Loading...
Minutes 03-13-79MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING $ ZONING B~ARD HELD AT CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, TUESDAY, MARCH~ 13, 1979 PRESENT Arnold Thompson, Chairman Fred DiSalle, Vice Chairman Gene Johnson Ezell Hester Caesar Mauti Simon Ryder Carmen Annunziato, City Planner Craig Grabeel, Asst. City Planner ABSENT Frank Oberle (Excused) Chairman Thompson welcomed everyone and called the meeting to order at 7:30 P. M. He introduced the members of the Board and City Planner. MINUTES OF FEBRUARY 27, 1979 Mr. Johnson made a motion to accept the minutes, seconded by Mr. Hester. Motion carried 6-'0. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Ryder referred to this Board recommending approval of the Melric application at Las Palmas and advancing it to the Coun- cil with a vote of 4-2 and reported that the Council denied the appmoval with a vote of 3-1. NEW BUSINESS Site Plan Approval Applicant: 'Sage & Sand Motel, Inc. Location: 1935 South Federal Highway Project Description: Addition of 24 Motel Units Mr. John Sheperd, owner of Sage & Sand Motel, came before the BOard. Mr. Annunziato informed the Board that this is an addi- tion of 24 motel units to the existing Sage g Sand Motel. The required parklng has been met. Two tennis courts and ashuffle board court have been added. Mr. Annunziato referred to the staff comments and advised the Building Department has noted if not permitted by March 15, 1979~ 'they must meet the energy code. and the handicapped parking must be adjacent to the building. The City Engineer notes the grades and elevations are to he shown on the final plan. The recommenda- tion is the plan be approved subject to these notes. Mr. Ryder referred th the reminder about the energy code moming into ef£ect on March 15 and stated he assumes approval means approval?by the City Council. Mr. Annunziato informed him this means approval of the building plans by the Building Department. It is a reminder that we will enforce the energy code starting March 15. MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1979 After review of the plans, Mr. Hester moved for site plan ~appro- val for Sage & Sand Motel with the staff comments, seconded by Mr. Mauti. Motion carried 6-0. Appli cant: Lo cation: Legal Description: Proj eot Description: Dr. $ Mrs. L. A. Galainena S.E. 2nd Avenue, 325 ft. East of Pederal'Highway Lots 57, 58, 59 $ 60, The Lawns One Story/Medical Office Building Intracoastal Medical Building The architect for this job came before the Board and showed an artist~s rendering of the proposed building. Mr. Annunziato in- formed the Board that this building apprises approximately 5,000 square feet consisting of four medical suites. Parking is pro- vided for the four doctors amounting to 24 parking spaces. The site is 20,000 square feet with 6,000 square feet in landscaping. Mr. Annunziato referred to the staff comments and read Mr. Howell~s memo: "Pertinent to the above, my determination is that a six inc~ (6") minimum slope on asphalt parking area is required to top of catch basins. If not permitted by March 15, 1979, must meet with energy code. [ The Engineering Department has noted detailed drawings for paving and drainage to be sub- mitted, 3" rainfall to be contained on site, minimum parking lot grade to be .5%, and parking lot specifications to be minimum of 6" crushed rock and 1" asphaltic conereteo The Utility Depart- ment has noted that no trees are to be planted in the rear ease- ment. The Police Department has noted that outside lighting is required. The General Services Department has noted trash cans can be provided instead of a dumpster. He also read his note on the plan regarding the easement. It is the recommendation this plan be approved subject to the staff notes. Mr. Johnson questioned why this application had been changed to note 13 days instead of 20 days and Mr. Annunziato explained the time required for review and advised this was just an administra- tive detail. After review of the plans, Mr. DiSalle made a motion to accept the site plan subject to the staff comments, seconded by Mr. Hester. Motion carried 6-0. Applicant: Charles J. Simon Location: Corner Seacrest Blvd. $'S. E. 36th Avenue Project Descript±on: Medical Offices Mr. Roy Simon, Architect, came before the Board and stated he would like to hear the staff report. Mr. Ar~uunziato stated within the last year, this property was rezoned from single family residential to C-1 for a medical office. This plan has been .submitted in conjunction with the new zoning. Eighteen parking spaces are required for the three suites and 18 are -2- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1979 pmovided. The building encompasses approximately 3,600 square feet and the lot 'area is approximately 21,000 square feet. The drainage on site retainage is by wash rock filled basins. The landscaping is provided on site. Mr. Annunziato referred to the staff comments and read Mr. Howell's memo that the handicapped parking should be situated closer to the entrance, the roof overhang cannot encroach set- backs on the north and south side, and if not permitted by March 15, it must meet withtthe energy code. It Us his understanding there is a technical reason for locating the handicapped parking space where it is noted and he believes the architect will have to discuss this with the Building Official. He clarified that the drain rock is to be 176'' deep. There is a memo from the Utility