The URL can be used to link to this page

Minutes 01-22-80MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING & ZONING BOARD HELD AT CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, TUESDAY, JANUARY 22, 1980 PRESENT Arnold E. Thompson, Chairman Fred F. DiSalle, Vice Chairman Lillian Bond Wayne Drew Marilyn Huckle Simon Ryder Garry Winter Carmen Annunziato, City Planner Craig Grabeel, Asst. City Planner Chairman Thompson welcomed everyone and called the meeting to order at 7:30 P. M. He introduced the members of the Board, City Planner, Assistant City Planner, and Record£ng Secretary. He acknowledged the presence in the audience of Mayor Riscoe, Councilman Trauger and Councilman deLong. MINUTES OF JANUARY 8, 1980 Mrs. Bond made a motion to accept the minutes of the meeting of January 8, 1980. Mr. DiSalle seconded the motion. Motion carried unanimously. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Annunziato announced that tonight, he distributed 50 copies of the Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan Summary Report which is a synopsis of the adopted Comprehensive Plan of the City of Boynton Beach. It is for the use of residents and property owners in the City and is a guide to the Comprehen- sive Plan. He explained how the uses of the Comprehensive Plan are addressed. Mr. Annunziato referred to now being in a position to set public hearing dates for the Planning & Zoning Board to modify the zoning map consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and listed the dates the chambers would be~available in February. After discussion, it was agreed to hold the first public hearing on Thursday, February 21 at 7:30 P. M. COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Annunziato informed the Board that yesterday, he received in the mail a copy of the zoning petitions being forwarded to the County and advised that one directly impacts on the City. In discussion with the City Manager, he suggested this should be addressed by the Planning & Zoning Board as it affects pro- perty directly south of the City. It is a request to rezone the Grimes parcel to industrial. He would like to add this at the end of the agenda for discussion and action. Mr. Ryder moved to modify the agenda with this addition, seconded by Mrs.. Bond. Motion carried 7-0. MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 CITIZENS AWARENESS PRESENTATION Mr. Grabeel explained the information program and requested the people present to complete the surveys and post the available schedules in their condominiums or public place to inform the citizens of our community. He then introduced Mrs. Jackie Winchester, Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elec- tions. Mrs. Winchester discussed the aspects of voter registration, technicalities of the election process, the upcoming presiden- tial primary and some possible solutions for the problem of voter apathy. PUBLIC HEARINGS Rezoning Request Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Use: Request: John W. Knupp (Sunapee Enterprises, Inc.) Adjacent to the rear of 924 N. Federal Highway Lot 20 less East 55' and that portion of the alley ~lying East of Lots 21,22, & 23, and West of Lot 20, Block 4, Lake Addition to Boynton Beach Placement of chain link fence around subject property together with the adjacent U.S. 1 frontage to enclose Malayan Palm Tree sales using the presently existing building as a sales office Rezone from R1A to C-4 Mr. John W. Knupp, 7608 S. Flagler Drive, West Palm Beach, informed the Board the only real use for this property to be rezoned would be with the adjoining property in front. It is a small piece in the rear with an alley cutting it off. It would be more usable to have it rezoned with the abandonment of the alley. Mr. Ryder referred to the purpose being to store trees and Mr. Knupp agreed and stated he has 25,000 Malayan Palm Trees and nee~ a retail outlet. Mr. Ryder asked if this would be a temporary use and Mr. Knupp replied negatively. Mr. Ryder referred to the intent being to use the existing building for an office and the rest of the area for outdoor storage and Mr. Knupp agreed and explained how the palms would be on display outside. -2- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Mr. Ryder summarized that there is a commercial strip along the east side of Federal Highway and it conforms to a uniform depth. To the east, almost invariably there are homes. This 20' alley acts as a buffer between the commercial and residen- tial. This application is a request to extend the commercial use eastward and eliminate the alley. Mr. Knupp stated the alley runs about 3' off the northwest corner of the present building and Mr. Ryder replied that he visited the site and there is substantial area available now without any addition. He doesn't see how an exception can be justified here. It would seem the existing commercial area is adequate for this purpose and any other purpose. He thinks it would be a horrible impact to encroach on the residential area. He walked through some of the adjacent streets and there are fine homes. When making a change in a developed area, it should be with something which will not be harmful to the people who are there. He cannot see how this reza/ng applica- tion can be justified nor the abandonment of the alley. Chairman Thompson asked if this area was downgraded in the Comprehensive Plan from C-4 to C-3 and Mr. Annunziato replied negatively and stated the land use existing prior to the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan was C-4 and will remain C-4. Mrs. Huckle stated she thinks it would have been well to address the abandonment first because she notices there are several staff comments against the abandonment and she does not think this gentleman would be interested in having this property rezoned if the alley is not abandoned. Mr. Knupp clarified that he would like to have the alley abandoned in order to use the property in the rear. He cannot use the property with an alley in the middle. Mrs. Huckle referred to utility companies objecting to the abandonment of the alley and Chairman Thompson stated these are two separate items. Chairman Thompson requested Mr. Annunziato to read the staff comments. Mr. Annunziato advised that his comment is that he finds no objection to the use for the C-4 use, but feels the encroachment of C-4 would be detrimental to the residen- tial ~ea. This is not consistent with the adopted Comprehen- sive Plan. He thinks the rezoning should be addressed sepa- rately from the abandonment. If the lot is rezoned, it could exist without the abandonment, but one does impact on the other. -3- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Chairman Thompson asked if anyone wanted to speak in favor of this rezoning request and received no response. He asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to this rezoning request and received no response. Mrs. Euckle referred to these requests possibly being denied and asked if it~would be possible to maintain the business on the present C-4 frontage and Mr. Knupp replied that he would have to reconsider, but it probably would not be impossible. Mr. Ryder moved that this Board recommend denial of this rezoning request from the applicant, John W. Knupp, with regard to rezoning the area of R24 North Federal Highway, from R-lA to C-4. Mr. Winter seconded the motion. Under discussion~ Mr. Annunziato suggested that a reason be given for tha recommendation and Mr. Ryder stated that he indicated it would be detrimental to the existing residential develop- ments and the buffer which now exists in the form of a 20' alley provides the necessary buffer for separation between the residential and commercial. Chairman Thompson added that it is not consistent with the land use plan. Mr. Winter added that it would be spot zoning. Motion carried 7-0. ~bandonmen't Request Applicant: Location: Request: John W. Knupp ($unapee Enterprises, Inc.) That portion of the alley lying East of Lots 21r 22 & 23 and West of Lot 20, Block 4, Lake Addition to Boynton Beach Alley Abandonment Mr. Knupp informed the Board that if this alley is abandoned, it would give him better use of this property. He realizes there w°Uld~be a cost involved in moving the power lines, etc., but he would take care of that. Chairman Thompson requested Mr. Annunziato to read the staff comments. Mr, Annunziato stated ha is not in favor of this proposed abandonment in that this alley provides a buffer to tha residentially zoned land to the east. The Acting Director of Public Works has approved this request. Southern Bell has informed us they have buriad facilities in this alley and cannot agree to this request. The cable in this alley is vital to provide telephone service to Northeast Boynton. The cable was placed this year and it would not be feasible to abandon it, even if an adjacent easement were granted. Mr. Annunziato continued that Florida Power & Light Co. objects to this request since they currently occupy this area with over- head electrical facilities that service the residential commun- ity all the way east to the Intracoastal. They are agreeable to lifting their objection if a utility easement is granted to FPL, 12 feet in width, to permit continued use of electrical -4- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 facilities. They would be more than willing to assist the petitioner, Sunapee Enterprises, Inc., in preparation of the easement documents upon their equest. Mr. Annunziato advised that Florida Public Utilities Company has no objection to this abandonment because they have no underground gas distribution facilities located within the limits of this alley right-of-way. