Loading...
Minutes 02-13-79MINUTES OF THE REGHLAR MEETING OF THE PLANNING g ZONING BOARD HELD AT CITY HALL, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, TUESDAY, ~EBRHARY 13, 1979 PRESENT Arnold E. Thompson, Chairman Fred F. DiSalle, Vice Chairman Ezell Hester Gene Johnson Caesar Mauti Simon Ryder 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~ Recording Secretary and Assistant City Planner. He referred to having a long agenda and stated the Board would try to expedite th~ matters as fast as possible. MINUTES OF JANUARY 30, 1979 Mr. Mauti moved to accept the minutes as written, seconded by Mr. Hester. Motion carried 5-0 with Mr. Ryder abstaining since he was not a member of the Board at that time. ANNOUNCEMENTS Mr. Annunziato announced there would be a meeting of the Local Planning Agency on February 22 to start working on the recommen- dation to the City Council on the Comprehensive Plan. OLD BUSINESS Public Hearing Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Use: Request: Melric, Inc. (Agent Conrad W. Schaefer) Lying East of Las Palmas Park Subdivision and South of Lakeside Harbour Drive Acreage Construction of Twelve (12) Townhouses Rezone from R-1AA to PUD Mr. Gene Moore came before the Board representing the applicant and referred to consuming a couple hours at the last hearing and stated they would expedite this as soon as they can. The Board asked the applicant to go back to the engineers and prepare a lot configuration for a single family development. He then pre- sented this plan to the members and explained that the 12 town- house units ~w~not an increase from what could be obtained with single family lots. He added that house foundations were imposed on the drawings to show the minimum setbacks could be complied with. He explained that to get the full 12 lots~ fill would be required in the northeast quadrant. MINIiTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD FEBRUARY IS, 1979 Mr. Moore then introduced Mr. Melvin Rubinoff, one of the princi- pals involved with this development. Mr. Rubinoff stated in view of the time spent at the last meeting, he will try to be ~rief. In reference to the history on~ this land, last July they had a conditional offer to purchase the land. Before commit-lng to pur- chase, they did meet with the residents. They showed their pre- liminary sketches and with the exception of a few, most of the people indicated it was reasonable under the conditions which prevailed with this piece of land lending itself to something different than R-1AA. A week ago Saturday, they met with the residents again. Their feeling was not to change from R-1AA and he cannot help but believe this is a result of some misunderstand- ing. Mr. Rubinoff then compared the two plans. He explained that the number of units would be 12 with 12 families whether zoned R-1AA or PUD. His plan calls for townhouses and two story homes are allowed in the R-1AA zone. 35% lot coverage is allowed under R-1AA and the lot coverage with the townhouses will be 22%. There are no recreational facilities required for R-lB_A, but recreational facilities will be provided for the residents under PUD zoning. Maintenance under PUD is the consistent type as opposed to individ- ual maintenance of individual homes. In driving through neighbor- hoods, there seems to be one or two who do not maintain to the' same standards and this will be prevented with complete mainte- nance under the PUD. The landscaping will be a total plan as opposed to each resident making a decision. The seawall and beach will be maintained. Usually single family homes have permanent type residents; but it is envisioned ~th the type of townhouses planned, half the residents will be snow birds and half full time residents. He and his three associates intend to live here on a part time basis as this was the original purpose for buying the land. The size of the house is questionable under R-1AA, but the townhouses are planned to have 2,250 square feet. The people in Lakeside Harbour wanted the loop road closed and the people in Las Palmas wanted it opened, so the plans have been amended and a turn- ing circle has been created and the cars not realizing it is a dead end can go around the circle and not have to use driveways. The residents referred to tennis lights and there will be none. Before making the plan submission, a full set of architect plans were prepared and the drawings shown are not an artist's concep- tion, but represent- what the structural plans are. Mr. Gene Moore again referred to the proposed subdivision plan and explained that 12 single family lots could be contained on this parcel with filling in the northeast corner. Mr. Ryder asked if the access to Lots 1, 2, and 3 would be by the street to the north and Mr. Moore replied affir~ tively and ex- plained that it is a private road. Mr. Johnson referred to the individuals having to maintain the road and Mr. Moore agreed it would be their responsibility along with the other property owners. -2- MINUTES - PLANNING $ ZONING BDARD FEBRUARY 13, 1979 Mr. DiSalle questioned how the revised layout differed from the ori- ginal submission and Mr. Moore replied that this is an alternate plan for single family lots as opposed to PUD. It was their under- standing that it was the request of the Board to show it would be possible to fit 12 single family lots on this property. They have done this, but do not feel it is the best use of the land because a number of the lots will be segregated and the full value of the land cannot be used. On the original plan, there was mention to the interior road dead ending and the revised plan shows a cul-de-sac. Mr. DiSalle clarified that the revised layout is not for townhouses and Mr. Moore agreed and stated it shows a single family subdivision with 12 single family homes. The townhouses would have zero lot lines with more open space and visibility. He showed the plan of what was proposed. Mr. DiSalle clarified that the original plan shows four clusters with zero lot line and Mr. Moore agreed and stated they have not altered the initial request for the PUD. Mr. Johnson .referred to the single family lots not being drawn to scale and Mr. Moore informed him that they are drawn to scale to meet the setbacks. Mr. Johnson asked if every lot would have the 75 ft. minimum frontage and Mr. Moore replied affirmatively, at the building line. Mr. Johnson questioned the setbacks on the rear of the houses and Mr. Moore replied they wou~d meet the code requirements. Mr. Ryder added that R-1AA requires front and rear setbacks of 25 ft. There was some further discussion about the setbacks and Mr. Moore advised that the engineers have advised that the proposed plan meets the subdivision requirements meeting the required footage. Mr. Johnson questioned the size of some of them and Mr. Annunziato clarified that the setback lines are shown to show the houses can fit on the lot. Mr. Moore added that the houses could be two stories. Mr. Moore clarified that the proposed project provides for 12 single family units, four buildings, three units each. The application does not ask for a change in zoning from R-1AA, but merely requests approval of the PUD to allow full utilization of the land instead of single family. 