Department, but changes have occurred which supersede the memo. The Police Department notes there shall be no view obstruction to the roadwayo His comment is sidewalks are re- quired and the parking requirements are noted. The Fire Depart- ment requests the water line to be extended and a fire hydrant to be located at the southeast corner. The staff recommendation is it be approved subject to comments. Mr. Roy Simon referred to the handicapped parking space and ex- plained that the ramp goes into the building and it was felt it would be better for the handicapped to park at the bottom of the ramp rather than closer to the building. In regards to the overhang, he was not aware this was not allowed with having a 30t setback on each side. Part of energy conservation is to have an-overhang. With a 30t setback, it would not be bothering any- body and he would like reconsideration of this. Mr. Annunziato informed him this would require a variance from the Board of Adjustment. Mr. DiSalle questioned the reason for the objec- tion to the overhang and Mr. Mauti replied that it encroaches on the setbacks. Mr. Simon stated he was not aware an overhang was not permissable and Mr. Mauti informed him that it is per- missable providing it is within the setback line. Mr. Simon ciarifi~d that he was not aware overhangs were not permitted in the setbac~ and Mr. Annunziato replied that this is part of the code. Mr. Roy Simon referred to the water line and asked if the 'owner is required to extend that line and install the fire hydrant and Mr. Annunziato replied affirmatively. Mr. Simon stated the rest of the block is not provided with water and this would provide them with water as well and Mir. Annunziato agreed. Chairman Thompson clarified that 30' is the required setback for C-1 and Mr. Ann~nziato agreed. ~hairman Thompson clarified that either this building will have to be moved in or there can be no overhan~. He asked if there was a maximum for an overhang and Mr. Annunziato informed him that no overhang is permitted in the setback of commercial zones and 2~ is allowed in residential zones. -3- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1979 Mr. DiSalle referred to compliance with the energy code and asked if they were going to modify the building requirements for an overhang and Mr. Annunziato replied this was not necessary, but it is just necessary to change the size Of the building. Mr. Ryder referred to this lot being rezoned last year and stated at that time, the Planning & Zoning Board denied this request for rezoning because in some instances it was an example of spot zoning with applying to only one lot. Subsequently, the Council also denied it. Shortly thereafter, the matter came up for re- consideration and it was approved by the Council. At that time, the application was for the applicant-to use the premises for his own use. It seems now, Dr. Simon is going elsewhere and these are rental units. This looks like a switch and there are financial consequences here too. This is now becoming a commer- cial affair. Some objection was made previously to having eom- mereial in a residential area and now it is really commercial. Mr. Mauti replied that once it is approved as C-l, we cannot stop it. Mr. Ryder clarified that he was just giving th~ history on this. Whether we can stop it or the City Council can, that remains to be seen. Mr. Johnson added that he attended the me,t- ing when Dr. Charles Simon said he wanted this for a professional office and this is something different. Mr. DiSalle asked if this conformed to the comprehensive plan and Mr. Ryder replied negatively. Mr. Ryder continued that we dis- cussed spot zoning at the last meeting and this is a good example. He just wanted to relate the fact this did not go through that readily and was denied by both and then reconsidered. At that time~ it was for the use of Dr. Simon. We now find they are building three suites to be rented out. Mr. Mauti questioned how this could be rectified and Mr. Annunziato replied that there is always the danger in zoning when one is close to the issue. What Mr. Ryder says is true and part of the record. The Planning & Zoning Board recommended the rezoning be denied, but it doesn't change the issues at this time° The land was rezoned. The zoning dictates the use. Mr. Mauti stated this should have been brought up during the comprehensive planning discussions and rectified then and Mr. Annunziato replied that the zoning occurred within a year and it would have been foolhardy to change it. Mr. DiSalle asked if a doctor's office or professional building was planned and Mr. Simon informed him it would be a professional building for doctors. He added that there is a church on the north side and on the south side, there is a parking lot for a church in Delray Beach. Mr. DiSalle stated that a church is a permitted use in the residential zone. Mr. Simon continued that his parents live to the east. They are trying to make it not too harmful to the residential neighborhood. -4- MINUTES - PLANNING $ ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1979 Mr. Hester moved that the plan be approved, because it is zoned C-i, ,in connection-with the staff comments, seconded by Mr. Mauti. As requested, Mr. Annunziato took a roll call vote as follows: Mr. Ryder - No Mr. Hester - Aye Mr. Thompson - Aye Mr. DiSalle - No Mr. Johnson - No Mr. Mauti ~ Aye Motion lost 3-3. Mr. Annunziato clarified that no action is taken on this plan. Mr. Simon asked what the owner