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak in favor of this abandonment request and received no response. He asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to this abandonment request and received no response. He asked if there were further comments from the Board members and received no response. Mr. Ryder moved that this Board deny the request for this abandonment of the 20' alley lying east of Lots 21, 22 and 23 and west of Lot 20, Block 4, Lake Addition to Boynton Beach. Mrs. Bond seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mr. Ryder stated basically his reason is he doesn't see how it is in the interest of the City to extend this into the commercial area and it is vitally needed as a buffer between the residential and commercial ~eas. Motion carried 7-0. Rezoning Request Applicant: Location: Use: Request: Peter B. Scott (Summit Investment Corp.) North side of S.W. 23rd Avenue, bounded on the West by the right-of-way of 1-95, and on the North and East by High Point Con- dominium Construction of multi-family residential dwelling units Rezone from R-1AA to R-3 Mr. Annunziato explained the location and stated the request is to rezone from single family to R-3 multi-family. The Comprehensive Plan is consistent with the density of 10.8 units per acre. Mr. Walter Young, 420 N.E. 37th Street, Boca Raton, came before the Board as a representative for the application. He stated the agenda gives clarity of the location, but leaves a lot to be desired about what they intend to do with the property. They are interested in developing this pro- perty based on physical restraints, consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, and to protect High Point. It has come to their attention there are some concerns relative to what kind of development this is going to be, but they recognize this is not a contract issue but would have to respond to -5- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 site plan approval. It will be multi-family, one and two story residences. They will not go above two stories through- out the entire facility. There will probably be an equal number of each. This will not be a rental development, but will be fee simple to be transferred. He did not prepare an exhibit to show as it was stated by the staff it was not re- quired at this point, but when the plan is submitted. They appreciate the people coming and are ready to respond to them. They assure the people they will develop at 10.8 density, utilize the existing buffer strips, utilize the special characteristics of the property and will provide for a greater amount of green area. They are satisfied the utili- ties are available and will absorb any costs necessary to extend. This will have no burden upon the City and it will be a project the City will be proud of and will enhance High Point immediately adjacent. He then read the letter submitted by Mr. Peter B. Scott giving assurance the entire project will not be developed at a height higher than two stories. Mrs. Bond referred to the people being very much concerned how the buffer zones will be treated adjacent to High Point and asked if they were giving strict assurance the homes won't be more than two stories ~d Mr. Young replied that he was giving absolute assurance. Mr. Ryder referred to getting requests for changes similar to this from time to time but normally they are in a much larger area and stated at this particular location, there is a low profile of basically one story buildings which is true of High Point, Chapel Hill, Leisureville and Ridgewood Estates. Regardless whether it conforms to the Comprehensive Plan, the moderate density indicates the maximum. .It is not a matter of something we are compelled to adhere to. He would think because this area is so small, it would not lend itself to this density surrounded by these developments. Also, Boynton Beach. has not lacked applications for various types of housing, so there is not a question of need. It is highly questionable whether this would be in the best interest of the City and the people living in the area. Mr. Young asked if he was Saying the proposal was greater in density and Mr. Ryder clarified that the application states the density conforms to the Comprehensive Plan, but that is the maximum and it doesn't preclude our action to keep it lower. Mr. Young stated that he realizes this is the upper ridge in the zoning category, but after a feasibility study and considering the beautification requirements, there will be some flexibility.~ He thinks they can compliment the ad- joining developments. -6- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Mr. Young then showed some plans and pointed out the amount of green area and explained it woUld be developed in a POD con- cept. He showed pictures of the type of townhouses they intend to develop. He showed a preliminary sketch of the plan for the area with the utilization of the buffer strip shown. Mrs. Bond asked if the price range would be the same as indi- cated on the brochure and Mr. Young replied the price cannot be established until the land is developed. Mr. Winter asked what the density of High Point is and Mrs. Bond replied that she believes it is 7 per acre. Mrs. Huckle questioned the density proposed in this application and Mr. Young informed her that it is 10.8. Mrs. Bond asked if there would be only one entrance into this project and Mr. Young replied affirmatively, as required by the County. Mr. Young referred to this being zoned multi-family previously and stated all the area around this was changed to multi-family with the exception of this one parcel. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak in favor of this rezoning request and received no re- sponse. He asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to this rezoning request and the following came before the Board. Mr. Robert Bruce, 275 High Point Court, advised he is a member of the Board of Directors of Section 4A, High Point. He is a representative not only for the people who received a notice of this change, but is speaking for all the people in High Point because they are very proud of their area. He would like to point out that High Point is such a desirable area that they have a waiting list of people who would like to live there. In addition to that, last year the Board of Assessors reassessed their property and there was a substantial increase in the assessed Value up to $7,000 per unit. He does not see any reason for changing the zoning of this land on 23rd Avenue. He referred to Page 21 of the zoning bylaws and stated in reference to buffer area, the area should be of substantial size to provide a buffering or graduation of uses to be con- siderate or to complement adjacent uses or districts. He cannot imagine building 60 units on 5.7 acres with all the greenery referred to and still have an adequate buffer. He is disappointed Mr. Young didn't have a picture to show where the buildings will be located on this land. There is also question on the access point and he thinks having just one would be considered a safety hazard. He is one who is vio- lently opposed to this change in the zoning. -7- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Mr. Harold Hennessey, 240 High Point Boulevard, advised that he is Vice President of Section 4, High Point Boulevard Asso- ciation and ech~ what was just said. His section is opposed to the rezoning of this property. He also feels with only one exit from this property that it would be a tremendous hazard going onto well travelled 23rd Avenue. They also feel it would downgrade the value of their condominiums because it is not in conformity with the same type of apartments that surround that particular property. He hopes the Board will turn down this request. Mr. Robert Logozzo, 240D High Point Boulevard North, referred to being in control of this and stated if the request is granted, the property could still-be sold in a year and then what would happen? This would then be open to change and could allow something undesirable such as apartments. Mr. Bert H. Peter, 165A High Point Boulevard North, referred to being a professional engineer and stated he would like to touch on some of the assets which were overlooked. Having a one way situation into a parking area is a fire hazard and would not be permissable in other areas. They were also not informed how many parking lots there will be and how it will be handled. He feels the plan should be shown so they have some idea what it will look like. The rear section of High Point is nicely landscaped and they want to keep it that way. They also do not want to be abutting two story buildings and get shade, in the afternoon. Mrs. Bond asked if he lives close to this particular area and Mr. Peter replied that he lives two blocks from there. He owns his property and feels this will devalue his property. Rental apartments are not compati- ble with retirement areas. The people are living here to find peace from the big cities. They do not want to see children running around. He thinks the people will be crammed into this space and will not be to their interest. Mr. Ryder informed the speakers that the detailed plans are not available or required at the time of rezoning; however, Mr. Young did submit sketches but he cannot be held to these. These details will be considered later when plans are sub- mitted. Mr. DiSalle stated that it appears to him from all the discus- sion that in the best interest of the people of Boynton Beach and particularly High Point, he thinks we should maintain the physical character of this area until such time that there is an adequate buffer zone, the safety hazard has been eliminated, the traffic situation taken care of, the parking facilities are adequate, and the area should be maintained. -8- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Chairman Thompson stated that two members of the Board do own property in High Point, but he does not think that constitutes a conflict of interest and they will not abstain from voting. Mr. Annunz±ato stated he evaluated the applicant's request as it pertained to this site and this request was contemplated by the Comprehensive Plan. The plan provides for a maximum den- sity of 10.8 units per acre. The issues that are related to that maximum density are harmony, whether the application will burden the utilities and the physical characteristics of the site. It was on his recommendation that the applicant not' present a plan because it is not binding and just confuses the issue. The applicant has committed himself not to exceed two stories and one-half of the project will be single family homes. He thinks the harmony issue has been answered and the density by the Comprehensive Plan. The land has some peculiar- ities and there are various elevations. One or-two stories may not be noticeable since this land sits lower than the High Point land. As far as the issues of parking, driveways, and land uses, they cannot be evaluated at this time because these are issues of the site plan approval procedure. Mr. Raymond Kiernan, .155B High Point Boulevard North, stated approximately four to five years ago, the Planning & Zoning Board rejected and denied a request for two story apartment buildings on 23rd Avenue. There have been no physical changes since then and he explained. He thinks this Board is obli- gated to the City to stop the business of spot zoning. He begs the Board to grant the wishes of the people assembled and deny this request. Mr. DiSalle made a motion to deny this request for rezoning on the north side of S. W. 23rd Avenue, bounded on the West by the right-of-way of 1-95, and on the North and East by High Point Condominium.