REVIEW COMMENTS
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
QUINTUS GREENE
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR
JANET PRAINITO, DEPUTY CITY CLERUf
OCTOBER 27,2000
TO:
DATE:
RE:
RECORDED EASEMENT
Attached please find a copy of the above mentioned easement which was recorded and in
Palm Beach County on August 25th, 2000
^~
!l"",\ ?':
~ In' . ~ :' .
,.il D .If Ji;.., " , .
1 "f'( ~
J n f I
I,/li~ '1_
J,JUf i\'II' - I
1
~r;-'v
c: Planning
Utilities
Engineering
j: \shrdata\cc\wp\memos\quintus greene.doc
,.t<<)
~"-- ~CTUR-iP/C'~ ~S .
. ~~
'l'rtJ\CK1NG Ll,lG - ::H'I'I~ PLAN Ht::',I1.I~W ::iLJtlMe'''J'AJ.
PHUJl::C'l' 'l'l'l'LE:
LJEtiCRIP'l'lON:
'l'YPE:
LJA'l'E REC I D :
CEDAR RIDGE TOWNHOMES - PARCEL D ~'lLE NU.: NWSP 96-002
NEW SITE PLAN
NEW SITE PLAN MAJOR SITE PLAN MODIFICATION
3/4/96 AMOUNT: $1500.00 RECEIP'r NO.: 00194
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
TWELVE (12) SETS SUBMITTED:
COLORED ELEVATIONS RECID:
3/4/96
(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
--DENIED
DATE:
DATE OF LET'rER TO APPLICANT IDENTIFYING SUBMISSION DEFICIENCIES:
2nd SUBMIT'I'AL
ACCEPTED
DATE:
DENIED
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: ~/1 ~ RETURN DATE: :sld..~ MEMO NUMBER: 0(o-/IL-\
1st REVIEW COMMENTS RECEIVED
PLANS MEMO # I DATE I "c"
Plannino ~I ~0 ~ 1'57/ "1-2 ?~~ <-
Building L~~-Q(~11 -\'--I-9Co / ~
Engineer __-( <LV I ~-~.J.q6 /~
KLliln..r- . '1.' t) I _
F",oreste(r .,_)' : Ct cd.] I (;-]8'-1 /X__
eft'! I"\\N '/',. &. .~ Y. . '1(.,-/b~/ q} q~ c.-
DATE OF MEETING.: ".,'
I t
DA1'E OF LETTER SENT TO APPLICANT IDENTIFYING TRC~'REVIEW COMMENTS: ?
(Aesthetic Review APP" dates of board mtgs. & checklist sent out wI commentf
utile
P.W.
Parks
Fire 'r
~o~1:e 'oj'..
"V.I- .131.-" if"}..()
TYPE'~F VARIANCE(S)
PLANS
y
MEMO # / DATE / lie"
q 6- 101: / 3 ~J.J'(l? / 0_
9(O-~ (' / ~-.CJ.o-3i:.1 C
~b-I J" / ~~'d.- "~b' (.-....
~~T:J.~O / I -18,.9C I C
OJ, ) Lf / I ~ 1l:11G:~1 C/
NINETY DAY CALENDAR DATE WHEN APPLICATION BECOHES NULL AND VOID:
DATE 12 COMPLETE SETS OF AMENDED PLANS SUBMITTED FOR 2nd REVIEW:
(Must be assembled. Reviewer shall accept amended plans & support documents)
COLORED ELEVATIONS REC' D:
slit
SENT TO TRC T,9 ~f:IlFORM ~.~cc:' REVU\J ~ .., -/
SENT:. ~ 917 HEHO *; ~€. 7 ~'5'~ RETURN DATE:
2nd REVIEW RBCOHHBNDATION/DENIAL
PLANS MEMO" / DATE I"R/B"
Planning / 1_____
auilding Y ~.11~~ I 5~Z:; / C'.,./
Engineer . -/'9 / b 1 9/. / 6
~:~ y )~-.;s7_~ sfa-2- ~v--
C '''/'''1 /'.:J/{ (U"" r)..,-,) Y #-",,'''l. e,/.,,,,, C
\' ..... t" " v '^"~ -/.c-~ -
LETTER TO APPLICANT REGARDING TRC APPROVAL/DENIAL AND LAND DEVELOPMENT SIGNS
PLACED AT THE PROPERTY DATE SENT/SIGNS INS'l'ALLED:
. ~ ~);/
HEHO
OA'I'E
util.
