Loading...
REVIEW COMMENTS 'l'UJ\L:K1NG Ll.!-<.: - til'J'I~ PLAN HC;V.lJ~W tiUtlMO"J'AJ. PI{lJJ 1::C'l' 'l'l'l'LE: lJEtiCRlpll'lON: 'l'Y PE : X lJA'l'E REC I D : NAUTICA SOUND (FKA KNOLLWOOD GROVES PUD) F1LI:: Nu. :NWSP 96-001 NEW SITE PLAN MAJOR SITE PLAN MODIFICATION 3/4/96 AMOUNT: 1500.00 RECEIPT NO.: 04021 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * TWELVE (12) SETS SUBMITTED: COLORED ELEVATIONS REC'D: 03/04/96 03/04/96 (Plans shall be pre-assembled. The Planning & Zoning Dept. will number each sheet of their set. The Planning Dept. set will be used to check the remaining sets to ensure the number and type of sheets match.) * ~ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * APPLICATION & SUBMITTAL: DATE: ACCBPTED 3/4/96 --a.ENIED DATE: DATE OF LET'rER TO APPLICANT IDENTIFYING SUBMISSION DEFICIENCIES: 2nd SUBMIT'IIAL ACCEPTED DENIED DATE: DATE: DATE OF SUBMITTAL ACCEPTANCE LETTER: REVIEWER'S NAME: * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * (Label TRC Departments on each set of plans) DATE AND MEMO NUMBER OF MEMO SENT TO TRC TO PERFORM INITIAL REVIEW. DATE SENT: 3/11/96 RETURN DATE: 3/22/96 MEMO NUMBER: 96-113 1st REVIEW COMMENTS RECEIVED Util. P.W. Parks Fire Police PLANS ~~':t. I .DATE I ".CII lo- 11.~\i J\l.:'I ~ q(c~ I '3-\'\-~~ I--C:- =E Cf(o~ ,~ ~_I ~:J.1' / C/ . ~-d.=)'5: _~~~(, /k- Y (J~ I~ .,.1' .. (, I C/ Planninrr Building anlineer Engineer Forester PLANS MEMO # / DATE I "C" 9~7- Ii..3/ "5/J71c,', / (, ~6 oct")" / '3./'-t-cl') I ~ Cj& a1 tf ~. -; 1\5' If), '- ~ ~ <1L,-ll'-Il'-- 1"3 -\~ -~\;. I~_ 9' -1Gb c{Jq 1'1 {, ('/ DATE OF MEETING: . TYPE OF VARIANCE(S) DATE OF LETTER SENT TO APPLICANT IDENTIFYING TRC REVIEW COMMENTS: (Aesthetic Review App., dates of board mtgs. & checklist sent out wI comments NINETY DAY CALENDAR DATE WHEN APPLICATION BECOMES NULL AND VOID: DATE 12 COMPLETE SETS OF AMENDED PLANS SUBMITTED FOR 2nd REVIEW: (Must be assembled. Reviewer shall accept amended plans & support documents) COLORBD BLBVATIONS REC I D: HEHO SBNT TO TRC TO PERFORM 2nd RBVIBW. DA'l'E SENT: '-1/17 MBMO #: .:203 RETURN DATE: (~ 2nd RBVIBW RECOMMBNDATION/DENIAL Utile P. W. Parks Fire Police PLANS aEMO / D T /"~./DII }, (..,~)L / q "J- :b/~/ -Z- ~- , ) /"+ 2 f. / . ~ 9G-CLo2- / / .-:::L- 9~" :J.~ / / 0::--- -X- Qj.;l..; / cq ~ 'f / t"___ PLANS MEMO" I DATE I"R/I)" Planning / / Building ~ ~("-4~~/~/C/ Engineer ~ b-J /~/t!.- Engineer / I Forester j 0c, - t1~ / 'fI.2.=) I ~-- LETTER TO APPLICANT REGARDING TRC APPROVAL/DENIAL AND LAND DEVELOPMENT SIGNS PLACED AT THE PROPERTY DATE SENT/SIGNS INSTALLED: SCHEDULE OF BOARD MEETINGS: PAD cctCRA DATE APPROVAL LETTER SENT: A: 'I'RACKING. SP ......I.~.~~'1l~I'.I...... r' r', . """'f' ,.,.,,-.. '''''~I'''''''"~'''' ~ ..,~ w 1""1....,....,~.II'H.'P r .'l ,.. ,.,.~.. w ...r ~. . "1mTl 1" ,,,,",,"rlfrl'l"ll'l""l'P""I!""~. ...,. _ ,.... ~......'l~,.~ '. ,." . ...,.... ,. .~.' "~I"--. n, ".1'''"'1''" ,- .,........ .'r<"O~..r.._ ~.... r.. ".1 """'.., ....1 ..........,"" "'!""',.. .. _.~" MEMORANDUM rnlrn@~nwrn i U{ iUUI MAY 29 f99) i 1 rn CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH PLANNiNG AND ZONING DEPT. '1'0: Tambri Heyden, Planning Director FROM: Michael J. Pawelczyk, Assistant city Attorney RE: The Entrance Wall Sign at Naut1ca Sound DATE: May 16, 1996 IIIU!: How i. .1qn .~ea 4erine4, an4 how ia sign area calculated pursuant to Chapter 1, Article 2, of the L..4 Development aegulatioDs, City of Boynton Beach? Facts: Nautica Sound has planned an entrance wall to the subdivision and on such wall, they plan to set forth the spelling of "NAUTICA SOUND" in large capital letters. Nautica Sound claims that the area of each individual lettflJr should be added together, thus, disregarding the spaces in between 1 however, the City of Boynton Beacb Planning Department questions whether this is the correct way to measure sign area. Disou~sion: Pursuant to Chapter 1, Article 2, of the Land Development Requlations, "area of sign" is defined as: tithe square foot area enclosed by the perimeter of the sign. The perimeter of the sign shall include all background material, panel, trim, and color that differentiates the sign from the building, structure, or object on whiCh the sign is attached. The 'area around and enClosing the perimeter of each sign shall be summed and totaled to determine the total 61gn area. If the sign is co~pos.d of individual letters or symbols using the wall as a background with no added decoration, the si9n area shall be calculated by taking the sum of the areas of the smallest contiguous rectangles containing a letter, symbol, or oontinuous line or lines of advertisinq matter." The letters composinq "NAUTICA SOUND" are planned to be placed on the subdivision entrance wall, using the wall as a background with no added deooration. On the plan drawinq, the letters included in the word, ltNAUTICA SOUND- are not differentiated from the structure on which the letters would sit, thus the area of the individual letters shall be calculated by taking the sum of the areas of smallest. cuUt;..1.9UO\lG rootl:Lrig1o:i conta.in1nC} a letter. HJP: aw 19D01az.81/"lMOfHiYPiN.2J CC.. ~ fCv.k ;it-'; ~~~ IV tJ --s'"'p 5~ " PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM NO. 96-203 FROM: Robert Eichorst, Public Works Director Al Newbold, Deputy Building Official Bill Cavanaugh, Fire Prevention Officer Clyde "Skip" Milor, Utility Dept. Chief Field Insp. Sgt. Marlon Harris, Police Department John Wildner, Parks Superintendent Kevin Hallahan, Forester/Environmentalist William Hukill, Director Department of Development :M?G. ~ ~ Tambr~ J. Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director TO: DATE: April 16, 1996 File No. : Plan - 2nd Review Nautica Sound (fka Knollwood Groves PUD) Adjacent to Lawrence Road on the west LWDD L-19 Canal to the south and Hypoluxo Road to the north Karyn I. Janssen Kilday and Associates, Inc. NWSP 96-001 SUBJECT: New Site Project: Location: Agent: Attached is the amended site plan submittal for the above referenced project for your final review and recommendation. We would ask that you review this amended site plan submittal to determine if the plans have been adjusted to satisfy comments previously made by your department. If your comments have been satisfied or if your comments can be met at time of building permit, please advise the Planning and Zoning Department in writing. If your comments have not been met, please advise the Planning and Zoning Department in writing. Finally, we would ask that you include in your memorandum a recommendation as to whether the project should be forwarded to the Planning and Development Board for consideration. Please return your memorandum and the amended plans (Engineering Division shall keep their plans) to the Planning and Zoning Department by 5:00 P.M. on April 23, 1996. If you should have any questions regarding this plan, please feel free to call Michael E. Haag at Extension 6260, who is coordinating the review of this project. cc: Carrie Parker, City Manager (Plans) (Memo Only) Floyd Jordan Charlie Frederick Marshall Gage John Guidry a: 2ndRevwm. nau Fire Prevention Memorandum No. 96-237 TO: Tambri Heyden, Director Planning Department FROM: William Cavanaugh, FPO I Fire Department DATE: March 29, 1996 RE: Nautica Sound Lawrence Rd NWSP 96-001 ....'......'.._~""-".._......~..."''"..,~._....,-'.."'..".,."....-....."- ~ @ [-," [I \'Ji f,-" t, l ~ ii,' S ! \.'J -L"l ill MAR 2 9 1996 i ~ ..._..J PLANNING AND ZONIr-~G ~DJZL_..,_._... We have reviewed the plans presented. We have noted the security gates shown and have included the City standard for them. Attachment cc: Chief Jordan FPO II Campbell File 1---' h" Ir: \-f"p?/!:<,.{ A . "'5jl-'.! /Vi.- . .~ 13081 MILITARY TRAIL DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33484 March 28, 1996 . :mr ~ co ~ B ~o ~ 1~1 C~= ".iLll ~ , i pOhn I. Whitworth III l j I SecI8latylManager -~- I FV.~NI;'~G MJO J William G. Winters 711:.I:"'G f1rpT Assistant Manager ...__..__c,-:;",:,,_:~~___~ Ichard S. Wheelihan Attorney Perry & Schone. PA ~'" LAKE WORTH DRAINAGE DISTRICT ;/ (~ LLODD.- ~P!) Jr ~f?::::'-~)iI;S,Y-'. Tambri J. Heyden, Director City of Boynton Beach Planning and Zoning Department P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, FL 33425-0310 /!-1:r--f:- r..")..:;, h/.2..j r t/./Lvfi./..~., /'.:;..:.' V .,?', r..: / ~(/ /y ~j 1,/' ,- (Jr 'I-'i=. /,,)(IJi /y h /'.-r- ;--"J/. l.-lf-/~/?- / /",~ Dear Ms. Heyden: 1/J./)(/[/J';;;').~' {'~,-,,?-~ /1 ~'/- /fL:0 l...-L..s' r /:/;"'l-' .. '_' -- .-<<-" {.:J ' - '. J Lc~// "A~ / ..:, r oj/- /lj~ 4-'7 LV') f7-/.. Subject: Technical Review Committee Agenda Items 1. Project: Nautical Sound (FKA Knollwood Groves) - No objections. 2. Project: Knuth Road PCD Service Station - A drainage permit has not yet been issued. 3. Project: Cedar Ridge Townbomes - Not is the LWDD service area. 4. Project: The Village Pub at the Villager Plaza - On January 3, 1996, the L WDD contacted Robert Bosso, P.A. regarding the failure of a portion of the drainage facility associated with this shopping plaza. To date no follow up contact or repairs have been made. We would like to thank. you for the opportunity to comment on this Agenda. Our response would have been much more timely, however, it was received on March 26. Sincerely, LAKE WORTH DRAINAGE DISTRICT .~~.~ Shaughn J. ~bb Chief Inspector SJW Imfb c: Patrick A. Martin, P.E., District Engineer, L WDD Delray Beach & Boca Raton 498-5363 . Boynton Beach & West Palm Beach 737-3835 . FAX (407) 495-9694 TO: PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM NO. 96-163 -:A~ / Tambri J. Heyden /~' Planning and Zoning Director Michael E. Ha~fJ11'C ~ Current Planning __ inator March 27, 1996 FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: New Site Plan - 1st Review Project: Nautica Sound Location: Adjacent to Lawrence Road on the west, LWDD L-19 canal to the south and Hypoluxo Road to the north. Agent: Kilday and Associates File No.: NWSP 96-001 The following is a list of 1st review comments regarding the site plan review of the plans for the above-referenced project. It should be noted that the comments are divided into two (2) categories. The first category is a list of comments that identify deficiencies from the City's Land Development Regulations (L.D.R.) that are required to be corrected and shown in compliance on the plans andlor documents submitted for second (2nd) review in order for the project to continue through the site plan review process. The second set of comment(s) lists recommendations that