12 single family lots can be developed on the property and meet all requirements. The only thing required would be refilling of the corner lot line and the governmental agencies would allow this. No additional units are being requested under the PUD. No additional density is being requested. No additional traffic impact would result. This project will add 1.8 million dollars to the City's tax roll without causing an impact on the recreational facilities. The owners have re-arranged the PUD plan to include a cul-de-sac. This is in accordance with all City requirements and has been approved by all department heads. Mr. Mauti explained how when measuring Lot 7, the whole lot seemed to be under water and if this property line is correct~ quite a bit of land fill would be required to build a house. Mr. Moore agreed and added this was acknowledged in their presentation. -3- MINVdTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD FEBRUARY !S, 1979 Mr. Mauti continued that Lot 6 had about the same condition with about 45 feet projecting into the water and Lot 3 and part of Lot 5 have the same condition. He then explained how the bulkhead was shown approximately 18 feet in the canal. Mr. Moore informed him that under the existing rules of the City~ you are allowed to utilize submerged land for lot area. Mr. Mauti stated there would be no rear yard and Mr. Moore replied that the rear yard would be water. Mr. Mauti stated he believed a variance would be required from the Board of Adjustment to build on these lots and further discussion followed regarding the submerged land. Mr. Annunziato clarified that the propertylines for this tract of land project into the water in the south and northeast corner. Lots 9 thru 12 utilize the water in the canal for their setbacks. Mr. Moore added that it would not be required to obtain a variance from the Board of Adjustment. Mr. Mauti again explained how Lot 7 would require major filling to be usable. Mr. Ryder referred to three lots actually being isolated from the rest of the development and Mr. Moore agreed~ but stated this is not the way they desired to develop the property. He clarified that they have shown 12 single family homes would fit on this land~ but it is not the best use of the land. Mr. Conrad Schaefer clarified that the property lines are noted with the heavy black line on the outside and fill is allowed to this line. The original plan does not show the area filled, it can be filled as shown and 12 single family homes built. Further discussion followed regarding the size of the rear yards on Lots 97 10~ 11 and 12. There was also discussion about the type and size of dwellings which could be built. Mr. Schaefer clarified that the single family units which could fit would not be compa- tible with the existing homes and that is why the planne~ decided to go to a more pleasing configuration as shown on the original plan. Mr. Thompson asked if the 12 single homes were built and the area filled in~ would there by any Provisions for stopping the erosion in the future and Mr. Schaefer. explained they would go down the property line and build a bulkhead and fill to the proper eleva- tion. The~e would then be 12 homes to meet the standards. How- ever~ he explained how in building conventional detached homes~ there would be some odd sizes on these lots. They do not want to do that, but want to maintain the homes with continuity. They do not understand the reluctance to go with the plan sub- mitted. Mr. DiSalle stated the point of presenting this alt-er- native was to show it was feasible to put 12 homes on individual lots and this has been shown. Mr. Thompson announced letters had been received in regards to this application. He read a letter from Henry and Erna Parpard~ 631 Lakeside Harbor, stating their objection to this rezoning. -4- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD PEBRUARY 13, 1979 Mr. Thompson read a letter from Helen B. and Charles H. Sipp!e, Jr., 625 Lakeside Harbor Drive, objecting to this rezoning. He read a letter from Mrs. Glenn Guthrie, 626 Lakeside Harbor, strongly objecting this proposal. He read a note from Linda L. and John J. Bielak, 2~24 N. Federal Highway~ Apartment 308, objecting to this rezoning. He read a letter from James R. and Beverley A. Warnke, 617 Lakeside Harbor, stating their opposition to this requested zoning change. Mr. Thompson asked if anyone wanted to speak in favor of this request and received no response. He asked if anyone wished to spe~3~ in opposition to this request and the following appeared before the Board. Mr. John Ball referred to 12 names being submitted on a petition and Mr. Thompson replied this was read at the last meeting. Mr. Ball stated the applicant is not filling the land in, but is using it as is. Based on the aerial photograph, only six homes would fit on this property without filling in the land. This road cuts 2 to 5 feet off his property line. He requests that it be taken into consideration that this street for aesthetic and safety pur- poses should have a reasonable setback. The existing homes are set back 45 feet with the setback and easement and they would like that continued. One lot is shown with 180 feet to the waters edge, but 3/4 of the house would be on the water. He is really against the road as he believes it comes close to his property line. He does not think townhouses will blend in with the neighborhood. Townhouses would face the wrong direction and take the view away. He believes the density is misleading. All the people would see from the road would be carports a~d concrete~ The tennis courts with semeening will be another thing to block the view. Mr. Mike Yandrasevick~ 638 Lakeside Harbor, referred to living here for 40 years and stated it has been strictly residential homes. He does not like to see this changed to PUD. He is not in favor of townhouses connecting with a private street. If they can build 12 single family homes on 75 ft. lots~ this is what should be done or they should look for another place. He strongly objects to townhouses in this particular area. Mrs. Julia