~rom R-1AA to R-3. Mr. Winter seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mr. DiSalle stated at this time, this should be denied pending clarification of the buffer zone and elimination of the safety hazard. Mr. Ryder contin- ued that he would like to suggest this be denied on the basis that it is not in keeping with the already established various developments in the area and apparently the area is too small and it would appear there is the intent to get a numb~r of units in here which would be far in excess of what we would like to see. Motion carried 7-0. At this time, Chairman Thompson declared a recess and then reconvened the meeting at 9:00 P. M. -9- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Applicant: Location: Use: Request: Sally Benson, Attorney representing Melric, Inc. Lying East of Las Palmas Park Subdivision and South of Lakeside Harbor Drive Construction of 10 Townhouses Rezone from R-1AA to Planned Unit Development (PUD) with LUI of 3.64 Ms. Sally Benson stated the request is for PUD approval on this 2.75 acres. They anticipate constructing ten townhouses which will be two stories. She showed a rendering of the proposed structure. She pointed out the ten units are pro- posed to be placed with six on the north and four on the south with an open view in the middle to permit the residents on Las Palmas Road to have a view of the Intracoastal. The land use intensity is 3.64, but they have contracted to pur- chase an additional lot direCtly to the west which will be used strictly as a buffer zone and will be landscaped com- pletely. They also plan to construct a wall to block out any noise, traffic, etc. from the local residents. Four of the ten units will be purchased by the officers of the corporation who will only be using them two weeks out of the year. There will be a provision in the declaration of covenants and re- strictions that renting of the townhouses will not be permitted. This will not cause extra traffic. The units will be selling for approximately $200,000. They have included a cUl-de-sac on the plan to take care of the traffic coming down Las Palmas for the use of the public. To the south of the property is a canal and marina, they have purchased the buffer lot to the west, to the north is an undeveloped area and to the east is the Intracoastal. They have tried to meet any objections. They feel this is a good plan. They have satisfied the staff requirements. There was some discussion regarding access for sanitation and fire trucks and at the request of the staff, they have made an opening so the road will connect to Lakeside Harbor Drive. She explained that the neighbors previously objected to such a connection, but the staff has made this request taking into consideration the safety of the citizens. This is a physically attractive plan with a lot of open space. Ten single family homes could have been built, but this town- house plan gives much more open space. She then introduced Mr. John Ewseychik, the designer on this project. Mr. Ryder clarified that in contrast to the previous plan submitted, this plan is changed with an opening so the resi- dents can see the waterway. Mr. Ewseychik added that from a planning standpoint on this particular development, they are trying to preserve the view of the water and have done that successfuly for the residents by clustering the density in this fashion. Another point is there will be a homeowners association so all the common grounds will be uniformly main- tained. They have also been able to provide a community pool MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 and tennis courts which could not be done under the traditional single family layout. The entire project will be developed at one time and not sporadically like single family homes. There will be much less traffic generated for th~ type of homes. He showed a plan with ten single family lots and pointed out how it would block the view and have little room for recrea- tion. The land use intensity is 3.64 and it would be higher with single family. They feel this is a much superior plan for the residents with more benefits. Mr. DiSalle questioned the 6' wall shown and Mr. Ewseychik informed him a 6' decorative fence type wall in wood and con- crete will be constructed. Mrs. Bond asked if it will enclose the whole area and Mr. Ewseychik replied negatively and pointed out the limits. Mrs. Bond clarified that it will be closed off to the residents of Las Palmas Road and Mrs. Benson agreed, because of the complaints submitted by the residents. Mrs. Bond referred to a portion of this land being under water previously and asked if this was still the case and Mr. Ewseychik pointed out the location of the shore line and advised the property line does extend out into the water. He explained that they took into consideration the existing shore line which they are calling the property line. Mrs. Benson clarified that they will maintain the existing shore line. Mr. Winter questioned the accuracy of the map submitted with the application and Mr. Annunziato informed him the map is as accurate as possible at that scale. He clarified that Las Palmas does not go into Lake Worth, but deadlines approxi- mately 300 feet to the west. Mr. Winter clarified that part of this property is in water and Mr. Annunziato agreed. Mr. Winter asked if they are using that acreage as part of the criteria for the density and Mr. Annunziato replied affirma- 'tively. Mr. Winter clarified that the density is higher based on the usable land. Chairman Thompson referred to this originally being submitted as 12 units and stated it has been reduced to 10 units and Mr. Annunziato agreed and explained the zoning ordinance pro- hibits resubmission within one year, but this is a distinct different submission. Mr. Annunziato referred to the request to connect to Lakeside Harbor Drive and stated this property owner has legal access to Lakeside Harbor Drive by ownership of the land and the staff requested that road be connected to alleviate having our garbage trucks back up or turn around on someone else's property. Also, Mr. Ewseychik's statement was accurate in that the number of traffic trips will be less for this type of development. -11- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Mrs. Bond questioned the height of t informed her they will be two storie Mr. Ryder asked if the 10' access ea and Ms. Benson replied affirmatively that in addition, they will make a c public recreation needs in the area. Mrs. Bond referred to the 6' wall an close off the property to public res replied this is private property, bu Mrs. Huckle asked if they anticipate children and Ms. Benson rePlied that and she doesn't believe children wil questioned the unit cost and Ms. Ben be about $200,000 per unit. Mrs. Hu footage proposed and Ms. Benson info around 2,300 square feet air conditi Chairman Thompson requested Mr. Annu comments. Mr. Annunziato stated the two-fold issue. Are we exceeding an associated with the land? The densi with the Comprehensive Plan and is c ing areas. The ten unit count shown family unit design. The issues rais access to the Intracoastal, buffers Palmas residents. Concerning openne provided in line with Las Palmas whi Lakeside Harbor for the prevailing b looking east. Another question rais driveway and Ms. Benson has reported for the lot and the location of the addressed. The issue of the connect Drive was addressed by the staff bec tion trucks are turning around and i tion for the trucks, it was one staf this road be opened as a private roa Mr. Annunziato referred to the staff Utility Department notes the water m The Public Works Dept. notes it shou to ordinances. He has commented the with the Comprehensive Plan, provide 'f'ir.e truck~access. Heexp~.~ned~how the ability to circulate fire trucks and has requested a stabilized subgra utilizied for emergency situations. 5e buildings and Ms. Benson ~ with two bedrooms. ~ement was being retained · Mr. Ewseychik added ~sh contribution for asked if this would idents and Ms. Benson h no gate is anticipated. ~ selling to couples with this has been discussed be allowed. Mr. Ryder son informed him it would ~kle questioned the square ~med her it will be Dned space. nziato to review the staff planning issue here is a ~ of the density criteria ty proposed is consistent )nsistent with the surround- is based on the single ~d previously concerned mnd open space for the Las ss, the corridor has been ~h opens Las Palmas and reezes and aesthetic view md was the location of the they have now contracted ~treet does not need to be .on of Lakeside Harbor muse currently our sanita- n order to have circula- f recommendation that comments and noted the ust be looped at both ends. ld be consistent subject density is consistent improved subgrade for he was concerned about out of the southern POD le covered with sod be Mr. Annunziato read the memo from the Recreation & Park Direc- tor stating based on the Subdivision Regulations, the public dedication requirement is 10 units @ .018 ac/unit = .18 acres. He recOnnnends one-half credit for provision of private recrea- tion facilities provided~ He recommends fee in lieu of land equivalent to .09 acres. -12- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Mr. Annunziato added when and if this is approved, at the time of filing of the preliminary plat, land values would have to be determined. The overall staff recommendation for this master plan and PUD is it be approved subject to staff com- ments and that the density does not exceed the single family format and is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak in favor of this rezoning request and received no re- sponse. He asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to