was to do in this case? Is there something wrong with the site plan? This is before the Board for site plan .approval. Mr. Annunziato informed him that the Planning L ZOning Board makes recommendations to the City Coun- cil and in this case, no recommendation is made. It is not a denial, but it is not an 1approval. Mr. Simon asked if it would go to the Council with no recommendation and Mr. Annunziato re- plied that possibly he should research this and get 'some advice. Mr. Johnson made a motion to table, seconded by Mr. DiSalle. Mr. Ryder questiOned the purpose of tabling and Mr. Annunziato replied he-will get some background concerning the 3-3 vote and whether to forward or not. This will come back to the Planning Zoning Board in two weeks. Mr. Mauti asked if the applicant had the option to go before the City Council and Mr. Annunziato re- plied that it is questionable and Chairman Thompson added that this must be researched. Mr. Hester stated that the plan has been presented according to the zoning and'he does not see how it can be denied. ,~That happened before should not have a bear- ing on what is going on now. What happened a year ago should not be considered now. It is zoned properly for this plan. We cannot deny the man the use of his property which is properly zoned. Mr. Ryder again questioned what would be accomplished with tabling and Mr. Annunziato replied that it can be forwarded with no recommendation; it could be forwarded to the Council advising of the split vote. Mr. DiSalle stated that this is a question of spot zoning. He does not know how it was zoned C-1 in this residential area and it should have been discussed last year. What we are actually saying with this vote is that we don~t agree with the zoning. Mr. Hester stated that it is al- ready zoned. Mr. Ryder stated that the use has been changed. We have taken action with a 3-3 tie. Mr. Johnson then withdrew his motion to table and Mr. DiSalle withdrew his second. Chairman Thompson clarified that this will be forwarded to the Council with no recommendation. -S- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1979 Mr. Simon requested the Board to comment on the site plan and zoning separately as he does not know if the site plan meets their approval or not. This application was for site plan appro- val and he was not prepared to discuss the merits of zoning. Mr. DiSalle stated the site plan is good and Mr. Simon replied that it is being denied. Mr. DiSalle clarified that they are denying the zoning as this is a case of spot zoning and they do not recommend it. Chairman Thompson stated the zoning has been approved and Mr. Ryder added that the use has been changed. Mr. Hester stated that it is submitted for site plan approval and the zoning does not come into the issue. Mr. Annunziato clarified that the staff recommendation is the site plan be approved sub- ject to comments relating to the site plan only. Applicant: Charles Leemon III Location: S.E. corner of N.W. 2nd Avenue and 1-95 Project Description: 100 Room Holiday Inn, Pool L Restaurant Mr. Charles Leemon, III, appeared before the Board and intro- duced his consulting engineers,Mr. Charles Bland, Mr. John Morgan, and Mr. George Guthrie. Mr. Annunziato referred to the plan and stated it is for a Holiday Inn located in the southeast corner of 1-95 and N. W. 2nd Avenue~ It is a four story building with 100 rooms and an accessory build- ing with parking underneath. 146 parking spaces are required and 146 parking spaces are proposed. The total site area is 105,000 square feet. Approximately 10,626 square feet of build- ing will occupy the ground. Also provided is a pool, loading area, lighting and signs. Mr. Annunziato referred to the staff comments and read Mr. HowellTs comments noting on-site water retainage not shown, paving elevations not indicated, handicapped parking to be adja- cent to the building, handicapped entrance not shown and the engineers have noted the same. The Ut~ity Department has noted the City requires a 20T easement for the water main relocation and the site plan has been rectified to show this. Detailed plans are required to show the relocation of the water main. The Public Works Department has noted to eliminate the canopy over the driveway and he explained how this would cause a pro- blem for the truck when emptying the dumpster, He has com- mented on parking to be a minimum of 65~ for 90° parking. It is requested the right-of-way on 1st Avenue be dedicated and me explained. He then referred to the elevations being shown on Page 2 and the blowup of the unit being shown on Page 3. The staff recommendation is that this plan be approved subject to comments. Mr. Ryder referred to this application being before the Board because of a change in zoning approved last year. In the first instance, this application was denied by the Planning & Zoning Board and City Council, but subsequently the City Council re- versed their decision and approved it. At that~time, when the -6- MINUTES - PLB/~NING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1979 public hearings were held, a number of people living in the vicinity appeared objecting. Single family homes are still being built along 1st Avenue. He objects to a four story building being built and the traffic and thinks it will damage the single family owners. The entrance is in the middle of the exi~ from 1-95. This is much t~ close to the exit and danger- ous. On the other side of the street, there is a school and no curb cut is