the Planning and Zoning Department staff believe will enhance the proposed de~elopment. The applicant shall understand that all documents and plans submitted for site ~lan review are subject to additional comments. I recommend that the applicantlagent contact me regarding questions related to the comments. If the applicant is not intending to correct code deficiencies and they request that the project remain on the review schedule identified in the attached letter they should contact me regarding the procedures, application forms, fees and submittal deadline dates for seeking relief from the code requirement. I. SITE PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS: 1. Show, label and dimension on all plan view drawings all easements of record for the project. Amend the location of landscape material to be consistent with the plat note regarding no trees shall be located within utility easements without prior approval from the Boynton Beach Utilities Department. Add to general notes found on sheet 1 of 11 a note indicating the restriction regarding trees being located within utility easements. 2. Add a note to the general notes found on sheet 1 of 11 indicating that all changes to the quantity, spacing, specie and size specifications of the landscape material shall be approved through the City of Boynton Beach permit process. 3. Show, label and dimension on sheet 1 of 11, 4 of 11, 5 of 11, 7 of 11, 11 of 11 line- of-sight triangles that are required at the intersection of the recreation area driveway and the private right-of-way and the other areas where two rights-of-way intersect. Also add a note that identifies the space within the triangular areas that shall be maintained to allow an unobstructed cross visibility. 4. Modify the spacing of the areca palms shown on sheet 8 of 11 from three (3) feet on center to two (2) feet on center. 5. Add the following note to each plant list: The quantity of hedge material derived from the spacing specified on the plant list shall supersede the quantity of material specified on the plan. Page 2 Memorandum No. 96-163 1st Review - New Site Plan Nautica Sound 6. Delineate on the landscape plan the landscape material that is being planted to meet the tree management plan. 7. Place a maximum, on center, tree spacing dimension on each landscape plan that depicts a required perimeter tree buffer. The tree spacing shall be consistent with the spacing identified on the master plan. Where applicable adjust the material to comply with the maximum spacing specifications. Note: the required buffer trees shall be located on the subject project property. Check the tree spacing along the lots that abut Springfield Boulevard. 8. Show and label on sheet 8 of 9 the perimeter setback for the recreation area and where applicable amend the location of the amenities. 9. Add to sheet 1 of 9 the location of the bus shelter pavilion. Identify on the sheet the distance the shelter is located from the adj acent tract lines to the north, south and west [note: the minimum setback is ten (10) feet]. Show and label the location and width of the shelter structure overhang. 10. On sheet 8 of 9 or s et 1 of 8 identify the overall dimensions of the recreation building. On sheet of 9 show and label the width of the recreation building overhang. 12. Add to sheet 1 of 9 th width of the ingress and egress driveway openings, vehicle use aisle width and b ck-up distance for the parking lot located at the bus shelter area. Also dimension he width and length of the regular and handicapped parking space, including hand capped access aisle. Show the direction of traffic flow with traffic arrows and ide tify the location and type of curbing. 11. Specify on sheet 3 of the distance to the guardhouse from the tract line to the north, south and west Also show and label the width of the guardhouse building overhang. 13. To correspond with t e dimensions on the plan (sheet 8 of 9) revise the total area of the basketball cou from 5,600 square feet to 5,640 square feet. Also revise the total area of the tenni court from 14,100 square feet to 14,000 square feet. Amend the parking computat ns and other site data accordingly. 14. Correct the inconsist ncies between the recreation area layout plan and the conceptual engineerin plan regarding quantity of parking spaces, location of landscape islands and width of main access aisle. 17. Identify the color of t e exterior trim identified on sheets A-2, A-4 and A-5 of 8. The color shall be ide tified by name, color code and manufacturer. Also indicate on the drawings the 10 ation of the trim. Identify the color of the following building components shown on sheet A-2, A-4 and A-5: 15. Add to the recreation rea layout drawing a typical striping detail drawing depicting the parking space stri ing. The typical drawing shall be in compliance with city specifications. 16. Specify the color of th imish materials and components of the entry wall, columns and fence shown on heet 9 of 9. Identify the color by name, color code and manufacturer. Page 3 Memorandum No. 96463 1st Review - New Site Plan Nautica Sound ii. iii. solid do r and frame iv. decorati e columns v. decorati e tile 18. Specify the type and c lor of the rmish materials and components proposed for the pool pavilion shown 0 sheet A-2 of 8. Identify the color by name, color code and manufacturer. 