CORRESPONDENCE
,;'-", 1.1' """ 1,/1\ lo;;,o;;i.IJ~.t;1 IIJLIJ I ,)- ;)-::;1,) , 10.11.1 ,
..,
t) U Y iI ~ U 11 lj C 11 T a x ,i "fr~
.",,------
Board of CoUDty Coaunlulon,n
Mary McCarty, Chair
!<en L. Posta, Vice Chairman
I<aren T. MarCWI
Carol A. Roberts
Warren H. Newell
Burt Aaronson
Maude Pord Lee
COunty AdminlItrator ~
Robert Wellman
Department of Engineering
and Public WDrka
V1nce Finiz10
Deputy City Engineer
City of Boynton Beach
100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd.
P.O. Box 310 '
Boynton Beach, FL 33245
SUBtJECT:
LIGHTHOUSE SRILL RESTAURANT, BOYNTON BEACH BLVD.
Dear Mr. F1n1zto:
As YOU requested, Palm Beach County Traffic Di vision staff has reviewed the plans
and "Traff1 c Impact Statement" dated January 21, 1993 (prepared by John A. Grant,
III) for the Lighthouse Grill.
The Traffic Impact Statement submitted does not address the Countywide Traffic
Performance Standards (County Ord;nance 90-40) and 1 s not acceptable for a
project of this size. Using the rates from the County Fair Share Road Impact Fee
SchQdula (Table 10.8.1 Df thg Unified land D~v@lopm@nt Code), this 14.147 square
foot Quality Rutaurant 15 dcatenn1ned to g'ln"rah 1161 trips pel" dilY (after
allowance for 15'4 puser-by traffic). Because the ugmant of Boynton Beach
Blvd. between IntQl"ctate gS and S.acr8st Blvd. it ovorcapacity on a daily ba$i~.
a determination neQdE to be made whether in fact this project can meet AltQrnat"
Test '1 of the Traffit Standards.
Please have the applicant submit for our review and approval a new traffic impact
study 'Tor this project that addresses the Countywide Traffic P;rformance
Standards. Conceptual approval of this project by the City of Boynton Beach
should be made subject to any conditions that may be required by the results of
this traff1t study.
If you have any quest10ns concerning this letter. please feel free to contact me
or Dan We1sberg at 684-4030.
Sincerely,
c.c. Chris Cutrot Director of Planning, City of Boynton Beach
File: TPS - Mun. - Traffic Study Review
· An Eql.lal Opportunity . Atfinn.ti~ Adion Employer"
C,.""., 0/I1~"'U \F i n i z i 0 Box 2:1229 We.t Palm BelCh, flodda 18416-1229 (407) &844000
(. . ',1/12)5
;
Lh/V/UitE. l.s /v/2.J/7,...t.. 11 unc.1l.. TO J, GPA,..>l P~bAn.(;)J^"-
/JJ;s
Af3O\Jf. L&~1l...
'?>/s /9:{
~ ~ <ft> S. W;Jtt;E /dJ':)g/j3 ~ re{..~1ilJl
jlt,,14.~ f/
To: J. Scott Miller
: r ~~~J)
Date: 3/3l/94\,~1Jv
From: Ann Ford
Re: Janet Hall Site Plan Submission
Waterfront Restaurant - North Property
Pursuant to our 3/30/94 meeting with you, Craig Livingston (the architect for the above-
referenced property) and Janet Hall, I met with Michael Haag of our Planning Department this
mornmg,
Yesterday, Craig stated that he had met with Chris Cutro and Carrie Parker, at an earlier date,
regarding the site plan and had received permission to put it through the City's approval process
prior to receiving environmental comments from the necessary agencies, Mike Haag has spoken
to Carrie Parker about this and was told that this was not the case, In fact, they were told they
needed the environmental requirements met prior to submission to the City, In fact,
environmental comments will probably change the plan, requiring an extra submission to the City
after revisions are made if the plans go through the City approval process first.