permitted because of the entrance to 1-95. The same is true with traffic getting into the Holiday Inn. He thinks this is a dangerous situation. Most of all, he thinks we should be concerned where we have a project proposed about the impact on the people who have been there for years and have paid taxes. He thinks they should get prime consideration. There is a feel- ing we should have a hotel in Boynton Beach and the Planning Board has taken appropriate action and zoned a site on Woolbright Road. He feels this is the wrong place for a hotel on 2nd Avenue. Mr. DiSalle referred to the traffic situation and Mr. Leemon informed him that he has consulted with D.O.T. and they are more than 400t from the actual exit and there is plenty of time for deceleration. They have added three additional pi~es of pro- perty because of the recommendation of this Board since 1976 in order to accomplish this. He is surprised to hear these state- ments. Mr. Ryder pointed out that it is 163 feet from the brea~k which represents a change in angle and whenpeople approach this, they must slow down and make the entrance. Why did they deny a curb cut on the opposite side and have the entrance to the school through a side street? Mr. Leemon replied that he thinks differ- ent consideration was given to the school on account of the youngsters. He feels they have been tkrough in looking into this project. They thought about entering from a different street, but have gone to the trouble to add additional property to make sure it has easy access. D.O.T. had no question. D.O.T. is only concerned to the end of the fence. They like to get the experts? opinions and have done their homework and do not feel there will be a problem. Mr. Ryder referred to the impact on the surrounding area and stated a 6t wall hardly does the trick because people are enter~ ing the motel at all hours of the night. Mr. Leemon replied that probably the highest development of this property is a hotel. Contrary to the statement of people going and coming all hours, their surveys show the guests check in at an off time and they don~t leave during the morning rush hours. He told about running surveys of this because of operations in large metropolitan areas and the results have been favorable to hotels. Also, normally by 8 or 9 o'clock, the inns are full, so there is no need for additional traffic. The res- taurants close at 10 o~clock. It will not be a problem to the neighborhood. They have not had a problem with noise around the building because the people realize the guests are there for sleeping. -7- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 1~, 1979 Mr. Ryder asked if D.O.T. viewed the area and Mr. Leemon replied affirmatively, that Mr. Meyer, their engineer did come down. Mr. DiSalle ascertained that no residents from the area were present and Mr. Ryder stated that this was not an advertised public hearing. There was quite an attendance at the public hearings, but they did not know about it tonight. Chairman Thompson referred to most motels having a short driving distance from the interchange to the drivein area and pointed out that this showsdriving through a major part of the parking area~ which may create a problem. Mr. Bland explained how the parking was symmetrically divided and would not result in a speedway type access. He explained the uses of the various areas and stated the entrance is shown like it is to protect the neighborhood. Mr. Ryder referred to the present traffic situation in this area and Mr. Bland explained that people entering or exiting from the motel would be making right hand turns. He added that D.O.T. thoroughly looked into this situation. Mr. Ryder commented that they won't have to live with it, but the City will. Chairman Thompson stated that as the people are leaving the Holi- day Inn, they can only make a right hand turn and Mr. Annunziato agreed that they can only progress eastward. Chairman Thompson referred to people making a lot of U-turns to be able to get back to 1-95 and stated this would cause another traffic safety hazard. Mr. Leemon informed him that thorough studies of the traffic have been made when it goes and comes and it is mostly done during the off period. Chairman Thompson stated that N.W. 2nd Avenue does not have a~foff period, but is constant traffic most of the time. Mr. Johnson asked how many houses are along N. W. 1st Avenue to the south and Mr. Leemon replied there are none across the street, but there is one on the corner facing N. W. 4th Street. Mr. Ryder added that a couple of new homes have been built and a builder has been active on 1st Avenue. Mr. Leemon informed him this was beyond their property and there is nothing across from their property except the one house. Mr. Mauti referred to this being spot zoning and Mr. DiSalle said it would be the~same problem with the site on 15th Ave. Mr. Ryder disagreed with the statement about the site on 15th Avenue and explained how there was no residential development in the immediate vicinity and a curb cut had been provided. Mr. Ryder made a motion to deny this application. Chairman Thompson ascertained the motion died for lack of a second. Mr. DiSalle moved to approve this site plan subject to the staff comments, seconded by Mr. Mauti. Motion carried 5-1 with Mr. Ryder dissenting. -8- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 15, 1979 Master Plan Applicant: Location: Legal De scri ption: Proj eot Description: Paul Plunkett & J. McCor~ney (Reed L