19. Show and specify on s eet 9 of 9 the style of the sign and the color code for all sign colors. II. RECOMMENDATIO 20. None at this time. NOTE: If recommend tions are approved, incorporate them into the working drawings requi ed for permits for the project. MEH:dim xc: Central File a:1stSPNaud.Sd oo~@~u~rn MAR Z 9 I!D) BOYN 'ON BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT TRAFFIC UNIT TO: FROM: DATE: REF: TAMBRI HEYD N, PLANNING & ZONING DIRECTOR SGT. MARLON ARRIS 27 MARCH 96 NAUTICA SO - SITE PLAN REVIEW - SUPPLEMENT REVIEW MO #0222 I ~, PLANNING A~O ZONING DEPT. :~o;b"';;:~~~::~::~:~ The entrance/exits call for auto ted ~~;;"lpes1 ~~s ll.~.~d.,l~ have a telephone access system. This is a system that is accessibl b~;~~P,~~'>''l1!.gnum~~<Y(~ be supplied to police, fire and utilities department's dispatch q " te~s':'~f:~tb~: City ofBoyn(Q}.iBeac~~\~ n ~) - . (~;.:i...:..::.~...::.:....::::::...:',.,.::::::....::::~:::\..::~.::::::'.:.::~.~,.~..:: [:;~:::::::.::~l . ...., ~.. ~ Respectfully, J8kPL ~~~~ .JC5~)~ / *..-.~ ~::-:,:-:,x,:-:,:,:,:,:,,;,~,':"~' ":.:' :: .:; . .;.;: ~.- :..: . Sgt .Marlon Harris /;;,;Tt\ ((ll/:~l ._<>~ If :..-....;.. ..- X"" r.l~(:~~~:~';:::;.;;~~;;:l ''::::): t....~. r..~~;:;:~~~:;~:::~~:::\ .: .~ .: .:> .:. :>: .'~ -:> ~ ~;:::::::::::::~::~~~\ t.~b:::::::::~~:..i c:~:::::~~\~:} 1:::;::~:~:::::i cc~ '~'i.".'. ~... !Jfrn :-:;:o;ir TO: FROM: DATE: REF: TAMBR! HEYD N, PLANNING & ZONING DIRECTOR SGT. MARLON S 22 MARCH 96 NAUTICA SO D - NEW SITE PLAN- 1 st REVIEW MEMO $0218 ,,:;:'~";';';"';"'-:',',:.~.. ,;.' ..:.-:.:.;....:--;.~.: I have reviewed the above plans nd fin,d.,mfp:robfirn's:at this..time. /0' 7~")' u l>~ ", ~> ~~. , <t~ t.,il.,..,....~/l Respectfully~:;: \,\ :,,,.,...... ,( ~ \\. }\:.' d/ iJ-' a1 ~ ....w........, ~ ..........,.,.......,..,':..~ lP~}1arlTI~11 Q .......;.,.........;.;....... II [:::::::~:), ~ "::;. ~ ..J ;:;....:: ~::.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:...:..;.~.:.. ~::.:.~: f::::::~:;::;;::';:) :~~ "::, c::::::::') .;;.... -"";:', ~:\~;;:,:::.:: .:~') .... . ,',' ........:... @l>> f~)' ~ ~1, ,.:"/i \ ...:-....;..:::~;:.. ...,:-.:.;.;..;..... RECREA ION & PARK MEMORANDUM #96-148 10\ ~ rn fiJ\r ~ ,rii) 1~11 f~A.R? 2 00; II~ . ' L__.___.",,,.,_...--.i PL~~J\\;iNG ;\ND ., ~0,~,! . :,". rii'~cI."""~,~_,~,~,",",_;,,,,,,_~.,, To: Tambri Heyden, Plannin & Zoning Director John Wildner, Parks Sup rintendent ~J Nautica Sound - Site P an; 1st Rev~~ From: RE: Date: March 22, 1996 The Recreation and Park Dep recreation related comments. ent has reviewed the Nautica Sound Site Plan. There are no e project may continue through the normal review process. JW MEMORANDUM Utilities # 96-104 .-. . ~------~:l I r n iVi rs ...Il : rnI r-~ . @.._~..."L.L~'"1 ~Il; I ~j LM~R ? 2 ~Jl~P ~Lf'~NN,11JG .N~D . ,. _c_.J~!,::JJ"!l: L::rL__,_. TO: Tambri J. Heyd n, Planning & Zon ng D' FROM: \ John A. Guidry, \ Director of Utili ies \ March 21, 1996 Date: SUBJECT: N autica Sound, New Site Plan, irst Review Staff has reviewed the above re erenced project and offer the following comments: 1. Please show water sour e for irrigation. City water will not be supplied for irrigation, (City Compo lan, Policy 3C.3.4). 2. No trees, except palm tr es, are permitted within Utility Easements, (Sec. 7.5-18.1). 3. In reference to perimete walls, no structures or footers shall be allowed in utility easements, (A p. C, Art. VIII, Sec. 9). It is our recommendation that t e plan proceed through the review process. If you have any questions regar ing this subject, please contact Skip Milor at 375-6407 or Peter Mazzella at 375-6404. sm/nausdspI xc: Clyde "Skip" Milor Peter Mazzella F" File TO: FROM: RE: DATE: RECRE TION & PARK MEMORANDUM #96-134 Tambri Heyde . Planning & Zoning Director Kevin J. Halla n, ForesterlEnvironmentalist f.J!I- Nautica Soun (FKA Knollwood Groves PUD) March 18, 199 1:0 (i\'I-~-::.?"~-"'-n7;'--1 e,; I <-ctJ;P k U \y ffi (;): . . ! . . --"~.u.'""~ I !~ I 2 0 1900 ltJl ,.".~ The applicant should indicate n the landscape plan that there are at least a total of seven hundred and forty five (745) trees on th project, exclusive of the lake plantings. This is in conjunction with the original tree management Ian for no net loss of trees. (See attached letter of July 5, 1995). KH:ad Attachment -'\ , JLL-28-'95 FRI 12:01 ID: ,," ~ "fa NJ: **345 Fe1 , .- - ...,.-.--11." L-l'lDlPI AICIhItlotl/Pla '111 Farum ..... 81.MtalmA W.c Pllm BIIOt\, ~ C40'7~ _ .. . Fla: I<<m ,... .... MEMORANDUM DATE: July 5, , ~ Kevin l4allahan City Forester City of Soynto Beacn FROM; Karyn I. J ; KIlday &. ASSoCiates, Inc. RE: ,....~ Sound Site Visit OUR PROJECT NO.: 1020.1 TO: , -------_&__R~___ _=~~=~~~_~~~_~~_g______________ Rick Elaner of GL Homes, To Dwyer of Knollwood Grove, you and I met at Nautlca on June 27. 199!) to view the co dition of the Citrus trees on the Nautica Sound Site. We drove to the two ar... en 8 alte that were dlacu..ed In the letter addr...ed to you from Tom Dwyer dated Jun 21, 1995, a copy of the aerial photograph with the two areas ldentlned IS anached. urlng the site visit, Mr. Dwyer noted tt1at wttnln thes8 areas, there were approximately unhealthy Citrus trees. When counting the Citrus trees from an ..