P.W.
l-'arks
Fire
Police
P~N8
'f
y
'y
,
If.BMO H I DAY /"R/D"
f./t..- #S / Sk / ~
9f:,-tIGf /~t" . / L'....-
~ -<2t(P / ~Q / v
1 ~ ~ IPS- / 5;,;t. , / e..---
Od.:l,<f / / c/
SCHEDULE OF BOARD MEETINGS: PAD
DATE APl-'ROVAL LET~ER SENT:
. 'I'RACKING . ::; p
cc/eRA
.~-:j.:2/- t / /'s'
..
:f \'~ ----------""-~ - - - - - - -- - ..'
_____--r--' \ .--\ -~,,... ...,,""" ..o~. - . .-,;.-' - ' ' -
---. .' --,'-- .'-' ,. " ~'
. _-.' _~..:-~~,' iJ.~::-~j\S~-'- --- -- '-1'';\\
:-:~~~\Q:;;;'~j:~Nll.' ~ \.\~'\, G@'.Gg" \GX\\ "~~~_.....-s
'OJ _ ,..-,-, ' .-' \ y,. \I ' I ' \ l """\
~. . '''<'. ".-, . \ l\~:\~' G ," l ' I ,'/"\ G '
6~ ~''1'i-.~- , \~~, 'l' " .,;", \ I .-----::-i.~ i7-,.--i
-.-t- . -' ,(\-, '. ~ &1 . ^ "~' . ~.-:-::3'-~':::::'~ '
_ . _ ,.. ==? -l\1: ~~_. , ~ ~ (.\,~ ~ .': ' .~... (:~;:---~-".---.---, ", @ \~
_' / ~,_ " '.' .. .' p'_/ I I \ ' ~
o~ _ -:;<; t:--', " "\ '.'11' · '(;\ ,;;:' .I '/ l@'@' 0 '., ~
e. ,/)' .)'~' . " / . ,., ... I 'j-
" - ~"" _' ' ,.:'. ' . -:::,::..;:>".:. . ... ",' I ·
" __' ,.' ,;.'.' ,-'< /_,-1-,1.::::--"-<"""':": ~ - - -\ - .- J - ' - - ~
. ' _>,:3:'" _,,_ .~_~-~-' '.' .-- l I ·
. ". _ _ .:~,. -:or: ./.'. "':;;'-~' ""~",=,,.=::=":' -,::::, / \ \ / \
-"'\ ~~.. .' ,$'_:" --,'_. -- ' ~,. ,"" '
\ ~'" -< ,'<" ~,",,_ ..._ ,._ __ __..-_ ~.__" '. ..... -< '" .... I "i' "" '
_~.;;"_' ;....' :;-..~/ /'- ~ I. ' ,,-, .,.......'.v. ~ I \!I "" · ,
j' f~--- ~~~a..:;:..~_..."\ ~rr.;\ t ~ ~~i.!f:[J. ;.. .,,..~\ \ I, /-;;:-' (iiJ' \
._--- :(.r....~;;.'4>..~J~~- .,.\.\tl1' .' .:",~;':'. ..,\,.-_._,.,,-,;.;;:::r- '.. -" ,
~~ t ;..-.,' ~:. ._ -\~~- 1'- - :D,,/7" I" __:::~J:~---:=::--:;- ,
, \~._ ..\)11"'-- .\ ,- - 11.. - ~..-~ ,J \
. , _ ,~~_ _" . \ ' " _ -1 ,,_ . ... '. · _~_-.,-----..c-/ / @
t, 1'~~ L _ _ -::"'~. ~....' ,I:...." : tl.- ,I', \\( t, -,---" \,~'\
. ~ ~ _ > .\ r - .. '10 \: ' "",,' ],," C3 - c , ' ... to ",' ~
~ i '''_,.)' \. _ .' \\ _~ . . '\ : ':~",-;'-' ,;\ =: (i. \' <in (jil @) t:;.. I... t
t, \\.~. ',I. . _ c.~' \ . _._~,";\;:~., 1+,'. \' > i\ - \ ·
l t.~' · -' ::;J.....,~"'~~-""'.. '.' ' -" . .. .. '
, \- ... ~_...,,~~~_...,.., ,,- .',- \
, ,.... _ _' . . ...' -- '0'''' ." ,"" ,". . ( ·
... \ \.:_-----.,' (1U' ' ". " "'..7--- ' till
'I' ~~ I. ,i, ~... :"'-~_;'~";:.~S'\' t..\ (i) l'1l. ..