Malavasi, Agents) West of South Technical Education Center and East side of Congress Avenue Acreage Lawson Industrial Park Mr. Malavasi came before the Board and introduced Mr. Paul Plunkett. He stated he just received a copy of the comments from the staff and would like Mr. Annunziato to go over them first. Mr. Annunziato stated at our last meeting, this appeared before · the Board as a pre-application. Several comments were made con- cerning traffic including the out parcels~ etc. Most of the com- ments have been answered, but several more have been addressed. The Fire Department noted approved subject~to the Utility Depart- ment's memo which concerned the location of fire hydrants and the subsequent submission has alleviated that concern. He referred to Mr. Clark's comments regarding the t~affic lanes and there being a lengthy discussion and advised the turning movements have been shown on the master plan with the length and depth formulated. Mr. Annunziato read through the comments from the various depart- ments considered at the last meeting. He summarized this plan must coordinate with all public utilities and it is recommended the master plan be approved subject to comments. Mr. Ryder asked where the present sanitary sewers would discharge at this time and Mr. Malavasi replied that no sewers are available and told about the Utility Director's recommendation to build a dry system until the interceptor comes in. They will build the sanitary sewers and lift station as a dry system and will go into operation when provision is available. They have requested a waiver from the City fDm'~ the 1% acre lot so they will be allowed to use a septic tank until the system is available. After discussion and review of the plans, Mr. DiSalle made a motion to approve the site plan subject to staff comments, seconded by Mr. Johnson. Motion carried 6-0. Appli cant: Location: Legal Description: Proj eat Description: Bruce Rollyson High Ridge Road (at Florida Pneumatic) Acreage North Boynton Ind~tria! Park Mr. Malavasi came before the Board and stated he thought they took care of the fire hydrants and Mr. Annunziato informed him this memo preceded his resubmission. Mr. Malavasi referred to -9- MINUTES - PLYING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 1~, 1979 the outside utilities and stated his client will bring water to the site, but is not clear on the sewer. His understanding was they were to build a dry sanitary sewer collection system~and if a force main was available, he would connect to it. Mr. Annun- ziato replied this was in agreement with the comments. Mr. Ryder referred to off-site utilities being extended by the developer and Mr. Annunziato replied that this relates to water and explained the proposed water distribution system will be activ&ted when the water system goes into effect. Mr. Malavasi clarified they are allowed to have a dry system if a sewer is not available and Mr. Annunziato agreed. He explained the extensions of the sewer and water system. Mr. Annunziato referred to the staff comments and stated water and fire hydrants have been provided as required by the Fire Department. The Engineer has noted subject to Section 19 of the Subdivision Regulations for drainage agreements concerning water supply. He read Mr. Lawts memo noting the minimum dis- tance between fire hydrants to be ~00', off-site utilities to be approved by Russell L Axon and if not in place, a bond must be issued. The off-site utilities to be extended by the developer and the lift station site to be supplied by the developer. The Police Department notes access to N. W. 22nd Avenue. He has commented to provide an update on the roadway agreement and coor- dinate with public utilities. Mr. Annunziato then questioned the progress with the extension to N. W. 22nd Avenue and Mr. George Wasser, Architect, replied that when he received word about this, he was really amazed to hear they are in the public works business and buying rights-of- way and constructing roads in Boynton Beach. This is quite unusual. This property is being develope~ for a plant for Rollyson windows. It is light industrial with no pollution and will bring employment and pay City taxes. They will put in roads, sewer and water inside their property. However, he does not know why they have to pave High Ridge Road in front of Florida Pneumatic since their property does not even front on this road. The paving of a City street is normally the City, s responsibility. Putting in utilities in city streets is the Cityts responsibility. Mr. Rollyson has agreed to do this on his own property; however, to require him to go beyond his property and buy right-of-way and build the road, he thinks is unfair. He re. quests the Board to please reconsider this re- quirement. Mr. Ryder informed him that it is not unusual to require a developer to extend the existing services to meet his development, but he doesn't understand the reference to buying right-of-way. Mr. Annunziato clarified that the recommendation is that Mr. Rollyson coordinate with the property owners to the south, not purchase the property. Mr. Wasser replied that he dldn~t think this was Mr. ROllyson~s responsibility. Mr. Annunziato referred -10- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD MARCH 13, 1979 to this being a 30 acre industrial facility and stated it is highly recommended the High Ridge Road connection be accomplished. He explained .how the fire and police had to have access to the area. He stated that it is not unusual