Szymkowski, 655 Las Palmas Park, stated she agrees with these two gentlemen. As she understands from the presenta- tion, this is 5 ft. back and there is anneasement for the people from Las Palmas. If it isn't filled in~ they will be walking in somebody's living room. MrS. Ethelind Fart, 656 Las Palmas Park, stated she agrees with those in opposition. This area started out as residential and they would like to keep it that way. Townhouses would not be compatible and neither would the inexpensive homes proposed. -5- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD FEBRUARY 13, 1979 Mr. Hester asked if she would prefer the inexpensive small homes or the townhouses and Mrs. Fart replied that she is sure if they complied to the regulations, 12 nice homes could be built and not cheap homes. She wants the zoning to remain R-1AA. Mr. Hester referred to vi~ting the area and stated it is residen- tial~ but to the south there is a marina, in front is a filling station~and sports store and to the north are condominiums with four stories. The applicant is not asking for rezoning. He thinks it has been illustrated that the best use would be town- houses. There was reference to a large number of people in the area, but he cannot see where this would be detrimental. The area is surrounded by townhouses and condominiums. Mr. Schaefer requested to rebut some of the things the people said. In reference to the lot next door, a 6 ft. wall would be constructed or it could be heavily landscaped. Mr. Ball stated that the density is too great and Mr. Schaefer replied that the density is the same. Mr. Ball stated he would be able to look out over the water if single family homes were built and Mr. Schaefer explained how the townhouses will allow more open space. Mr. DiSalle referred to there being some misconception and stated that townhouses are residential. The density has been reduced from what is allowed under R-1AA and these are $150,000 homes. They have complied with the traffic problem, utilities, school, etc. He cannot see why there is so much objection to townhouses. Mr. Ryder referred to one of the greatest concerns of the resi- dents being that they are going to lose easy access to the water front and the dedicated street stops at the end. The alternate plan does not seem to be too attra~tive~ but possibly something which would be acceptable would be to continue Las Palmas into the project as a City street at an angle with a turn-around at the end. He thinks the original plan lends itself to better treatment than you can get with single family lots. Mr. Schaefer referred to studying this for two weeks and coming up with an alternative plan and stated one of the biggest objec- tions was the access by emergency vehicles and this has been solved. He explained how there possibly could be a third alter- native with parking further in and the people walking to the dwelling units. A turn-around has been shown for police and fire vehicles. Mr. Mauti stated he thinks there has been a misunderstanding from the people adjacent with having to look at two story dwellings, but two stories are allowed in R-1AA. The owner is allowed to utilize the property and is entitled to two story dwellings, but it is a question of which type. -6- MINUTES - PLANNING $ ZONING BOARD FEBRUARY 13, 1979 Mr. Annunziato clarified that Mr. Ryder was alluding to having a cul-de-sac in close proximity to Lake Worth and Mr. Ryder agreed and stated there should be a public street to the water front, which could be worked between the town houses. He explained how R-1AA would provide City dedicated streets to the water front. Mr. Schaefer pointed out that the public would have access by the existing easemem~s. Mr. Ryder added that it was also necessary to have a turn-aroMnd area for cars at the end. Mr. DiSalle made a motion to approve the request from R-1AA to PUD, seconded by Mr. Hester. Mr. Ryder requested a roll call vote. Mr. Annunziato referred to the staff comments made. Mr. DiSalle clarified that the motion was to approve the request from R-1AA to PUD subject to staff comments, seconded by Mr. Hester. As requested, Mr. Annunziato then took a roll call vote on the motion as follows: Mr. Ryder - No Mr. Hester - Aye Mr. Thompson - Aye Mr. DiSalle - Aye Mr. Johnson - No Mr. Mauti - Aye Motion carried 4-2. Site Plan Approval Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Project Description: Project Name: David Reed $ Barry Gales (Agent Hank Skokowski) Congress Avenue, South of Congress Middle School Acreage 78 Acres, 842 Units - Garden Apartments Meadow Lakes Ms. Sally Benson, Attorney, introduced the developer's staff. Mr. Hank Skokowski then explained the revised plan containing 542 units. The density was reduced from 10.79 to 6.9 units per acre with a gross density of 8.8. There is a reduction of 300 parking spaces. He then told about the different types of units planned consisting of three story garden apartments, two story garden apartments, townhouses and duplexes at a sales price starting at $42,000. He explained how they no longer felt there was a problem with compa- tibility with the surrounding areas. Also, there will be no parking in any exterior setbacks. Further discussion followed regarding the parking content and design. Mr. Annunziato stated the planner has gone to great ends to answer the buffering problems and the density has been signi- ficantly reduced. Mr. Ryder added that it is consistent with the comprehensive plan. -7- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD FEBRUARY 13, 1979 After discussion and review of the plans and recommendations, Mr. Ryder made a motion to approve the site plan subject to staff, school and County recommendations, seconded by Mr. Mauti. Motion carried 6-0. NEW BUSINESS Subdivision Regulation Pre-Application Applicant: Location: Project Description: Watersedge (Burl Gentry, Agent) North Federal Highway, North of Boat Ramp Park 43 Townhouses Mr. Annunziato told about the history of this project and Mr. Gentry explained the plans. Mr. Annunziato read the staff com- ments. Discussion of the plans followed. Mr. Hester made a motion to approve this application subject to staff comments, seconded by Mr. Johnson. Motion carried 6-0. Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Project Description: Summit Associates, Ltd./Hunter's Run Golf $ Racque~ Club South Congress Ave. (01d Charter World Property) The West ~ of the Southeast ~ of the Southwest ~ of the Southeast ~ of Section 1, Township 46 South, Range 42 East, Palm Beach County Five Acre Tract The planner explained the plans. After review and discussion, Mr. Ryder made a motion to approve, seconded by Mr. Hester. Motion carried 6-0. Master Plan Appli cant: Location: Proj eot Description: Watersedge (Burl Gentry, Agent) North Federal Highway, North of Be.at Ramp Park 43 Townhouses The planner reviewed the plan. After review by the Board and discussion, Mr. DiSalle made a motion to approve subject to staff comments, seconded by Mr. Mauti. Motion carried 6-0. (NOTE: During the preceeding four applications, the secretary had to leave because of illness and the recorder was not operating, so the above is a condensed report submitted by the City Planner. ) -8- MINUTES PLANNING $ ZONING BOARD FEBRUARY 13, 1979 Applicant: Location: Project Description: Summit Associates, Ltd. (Paul Hykel~ Pmojeet Manager) South Congress Avenue (01d Charter World Property) Revised Master Plan to include: 1. A marina facility 2. A bridge on Summit Boulevard The inclusion of a five-acre parcel which was recently purchased into our Master Plan 4. A reduction in the parking requirements from two spaces per dwelling unit to 1.75 spaces per dwelling unit Mr. Paul Hykle explained how there was water access to Lake Ida from their property for boating and pointed out the location for a planned marina facility. He then explained the marina facility in detail. He referred to the parking spaces and explained that based on the amount of snow birds living at their similar project, Boca Lago, they have never found the need to have two parking spaces per apartment unit. He added that additional parking spaces would be reserved if found to be needed, in the future. He explained how this would allow more open landscaping space. Mr. Annunziato advised that the PUD code provides for two parking spaces per unit, but there is also a section providing for changes to strict interpretation of the code predicated upon Council approval. They have provided the space for the additional parking~ but there is a question whether they will be constructed at this point in time. If this is granted by Council subsequent to our recommendation, he thinks the option should be reserved to require construction of the additional .25 parking spaces per unit if needed and this should be recorded on the record plat. He ex- plained how it was difficult later to enforce changes unless specifically recorded in a verifiable form that is easily access- ible. Mr. Hykel replied they would have no objections to stating this on the recorded plat. They will record this with each plat for each section. Mr. DiSalle made a motion to accept the plan subject to Mr. Annunziatots comments, seconded by Mr. Hester. Under discus- sion, Mr. Annunziato read the engineer's comments noted on the plan regarding the technical aspect. Motion carried 6-0. Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Summit Associates, Ltd. (Paul Hykle, Pr6ject Manager) South Congress Avenue (Old Charter World Property) Five Acre Tract Mr. Annunziato advised that all the required documentation was sub- mitted in conjunction with the masteTlplan that was approved by Council. The staff recommendation is to approve. Chairman Thompson ascertained there were no further comments or questions. Mr. Hester made a motion to approve the plan subject to staff comments, seconded by Mr. Johnson. Motion carried 6-0. -9- MiNVdTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD FEBRUARY 13, 1979 Preliminary Plat Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Summit Associates, Ltd. (Paul Hykel, Project Manager) South Congress Ave. (Old Charter World Property) Summit Plat No. 2 Mr. Hykel stated this is the pre-plat application for the same five acre out-parcel. He referred to the plan and advised the top half is condominiums and the bottom half is golf course. After review of the plat, Mr. DiSalle moved to approve the prelimi- nary plat subject to Mr. Annunziato's previous comments, seconded by Mr. Mauti. Motion carried 6-0. Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Project Description: Summit Associates~ Ltd. (Paul Hykel, Project Manager) South Congress Ave. (Old Charter World) Pod ' A ~ ~{unter ~ s Run Pod ~A~ of Summit Plat ! 232 units, Community Building $ Swimming Pool Mr. Hykel stated this is a pre-plat application for their first POD consisting of ~3.R units and pointed out the location. This is in accordance with the master plan zoning approved. The site plan will be explained later by their architect. Mr. Annunziato stated this is the first development POD within the Hunter's Run Golf $ Racquet Club. The cIubhouse was previ- ously approved for reconstruction in its preliminary stages. He explained the approval of the overall plat. In conjunction with each POD, there will be a site plan app~ovat which is to follow on this agenda. He explained the procedure to follow. Mr. Annunziato then referred to staff comments and advised the Fire Department notes that fire hydrants are to be no more than 500 ft. apart. He then read the following memo into the record from Mr. Tom Clark, City Engineer: "Plat and development plans are substantially complete and acceptable subject to the follow- lng: PLAT 1. Name of Mayor to beveorrected. PRM~s to be shown. 3. The lift station site shall be dedicated to the City instead of being an easement. 4. Match lines shall be added for Sheet 2 and Sheet 3. -10- MINUTES - PLANNING $ ZONING BOARD "DEVELOPMENT PLANS FEBRUARY 13, 1979 1. Stop signs to be provided (add note~. 2. Details required for drai~e.structure at Marina Lake. 3. P~ofile required to manhole 12 and 13. 4. Discharge piping from lift stations to be according to new Utility Department standard. 5. Site plan with fence required for lift station. 6. Note 12, Page 2, to be corrected to Boynton Beach specifications. 7. Note to be added for roadway construction that stabi- lized subgrade is to have P.B.V. of 50 Mr. Annunziato continued that Mr. Howell noted there is one handi- capped parking space per building and the code calls for a minimum of 25% for handicapped. This should be noted at site plan appro= val. He then read the following memo from Mr. Mark Law, Acting Utility Director: "The above subject plans are approved subject to the following: 1. Two (2) 6" valves on fire hydrants ~2, ~4 and #7. 2. Easement for fire hydrant ~7. Cleanouts at limit of easement if in paved area at finish grade. 4. Thirty-inch (30") frame and cover with no steps in manholes. 