\ ~ \. / .' \' ~ I . .. , .. - -.- ..-:" . \ :if :a (,~l\ ,...
, .\ , f,' .' . \ . C ..' " - "'"
.\ \ f I' - - -\ - - --- ~ ' ,'~' -- '
. " : I ~ - c.""- '\ .. ..,--' ·
., I' ,III I ," .'. ' ,'" --......;"",,,,,,::::-...- ,... ~
'I \ ' " \ fj;::j" -- I \---::: \. ,- .' --- ~\
,(I~ . ,. ~ \. \, '" . ... . ,-. _ . ,. _ r.;, \.
...... ~. :,~:,,,"_l __~..- \" I" .....-' - ~:.
. . :. ,-~~.." ~,~..-. ' [~\ '
~'1 ,0. f-.' _'-"'- . ,,;:,'~::'" '.: ~' :~'';'' , ~ 1\ \ \ - - (i:;'V \'
" .v, ' _.._ _ -'a .. ...7. i;;,:' ',,:, ." \ i; (\\0 l~) C-'
(\ ' '[ · ..... ,c:'ti ,.' -,.' '
~ '~r J ~.. .!''':.7r.''!~!'-\ ,.:-:"r~. i .\ \
.. l~ --"tJ..:~'~'-'-' . I~~\\\;:'\ "
'? ,/'0'- .-\,' ',,,,,' ~G \ \
i;"Nltt'. > ',\, ' ~,'r-<'""- '1-\ '\.
\~,~~t~~~~\~~\t'~ _ .\~ ," \ ' .-- ,- ,- ~''J\ '
;.,\,." " ., ~
,,_,," r A ' ' '.
\\,:,\\< " ,'i) ," '\ ' ..' : ,~ "
,.", .1\' , \'_ ,r '. \'\'\ .:t /. \'
r'\\ .:n ." t,\ '.;l\ \" : lli 7i j
; ,."., '. '... . ," .
. \~" \\l,' il 'I,
I'" h \ ;. : '
I,\"~ ..\..... .~.." ,: L -------------..---- /
\' ,..,.<""',,"',,",,c,.,',c... 0::; c;;;:'" '-"? _ -" -~.~_-:: : ::::::: - - ~:;.i't.:J.J,..;J.~-" l.
, ," -"...~,.,. --,-..- ' ~--- '
"..,.. .... ._. ",." ,.,,_ _"".,," . ' . -- 1\\'
..'''''. -' .. . '. . ,
\~~ .' :,\,;;~ .' :. - ' ~".~.~~ ;\, i: ~~ \\ilfl
~ \\ ~II,,\I\\' ~. ~ . \ ~ "\\\\~ t '-::-:I. l' \\.\\\\\\~l\\\\\\ ""'lV
__- ,\\ l" ' f W\\\\ ~' u. I , ,\\-\,' \~'\'I I !\W,I'
i ~,\ \..... J ~ . H ~~\ '\ \\:. -' 1. \ wt\~W~~ ~l. ~~
; t \ \ \~ it" \\\. ." ~.. t\ ar.,\.\'t\ ~~\, "\It
~'f~?tt- _ \ \ .,' , :1 . - . ~~. \1 \\'~\\~t .t\ l'
, . .. ""'~' ..\ " .' '
.::.:..~ ... . ....\ ;.~, :,: !', \ \\, 1\ \ lu,l
EX\-\\an "/\"
,
.
\
~ , 'l
;\. ~
\- "
, \.
\t)
~ \'! \ \ \ ~\'\
..... . " '\\\
: \\\l~~\~ '\'
~
,..