this rezoning request and the following came before the Board. Mr. Henry McLaren, 2424 North Federal Highway, stated he was brought up to believe the essence of zoning was protection of a district and he made a substantial investment in this district based on the fact it was a single family district and he would like it to remain a single family district. He then referred to Section 31, Subsection E, Paragraph (d), and stated in pro- viding for PUD districts, the smallest area possible to convert to PUD is five acres and he understands one-half acre of this property is under water. It also provides that in lesser areas, it may be approved for a PUD in a specific case upon findings by the Planning & Zoning Board and City Council that particular circumstances justify such reduction, that the re- quirements for PUD and the benefits to be derived from PUD can be met in such lesser area, and that permitting such lesser area for PUD is in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan. He submits this should remain a single family district. If access is needed for fire trucks and garbage and fire trucks to pass, this is vacant land and the City can take it by eminent domain and make it a highway for them to pass, but the single family district should be left to preserve the character of this area. There has been nothing clarified about the parking requirements. He understands the owners want to reside here two weeks per year and they could be sat- isfied with single family homes. He requests the Board to deny this application. Mr. Derle Bailey, 644 Las Palmas Way, stated his property is approximately 225 feet west of this proposed rezoning appli- cation. He has lived here for eight years and when he boUght his property, it was zoned for single family homes. When the City had a master rezoning in 1975, this was left as R-1AA zoning, which is single family detached homes. He opposes the rezoning to PUD. The intent of R-1AA zoning is detached single family homes and the developer is requesting a multi- family development. They have bought another piece of pro- perty and in effect want to label that with the PUD. If this is rezoned to R-3, it would change the zoning requirements of this area. There are only three parcels zoned R-1AA undeveloped -13- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 in the City on the waters edge of Lake Worth and this is one of the parcels. He has attended Planning & Zoning Board meetings during the past 13 years and has seen requests made for rezoning to upgrade properties. If this R-1AA is rezoned to anything other than specifically required in that zone, such as PUD, it would surely appear to be downgrading of the property. The developer knew it was zoned for single family detached homes. He has a deposit receipt and contract for sale and purchase of that property dated February 1978 and it is stipulated that he will purchase this property if he can obtain rezoning of this property from the City to allow the erection of a 14 unit condominium building. His intent when he purchased this property was to get it rezoned. In July, 1978, a deed was issued to Melric, but they did not come before the Planning & ZOning Board until February 1979. If this request is approved, the developer~'.s gamble will have paid off but it will not benefit the residents who have lived there for so long. He then presented a petition from the residents on Las Palmas and Lakeside Harbor Drives supporting him in this matter. Mr. Bailey then referred to Mr. Annunziato's statement that this is consistent with the area and Mr. Annunziato clarified tha~ it is consistent in density. Mr. Bailey continued that if you look around the City of Boynton Beach, you Will not find any R-1AA adjoining PUD in the same block. There is room for ten single family detached homes on this property and that is what everyone in the area would like to see there. Their objection is the cluster. They do not want apartments on their street. Mrs. Clark referred to nothing having been said about Lakeside Harbor Drive being a private street with the people owning to the middle of the street and she stated it is a very narrow street and she does not see how it could possibly take on any more traffic. She explained that in order to widen the street, property would have to be condemned. She thinks this is very unfair. She then referred to the statements made about not disturbing the shoreline and advised that they have already done a lot with taking out all the mangroves, seagrapes and trees and none of this is supposed to be removed. This pro- perty was all bulldozed under after they were turned down the last time. She does not object to single family houses. Also, there are three vacant lots to the north and the owner is waiting to see if this is approved, so he can apply for the same. She thinks the Board should be interested in all the people. -14- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Mr. Glenn Guthrie, 626 Lakeside Harbor, stated in reference to the garbage trucks, they have been going around, but did not until all the trees were bulldozed out. The applicant did not mention anything aboUt the drainage easement which is supposed to be there. The ground was levelled and his property is flooded out now. It was mentioned the ditch would be replaced, but nothing was brought up about that. Chairman Thompson read a letter from John J. and Linda L. Bielak stating they are against this rezoning because at the time they purchased their property, they were informed the property to the south was zoned for R-1AAA and they based their )urchase on that information. Mrs. Huckle referred to the additional lot being purchased and questioned what this does to the acreage and Ms. Benson informed her this is not part of the PUD and it Will just increase the property owned by Melric. This lot will be strictly R-1AA and will be landscaped for a buffer. Techni- cally looking at it, it will decrease the land use intensity. Mrs. Huckle questioned where Melric was located and Ms. Benson informed her their address is 401 Bay Street, Toronto, Canada. Mrs. Huckle referred to the minimum number of acres required for a PUD with conditions for the City Council and Mr. Annunziato clarified that the land use intensity shows a minimum of five acres, but less is permitted when certain conditions are apparent. Mrs. Huckle questioned what cer- tain condions prevail and Mr. Annunziato replied the config- uration of the lot, location, use of land, density, harmony with surrounding environmental and land uses. He added that another thing are the amenities provided which are the pool and tennis courts and Mrs. Huckle replied that she would not say these are particularly advantageous to the neighborhood. She clarified that in qualifying this as a compliment to the residential neighborhood, she does not consider a tennis court and swimming pool as an advantage. Mr. Annunziato stated that one advantage is the open space would probably not exist if developed for single family purposes and Mrs. Huckle replied this is debatable as single family homes have side yards. Mr. Ryder stated one of the critical aspects in considering this is the density is comparable to what you would get in maintaining the area R-1AA. He does not see how the present residents can be hurt with these homes costing $200,000. He did speak to two homeowners on th9 block and they said they would prefer this as opposed to continuing the dumping grounds which are there now. -15- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Chairman Thompson clarified that the lot recently purchased could have a single family house built on it if not included with the PUD and Ms. Benson clarified that it was not included in the PUD as she only found out about the proposed purchase after advertising. They may come back with an amended PUD. Chairman Thompson referred to amending it at this time and Ms. Benson replied that it is too late since it has been ad- vertised, but questioned if it could be put under unity of title and Mr. Annunziato replied that he did not see any pro- blem. He clarified that the status of that lot at this time is that it provides an additiOnal buffer. Mrs. Clark questioned where the wall would be located and Mr. Ewseychik pointed out the location on the plan. Mrs. Clark clarified that the lot will be outside the wall and Mr. Ewseychik stated the wall could be extended into that area. Mr. Drew referred to the aerial photo of December 1977 show- ing quite a difference in the appearance of the lot as com- pared to today and Ms. Benson showed aerial photos taken during the past few weeks. Mr. Drew stated there were quite a few large trees on the property in 1977. He believes this would be a nice looking project from the Intracoastal Waterway, but his opinion is it would change the area to being over-developed from one of serenity. He feels a change of this nature would not be good. It was mentioned there won't be children and he thinks with a lack of children, it will cause disharmony in this area and perhaps disregard and a safety hazard in that area. Mrs. Huckle asked if the plan presented previously was for the same type of buildings of equal Value and quality and Ms. Benson replied affirmatively. Mrs. Huckle commented that possibly the residents had some changes of heart know- ing about the quality of construction and the property value involved. Also, the density is very low and is almost exactly the same as single family homes. Mr. Ryder stated he was opposed to the original plan because there were twelve homes and they had the appearance of a private enclave. The waterway could not be seen and there was no other access. In his opinion, this is an improvement. Mr. Drew asked if he checked the existing seawall when he visited the site and Mr. Ryder replied negatively. Mr. Drew referred to the seawa~ creating a problem with this type of development and stated it would not be the same with a single family development. He feels the residents still have the same feeling and he feels they will destroy what is there. -16- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Mr. Bailey stated in regards to knowing about the quality, the last home sold located to the west end of the street was $70,000 and the value increases progressing towards the water- way. He understands they paid over $30,000 for this lot. They feel $200,000 houses can be built on the water. They do not feel density is the argument at all, but do not like the cluster. Ms. Benson assured the Board that the seawall will be taken care of. There was also some mention made regarding children and disharmony and they said they would not want children because of receiving complaints about the noise. This development will improve the property values of the homes and will not downgrade the area. In the master land use plan adopted in 1975, PUDs were not shown. Ten single family homes can be built on this property and they are not increas- ing the density. They feel this layout gives a better use with more open space. The neighbors' objections are based on townhouses vs. houses. They feel this layout should answer that for the Board with showing all the open space. With single family homes, there will be homes everywhere and the waterway could not be seen and the pool could not be con- structed. Mr. Winter asked what percentage of the people living in the area signed the petition and. Mr. Bailey replied that he wasn't sure, but 100% signed it living on Lakeside Harbor Drive. Mr. Guthrie stated that he feels single family homes would in- crease his property value more than townhouses would. Mr. Winter made a motion that this request by Melric, Inc. to rezone this property from R-1AA to PUD be denied, seconded by Mr. Drew. Under discussion, Mr. Winter commented that he agrees with the residents regarding this proposed plan. Single family homes in the $200,000 range will increase the property values in the area compared to any type of condomin- ium development. It was mentioned that some people would rather see townhouses rather than the dumping ground, but he cannot see it being left that when single family homes can be built or the lots sold. There will be greater green area with individual homes rather than townhouses. Mr. DiSalle referred to expressions given in favor of single family residences and stated by definition, a townhouse is a single family residence. He does not find the cluster Objec- tionable. As requeSted, Mr. Annunziato then took a roll call vote on the motion as follows: -17- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Mr. Winter - Yes Mr. Drew - Yes Mr. DiSalle - No Mrs. Huckle - Yes Mr. Thompson - No Mrs. Bond - No Mr. Ryder - No Motion failed 4-3. Mr. Ryder moved to recommend approval of the rezoning re- quested by Melric for the property adjacent to Las Palmas for the construction of ten townhouses to be rezoned from R-1AA to PUD. He added that his basis for this motion is the proposed density is comparable to the ones existing and this development as proposed must necessarily enhance the area. Mrs. Bond seconded the motion. No discussion. Motion carried 4-3 with Mrs. Huckle, Mr. Drew and Mr. Winter dissenting. Applicant: Location: Use: Request: Project Name: Max Amback (John Ewseychik, Agent) Bounded on the West by N. Congress Ave., on the East by L.W.D.D. Canal E-4, on the South by L.W.D.D. Canal L-21, and on the North by L.W.D.D. Canal L-20 Construction of 425 residential dwelling units~ lakes and recreation facilities Rezone from R-1AAA to Planned Unit Develop- ment (PUD) with LUI of 3.6 Dos Lagos Mr. Grabeel explained the location. He informed the Board the request is for rezoning to PUD. This has been extensively master planned with comments from the School Board, County Traffic Engineer, and South Florida Water Management District. The development plans 425 units consisting of 93 single family units, 132 duplexes and townhouses and 200 row townhouse units. He then described the extensive recreation planned. The pro- posed sale prices are $100,000 for the single family and $75,000 for the multi-family. Mr. John Ewseychik informed the Board this tract of land is 95 acres. It is old pasture land with very sparse vegetation. He then explained the plan pointing out the location of the various type units. He pointed out the various recreation areas located throughout the development. He also explained the traffic plan with the site being divided with the main access point to Congress Avenue. They will be donating to the City a 50' wide linear park system along Congress Avenue and Miner Road, which exceeds the public dedicated require- ments. He explained the bike system with mounding to buffer the development from Congress Avenue. He referred to the developer's previous experience and stressed that the proper -18- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 amenities will be provided. There were some comments made by the Technical Review Board which have been addressed adequately. He has reviewed the Comprehensive Plan and this project falls well within it. The density will be about 4.5 units per acre and they have clustered to provide open space. He wilt be happy to answer questions after the staff comments are made. Mr. Grabeel referred to the staff comments and read the follow- ing comments listed by the Building Official: 1. Show dimension lines from streets, parking areas, and between buildings; so that reference points will be available to the Building Department, for future tie-in surveys. 2. Show finish grade elevations and finish floor eleva- tions on the site plan. 3. I recommend no street elevations be permissable below the flood pla~ of eleven feet (11'). 4. I recommend paving of Miner Road on the north property line and an exit from the easterly part of the project to Miner Road. 5. Indicate handicap parking in parking lots. 6. A copy of the recorded plat will be required before any building permits are issued. Mr. Grabeel read the comments noted by the City Engineer that minimum street grades should be planned so that water should not get so high during a 100 year storm that streets would be impassable for evacuation. In his opinion, the minimum street grades should be elevation 12.0 or greater. Improvements to Congress Avenue should be made and shown on drawings as re- quired by the Traffic Study. Mr. Grabeel read the comments from the Director of Utilities as follows: Water Lines - The three connections (two on Miner Road and one on Congress Avenue) and the looping of an 8" water line at the south end of the development adjacent to Lake Worth Drainage District Canal L-21 all will re- quire a 15' easement with no plantings allowed. Secondly, dead-end water lines with fire hydrants will not be allowed. In order to serve these areas, it will be required that the line from the 8" line be a 6" line to the fire hydrant up one side of the street, and a 4" line back down the other side of the street, looping back to the main line. Thirdly, location of water meters are not shown, and easements are not indicated. -19- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Fourthly, there should be a line feeding on the divided street all the way across the property to the east side, with appropriate valving; and the 8" connection onto Congress Avenue should be made at that point, instead of where it is shown on the plans. Sewer Lines - Service laterals are not shown. Ail of the above is approved contingent upon the financing by others of the water and sewer line going up Congress Avenue and across Miner Road. Mr. Grabeel read the note from Ptlm. Stanley Cale of the POlice Department noting that in reference to the second T.R.B. review of the Dos Lagos Development, his feeling about the one entrance is still the same. However, in view of the T.R.B. staff agreeing with the recommendation by the developer to increase the main road elevation to two feet above the 25 year storm level, he will agree and approve the plans. Mr. Grabeel read a memo from the City Planner noting this is recommended for approval subject to the following: 1. The applicant shall be assessed a fair-share contri- bution of $95,000 or construct improvements to Congress Avenue consistent with Palm Beach County Ordinance #79-7 and Mr. Walker's memorandum of 1/21/80; and, 2. The applicant commence an agreement with the School Board of Palm Beach County to transfer .4 of 1% to the School Board on a sale of a unit, for construc- tion of schools in Boynton Beach and/or its reserve annexation area. Mr. Grabeel then read the following memo from the Recreation & Park Director noting the following revised recommendations relative to his original memo dated January 8: Public Open-Space Dedication Requirements- Review of units~reveal: 93 single family units 132 duplexes/townhouses 200 row townhouses 425 total units Based on Subdivision Ordinance, computations are: 225 units @ .018 acre/unit = 4.050 200 units @ .015 acre/unit = 3.000 -~.050 acres Recommend one-half credit for private recreation faci- lities provided, thus reducing the requirements to 3.525 acres. -20- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 As the development is providing a public easement for a bike path and lin~ park encompassing approxi- mately five acres, the remaining 3.525 acres required shall be considered met and the public dedication open space requirement fulfilled. 