5. Radio monitor device for sewage pumping station same as City specified." Mr. Annunziato stated the staff recommendation is to approve sub- ject to staff comments. Mr. Mauti requested comment from the developer regarding the com- ments contained in these memos. Mr. Hykel replied they have no objections to any of the comments with the exception of the park- ing spaces for the handicapped which they would like to discuss when the site plan is reviewed. They will conform with all the other requests in the memorandums. Mr. Mauti referred to the City Departments not giving prior information to the developer before the meeting. Mr. Ryder made a motion that the Planning $ Zoning Board recom- mend approval of the preliminary plat for Summit Associates re- garding POD A of Hunter's Run to the City Council subject to the stipulations made by the Technical Review Board, seconded by Mr. DiSalle. Motion carried 6--0. Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Project Description: Ridgewood Estates (Burl Gentry, Agent) On S.W. 6th Street south of S.W. 23rd Ave. Ridgewood Estates 55 Building Lots, 10.7 Acres MINUTES - PLANNING $ ZONING BOARD FEBRUARY 15, 1979 Chairman Thompson referred to the last item on the agenda pertain- ing to discussion from the home owners in Ridgewood Estates and stated the Board would hear comments from the home owners at this time in regards to this site plan. After reviewing the plan, Chairman Thompson asked if S. W. 4th Street would exit onto S. W. 23rd Avenue and Mr. Burl Gentry explained this would be in conflict with the zoning ordinances and he explained the lots had been realigned taking into consid- eration the access. Mr. Ryder referred to the question being explored whether 4th Street could be opened into 23rd Avenue and Mr. Annunziato replied when this plan was approved as a master plan, he was instructed to coordinate with D.O.T. and/or Palm Beach County and the City staff to perhaps come up wi~h an alter- nate traffic plan. Mr, Gentry coordinated with D.O.T. and he coordinated with the County. Golf Road is under sole juriSdic- tion of Palm Beach County. He told about meeting on site with County and Police representatiCes and explained how there would not be enough stacking room from Golf Road to where a stop sign would be required and it would be on a declining pavement. He explained how it would be a more dangerous solution than what is there now. The County Traffic Engineer recemmended traffic counts be taken and he read the traffic report submitted. The summation of the findings is that traffic is a little higher than would be expected on 6th Street for a local street, but the solu- tion presented in conjunction with this plat would do nothing but help to alleviate that situation by diverting some of the traffic onto 4th and 5th Streets. Chairman Thompson clarified that the recommendation was to connect the access road and leave both ingress and egress onto S. W. 23rd Avenue. Mr. Annunziato clari- fied the recommendation from the staff based on the surveys is to accept the plat as presented, as this appeared to be the safest solution to a somewhat tenuous problem. Chairman Thompson asked if anyone in the audience cared to speak on this situation. Mr. Rudy Blank~ 702 S. W. 25th Place, referred to the amount of traffic in this area and stated there are only two streets going east from Charter World~ Lake Ida Road and S. W. 23rd Avenue~ and that traffic will be using their streetsfor a bypass, They re- quest relief and an additional~cess road for safety pu~oses and emergency exit. He then showed an alternate plan showing S, W. 4th Street opened onto S. W. 23rd Avenue and explained how this would allow the traffic to be distributed more evenly~ Mr~ Ryder referred to additional property being required and Mr. Blank replied nega- tively and told about discussing this with Mr. Gentry and it would not interfere with their present plan and he explained. Mr. Mauti questioned their research into extending 4th Street and explained how 4th Street. would give a direct connection into 23rd Avenue from Swinton Avenue. Discussion followed regarding how this would affect the traffic flow. -12- MINUTES - PLANNING $ ZONING BOARD FEBRUARY 13, 1979 Mr. Annunziato clarified that by connecting 4th Street, which is an alternative, there would be a straight street from Mission Hill Blvd. to 23rd Avenue and this may be a fact in drawing additional traffic as opposed to having traffic make several right-hand turns. Mr. Blank stated the counter should have been put in the road for a str~t 24 hour period instead of being put there and removed different times. Mr. Annunziato replied that counts were taken for a complete 2~4hour period. Mr. Ryder referred to 6th Street being originally designed to di~ courage people from cutting through the development, and explained how with opening 4th Street, it would give people a more direct approach to cut through. Further discussion followed regarding the change in the street layout when 1-95 was built. Mr. Ryder asked if the people on 4th Street would complain if it was changed and Mr. Blank replied negativelyand explained that they get a share of the traffic now. Mr. DiSalle questioned on whose property it would be enc~aching if the street was extended and Mr. Blank replied that ~uld be ontthe developerts property. Mr. Gentry replied that it would be County right-of-way. Mr. Mauti referred to closing 6th Street and Mr. Annunziato replied this would be an unacceptable solution because the entire area would be served from the south and more than one access is needed. Mr. William Thomas, 2714 S. W. 6th Street, stated he lives at the corner of S. W. 6th Street and 27th Avenue where there is a four way stop sign. He told about checking one night and count- ing 15 out of 16 cars that did not stop. In reference to S.W. 6th Street, it is only two blocks shorter than S. W. 4th Street. The residents on S. W. 6th Street do not want to dump all the traffic onto 4th Street, but they do not want all the traffic either. Mr. Bob Riscoe, 3113 Chapel Hill Blvd., asked if 5th Street is a private street and Mr. Annunziato explained that it is platted through to 23rd Avenue. Mr. Riscoe explained how 5th Street was almost a straight turn from 23rd Avenue and suggested opening that and closing the ramp to 6th Street. Mr. Annunziato replied that this solution was evaluated on site and with it being on a decline, there would not be room to decelerate prior to entering the single family area. Mr. Riscoe replied that in order to make the turn, people must decelerate. Discussion followed whether this would be an.advisable solution. Mr. Ryder referred to not being able to reach a solution and this problem requiring further consideration and suggested pro- ceeding with the application with the request that the City Council instruct the City Engineer to consider this proposal of access into 5th Street or possibly 4th Street. -13- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD FEBRUARY 13, 1979 