~
\j\
'0
r-
~
CEO AR R\OGE o~~~~
PREPI\REO FoR JOE 6I\S~\\..E SO\,n\-\1
C\T~ of 90"iN10l4 9E~C\I. f~O!\IO~'. .'- .,-"'-
, ,..-------
PROPOSEO
"
,
'J'HJ\CKlNG 'u - til'I'I:: PLAN Ht::Vll::W tilJU! )''I'AI.
TRC Mrs-
t1~ 2f;fGlG
PHUJl:;C'l' 'l'l'l'LE:
lil:;::iCIUf"l'lON:
'I'Y fiE:
lJA'l'E REC I D:
CEDAR RIDGE TOWNHOMES - PARCEL D li'ILl:: NU.: NWSP 96-002
NEW SITE PLAN
NEW SITE PLAN MAJOR SITE PLAN MODIFICATION
3/4/96 AMOUNT: $1500.00 RECEIP'r NO.: 00194
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
TWELVE (12) SETS SUBMITTED:
COLORED ELEVATIONS REC'D:
(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.)
3/4/96
* ~ * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
APPLICATION & SUBMITTAL:
DATE:
ACCEI!TED
3/4/96
--DENIED
DATE:
DATE OF LET'fER TO APPLICANT IDENTIFYING SUBMISSION DEFICIENCIES:
2nd SUBMIT'l'AL
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: ~~ l RETURN DATE: "3/:J..~ MEMO NUMBER: 0(o-/IL-\
1st REVIEW COMMENTS RECEIVED
PLANS
MEMO # / DATE / "e"
/ /
~J / 3~\q-9t~ / C_
/ /-
/ /
<1 ~-t18 / <5-i 8" - '1{n I =r=
PLANS MEMO # / DATE / IICII
Util. q 6- 101" / 3 ~:J.JJ1? / 0,.._
P.W. Y 9(O-~ I~-'Ji/ ('---
Parks 9b-1 J I ~~~- ~lI (~
E'ire ~~T' -:),"1'0 I -18-<)<-01 C
police y OJ, }LL/~I\{,I')(.,/ C/
'I'YPE:' (lIi' VARIANCE(S)
Plannino
Building
Engineer
-E'R9tR8er-
Forester
C ....-',,/ ru. f\"i, (. ..,- ? I
....\ . 1 "'t'\l~ ~_~,'" .a...... .., (,...J.'" . J
E. ... .
DATE OF MEETING..:, '";'
/.J'
IDENTIFYXNG TRC_.REVIEW COMMENTS: 3 .: 'j
board mtgs. & checklist sent out wI comment
Ii. .
DATE OF LETTER SENT TO APPLICANT
(Aesthetic Review APP" dates of
NINETY DAY CALENDAR DATE WHEN APPLICA'fION BECOMES NULL AND VOIDe
DA'rE 12 COMPLETE SETS 0' AMENDED PLANS SUBMITTED FOR 2nd REVIEW:
(Must be assembled. Reviewer shall accept amended plans & support documents)
COLORBD BLEVATIONS RBC I D;
MEHO SBNT TO TRC TO PBRFORH 2nd RBVIBW~
DA1'E SENT: . .' J- HBNCr I ;
RBTURN DATE:
2nd REVIBW RBCOMMBNDATION/DENIAL
PLANS MEMO I / DATE I"R/DII PLANS MEMO .. I DATE I"R/O'
util. I I Planning I I
P.W. I / auilding I I
~ark8 I I Engineer I /
fi'ire / / --ettg ine~ ~ / I_-
Police I / Forester I I
c )7""1 I' '1/( ( ",'- )
LETTER TO APPLICANT \... . \...'.i....' r)...Ltf ,~
REGARDING TRC APPROVAL/DENIAL AND LAND DEVELOPHEN'r SIGNt
PLACED AT 'l'HE PROPER'l'Y DATE SENT/SIGNS INS'l'ALLED:
SCHEDULE OF BOARD MEETINGS: PAD ':;l~~ CC/CRA .5~ /;2/
lJA')'E APPROVAL LE'}"I'ER SEN'r:
A: 'l'kACI< I NG . a~'
c.~pP<f!- f<.AO~ _~~
::-:- ::-
-GlfB flU'(N ~Igw
. e,ovtJf)A"-,,, :sv\2.vg,Y I ~ I tv';;ll <<1G1~
N e:e:o ~~~ 6F' l\1 f! {;irJ <:n ~ .:; I t1O< J ,..>CVJ{) I rJ 6--
Au.. e"A5Gn~.