2. Private Recreation Facilities Assuming that the development shall service families and children, an open play field area of two acres should be provided to accommodate activities such as touch football, soccer, sandlot softball, volleyball, frisbee, and o~her field activities requiring open space which is not currently provided in the plan. The area designated for lots 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, and 66 is ideally located and suited for such an area as it borders the lake, joins the jogging path, and can accommodate family picnicing and social activities as well if properly designed. The School Board projects 171 children will live within this development. Motorola may also increase the number of children living in this development. o Easement along Congress Avenue and Miner Road Provide a public easement along Congress Avenue and construct and maintain an 8 ft. bike path along with appropriate landscaping. If the construction of Miner Road is required, a similar requirement should be provided along Miner Road. Mr. Grabeel then read the attached letters from The School Board of Palm Beach County dated January 3, and from the South Florida Water Management District dated ~January 8. Mr. Annunziato then read the attached letter dated January 21 from Mr. Charles Walker, Palm Beach County Engineer's Office, director of Traffic Division. He explained that we are still assessing the fair share impact amoun~ based on the action taken by the City Council several months ago enforcing Ordinance No. 79-7. The construction alternative included in Mr. Walker's letter is one the applicant would have to address. Mr. Annunziato referred to the drainage and stated as best he can understand, the lake in a 100 year storm would rise to an elevation of 12.9' In addition because the roads are tied into the lake, the level of the water in the roads would be somewhere in the area of 12.9'. The elevation shown with the plan shows some of the roads to be constructed as low as 10½' which would result in a 100 year storm with the streets being flooded. This has raised several considerations. The Police -21- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Department suggested the road be raised 2' above the 100 year storm level and felt there should be an alternative access to the property. The Building Official commented the street ele- vation should be 1l'. Mr. Clark arrived at a minimum street elevation of 12'. Independently of the City, Mr. Walker is recommending Miner Road be addressed and accessed as part of this development. Mr. Ryder referred to the County taking action to re-inState Ordinance 79-7 and Mr. DiSalle informed him the court will give a decision on April 1. Mr. Annunziato advised that we are still assessing all building permits coming in. Discussion followed regarding the roads and access planned. Mr. Ryder asked if the main entrance road is to be dedicated to the City and Mr. Ewseychik replied negatively as all Streets will be private. Mr. Ewseychik stated that they met with the Technical Review Board last week and agreed to all points with a couple of minor exceptions. They are willing to pay .4 of 1% to the School Board. From the transportation standpoint, they are willing to pay and become part of the fair share ordinance for the sum of $95,000. There was concern expressed concern- ing Miner Road because of the drainage situation and they were committed to construct roads to provide decent emergency evacuation in the event of a high storm. The only other comment negating the need for Miner Road relates to wanting the developer to build another road. With paying $95,000, they feel they have covered their impact on the County road system. He referred to Quail Ridge, Indian Springs and other developments having only one point of access and stated they feel it is adequate for these 425 units. A signal is not required at this time, but if needed they will put it in. Mr. Ewseychik continued that he disagrees with the comment made by the Parks Department. They do have an extensive recreation program which is based on their proposed market. He referred to having recreation areas and park areas with green open space throughout the site and explained it was planned in a fashion based on the residents' needs. The requirement was 7 acres for recreation and they have 10 acres planned. They recognize it is very important to have a good recreation program and feel they have covered this in the plan. Mr. Annunziato stated the staff comment is the master plan be approved subject to the memos. -22- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Chairman Thompson referred to the right-of-way for Miner Road being along the canal and stated he is against this. Mr. Annunziato explained how the decision was reached to locate Miner Road. Chairman Thompson referred to Mr. Frederick suggesting addi- tional lots be used for recreation and stated it would be difficult for us to alter this without additional comments and he believes additional information should be submitted to the Council for their consideration. Mr. Ewseychik stated in reference to the park area, it comes down to a matter of marketing and opinion and it is not a code requirement. They have exceeded all recreation code requirements. They have met the guidelines. He requests the Board to rectify this issue. Mr. Annunziato clarified that the standards Mr. Ewseychik are referring to are the Subdivision Standards and there is no limit to private recreation which can exist in a PUD. The issue of children is really the issue. He explained how he felt the Recreation Director's comment was based on the number of children expected. He reviewed the various recrea- tion areas provided. Mr. Ewseychik added that 75% of these units will only be two bedroom units and stressed again that they have met the code requirements. Mr. Annunziato agreed that possibly School Plant Planning is not aware that 75% of the units will be two bedrooms and there is the possibility the two acre park is not needed. He recommends the plan be approved subject to staff comments with additional information to be submitted. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone in the audience wanted to speak in favor of this rezoning request and received no re- sponse. He asked if anyone wanted to speak in opposition to this rezoning request and received no response. Mr. Ryder moved that this Board recommend approval of the application made by Max Amback with regard to the rezoning of the Dos Lagos D.evelopment from R-1AAA to PUD subject to staff .comments, T.R.B. comments, memos discussed and entered into the minutes, and acceptance of Mr. Frederick's memo pend- ing further discussion with the applicant and School Board with regard to the need. Mr. Annunziato suggested the memo be adopted and if there is additional information presented, it can be addressed when given to the Council and Mr. Ryder agreed. Mr. Ewseychik asked if this included the recommenda- tion for the construction of Miner Road and Mr. Annunziato replied affirmatively. Mr. Ewseychik stated they do not accept that since they are paying the fair share impact fee of $95,000 and only one entrance is needed. Mr. Ryder com- mented that some day this will be needed as east/west roads are a great necessity in this area. Mr. Ewseychik agreed there is a need for east/west roads, but they can use the $95,000 -23- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 to construct it with. He referred again to there being other developments in the area with only one access point with more units. Mrs. Bond asked if there would be a fence along Miner Road and Mr. Ewseychik explained how there would be a buffering system along Miner Road. Mr. DiSalle then seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mr. Ryder stated he thinks it is encumbent on this Bqard to insist on the improvement of Miner Road and the applicant can discuss it further with the City Council. East/westhroads will be needed in the future, but the ques- tion is who is going to pay for them. Mr. Ewseychik stated this issue is actually the County Engineer's request. They have committed to pay their fair share. Mr. DiSalle stated he thinks the impact fee should take care of whatever roads are necessary later. Mr. Annunziato clarified that there are two issues - the construction of Miner Road and whether additional access is needed to Miner Road. The staff thinks there is a need for a second access to Miner Road. The applicant is saying they do not want or need another access onto Miner Road. If the Board determines they do need it, then Miner Road becomes a necessity. Mr. Ewseychik stated this additional access came up at the ~.R.B. meeting due to the low elevation of their right-of-way and having an emergency access in the event of having a l~rge rain storm. An additional guard house would be needed for another entrance with additional cost involved per year, in addition to the cost of constructing that road. There are many developments in this County that are much larger and they have only one access point. Chairman Thompson referred again to requiring additional information and suggested possibly tabling this. Mr. Gene Mpore, Attorney representing Mr. Max Amback, clari- fied that Whey have gotten down to specific issues. He seriously ~uestions. the validity of the requirements. They have suppl~ed more recreation area than required by ordinance. However, Mw. Frederick tells this developer, who is the land owner, to put in a soccer or football field and knock out six prime lots which is over and above that required by statute. He thinks this is basically wrong. The cost of such a re- quest will only be passed onto the buyers. He thinks this requiremen~ is arbitrary and the Recreation Department is taking authority above what is theirs. The developer knows how to market and feels this is the best use for the con- sumer. They are rapidly approaching the breaking point. -24- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Mr. Moore continued that they have agreed to give the Miner Road right-of-way and contribute the $95,000. This developer dOes not want a second access, but wants the development to be private. There are many such developments throughout the County. They take exception on being told how to use the land. Chairman Thompson referred again to needing more information for the School Board and clarified that this can be tabled or the recommendation be made with all comments with discus- sions to continue with the City Council. Mr. Moore stated that he thinks the issues are well presented. He does not know what additional information could be sub- mitted to the School Board. Mr.Annunziato replied that they were unaware of the number of bedrooms in 75% of the homes. Mr. Moore stated this could be rectified before the City Council meeting. He does not think this Board is bound to accept the staff recommendations. If Miner Road is con- structed, it will be a road going from nowhere to nowhere with a cost to them of $100,000. Mr. Annunziato disagreed and referred to there being development to the north. Mr. Moore suggested they proceed. He clarified that the matters questioned are the paving of Miner Road and the recreation dedication. Chairman Thompson referred to there being a motion on the floor and Mr. ~nnunziato clarified the motion is to approve subject to staff comments and the appli- cent will seek clarification with the School Board and present at the City Council meeting. Mrs. Huckle stated that normally a letter with information such as recommended by the County Engineer is submitted, to the T.R.B. for consideration and Mr. Annunziato agreed. Mrs. Huckle asked if they disagreed or questioned the recom- mendation, could