Mr. Gentry referred to access and explained how the rate of decline had to be considered. It would be impossible at 4th Street to obtain the safe situation without encroaching almost 100 feet into the property, which would adversely affect this project. This would also apply at 5th Street. Evidently D.O.T. considered this situation which resulted in having the transition along the curve. By extending-24th .and 25th Avenues, two other alternatives will be given to the people. Statistically, this development will definitely reduce the traffic volume for these people. The plan does comply with all the ordinances. Also with reference to the additional access, this would cause a financial burden upon the developer which would be unfair. Mr. Ryder replied that if it is deemed necessary~ the City may have to pay a share. Mr. Ryder stated the development could pmoceed pending a decision on the traffic matter. Mr. Gentry replied the changes could be made to some degree at 5th Street because there is amore of a transition area~ but at 4th Street it would be virtually impossi- ble because of the grade required in the short-distance. It would also involve complete reconstruction of the ramp. Further discussion followed. Chairman Thompson announced that obviously a decision could not be reached without coordinating with the County and D.O.T. He suggests that a recommendation be included with the motion to recommend to the City, County and D.O.T. to work this out to the best of every- one's advantage. Mr. Blank referred to the elevation of 4th Street and Mr. Thompson replied that this whole matter would have to be worked out through the Engineering Department. A recommendation will be submitted by the. Board to the Engineering Department and that is all this Board can do. Mr. Mauti recommended that Mr. Annunziato meet with the engineers and reach a solution to be submitted in writing. Mr. Riscoe re- quested that the interested parties also be not~fied so they can give input. Mr. Arnold Moretto, applicant~ referred to when the original plan was submitted and it was recommended to discuss with the Traffic Engineer and D.O.T. and this has been complied with. A recommen- dation has been made by the Police Dept. Chairman Thompson re- ferred to many-people being concerned and stated he feels it should be researched further whether there is some solution. Mr. Ryder added that he could proceed with his project~ but the traffic situation would be researched further. Mr. Moretto requested Mr. Annunziato~s comments and Mr. Annunziato replied that he met on site with the Traffic Engineer and he stateddthe proposal as pre- sented Provided for a reasonable solution and in effect alleviates some of the traffic going-down 6th Street. Traffic counts were taken which did prove to be high for 6th Street, particularly during the business hours. Mr. Johnson asked if it meant 35 more houses could be built on 6th Street? -14- MINUTES - PLAIRI~NG g ZONING BOARD FEBRUARY 13, 1979 Mr. Annunziato referred to staff comments and read the Engineer- ing Department notes it is subject to additional structural de- tails for outfall structures and street lighting plansf He re- ferred to a memo submitted by the Recreation Director and stated he didn't think we could get into the provision for improvements on the Girl Scout Park because we have not been able to receive the deed to that property yet. He thinks we should move in line with the dollar dedication at this point. The School Board also reviewed this and made the recommendation of .4 of 1%. Mr. Mauti made a motion to approve this plat subject to all the various staff comments. Mr. Ryder referred to a study being made pertaining to the traffic situation and Mr. Mauti replied that a recommendation was already made pertaining to this with asking Mr. Annunzi~to to meet with the engineers and submit a report to the Board and subject to all the comments will cover this. Mr. Annunziato clarified that they were expecting a report from the City Engineer and the County Engineer and Mr. Mauti replied af- firmatively. Mr. Annunziato asked if this report should be for- warded to the City Council with the Board's recommendation and Mr. Mauti replied affirmatively. He asked if the Board wanted the recommendation to wait for these reports and received an affirmative response. Mr. Gentry referred to this being a pre- liminary plat and stated approval of the final plat would still have to be obtained. Mr. Annunziato clarified that it was scheduled for action by the Council next Tuesday on the prelim- inary plat and he cannot guarantee these reports will be received by that time. Mr. Ryder suggested if the data is not available at that time, Mr. Annunziato can report to the City Council~ that they can still move on the preliminary plat. Mr. Hester then seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. Site Plan Approval App!i cant: Location: Legal Description: Proj eot Description: Summit Associates, Ltd. (Paul Hykel, Agent) South Congress Ave. (Old Charter World Property) Acreage POD Ay 232 units, Community Building and Swimming Pool Mr. Hykel pointed out the location and then showed the site plan. The members then reviewed the site plan. Mr. Gilbert, the Archi- teat, then explained the plan. Mr. Hykel pointed out the location for the models and sales office. Mr. Gilbert added that all the units will be condominiums, one and two stories, with a private road for access. Mr. Hykel explained that only apartments, town- houses and villas would be constructed and no free standing homes. He told aboutaa typical building having a villa on each end with two townhouses in the middle. He then explained how the various City requirements had been met. -15- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING 'BOARD FEBRUARY 13, 1979 Mr. Hykel then pointed out the location of the pool and clubhouse and told about the parking'provided as required. He explained how the pool would be centrally located and there would be a minimum of vehicle traffic. Mr. Annunziato added that ~ith the clubhouse parking being revised, it alleviated some of the staff comments. Mr. Annunziato explained that the plans covered a package of units. and they reviewed thoroughly the plans covering each type of unit. He added that the Board must make the finding that the development of this POD is consistent with the approved Master Plan POD A in terms of density and this is well under the density that was ap- proved for POD A in conjunction with the master plan. Mr. Hykel added they were permitted to build approximately 308 units in this particular section, but they are building 232 and a small parcel is reserved in the corner