-tal. there are app x1mately Five Hundred and Forty-Five (545) trees located within theM two areas. One you subtract out the percentage of unhealthy trees, the total then becomes lIIIf: , . .,_ Thirty-8bc (431) n.. Thill is the to., numb8' of ' trees that the CIty of" 1iOynion" -, will requtrw GL Ham_to replace when applying the- no net 10.. requll'tmtf( . " re, GL Homes will have to include 438 trMe wIthin theIr site plan tor the parcel. There are approximately 308 U~~.ed to b. planted wtthtn, the landscape I:MJtfera aurrou Ing the perimeter of the property and within the recreation ar.... Thll CUTlounts to 70% f the required treG$ for tho no net lose requirement. The remainder of the nee nee iwy to fulfill this requirement will be placed within the individual lots on the Bite. Th e are three trees minimum proposed for tne Zero Lot Line units and three trMI mlnlmu proPOSed for the 'Z: Lot Une units. The overall tree count for the lite will exceed the ulred 438 trees necessary to meet the no net loa requirement of the City. If you nave any question, or ncems, pleese do no! hesitate to contact me. 43~ -+- 307 1f 7 'f S- ~) 'fUkJ oa: RIck Elsner; GL Horn w .,,__ Ii TO: FROM: DATE: RE: DE ARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT ENGINEERI G DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. 96-094 \ill-~ @ ~ ~_W ffil~ , n I L '" Q I 8 1996 ... \ . I I ". '. , '" ~<~ ! \ L. _---.---1 , PL~.N~m~G fINO ...."..~,..1C~!NG OSfL_,"",," Tambri J. Heyden, PI nning & Zoning Director _ukill' P.E., ity Engineer March 15, 1996 LANDSCAPING AND RECREATION FACILITIES REVIEW We have reviewed subject project an have the following comments/recommendations: Revise documents to refl ct all comments. All plans submitted for s ecific permits shall meet the City's code requirements at time of application. These p ts include, but are not limited to the following; site lighting, paving, drainage, curbing, lands aping, irrigation and traffic control devices. Permits required from agencies such as the FD T, PBC, SFWMD and any other permitting agency shall be included with your permit request Do not start landscaping for Nautica Sound Plat Two until a Land Development Permit is issued. Chap.5, Art.VI, ec.3, pg.5-12 The outfalls within Lake No.3 (SH.34 of 37), their related drainage pipe and the control structure out to L WDD -19 shall be made a part of the Nautica Sound Master Stormwater Drainage System and sh 11 be placed in a Water Management Tract by a recorded instrument. The Tract and related s ctures shall be the sole responsibility of the H.O.A.. Chap.6, Art.III, Sec.5-1, pg.6-2 and Art. V, Sec.5B, pg.6-8 Provide Certification by eveloper's Engineer that drainage plan complies with all City codes and standards. Chap.6, .IV, Sec.5A, pg.6-7 and Chap.23, Art.IIF, pg.23-8 Provide details for pave ent, grates, pipes, catch basins, etc. Chap.6, Art.V, SecAB2e, pg.6- 20 All swales, detention are s and disturbed areas must be sodded. If not irrigated, use bahia sod. Chap.7.5, Art.II, Sec.5C , pg.7.5-15 Specify clear sight trian es at all driveways and adjust landscape plan if needed. Chap. 7.5, Art.ll, Sec.5H2, pg.7.5- 7 Do not plant large canop trees adjacent to parking lot lighting which will later create shadow areas. Chap.23, Art.l, S c.6, pg.23-6 Photometries must be ap roved for both pedestrian and parking lot lighting for the parking lot and bus stop area before building permit can be issued. Chap.23, Art.ll, Ala, pg.23-6 11. Use white pavers to deli eate the pedestrian path thru paver areas. Chap.23, Art.IIP, pg.23-1O Recommendations A. Reduce the width of the gress/egress aisle from 27 feet to 22 feet and extend the curbed islands out (southward) nother 5 feet. Install "D" curb through ut the parking stall areas and eliminate the wheel stops. This will create a more esthetic an maintenance free parking lot. Not having the additional asphalt beyond the wheel stops ill add some additional 860 sq.ft. of pervious area. Comments 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. B. WVH/ck C:NAUSDL&R xc: Ken Hall To: From: Re: BUILDING DIVISION roJ.D rn@rnu-LrN1 ill) MAR I 5 !9SS L~...> -~. ...., EMORANDUM NO. 96-095 March 14, 1996 Tambri Heyden, lanning & Zoning Director Al Newbold, De uty Development Director Site Plan Revie for Nautica Sound PUD Per your request, the Building ivision has reviewed the plans submitted for the above referenced project and offer the ollowing comments: AN:mh 1. The Entrance W 11 sign, including background, has exceeded the 32 Sq. Ft. maximum (See hapter 21, Article IV, Section 1, D.) 2. All entry signs s all comply with the attached Page E-3 of the Policy Manual for Height Measure ents (Copy attached). 3. Parking calculati ns on Sheet 8 (24 of 37) must comply with Chapter 2, Section 11, E. (12) of the Land Development Regulations. r!