for an applicant to improve public roads in front of his property to serve his p~operty and he does not understand the reluctance to try to coordinate with the p~operty owner to the south. Mr. Malavasi told about Mr. Rollyson having had a sad experience with the property owner to the South previously. Mr. Annunziato stated until this avenue has been thoroughly researched with coordination with the p~o- petty owner~ he does not think it can be precluded particularly when we are talking about providing fire and police service to a 30 acre indust,rial development. A lengthy discussion followed on the importance of having access to this site from the south. Chairman Thompson asked if Mr. Annunziato had contacted the owner to the south and Mr. Annunziato replied affirmatively and there is good indication they will cooperate, but the motion was to have the applicant contact the owners. Mr. Wass~r referred to this being only one building and a small part of the industrial park and stated he thinks it is an unfair burden on_this plant to spend all the money for the roads and right-of-way. Possibly a proposition should be worked out with everyone paying equally per the land they own and Mr. DiSalle questioned who would pay until it is developed? Mr. Wasser told about a county in South Carolina brirg[ng in sewer and water to the site and giving a five year moratorium on taxes to bring in industry. Mr. Annunziato stated he is willing to offer his services to meet with the respective parties to see what can be done to work this out. He is surprised the applicant has not coordinated this. Mr. Ryder asked if there was any possibility the applicant could be recompensed when this owner develops and the application would not be considered unless this is don_e, for him to assume the cost of the road and Mr. Annunziato replied that generally we do not have such agreements. After further discussion of the ne~d for this access, Mr. Annunziato stated he is willing to coordinate this and will report back at the time of the preliminary plat. Mr. Mauti referred to Mr. Malavasi being requested at the last meeting to coordinate this and Mr. Malavasi agreed, but told how his client had disagreed and Mr. Wasser has taken over. Mr. Mauti stated he did not think it was the position for the City Planner to talk to anyone. Mr. Wasser stated he thinks this is above and beyond what the City can require. After ~urther discussion regarding the coordination efforts, Mr. Ryder stated apparently there has not been enough participation to come to a sol!ution and he moves to table this, seconded by Mr. DiSalle. Mr. Mauti questioned the purpose and Mr. Ryder re- plied to resolve the matter of access. Mr. Johnson suggested that Mr. Annunziato work with them on this matter of access and Mr, Ryder replied he is sure M-r. Annunziato will do w~ever he can mn that regard. Motion carried 6-0. --~_~-- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD Preliminary Plat MARCH 13, 1979 Appli cant: Location: Legal Description: Proj eot Description: Watersedge (Tom Erling, Agent) No. Federal Highway; North of Boat Ramp Park Acreage 43 Townhouses Mr. Tom Erling, developer of the property, and Mr. Burl Gentry, engineer, came before the Board. Mr. Annunziato stated this is a preliminary plat for Watersedge. The Board has reviewed the site plan, pre-application and master plan. This is the process to plat the land. The platting docu- ment has been submitted. There is a question remaining regard- ing the parks and recreation dedication. The procedure is the Planning & Zoning Board determines what the fair market value of the land is bysstriking a mutual agreement, accepting a purchase agreement, or the applicant can get an appraisal. He has re- quested the applicant-to submit a copy of the purchase agreement which set the price of land as of September at $56,000 per acre. He recommends the Board accept that as the land value and address the parks and recreation dedication with that number. The members reviewed and discussed the plans and Mr. Annunziato advised the plans were approved seven to eight months ago and this is the platting procedure in conjunction with the approved plans. Mr. Hester moved to approve the preliminary plat with the comments regarding recreation ~and other staff comments, seconded by Mr. DiSalle. Motion carried 6-0. OTHER DISCUSSION Mr. Johnson suggested that the Board have a planning meeting with the City Council. Mr. Ryder questioned whstguidance or help he was looking for and Mr. Johnson replied that he did not know, but thinks it may be helpful. Chairman Thompson referred to Meadow Lakes and stated after many hours spent by the Board on that project,~ it was sent to the City Council and he understands they made substantial changes. He thinks it would help us know what the Council is after~ so we can work towards that. Discus- sion followed whether such a meeting would be necessary and it was decided it wasntt at this time. Mr. Mauti made a motion to adjourn, seconded by Mr. DiSalle. Motion carried 6-0 and the meeting was properly adjourned at 10:40 P.M. Respectfully submitted, Suzanne M. Kruse, Recording Secretary (Two Tapes) -12- DATE: TIME: PLACE: March 13th, 1979 7:30 P.M. Council Chambers City Hall AGENDA PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD Regular Mee%in9 Acknowledgement of"Members and Visitors. Reading and Approving of Minutes. Announcements~ Communications. Old Business~ 6. New Business: A. Site Plan Approval: Applicant: Sage & Sand Motel, Inc., Location: 1935 So. Federal Highway Legal Description: See Survey; Project Description: Addition of 24 Motel units; 2. Applicant: Dr. & Mrs. L.A. Galainena Location: .S.E. 2nd Avenue; 325 ft. East of Federal Highway Legal DescriPtion: ~Lots 57~58,59 & 60, the Lawns Project DesCription: One Story/Medical Office Building Project Name: Intracoastal Medical Building 3. Applicant: Charles J. Simon Location: Corner Seacrest Blvd. & S.E. 36th Avenue (Gulfs%ream Blvd) Legal Description: See Survey; Project Description: Medical Offices 4. Applicant: Charles Leemon III Location: SoE. corner of N.W. 2nd Avenue and 1-95 Legal Descfip{ion: ~See Survey Pro~ect Description: 100 Room Holiday Inn, Pool and Restaurant - Master Plan: 1. A~p!i~ant: Paul Plunk~t~i& ~.