Mike and I discussed the fact that the plan (if Craig revised it correctly to address the staff
comments made from the first submission and review of the plan by the City) could go through
City review first and then on to receive environmental comments, Mike felt that Planning had
done 3/4 of the work already (prior review) and there was no harm in this, However, he made the
point that City approval of the site plan might enhance the Hall's position if a lawsuit arose (a
possible "taking" issue) from the environmental review, and this was his concern. (Note: Plans
already have been submitted and a fee paid to the City so the review is in progress, However,
Craig Livingston did not revise the plans within the required 90 day deadline and this requires a
new submission with fee unless the City granted an extension, Craig claimed yesterday that the
environmental review required City comments first, and the City, therefore, needed to go forward
with the Hall's review process, Otherwise, the City would be intentionally impeding the progress
of the site plan. Mike feels, clearly, Craig is playing the City and environmental agencies against
each other in this instance,)
Tambri was not available this morning and Mike will discuss this in detail with her when she
returns regarding going forward with review of the site plans, If the Halls submit today, they will
not be able to be placed on the CRAB agenda before May 9th because Mike will not have enough
time to receive comments back from staff, write them up, and prepare for the April 11 th meeting,
This will put them on the May 17th Commission/CRA Agenda,
Mike had advised Janet Hall to pay for a "new" submission (because of the missed deadline) and
submit a letter stating that Craig had moved to New York and she was not able to get plans from
him within the 90 day time limit to ask for relief from the Commission and refund of the second
fee paid,
cc: Tambri Heyden, Planning
Mike Haag, Planning
.ill
MAR31-
c.A'1I'r
PLANNING AND
ZONING 0
April 1, 1994
City of Boynton Beach
Planning and Zoning Department
P. O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425
Attention: J. Scott Miller
RE: Lighthouse Grille
Dear Mr. Miller:
We submitted our Lighthouse Square project in January 1993 and
received comments from staff in March of 1993 and paid the
application fee of $700.00 at that time.
Subsequent to revising our plans, reflecting staff comments, we
submitted for a second review in December of 1993. Again, staff
requested modification to plans which we have submitted on April 1,
1994.
In as much as we have already paid the initial application fee and
staff comments regarding the Department of Transportation bridge,
pushed completion of our revised drawings past the 90-day time
frame, we respectfully request that the second fee be waived.
We appreciate your cooperation and understanding in this matter.
Respectfully yours,
~~
JH/cmc
La~
To: J. Scott Miller, City Manager
Date: May 10, 1994
From: Ann Ford
Re: Lighthouse Grille / Hall
Permit Application Fee
Waiver Recommendation
Pursuant to our meeting with Janet Hall three weeks ago, please sign below if this memo
conforms with your directive.
Janet and Wendall Hall paid an initial permit application fee for their Lighthouse Grille Restaurant
project. Craig Livingston is the architect for this project, and he moved his practice to New York
before completing the site plan review process for this restaurant (for which he was paid in
advance), This move caused substantial delays for the Halls in their attempts to obtain Craig
Livingston's revised plans to address city statT comments. The result of this delay was their time
to respond expired and they were charged an additional fee when they reapplied and submitted the
revised plans,
At our meeting, you told Janet you would support her request to the Commission for a waiver of
the second fee, because the delay was one over which she had no control.
f\
~\
~~
-; ,- 'JVED
~'~. ..; ~~_~ .J....
MAY 1 Ii L . "
CflY F_~~,i~~I~'C~;~~'.i l, f'. ; ~
April 1, 1994
1. Scott Miller, City Manager
City of Boynton Beach
P.O, Box 310
Boynton Beach, FL 33425
Re: Lighthouse Grille
Dear Mr. Miller:
We submitted our Lighthouse Square project for permits in January of 1993 and received staff
comments in March of 1993 , We paid the application fee when we initially submitted the plans,
Our architect, Craig Livingston, moved to New York and was difficult to reach for modifications
to the plans required by staff comments. We were substantially delayed due to an inability to
obtain the revised plans from Craig to resubmit, This resulted in an expiration of the time period
allowed, and I was told to pay a second application fee for the review of the modified plans and to
being the process once more,
I would like to request your recommendation to the City Commission to waive the second fee I
was required to pay to the city, It was not within my control to get the modified plans to them at
an earlier date,
Thank you for your help with this.
Sincerely,
"
" ~~;//~ #4k
L
Janet Hall
.tv.
RECEIVED
MAY 27/ I 'J r1
CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE