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 ;
,