(~ Al Newbo a Att.: Copy of Specific Policy o. E-3, Measurements Ji I I t I I I I I J , , I I I I I f I , - PARTMENT OF DE' .LOPMENT MEASUREMENTS November, 1995 I. VERTICAL MEASUREME TS. METHODS FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF VERTICAL DISTANCES ARE AS FOLLOWS: A. ANTENNAE 1. Residential Inst llations: a. Ground mounted receiving antennae cannot exceed twenty-~ve feet (25') in height measure from the average ground elevation at the base to the highest point of the antenna. (LDR Chapter 2, Section 4, Paragraph F4, Page 2-7) b. Roof-m unted and wall-supported receiving antennae cannot exceed thirty-five feet (35' in height measured from the average ground elevation of the nearest side of the bu lding, and cannot rise more than fifteen feet (15') above average roof line. (LDR C apter 2, Section 4, Paragraph F4, Page 2-7) c. Private ommunity receiving antennae systems cannot exceed forty-five feet (45') in height measured from the average ground elevation at the base to the highest point of the an enna. (LDR Chapter 2, Section 4, Paragraph F4a, Page 2-7) d. Ground mounted Transmitting Antennae can be no taller than forty-five feet (45') measure from the average ground elevation at the base to the highest point of the antenna d cannot rise more than twenty feet (20') above the average roof line. (LDR C apter 2, Section 4, Paragraph F5a, Page 2-7) B. SATELLITE DISH TENNA SCREENING 1. Vegetative or so id screening is required on the three sides of a ground-mounted anterma not facing the major signal direction and shall extend to the highest point of the antenna. (LDR Chapter 2, Secti n 4, Paragraph MIa(4), Page 2-10) 2. Koof-mounted tennae in commercial and industrial districts shall not be clearly visible from any point .thin public right-of-way or residential district. If screening is required to accomplish this esult, it must be a solid wall or fence on ~l visible sides high enough to hide it from public vi w. Exception: The screening may be lowered on the receiving side of the dish only far en ugh to avoid signal interference. (LDR Chapter 2, Section 4, Paragraph M2D(2)(c), Pag 2-11) E-3 ~. \r...1'!:n~,"T""c""\ ........__.-.~_, ____... -_.....,..~' --..........., .-..., ..,~... -..-...,~ ............. . ~;I I , C. ~ BUILDINGS AND BUFFER WALLS w 1. Buildings (Synonymous with structures for measuring purposes). Flat roof building heights are determined by measuring the vertical distance I between the average finish grade and the highest finished roof surface, top of parapet or highest point of structure or equipment, whichever is higher. For purposes of this I measurement, the average finish grade is assumed to be 6" below the main finish floor unless otherwise clearly indicated on application drawings. The main finish floor is the floor immediately inside the main entrance on the side facing the front I property line. In the case of 'split level' plans, the building official shall determine main finish floor. Pitched roof building heights are determined by measuring the vertical distance . between the average finish grade and the apex of the highest pitched roof. (See ell! a for definition of finish grade and finish floor. Buffer wall heights are determined by measuring the vertical distance between the lowest I point along the top of the wall and the average finished grade on the exterior side of the wall, I but at no point on the wall can the measured height be more than six inches below the required height. Walls may be stepped in increments not exceeding eight inches in height, with a minimum M step spacing of 25 feet. I Development Identification Signs I 2. D. SIGNS 1. a. a. b. Height of development identification signs are measured from the highest point of the sign to the average grade along the face of the sign. When the sign incorporates I a berm or wall, their combined height shall not be more than eight feet (8') above the crown of the road. II. HORIZONTAL MEASUREMENTS. METHODS FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF HORIZONTAL I DISTANCE ARE AS FOLLOWS: I Cul-de-sacs are a minimum of 100 feet in diameter (50 foot radius) at adjacent property I lines, with minimum setbacklbuilding line located on an arc equal to the cul-de-sac radius plus appropriate setback/building line. The length of the arc so established shall not be less I than 75% of the required lot frontage. A. ENGINEERING MEASUREMENTS 1. Points of access are measured along right-of-way lines where points of access occur. If the n: right-of-way at point of access is a local road, the nearest intersecting street right-of-way line must be no less than thirty feet (30') away. If the right-of-way at point of access is a higher classification than a local road, the nearest intersecting street right-of-way line must be no I less than 180 feet away. 2. C:\WPWIN60\WPDOCS\POLICYMH\SPECCON\MEASURE.WPD I 3. Street paveme t widths are measured perpendicular to the flow of traffic from the center line between adj cent lanes to either the uncurbed edge of the pavement; the vertical interior (traffic) face of curb 6" or higher; the lowest point of a valley curb; or the vertical interior (traffic) face of mountable or barrier curb. B. SETBACK MEASU MENTS & ENCROACHMENTS 1. Setback measur ments a. Buildin overhangs such as eaves shall not encroach into setbacks more than two feet me ured horizontally from the farthest most projection to the vertical plane of required setback. b. Detache storage structures including pump housings in compliance with LDR Chapter 2, Section 4B2, Page 2-6 shall not at any point be closer than 3' to a rear property line or side property line, measured perpendicular to the property line, and may not be placed anywhere within any front yard setback or within any setback adjacent to a public right-of-way. ~ Fences, edges and walls in compliance with LDR Chapter 2 are allowed within setbacks Fence heights are measured vertically from finish grade to highest point of fence whether that point is fence structure, fence fabric, or (where permitted) barbed . re. d. Frontag is measured horizontally parallel to adjacent right-of-way lines or, in the case of c ed right-of-way, equidistance from the curve but in any event no less than frontage setback requirement at any point. 2. Setback encroa ents a. Remova Ie improvements may be placed in side and rear setbacks not encroaching into fron yard setback providing they can be disassembled with nothing more than hand too. s within 24 hour of notification to remove. This would include such things as ladde s, scaffolding, mobile equipment, playground equipment, etc. b. Sidewal, paving and slabs may be constructed in side and rear setbacks not encroac . g into front yard setback if they are in compliance with LDR Chapter 2 and ther are no above grade improvements thereon. C. EASEMENT ENCRO CHMENTSIPROHIBITIONS 1. Buildings and. tructures for which a Certificate of Occupancy/ Completion is r quired are not allowed within easements. 2. Walls are not al owed within easements unless approved by the Building Official. 3. Receiving ante nae are not allowed within easements. C:\WPWIN60\WPDOCS\POLICYMH\SPEC ON\MEASURE.WPD ~ .., IIi. MISCELLANEOUS DETERMINATIONS " w A. OFF -STREET PARKING which is required by the LDR shall not be counted or considered acceptable if any portion of proposed parking encroaches onto adjacent property or right-of-way not owned or otherwise irrevocably controlled by the applicant. Exception: Required parking for uses other than residential meeting subject provisions may be not more than 300 feet away measured along nearest pedestrian walkway. B. TIME IS DETERMINED AS FOLLOWS: 1. Hours are measured consecutively exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays and holidays. designated by the City. A 24-hour requirement means compliance by same time next business day. 2. Days are measured consecutively exclusive of Saturdays, Sundays and holidays designated by the City. A three-day requirement means compliance by the end of business on the third day following start-up. Exception: Periods of 14 days or more are measured by the calendar, not business days. 3. Weeks are measured by the calendar. A two-week requirement means compliance by the end of business 14 calendar days following start-up. 4. Months are measured by the calendar. A two-month requirement means compliance by the end of business two calendar months following start-up. 5. Years are measured by the calendar. A two-year requirement means compliance by the end of business on the same date two years hence. C. TRAVEL DISTANCE is measured along line of travel. D. DEAD END CORRIDORS are measured horizontally from nearest edge of exit or exit way to most J distant point of pocket or corridor. . E. PARKING STALLS are counted for parking areas according to the most recent approved site plan. 1 Where plans do not exist, parking spaces are counted on site. In either case existing parking areas must conform with LDR Chapter 23 when additional proposed parking stalls equal or exceed 25% I of the total stalls on original area. For example, where an existing parking lot with 40 stalls is ~ increased by 10 or more stalls, the entire 50 plus stall area must be brought into conformance with Chapter 23. If fewer than 10 stalls are added, only the new area must conform with Chapter 23. I I I I I WVH:mh 1015/95, Rev 10/23/95, 10/25/95, 11/13195, 11/27/95, 1/9/96,2/5/96 C:\WPWIN60\WPDOCS\POLICYMH\SPECCON\MEASURE.WPD rr~. ['2 ~7---- II D r-tJt I:" Ie iUn " i ' j I, If';' I 1= U1 I~':y -( t r I " , i ! i,...~.."" P" LIe WORKS DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM #96-056 TO: Tambri Heyden, lanning & Zoning Director FROM: Robert Eichorst, blic Works Director SUBJ: New Site Plan - ajor Modification - Nautica Sound DATE: March 14, 1996 The Public Works Department es not have a problem with this site. I do however want to advise the applicant that the pav rs at the entrance may not be able to handle heavy vehicles turning on them. ert Eichorst lic Works Director RElcr " S'J'.\)'\ PL ING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM NO. 96-113 TO: Carrie Parker, City Manager Clyde "Skip" M'lor, Utilities Dept. Chief Field Insp. Robert Eichors , Public Works Director John Wildner, arks Superintendent Bill Cavanaugh Fire Prevention Officer Sgt. Marlon Ha ris, Police Department Al Newbold, Bu'lding Division William Hukill Director of Department of Development Kevin Hallahan Forester/Environmentalist FROM: Tambri J. Heyd n, Planning & Zoning Director ';-~ 1st Review - PROCEDURES DATE: March 8, 1996 RE: SITE PLAN REV I Site Plan Project utica Sound (FKA Knollwood Groves PUD) Location jacent to Lawrence Road on the west LWDD L- canal to the south and Hypoluxo Road to e north Agent ryn I. Janssen o Kilday and Associates, Inc. File No. Find attached for you above-referenced proj project will be grant the project stays on that the plans and ex comments transmitted Department no later t return plans and exhi amended plans (second review the plans and exhibits for the ct. Site Plan Review approval for this d by the City Commission. To ensure that ine with the review time frame, I request ibits be reviewed and for.mal written o the Director of the Planning and Zoning an 5:00 P.M. on March 22 1996. Do not its. Retain same for the review of the review) . Adhering to the folIo ing review guidelines will promote a comprehensive review nd enable the applicant to efficiently obtain Technical Revi w Committee approval: 1. Use the review s andards specified in Part III, Land Development Regu ations, Chapter 4, Site Plan Review, Section 8 of the Code of Ordinances to review and formulate comments. 