~ McCor~e~ (~eed & Malavasi, Agents) Loc~t~o~: West of South Technical Education Center and .... East Side of Congress Avenue Legal DeSCri~ti0~: ° Acreage Project Description Lawson Industrial Park o Applicant: Bruce R011yson Location: High R~dge Rd. Legal' Description: Acreage Project Description: North Boynton Industrial Park (at Florida Pneumatic)~ Planning & Zoning Agenda March 13th, 1979 Page 2 C. Preliminary ~Plat: 1. Applicant:~_~_.Wat~sedge (Tom Erling, Agent) Location: No. Federal Highway; North of Boat Ramp Park Legal Description: Acreage Project Description: 43 Townhouses :-~ ~ ~ . ' · - BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA .... -i!~:-' A~o ApplicatiOns to be processed by the ~lanning and-Zoning Board must be received and accepted by the City Planner twentyi - · '(20) days prior_to the regular meeting. The applicant will be advised as to supplemental meetings necessary for application review. ~.. All applicants with approved site plans, which at a later date request a revision, will be processed in the same manner as the initial application ~ubject to all Code requirements effective at the time the revision is requested. Applicant's Address Intended.Use of Site The~-following data must appear-on all copies of the Site Plan: 1, Existing Zone 2. -Area of Site ~0~5 /9~z~/~ ~g,~.'z=~ 3. Total Number of Units Proposed 4. Density Gross ?~{//~/7-~ Per Acre /~.~ 5. Building Area~D~DgBZ ~3~O Sq. Ft.~X/5~/~ /~.~/~FD~DbED g,~% of Lot 6. Parking Spaces: Req ' d ~ Proposed ~f 7. Parking - Aisle Areat/~m Sq. Ft.~//~/~G-~'~OfE~?g% of Lot 8. Street ~ea ~/B ~~ Sq. Ft. % of Lot 9. Landscape ~ea Zo ~ ~9 ~F~ Sq. Ft ~~/~/~- ~WD~OB~ ~ % of Lot 10. H~ight 6f Buildings /e,~', Feet ~_ 11. Total Floor Areaway, ~9~0 Sq. Ft. What is the apPlicant's interest in the premises affected? ~Owner, Agent, Lessee, Etc.) Stories (I) (We) understand that this Site approval becomes a part of the permanent records of the Planning and Zoning Board. (I) (We) hereby certify that the above statements and the statements or showings made in any paper 9r~lans submitted herewith are'true to the best of (my) _(ourJ kn~.~dge ;~nd belief. This application will not be ac- cep~~es~ign~y the pwner ~f the property : ,? . _ , ?~i~3f~t~'~.?//~WNER-' - The Owner has here~y designated the above signed person to act as his agent in regard to th~ petition. (To be executed when Owner designate~ another to act on his behalf.) ~FO L- D ~ Craig Grabeel Assistant Planner FROM Edgar E. Howell Building Official tIAR 5 1979 DATE :_3_v. fv.2~ : My. determination on the above reference, is that handicapped parking should be situated closer to entrance, additionally roof overhang cannot encroach setbacks on North and South side. Note: If not'permitted by March 15th, 1979, must meet with energy code. PLEASE REPLY TO ~ / SIGNED E. Howell SIGNED 'rillS COPY FOR PERSON ADDRESSED GRAYARC CO., INC., BROOKLYN, hi. Y. 11232 MEMORANDUM Carmen ~ Annunziato ~ City Planner Mar~ G.. Law Acting ,Utility Director DATE March 5, 1979 Dr. Charles Simon --'. Rental offices L '-. Seacrest Blvd. The above s~bjeCt plans are approved pending. ~pon the following: No fire protection. Domestic water and sewer available. MGL:br Mark G. Law Acting UtilityDirector '/ I AVE. %yE .... 4TH. $TH. OCEAN ~vF IST r------- SW z 2Nb. MEMORANDUM March 5, 1979, TO: Mr. Carmen Annunziato, City Planner FROM: Tom Clark, City Engineer Re: Preliminary Plat for the Watersedge Subdivision Reference is made to memo of Feb. 26, 1979 from Bill Flushing to the writer which lists requirements for the· subject preliminary plat to be complied with. Other comments regarding development plans follow herewith: The roadway must have 22-ft. width 'of asphaltic concrete. The'drainage 'and development-p!ans must provide for grading and/or.drainage facilities to eliminate the ponding of water on City property~caused by the new construction. Retaining walls at both north and south property lines will be required unless required easements are obtained from the property on the north and unless the toe of the fill slope does not-.~encroach on the park property. Details are required for the street lighting proposed and an estimate of cost is required. A typical cross-section is requested extending from the south to the north limits of the proposed con- struction. Existing sanitary sewer manholes shall have note concern- ing adjustments to grade. Tom Clark MEMORANDUM TO:' ~ Tom Clark FROM: Bill FluShing Re: The watersedge Subdivision February 26, 1979 The following required, items a~e missing from the-preliminary plat'~~ 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10 ? 