. l-Ptt-J I)SUdlt (J Vf1N) O~Vi0 I'" r-v-t- 6 ~~ ..4;5 "(VI. ft ~ l~ f vAN \.'7...
~()e. ~~ ~T1f<-e ~l~ "SV10 1.)(;.0 f>GZ. Su 8M I' , f::::J).
A. ?U~~Y Or' 8)(1<-S'ifrv6 f) '-?\ f'J"l1 N(y 'r1~Av 5\o1-Ovl..--{) lU3
~ve:.n,~ />\5 A p~ Oy lAf'JO:?CA pe. p~ ~vBM /v-t?\-l.-6
. CO~() C:~..c:::.. no. "-
~"""V"'t"l I O/'J:JI
~ ~0./If2TjU).
OF "1'">1 E3
ff?-ofO';7 pao
~f?E?:
· p~ ~ ~ ~A. ?\19tlu/ t'r::::.. QU€*t (trEl)
l \1M~ ~~ -PlPP?-oVA;t- ~1(2&n~
. /l~I'lG- (;J).L-vuUA":J1oN~ i~ 100"" S()~nl~d
lA-t1~ :
. T"1~ ~ NO OvrS'f?'tNDlrJ&
~L L PPr-(pl.(c tb t-?S U 6- ~
'lY1A"\ cE:O~ f<A D~ r...,)ov~J) H ~ "'f"V Ct?tiP~
, 'n1~ ~ 'lWo 00r5~DING- lS":5UE.5
of U< w~ eMf2.t6n ~ CSC"'1()Ol,. ~ ~Ae.
~06--E.. H':-~___ ~_____~,-,--_._~ _____~__,_~__________
- A~ ~-Se;:nG;:J,- A~~ l1-1
rve:e:oS ro (O~ 51~ e, Y e 0111 fAA-n~
- OAA(N~<:r€ ~~~~ A~MGrJr
,."e::ep? 1O ~ Pl~V12EO
H, H<I.VE:. R, /'ti:NO H't?7r::::l,.P; we: O\.~??~p
V"Wo lS?()~ ~y A~ve: T1)
c..DN~W~ION ~~ ~~ ~~ TiMe.
~p~ ~e:t1 l:? f'~NG-. ptWGb6<? ~
~ woVt..-D -:?1'1Pl/'I -f7LJr>~ yl~ p~ J:rf>~
'to ~)t'~T1 QtJ QY 'r'1I\~ E: 'tf}Jo ~ L) G? l rJ
"f"ll~ Fot4-1 OF po. w~~ A;~ 8NJ 8 fZ..NJ~
~
\f"O
Y\1~9- 'rV'o
f>~~
-Ae.E 15 ~ r-J 6-
t~ \9~
~ov(2.
u:>1'1~~
of'J
~ ~~ ;Y>H.i qy
~ c:;iu is ,;\'\ .ro~~;OQ1. .sd:J.:-'(t0vtt!: ~~5
'7;4t.r> ~ j)-...nl~,.~ IJl~""(fi. rv"""" ,W>>l~ ifC pI
~ 6--4 8- Ov:.;- ~:~ ~. ~ov:'" "~T/\
l F' n A n ':v () ~ A ~ " . ~ Q~ ( ~ y
&1/) ~ ~~ ~. . ~ ~.~hrtf~
I ~ t-~ l) . tM ~., d.j).:,; /vk;;"
V~ ~ ~,j.
. / '" . (1)./. ~t; ~~-rf\-V
.. I , v:- ~ · .~.