they over-shadow the recommendation with their own recommendation and Mr. Annunziato replied affirma- tively. He clarified these are recommendatio~ from the County Engineering Staff and are not binding at all and neither are the staff comments unless based on an ordinance. Mrs. Huckle clarified that even if the T.R.B. agreed with a recommendation from the County and incorporated it into their recommendation, the Board could eliminate those sug- gestions from their recommendation and Mr. Annunziato agreed. Mrs. Huckle asked if they still felt additional information was needed and Chairman Thompson replied that he is not sure what the School Board recommendations would be when knowing that 75% of the homes would only have two bedrooms. -25- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Chairman Thompson stated that we should give some direction to the City Council as they will have to ultimately make a deci- sion. If we have additional information, it may aid the City Council in reaching their decision. Mrs. Huckle referred to these being big things which should not be collectively addressed and stated possibly everybody should be given an opportunity to view how they feel and make exceptions accordingly. Discussion ensued regarding whether to amend or rescind the motion and Mr. Ryder requested proceeding with the motion as it stands as the applicant can always appeal at the City Council meeting. Mr. Moore requested the Board to address the three issues. One issue is the paving of Miner Road at their expense after they give $95,000. If the members do not feel it is reasonable, it should not be recommended. The access to this road should also be considered. The other thing is recreation and the question whether it is fair to require six additional lots for recreation. As requested, Mr. Annunziato took a roll call vote on the motion as follows: Mr. Winter - No Mr. Drew - No Mr. DiSalle - No Mrs. Huckle - No Mr. Thompson - Yes Mrs. Bond - Yes Mr. Ryder - Yes Motion failed 4-3. Mr. Winter made a motion that the proposed Dos Lagos PUD be approved subject to staff comments with the following excep- tions subject to review: the recreation area recommend~ by Mr. Frederick and the paving of Miner Road recommended by Mr. Howell and Mr. Walker based on the fact the applicant is paying the road impact fee of $95,000, and the additional exit into this project from Miner Road. Mrs. Huckle seconded the motion. Motion carried 5-1 with Mr. Ryder dissenting and Mrs. Bond abstaining. Preliminary Plat Applicant: Location: Project Description: Mariner's Way (Bob Hamilton, Agent) East of N.E. 12th Avenue 4.75 acres, 32 units, townhouses -26- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Mr. Annunziato informed the Board that this preliminary plat is submitted as a resubmission since the original preliminary Plat expired. In reference to staff comments, to set a fee for recreation and has submitted dc which the Board can review. The Recreation Dire to set the fee for 4.88 acres. Information was by Mr. Hamilton stating the land value is $300, contract price being negotiated now. The proper consists of 4.374 acres and computed at this pri would be $68,587 per acre. He added the land va here is fair and equitable. The staff recommendation is this preliminary plat be approved subject to setting the land value at $300,000 for the site and $68,587 per acre. Mr. DiSalle made a motion that the preliminary p Mariner's Way be approved subject to staff comme the land valuation. Mr. Winter seconded the mot carried 7-0. Disc~Ussion Of 'P~roposed R'ez'oning of ~Grimes 'Parcel .e has commented cumentation ctor has noted submitted today 00 which is the ty actually ce, the value lue presented lat for nts including ion. Motion in the County Mr. Annunziato explained the location of this parcel at the southern end of the City and informed the Board is requesting this land be rezoned from commerci family residential to light industrial° The onl through a nice single family area in the City of He thinks this would be detrimental to that area in general. The City Manager indicated this sho~ dressed by the City Council with a recommendatioD from the Planning & Zoning Board to present to the County Commission. Mrs. Huckle qUestioned the current zoning of thi~ property and Mr. Annunziato informed her it is general commercial. Mrs. Huckle clarified that there is no industrialat all and Mr. Annunziato agreed. Mrs. Huckle clarified that they want to expand and Mr Annunziato agreed. Mrs. Huckle asked how much industrial ~ype traffic would be generated And Mr. Annunziato replied that we couldn't know until a~ter the rezoning, but there will be some truck traffic f~r metal products. Mrs. Bond referred to the residents being noti- fied and Mr. Ryder stated the people haven't asked about this. Mr. Ryder added that he thinks we should indicate our opposition in thinking about the people there. the applicant ~1 and single ~ access is Boynton Beach. and the City ~ld be ad- Mrs. Huckle referred to there possibly being access to this property from N. W. 22nd Street in Delray Beach and they discussed further the access to this property. -27- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD JANUARY 22, 1980 Mr. Ryder made a motion to voice objection to the County's proposed rezoning of the Grimes property due to the fact it will have a detrimental effect on City residents living on the approaches, seconded by Mrs. Bond. Motion carried 5-0 with Mrs. Huckle and Mr. Drew abstaining. ADJOURNMENT Mr. Winter made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Mrs. Huckle. Motion carried 7-0 and the meeting was properly adjourned at 11:45 P.~ M. Respectfully submitted, Suzanne M. Kruse Recording Secretary (Four Tapes) -28- Board of County Commissioners Bill Bailey, Chairman Dennis P. Koehler, Vice-Chairman Peggy B. Evatt Frank Foster Norman Gregory County Administrator John C. Sansbury Department of Engineering and Public Works H. F. Kah!ert County Engineer January 21, 1980 Mr.' Carmen S. Annunziato City Planner City of Boynton Beach P. O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, FL 33435 SUBJECT- Traffic Impact Analysis - Dos Lagos P.U.D. Dear Hro Annunziato: After review of the subject Traffic Impact Analysis, the following are '.recommended: (1) Dedication of additional right-of-way along Congress Avenue to provide for a 60-foot half right-of-way. (2) Dedicate 108 feet of right-of-way for Miner Road along the south right-of-way line of the Lake Worth Drainage District L-20 Canal.. (3) This development should have access to Miner Road. This access point should be no closer than 660 feet from Congress Avenue (centerline-to-centerline). (4) Construct Miner Road to County standards as a 2-lane (future 4-6 lane) facility from Congress Avenue easterly to this aeve-opmen~-s access point. (5) Bear the full cost of signalization at this project's access points on Congress Avenue and Miner Road if andwhen warranted as determined by the County Engineer. (6) Construct turn lanes at the project's entrance as required in the Traffic Impact Analysis for qDos Lagos P.U.D." prepared by Olsak & Associates, Consulting Engineers. BOX 2429 WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33402 (305) 684-2460 City of Boynton Beach -2- January 21, 1980 (7) Pa7 a fair share amount of $95,000.00 to Palm Beach County in' order to offset the impact of the traffic demand which the development will create on the road network. This could be paid upon the issuance of each bdi~ing p~rmit in the usual manner in accordance with Palm Beach County Ordinance No. 79-7. (8) In lieu of payment of a "fair share contribution for road improvements" fee, the developer could provide road construction that would be appropriate for the needs of this area. One recom- mendation is the construction of an additional two lanes of road- way with a median on Congress Avenue from just north of the L-20 Canal to a point 300 feet south of this development's main entrance with appropriate transitions at each end. This would include construction of the second bridge over the L-20 Canal. The developer should provide a set of detailed construction plans~ including drainage~ to be approved by the County Engineer prior to the issuance of a permit for-this proposed construction. This construction would commence prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy for the 214th unit (50%) in this develop- The construction should be completed prior to the Certificates of ............................... ~u~h'~'bei~is~Ued-f6~'-~O%-of~t'h~'~-units~'(25~7"-'units)%- Th~ developer would post a bond or letter of credit in favor of Palm Beach County for an amount equal to 110% of a certified engineer's estimate of the cost of the Congress Avenue improvements. This bond or letter of credit would be furnished prior to the issuance of the 100th Certificate of Occupancy 5y the City of Boynton Beach~ Florida. If Government four lanes Congress Avenue in this section prior to 50% completion of the development, then the developer would pay to Palm Beach County an amount equal to the engineer's certified cost estimate on which the bonding of these improvements to Congress Avenue was based. These monies should be paid prior to the completion of 60% of the units in this development. In no case should this payment, be less than the $95~000.00 fair share fee. It is the recommendation of this office that the above comments be imposed as conditions for approval of this development. The Collection of the "fair share contribution for road improvements" fee has been suspended by the Board of County Commissioners until April 1, 1980; however, the assessment of the fee is still in effect. Palm Beach County has continued to impose the fair share contribution as a condition of approval for Special Exception zoning petitions. This condition would have to be met regardless of the status of Ordinance $79-7. It is our recommendation that the City similarly impose this as a conditionwhere possible. City of Boynton Beach - 3- January 21, 1980 The opportunity to comment is greatly appreciatad. or be of further assistance, please call. Sincerely yours, OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ENGINEER Charles R. ~a~ker, Jr., ~.