2. The documents su mitted for the project were determined to be substantially complete based on the submittal requirements ide tified in Section 7 of the Site Plan Review Ordinance. Howev r, if the data provided to meet the submittal requir ments is insufficient to properly evaluate and process the roject based on the review standards or the documents show c de deficiencies, additional data and/or corrections shou d be requested by the reviewer through the Planning and Zon'ng Department. 3. Each comment sha I reference the section of the code that is incorrectly depi ted on the documents. 4 . Technical Review comments when th installation of conflict with ot Committee member(s} shall identify in their plans depict or when the location and heir departmental required improvements may er departmental improvements. page 2 of 2 Nautica Sound To: TRC Members Re: Planning & Zonin Memo 96-113 5. When a TRC Membe his/her review r code section may name of the appr review specified finds a code deficiency that is outside of sponsibility, the comment and the specific be included in their review comments with the priate TRC Member that is responsible for the 6. If a TRC member inds the plans acceptable, he/she shall forward a memo, ithin the time frame stated above, to the Planning and Zon'ng Director stating that the plans are approved and the do not have any comments on the plans submitted for re iew and recommend the project be forwarded through the appr val process. All comments shall be typed, addressed and transmitted to the Director of the Plann'ng and Zoning Department for distribution to the applicant. Pleas include the name and phone number of the reviewer on this memo. Michael E. Haag will be the Planning and Zoning Department sta f member coordinating the 1st review of the project. The Planning and Zoni g Department will send the applicant a cover letter which includes the comment(s) and directions to amend the plans to comply with he comments and the procedures for resubmission. When t e Planning and Zoning Department receives the amended plans, they w'll distribute the plans with a cover memo to all TRC Members for r view and approval. TJH:bme Attachment xc: (Memo Only) Floyd Jordan, Fi e Chief Charlie Frederic , Recreation & Parks Director Marshall Gage, P lice Chief John Guidry, Uti ities Director Central File A:lstREV.nau/TRC tfYPPLIJ 0--- /eO+.D -- C,.....,4 ( ir: L /8 -' '-.. j ,- ---1 ~. ~~.- ~r 12 ~)E ---: '-:'1: ! llf.lj "1: 11 iT/<,' t: 0 :r~':}!:~:UI::;:!~::':;>(}\i~~:::,:j::':::':ii!!ijX~!'\~il:i;:!.::.:.:.i~t;i.t~~~i~i?::\{":':::: ,.,~. r 4'" '-;;..j "~.;'..{J.'~..Jrif~': ~.J ~ i:iMttfjfi;;~)~;B~~~[~*i\W:~~)$iff;;\t~..:{~~~r~~jW~IJJ~i;ffNj?;' f ~ .,v:~~' .~, ,,,' ,"-'" ~f!ii;;;itii%fj\~'i'i;ii~Qjgi/m}i L-'frN ; lb'bt" ;~ '. - AG ~HHHHHH''IW-='~~N-3P ~.;~[ e;~_:~E ~ lBX tjj ~ 1 . rrrLITrrnmnU-U1~ '-...LU- ! I' ---' - ~.,.j.:....!- ,"0... f:.,11111111 ./ -........ " ,. -I' rrl~' '/ IpJi " .~' :-~rr~~ ~r I~ .~J.,~. ~-.~;i~f ~.jii _,',~l ~.UI ;~:Z , .' I' ! l' J I ~ l~~ ~ "f'Jl1 :;:J ili::l . WILF:' \.'" I . I fiif ;<i" ,- ~Ii @!- / \\11..', ' ' c ,/ r: {t:::"J, " iWi '......,' C:.~ll~- ":' "r- LfC~ I " ',: . :: L1LI/'L,!~ ,.'., 'f\~" ~ "OO~S ~( ",. [1;:rJ .d T'~ \0~ ~~i:::~i =- ~J~ ,\ 'S), . I 1. I I t::: ~ r ntH == J J _. :- ~ :: I .!~"ffiW3L~ -_=- ' - '" /"." I III \8 _" ~ I [.~ 111/ "- 11) --- ~ ~ 1,l-VW'l\\Y"1 cilIM ' '-... _pn 1 :-~~~f._ _ TTl. ~~~. ...) IIII ~-:..r:>d / 11 111 TT 1 , I I \ / 1I1'T ~ ~ ~-E ~ ~, ~ = , -- = f- "'1 == - ~ ) t:: , L ~'1AA t: ...... .,.... .,... C' ' ,. [' . '~ ,.'C',CC',O:' " .. ,',. J~ '.0. 1/8 MILE'SV~~. ~:~~r:T1~) =8T' j~" l,~ IIII1 ,II. - - ;-'".;,~ ' ... u:,:: ~C1G ~ t1'0 400. '800 FEET i~__.': & ::' ; I __ ft... -... tJt:!11r. Gj.'J(". =- "I li~~~~ _,_ -: '~~'~.J. . -=Jr.-- .u._____ IX: .-1.,." ! 1--, ~,.,-, -.-- LO~ATION MA? \ ',NAUTICA SOUND -- -'] F::'( ., \ ,I I L-- . --~ h> _ \( C3 -1 ~ . . I ~ I --- -., J.>>/. () 0 ",.,' .-- C-;4"''' L - , I' II'rA..' ~ffr~lLrhTI]JJ. '/'- . I~'--:' f-- LI~(L.',:, ~ ~j"-"',~ ~-1 ~::~ . ~ ',- 'h~' ~t::\\ \'f~:~ ~ ~ ~. ,rl; \~ l-~I ~ \,,~,I, l/"........- .1:.- ..-.'.~ .........r. j I,. '~. "1' ',,-." f \: f \ ~, I " ' _ '~)1<','ff'l ;r,:,.,.[\.=r+I....'l(Jl;~( J nCITRUS GLEN e" ; PUD LUI:4.D , (,,, i- ~o !r!~.'/ AG ( ~- :19 ! I I 'I' -':~ ....SOYNTON , ,...,H."........- NURSe-IESn ----~T.....7"'.,...... ... r h. l1...L i Flue r~----- h___ LUI:4.0 : f--- - -- - ---- zo CITY- ., T iIiiii PUD NIC LUI: .- --", ~iill-' . . ~ Ln..) rl Pl fr3 A LUI l~:I ~-< ~ r1 "MEL~ . _. . . I ~ ~ t A - "1, - w ; ,