which couldn't house more than another 8 to 10 units, so it will be under 250 units. They do not anti- mipate building the 4,000 units it is zoned for, but will probably build approximately 2,500 units in this whole development. Mr. Annunziato referred to the staff comments and stated the memo was read previously from the Engineering Dept. In regards to the handicapped parking requirement, the code calls for a minimum of 25% for handicapped. M~. Hykel pointed out that they had met this requirement. Mr. Annunziato stated the code will prevail and this can be worked out with the architect and Mr. Howell. Mr. Annunziato continued that fire hydrants must be provided as per the subdivision requirements. The Acting Utility Director's memo was read previ- ously. He has commented that parking is to be two parking spaces per unit unless a variance is granted. Also, the maximum occupancy in the community building to be 48 persons based on four persons per parking space. The recommendation is to approve subject to staff comments. Mr. DiSalle made a motion to approve this plan~subject to staff comments, seconded by Mr. Johnson. Motion carried 6-0. Applicant: Location: Legal Description: Project Description: Project Name: Orlan Homes, Inc. 1700 Palmlands Drive Tract 1, Section B 54 Villa Type Dwelling Units The Fairways Mr. Annunziato informed the Board this was also part of the Charter World court ordered zoning. The court order which still exists calls for the old zoning classification of R-RA and the unit type and makeup is in strict conformance with the court order as pre- sented tonight. The setbacks do not meet the requirements of the R-3 zoning code, but are according to R-2A which prevail in this instance according to the court order. -16- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD FEBRUARY 13, 1979 Mr, Paul Ortan explained they pRanned to follow the court ordered plan and utilize the existing utilities. Mr. Ryder questioned the location and Mr. Orlan pointed out the location plan. Mr. Orlan continued with explaining the plans to build duplexes in a single family type arrangement with a condominium concept. Mr. Annunziato referred to the plan and pointed out that the total number of units is 54 with a total of 27 duplex buildings with garages. There are easements drafted which conflict with the location of the units on the site. The applicant is going to have to submit an abandonment request to have those easements aban- doned and then submit new locations for utilities to serve this project. Mr. Orlan replied that he did talk to Mr. Clark about this and their intent is to apply for blanket abandonment and at the same time follow with full dedication for additional easements to give full coverage for utilities at this time. Mr. Annunziato stated this would be an appropriate procedure. Mr. Annunziato continued with referring to the setbacks and read the remaining comments that 'the development will be served with sewer and water and City sanitation. The Building Dept. questioned whether these are condominiums or fee simple units and this has been answered. Building Dept. commented there should be a sidewalk on Palmland D~ve. The City Engineer has noted this should be approved sub- jeer to obtaining the required easements and this is what he ex- plained earlier. He read a memo from the Acting Utilities Direc- tor recommending appmoval subject to the following corrections: 1. Cleanouts required at the limit of the easement o~ all City maintained sewers. 2. Detail sheet on sewage collection system required. 3. Water distribution system must show existing valves and water services. 4. Detail sheet required on water distribution system. Mr. Annunziato referred to his comments and noted there should be 20 feet between duplexes and development to be as noted in court order. He explained the 20 feet was required between units since these are being developed as duplexes. He then read a memo from Mr. Frederick referring to no private recreation facilities being provided within the development for its residents and stat- ing public dedication is required for recreation and open space. It is recommended ~ec~eation facilities be provided per the sub- division ordiaance or provide fee in lieu of land for the required dedication. The staff recommendation is the plan be approved subject to comments. Mr. Paul Orlan referred to the recreation facilities and advised he discussed these with the architect and a park was dedicated to the City originally along Congress Avenue which was to serve this parcel of land. Mr. Annunziato replied that 20 acres was initially dedicated by Charter World Development and an additional 10 acres by Hunter's Run Golf $ Racquet Club, but he doesn't know whether this would qualify for their dedication. Mr. Orlan explained that this parcel was included in the original approval of Parcel A. - 17- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD FEBRUARY 13, 1979 Mr. Orlan added that there are existing recreation facilities in this Parcel A and explained. Mr. Hester referred to this being developed under a court order and asked how it could be determined whether the pool would be part of this parcel and Mr. Annunziato replied that the City Attorney would have to make this determina- tion plus whether the subdivision regulations would apply. Mr. Orlan then told about their plans for development of Parcels B, C and D with recreation facilities to cover Parcels C and D and the existing facilities to serve Parcels A and B. Mr. Annunziato questioned whether the court order would preclude future subdivision regulations and Mr. Orlan read sections of the court order. Mr. Orlan suggested getting clarification from the City Attorney. Mr. Johnson made a motion to table this until the City Attorney is consulted and bring back for further discussion. Mr. Orlan referred to time being of the essence and stated if they had to dedicate land or pay a fee, they would do it. Mr. Ryder suggested forwarding it to the City Council with the recommendation a legal opinion be obtained before their review. Mr. Mauti added that it could be approved subject to a stipulation. Mr. Orlan replied he would be agreeable to the stipulation and would abide by the City Attorney's conclusion. Mr. Mauti made a motion to approve this plan subject to the City Attorney's checking in~o the feasibility whether they should meet the recreational requirements. Mr. Hester seconded the motion. Mr. Annunziato suggested that the applicant have his attorney contact'the City Attorney and Mr. Orlan replied that he would. Mr. Orlan referred to the 20 ft. setback between buildings and Mr. Annunziato explained how this