~. Director, Traffic Division CRW:GVf~F:eu If we can answer any questions South_Florida John R. Maloy, Execubve Director Management District Post Office Box V 3301 Gun Club Road - '¢¢~+,~ Pa,re' ~ea~h,~ "Florida 33402 Teiephone (305) 686-8800 Florida WATS Line 1-800-432-2045 IN REPLY REFER TO: 6-PBA January 8, 1980 Mr. Carmen Annunziato, City Planner City of Boynton Beach P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, FL 33435 RE: DOS LAGOS PUD~ Dear Mr. Annunziato: Following are our comments on the above referenced project which is located on an 88 acre parcel in Section 17, Township 45 South, Range 43 East, in Boynton Beach: Water Supply. The proposed development is located within the service area of the City's water supply facilities. Water Use Permit No. 50-00499-W was issued to the City of Boynton Beach on March 16, 1978 with an annual allocation of 3.89 billion gallons, pursuant to Chapter 373, Part II, Florida Statutes. District staff calculations estimate that a potable water demand of approximately 131,500 gallons per day will be generated by the proposed 359 unit project. When this figure is compared with ihformation contained in our files, it appears that the City's water supply facility has the groundwater withdrawal capability to serve the subject development. Storm Water Disposal. The subject 88 acre parcel is located in the C-16 Drainage Basin-and~the Lake Worth Drainage District (LWDD). Legal positive outfall is available to this proposed PUD through LWDD E-4 Canal. There are no significant drainage or potential flooding problems in the area so that with proper design of a surface water management system the future residents of the proposed project should have adequate drainage and flood protection. The applicant has exhibited a willingness to comply with District regulations by submitting a Surface Water Management Permit application to this agency, as required by Chapter 373, Part IV, Florida Statutes. Staff review of application no. 12279-A is not complete at this time; and as a result, we can forward no comments of a technical nature. Stanley W Hole Na~)es Robe~ L. CJark. Jr Robert W. Paddck Cmairm~n -- Fort L~uderdaie Vice Chairman -- Fort P~erce Nei( Galia~ner Nathanie~ P. Reed John L. Hundle¥ Cloud Hobe Sound Pahokee Robed K_ Butler Charles L. Crumpton Jeanne Bellamy Okeechobee Miami Shores Cora! Gables 6-PBA Mr. Carmen Annunziato January 8, 1980 Page 2 In conclusion, at this stage of review no problems appear to be associated with this project from a water supply or drainage standpoint. If you have any questions regarding this project, p~ase call our office. We appreciate this opportunity to comment. Si ncerely, J. STEVE REEL Assistant to the Director Executive Office JSR/pwk THOMAS J. MILLS SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS TI E SCHOOL BOARD OF PALM BEACH COUNTY. FLORIDA 3323 BELVEDERE ROAD WEST PALM BEACH. FLORIDA 33402 January 3, 1980 Carmen S. Annunziato, City Planner City of Boynton Beach P. O. Box 310, 120 N.E. 2nd Avenue Boynton Beach, FL 33435 ARTHUR H. BOUGAE LOUIS J. EASSA JAMES C. DE ROBERT S. HOWE[ BERNARD KIMMEL, SUSAN R. PELL THOMAS W. SANSBL Re: Dos Lagos PUD School Impact Dear Carmen: Pursuant to Chapter 235.193, Section 2, Florida Statutes, I am writing this official statement~relating to the projected impact of the Dos Lagos PUD on existing public school facilities. The Department of School Plant Planning has reviewed the information provided relative to the proposed Dos Lagos Planned Unit Development, wh'ich when completed will consist of ~/~dwel~i~ units. A mixture of single family units (~)~ duptex/townhouse units (J~%4), and row townhouse units (200) will comprise Dos Lagos when completed. This office estimates that Dos Lagos will generate approximately 171 public school age students at time of build out. A probable grade level breakdown of the 171 students would be as follows: 68 students in grade K-5, 42 students in grades 6-8 and 61 students in grades 9-12. The geographic area in which this proposed subdivision will be located is presently served by Rolling Green Elementary School, Congress Community Middle School and Lake Worth Senior High School. A listing of the existing membership of each school as of October 30, 1979, the additional membership to be generated by the subdivision, a projected 1984-85 membership, and the present usable permanent capacity of each school follows: Membership 1984-851 Usable2 Existing from this Projected Permanent School Name Membership Development Membership Capacity Rolling Green Elementary 657 Congress Community Middle 1378 Lake Worth Senior 2357 68 1000 670 42 1800 1441 61 1600 1619 1 The 1984-85 projected membership will be evaluated on an annual basis and may be revised annually, based on each school's existing membership and the amount of residential building activity within each school's attendance zones. 2 Usable permanent capacity at each school may be revised annually as a result of the placement of Exceptional-ChildEducation and Compensatory-Education Programs in the schools. Placement of these programs in traditional classrooms results in a downward revision of the capacity of the classroom due to the low pupil-teacher ratio customarily assigned to special programs. Capacity may vary annually based on changing programs within the schools. Carmen S. Annunziato Page 2 - - January 3, 1980 Schools serving this rapidlY groWing area are projected to be seriously overcrowded. The factor that Will determine when the enrollments mentioned onthe previous page will arrive is dependent upon the rate at which the various developments in the area are completed. But there is no reason to doubt that enrollments will increase when construction is completed nor can it be assumed that all growth is decades away. While ~the school Board and Administration have been encouraged to apply for advanced funding for the S-3, Santaluces High School, which when completed will alleviate overcrowded conditions at Lake Worth Senior High School, there is no guarantee that thesefunds will be available. State construction funds are allocated to school districts based on the actual number of students in attendance rather than on projected enrollments. Based on past experience, state capital outlay funding allocations for this district are generally in- adequate to provide facilities necessary for the additional students who will be enrolled when approved 'developments are completed. Therefore funds for capital outlay use must be generated locally, perhaps through millage increases, ad valorem bond issues, or some type of "fair share" impact assessment. The administration, therefore, will recommend to the Commission that as a condition of approval of this P.U.D. the owners agree to enter into a formal contract with the School Board of Palm Beach County to contribute a sum equal to .4 of 1% of the selling price of each residential dwelling unit in this development. This will be on a one time initial sales basis as a means of assisting the School Board in its attempt to acquire funds with which to alleviate overcrowded school conditions. These funds will be placed in a special capital outlay account to be used in the area impacted by this development. I have directed my legal staff to prepare the documents necessary to implement this contribution. The School Board has twice in the past 9 years attempted without success to pass bond issues to finance new school construction. It is essential that a reliable source of school construction funds be found; this will require a strong cooperative effort with the School Board by other governmental entities, responsible developers and concerned parents. However, if the school funding problem could be successfully resolved, the School Board would be able to build the facilities necessary to accommodate new residential growth within the county. Sincerely, Howard John~n Senior Planning Specialist SchoolPlant Planning 4/405/4 Q4-6 DATE: TiME: PLACE: January 22~d, 1980 7:30 P.M. Council Chambers City Hall AGuE N DA PI..~NING ~D ZONING BOARD 2. 3. 4. 5. Acknowledgement of Members and Visitors. Reading and Approving.of Minutes. Announcement. Communications. "Citizens Awareness" Presentation:- Jackie Winchester/Palm Beach County. Supervisor of Elections _~."Planning for Elections" Old Business: New Business: A. Public Hearings.8:00 P.M. REZONING REQUEST Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Use: Request: John W. Knupp (Sunapee Enterprises, Inc.) Adjacent to the rear of 924 North Federal Highway Lot 20 Less East 55' & that portion of the alley lying East of Lots 21,22 & 23 & West of Lot 20, Block 4, Lake Addition to Boynton Beach 'Placement of chain link fence around subject property together with the adjacent U.S. 1 frontage to enclose Malayan Palm Tree sales using the presently existing building as a sales office REZONE from R-lA to C-4 ABANDONMENT REQUEST 1. Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Request: John W. Knupp (Sunapee Enterprises Inc.) That portion of the alley lying East of Lots 21,22 & 23 and West of Lot 20, Block 4, Lake Addition to Boynton Beach See Exhibit 'A' Alley Abandonment REZONING REQUEST 1. Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Use: Request: Peter B Soott (Summit Investment Corp.) North side of S.W. 23rd Avenue, bounded on the West by the right-of-way of 1-95, & on the North & East by High Point Condominium See Survey Construction of multi-family residential dwelling units REZONE from R-1AA to R-3 Planning and Zoning Board Agenda January 22nd, 1980 Page 2 REZONING REQUEST 2.. Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Use: Request: 3. Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Use: Request: Sally Benson, Attorney representing.Melric, Inc. Lying East of Las Palmas Park Subdivision and south of Lakeside Harbor Drive See Survey Construction of 10 Townhouses REZONE from R-!AA to Planned unit Development-(PUD) With LUI=3.64 Max A m back (John Ewseychik, agent) Bounded on the West by No. 'Congress Avenue, on the East by L.W.D.D. Canal E-4, .on the South by L.W.D.D. L-21, and on the North by L.W.D.D. Canal L-20 See Exhibit 'A' Construction of 425 residential dwelling units, Lakes & Recreation facilities REZONE from R-1AAA to Planned Unit Development (PUD) With LUi=3.6 Project Name: DOS LAGOS Preliminary Plat: Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Project Description: Mariner's Way (Bob Hamilton, agent) East of N.E'. 12th Avenue See Survey 4.75 acres, 32 units Townhouses