Mr. Annunzfato continued. Also, as noted, Mr., Annunziato said the site plan approval comes to the Board in connection with the reconstruction of the parking lot and the modifications to the facade. He told the Board they had seen the facade and the parking lot had been discussed to a great extent. Mr. Annunziato said it was about 1/32nd of the total project, and asked if there were any questions. He showed where he meant on the overlay. Chairman Ryder asked if joint allocation required parking, Mr. Annunziato wanted to discuss that, There were no more questions as to the physical plan, Mr. Annunz±ato wanted to point out two things that went along with the site plan approval. The Building Department noted that the plan did not meet Code, and it still does not meet Code with respect to landscaping, Mr. ~nnunziato said the applicant will have to deal with the Co~nunity Appearance Board. The Recording Secretary believed they would meet on June 7th, Mr. Annunziato said the applicant would ~be advised of their next meeting, - 15 - MINU~TES - PLANNING'AND ZONING BOARD MAY 25, 1982 Mr. Annunziato said the Police Department recommends that additional lighting be provided to the rear and to the southwest of the buildings, He said the request comes to the Planning and Zoning Board based on purse snatching-and the like which have occurred as people walk behind the b~ilding.~ to and from the condominiums, particularly at night and following the movies. Mr. Goldenho'~z ~asked where that would be required. Mr, Annunziato replied it was required to the rear of the building. Mr. Goldenho<lz asked if it would-be on the building. Mr, Annunziato said it would be to the rear of the building, where he designs it or feels it would be most easily designed. Mr. Annunziato explained it would be additional lighting. To the southwest in the parking lot, Mr. Annunziato said there are now rela~ively-~ow~"ligh~Stand~ds~ Mr. Annunziato said there are some lightS,out onthethea~er and one powerful light standard. He said the Police Department was recommending additional lighting to the rear for the reasons stated. The second aspect of the request concerns the request for joint allocation of parking, Mr. Annunziato continued. In connection with the approval of the off-street parking regulations, which accompany parking lo% regulations, Mr. Annunziato said the City provided a rule for cons%ruction which allows the joint allocation of parking, based on the recommendation of the Technical Review Board to the Planning and Zoning Board. That recommendation by the Planning and. Zoning Board goes to the City Council, Mr. Annunziato told the Board, He said the recommendations have to be based on technical information p~ovided by the applicant. In this instance, Mr, ~nnunziato said it was relatively clear that the peak hours in demand for the theater are significantly different than the peak hours in demand for the shopping center. Therefore, you would have parking spaces which were not being occupied if each was required to provide park£ng separate from self, Mr, Annunziato said they did separate ou~ in the off~.street parking regulations, theaters from shopping centers. They did this because some theaters run 24 hours a day. Mr. Annunziato advised that in this instance, there was a net deficiency of 16 parking stalls over a total aYail~bility of 597, or 3%. He said it-was an insignificant amount and staff recommended that the Planning and Zoning Board recommend positively on this joint allocation of parking to the City Council. Mr. ~nnunzlato p~efer~ed that the Board make ~ ~otion as to the Site plan and one in connection with the joint allocation, Chairman Ryder reminded the Board that they were~now back as an advisory board and they would be recommending to Council. Mr. Annunziato made a mistake in his comments, H'e said there were going to be provided 581 parking stalls, where 597 are required. The 3% still applies. Mr. Zive moved to approve the site plan and approve reconstruction of the parking lot, subject to staff comments, n~oting the~ - 16 - MINUTES - PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MAy 25, 1982 recommendations of the Technical Re~iew Board. the motion, and the motion ca~ied 5-0, Mrs. Bond seconded Mrs. Bond made a motion that the joint allocation-~of parking be approved, noting the recommendations of the Technical Review Board. Mr. Hester seconded the motion, and the motion carried 5-0. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Wandelt moved~ seconded by Mr. Hester, to adjourn, and the meeting was properly adjourned at 8:45 P. M. Respectfully submitted, (Two Tapes) ~ - 17 -