was consistent with all the developments of this type approved.in the City recently. Mr. Orlan referred to the buildings being designed and planned and stated this would be met in most instances and Mr. Ryder replied that it 'would be to his advantage to maintain at least a 20 ft. setback between buildings. Mr. Orlan added that they will in- stall the sidewalk as required, but there is no sidewalk along Palmland Drive. Mr. Annunziato informed him this was a require- ment of all new developments in Boynton Beach. Chairman Thompson called for a vote on the motion to approve this plan subject to staff comments and the City Attorney's opinion re- garding the Recreation Director's recommendations. Motion carried 6-0. Appli cant: Location: Legal Description: Proj eat Description: Howard McCall, Agent for St. Joseph's Episcopal Church 3300 South Seacrest Blvd. Part of Section 4 $ 5, Township 46 South, Range 43 East, Palm Beach County. Columbarium Addition -18- MINUTES - PLANNING & ZONING BOARD FEBRUARY 13, 1979 Mr. Howard McCall, Architect, referred to a Columbarium being an accessory use for the church and explained that it was a wall generally constructed of stone and marble in which nitches are made for the deposit of urns. The structure will be approximately 30 x 60 feet. On the north side, there will be a total of 686 hitches. He told about the services conducted f~ the deceased. Mr. Annunziato stated the zoning code permits churches in the R-iAAA zoning, but there is no specific mention made of columbariums or graveyards. The applicant is requesting that a columbarium would be a legitimate accessory use to a church. From the staff view- point, there is no objection to this application and this request; but for approval purposes, he believes approval should be given by the Board and City Council that this is a legitimate accessory use for a church. Mr. McCall added that other churches in the area have columbariums associated withtthem. It is a customary accessory use for a church. Mr. Annunziato read the definition of an accessory use from the code. Mr. Mauti asked if any of the parking facilities would be altered and Mr. McCall replied negatively a~dno services are required for a columbarium- no water~ plumbing, etc. Mr. Ryder made a motion that the Planning & Zoning Board recom- mend that the City Council approve the application of St. Joseph's Episcopal Church with the determination that a columbarium is an accessory use to the church and also including the recommendations by the -Technical Review Board. Mr. DiSalle seconded the motion. Motion carried 6-0. Chairman Thompson suggested deferring discussion of major modifi- cations until the next meeting in view of the late hour. A motion was then made, seconded and carried to adjourn and the meeting was properly adjourned at 11145 P. M. Respectfully submitted, Suzanne M. Kruse Recording Secretary (Four Tapes) -19- DATE: TIME: PLACE: AGENDA ~LANNING AND ZONING BOARD February 13th, 1979 Regular Meeting 7:30 P.M. Council Chambers City Hall 1. Acknowledgement of"Member~ and Visitors. % 2. Reading and Approving of Minutes.-- 3. Announcements; 4. ConUnunicatiohs. 5.. Old Business% A. Public Hearing: Appl-icant:--Melric, ~Inc. (Agent~on~ad-W.__Schaef&r)_- Location: ~-~Lying--East.~of-La-s..~Pa~lm~s_~Pmrk SUbd%vis±o~_~and South of Sake-side Harbour Dr~ive Legal Description: Acreage Use:~ COnstruction of Twelve (12) ~Townh0uses Request:, REZONE from R~iAA to-PUD ~ . ~Note: See January 30th agenda items for materials. B. site Plan Approval: Applicant:~ David Reed & Barry Gales (Agent~Hank Skokowski) Location: Congress Avenue, South of Congress Middle School Legal Description: Acreage Project Description: 78 Acres; 842-units - ~arden Apartments Project Name: MEADOW LAKES Note: See January 9th agenda i~ems for materials. 6. New Business: no Subdivision Regulation Pre-Application: Applicant~ WATERSEDGE (Burl Gentry, Agent) Location: North Federal Highway, North of Boat Ramp Park Legal Description: See attached Project Description: 43 Townhouses e Applicant: Summit Associates, Ltd/Hunter's Run Golf & Racquet Club Location: So. Congress Avenue, (Old Charter World Property) Legal Description: The West ½ of the Southeast ¼ of the Southwest ¼ of the Southeast ¼ of Section 1, Township 46 South, Range 42 East, Palm Beach County Project Description: _ 5 Acre Tract Planning & Zoning Agenda February 13th, 1~79 Page 2 B. Master Plan: Applicant: WATERSEDGE (Burl Gentry, Agent) Location: North Federal Highway, North of Boat Ramp Park Legal Description: See attached Project Description: 43 Townhouses e Applicant: Summit Associates, Ltd. (Paul Hykel, Project Manager) Location: So. Congress Avenue (Old Charter World Property) Legal Description: See attached Project Description:~ Revised Master-Plan to include: 1. A marina facility; 2. A bridgeon Summit-~Boulevard; 3. The inclusion of a five-acre parcel which was recently purchased into_our Master Plan; 4. A reduction in the parking requirements from two spaces per dwelling unit to 1.75 spaces per dwelling unit; e Applicant: Summi.t~AssOciates~-~td~-(~auti~ykt~r'Proj~ctTManager)--- Location: So.~Congress Avenue (Old Charter-~Worl~-Property)- Legal Description: 5 Acre Tract C. i~Rreliminary Plat: Applicant: Summit Associates, Ltd. (Paul Hykel, Project Manager) Location: So. Congress Avenue (Old Charter World Property) Legal Description: Summit Plat No. 2 e Applicant: Summit Associates, Ltd. (Paul Hykel, Project Manager) Location: So. Congress Avenue (Old Charter World) Legal Description: Pod 'A' H~nter's Run Project Description: Pod 'A' of Summit Plat I 232 units, Community Building & Swimming Pool Applicant: Ridgewood Es~ates--(Bur~ Gentry, Agent) Location: On S.W. 6th Street south of S.W. 23rd Avenue Legal Description: Ridgewood Estates Project Description: 35 Building Lots; 10.7 acres D. Site Plan Approval: Applicant: Summit Associates, Ltd. (Paul Hykel, Agent) Location: So. Congress Avenue (Old Charter World Property) Legal Description: Acreage Project Description: Pod 'A' 232 units, Community Building & Swimming Pool Planning & Zoning Agenda February 13th, 1979 Page 3 e Applicant: OrlanHomes Inc. Location: 1700 Palmlands drive Legal Description: Tract 1, Section B Project Description: 54 ~illa Type Dwelling Units Project Name: · THE FAIRWAYS 'Applicant: Howard McCall, Agent for St. Josephs Episcopal Church Location: 3300 So. Seacrest Blvd. Legal Description: Part of Section 4 & 5, Township 46 South, Range 43 East, Palm Beach County Project Description: Columbar.ium Addition E. Discussion: Major modifications (definition of); see section 4, Paragraph L of the Zoning Regulations; Ridgewood _Estates (~ome~Owners)