11'. Date Key map "This instrument prepared by"'statement Correct contiguous Property information --Tie ~o' s~cti-6h-line.or 1/4~.section line Sheet number informatioh -~ Graphic scale Area for Circuit Court's ~rtifica~e A witness line West~6f-the mean high water line and thus a closure to .01 feet Platted parking areas~'not clearly stated Guest's parking areas'~not So indicated The. following item was found to be in error: I. The Plat desCription shows a'distance-of 83.58 -feet. This distance shouldbe 831.58 feet~ A~ legal question will be raised~with reference to the asterisk in.~.the~title certificate. Additional ~easement indication is'required for: The cul-de-sac The storm drain outfall In 24-ft. ingress and egress additional note shall state "and sanitary plumbingf" - cc~ Carmen Annunziato ,,/Watersedge 0 0 Townl~ou s e s f~,LV D. I '00 A TLA'FiTi_c Craig Grabeel Assistant Planner .JUBJECT: Intracoastal Medical Building_ 'OLD ) FROM YIAR ~dgar E. t-Io~ell Building Official .... DATE:, 3-5-q9 _Pertinent to the above reference, my determination is that a six' inch (6") minimum slope on asphalt parking area is required, 5 1979 to top of catch basins. Note: If not permitted by March 15th, 1979, must meet with energy code. PLEASE REPLY TO ~- SIGNED E. Howell ~,._DATE: SIGNED THIS COPY FOR-PERSON ~GRAYARC CO,, INC., BROOKLYN. N. Y. 11232 ~,DDRESSED TO Craig Grabeel Assistant P1 ann~r ~ ~o~.osuBJECT:'_~ . S_~ge__.an. d Sand,,,-:-M°tel~ Note: FROM 'ilAR 5.1979 Edgar E. Howell Building Official - If not permitted by March 15th, 1979, must meet with energy Code. Handicapp parking must be 'adjaoent to bUilding. SIGNED PLEASE REPLY TO REPLY E. Howell ~. -' THIs COPY FOR PERSON ADDRESSED : . ..... ..,.. . ~.'-~,'7-"T~'~~'?:-/: '~:"~? .......... GRAYARC CO., INC., BROOKLYN, N. Y. ~ '1232 PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD APPLICATION BOYNTON BEACH ,' FLORIDA All ~p~lications 'to' be processed by the Planning and Zonin~ Board must be received and accepted by the City Planner twentyJ a(~) days prior, to 'the regular meeting. The applicant Will be ~%ised' as to suppl'emental meetings necessary for application review. ' All 'applicants ~with approved site plans, which at a later_ date request-a .revision, wilt be processed in the ,same manner as the initial application subject to all Code requirements effective at the time the. revision is requested. Name of Applicant J)~.. Applicant's Address 1'5~i Address of Site In%ended Use of Site. Legal DescriPtion of Site L. The following data.must appear:on all-copies of the Site Plan: 1. Existing Zone 3. Total Number of Units Proposed 6. 7. 8. Density Gross Building Area Parking Spaces: Req'd Per Acre Sq. Ft. Parking - Aisle Area~~q. Ft. D-rop°ced ~. Street Area Sq. Ft. Landscape Area ~~9 Sq. Ft. '~ ! H~ight 6f' Buildings J~ Feet Total Floor Area ~1 ~ Sq. Ft. % of Lot % of Lot % of Lot % of Lot Stories What is the applicant's interest in %he premises affected? (Owner, Agent, Lessee, Etc.) (I) (We) understand that this Site approval becomes a part of the permanent records of the Planning and Zoning Board. (I) (We) hereby certify that the above statements and the statements or showings made in any paper or plans submitted herewith are true to the best of (my) (our) knowledge and belief. This application will not be ac- cepted unless signed by the owner ~~,.~_o__>.c_.,., /~_~- _ _ ] S'i~nature of OWNER of the property. The Owner has here~y designated the above signed person to act as his agent in regard to thi~ petition. (To be executed when Owner designate§ another to act on his behalf.) PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD APPLICATION BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA All ~p~l~cations to be processed by the Planning and zonin~ Board must be received and accepted by the City Planner twenty=' (20) days prior to the regular meeting. The applicant will be advised as to supplemental meetings necessary for application review. All applicants with approved-site plans, ~which at a later date request a revision, will be processed in the .same manner as the initial application subject to all Code requirements effective at the time the revision~ is requested. Na/ue Of ApPlicant Char]es [. Leemon |! | Applicant's Address 679 N.Wi'?9th St., Miami, Address of Site .Corner. 1-95-&-N.W. 2n'd Ave. Intended Use of site .~. Hotel Legal- Description of Site - see attached survey The-followingdata must appear, on al'i-.copies of the Site Plan: 1. Existing Zone- 2. Area of Site -105,0t0 sq. feet ..... 3. Total .Number of Units Proposed 100 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. Density Gross 24.1 Building Area 10,626 Parking Spaces: Req'd parking - Aisle Area 29~800Sq. Ft. Per Acre Sq. Ft. 10 146 Proposed 28.38 146 % of Lot % of Lot Street Area 29,200 Landscape Area 35,384 H~ight 6f Buildings 34 Sq. Ft. 27.80 Sq. Ft. 33.70 Feet 4 % of Lot % of Lot Stories 11. Total Floor Area 49,272 Sq. Ft. ~rnat is the applicant's interest in the premises affected? owner - (Owner, Agent, Lessee, Etc.) (I) (We) understand that this Site approval becomes a part of the permanent records of the Planning and Zoning Board. (I) (We) hereby certify that the above statements and the statements or showings made in any paper or plans submitted herewith are true to the best of This application will not be ac- (my) (our) know~ and belief. Ce ~ y the owner S~~e of OWNER of the property. The Owner has here~y designated the above signed person to act as his agent in regard to thi~ petition. (To be executed when Owner designate~ another to act on his behalf.)