{ ~'o-vX :5,o~-~ ~
q~. yu" ~ {q d^'2f'J J..-..- J.. 1.-.. \Ae, YF.' r.#~ J~ u ~
-t.:.,b ~ ~ r:""""" lM (--vJ ....\l.J V lYU/ ~
-!(....!j:t:. ~ ~.' ~~ rvo 'ID, ~ I...n 11- ~ ; !On J..., I ~^ If-""'"
.. ""?r ~ ~ ~.f'1~ ~ icf~~~~) 01 .Jt..e ~. n__ r)JL..-
. ,,/p1.~~
<~ .~.. ~ r~. '':..,;-dR ~
.. c~ , ... ..,.. , r.. I!J~~ /1#/
-+I- pl;:;t ~; .~c....---
., "", '
:' '. .' '..J& .. #_ _ p~ ..:.. /)'--
~ /1 jfcQ.../'.' .' t j/f) ~ '/~
, ~-- . ' '. ~-- / .
,~ .,:
". . ~
. '
. '
.~~ . &
" ~_ ' I
, .
, .
, '
.. ,
,;'l!'
oEl~<:,.....
o 1-'. (t) tll 0
5~/-fo-
9 I-'.(t) tll
(t)9 rT
:::::::(t)(DH
rT 9 00 rT
.. rT rT
00 tll::T 1-"
rTtr(t)oo
tll::T1-'
tr (t) 1-" tr /-f
o ml-'(t)
<: tll ::t 0 0
(t)tr(t)OO
tll 0..;>;' 9
m ~ m 9
::t 0.. tr.. (t)
tllOo.c:: :::
I-' ::: I-' 0..
I-'ElrtO(t)
(t)::rrto..
tr~(t)oo
(t) rt .. rt
..... ::t
00 1.D(1) tll
OHlootllrt
9 woo
"0 rt" (t) rt"
l-'::tn9::t
(t) (t) (t) (t) (t)
rt 0..:::
(t)'ODJrt"oo
o..C/-fOOC
tr tr
I-' :l:1 OJ u_
I-'-I-"~ (t)
o 0.. 0.. 0
l.Q rt
/-f(t)'O
1-" C '0
to tr.l tr /-f
::too 1-'0
rt" rt 1-" '0
IOJO(t)
o rt" /-f
Hl(t)/-frt
I 00 1-'- o.c::
~ to
DJ '0 ::t tr
o.c:: I-' rt (t)
DJ 00
/-feTl'1
(t). 0 (t)
Hl Hl'O
(t) I I-'
/-f:t:'~llJ
(t)rt"DJrt
~ o.c:: rt
o (t)
(t) eTo..
0.. ::t
llJrt
1-" rt 0
~
otrmrt"eT~QJ()1.D
/-f o.c:: 0 ::t::t 1-" 0.. (t) -
0.. ::t(1)(1)eTo..o..
1-" 00 0 ::r 1"'1 tll
::: ('"t 0 /-f (1) 1-" (1) /-f 8
tlltlll-'(t)::::::m ::r
::: Hl eT rT 00:l:1 (t)
o Hl rt" (t) 1-" rT 1-"
(t) ::T~I"'I::to..o..OJ
tll/-frt(1)(t)l"'IlCllCl
::: 0 1-" OJ (t) '1
p" C 0 1"'1 "tl 1-" (t)
to:::(1)C:::::Itr.l(t)
rt"::r mOOJm9
::T OJ 1-" lCl rT (t)
(t)()/-fo..OJ(t)OJ:::
(t)(t)(t)::I rtrt
()o..OJ::Ip"-(t)m
1-" tll rt rT tIl
rt" 1"'1 tr 1-" 0.. ::t eT
o.c:: I<:QJ(t)(t)OJO
:l:1 I-'rt ::I
~ 1-'- rt (t) C p" tr
rt 0.. ::T '0 /-f m (t)
rt lCl (t) /-f 9 (t) rt
o (t) 0 1-" ::t (t)
/-f m u. ::I tr (t) m
::ItrJO(1)OJO< rt
(t)oo::tOrt t"4QJ
'<: rT 0 eT 1-" eT QJ tr
DJO 0::r;>;'1-'
'OeTl-'~::I(1)(1)""
/-f (t) - 1-" m
1-" m I-' rt en ~ ::t
O-tlll-'::tOO(t)
Ii ~ OJ::tl"'lo..
mP"trrtOrt
rt::t (t) O::t tr
o DJ 9 p" I-' (t)
I-'tllS/-f nrt
OJ I-' 1-" tll tll 0 ::t :t:
p" ::I 1-" 1-" Hl 1"'1 (t)
o tr rt ::I::: .... (t)
'0 (t)(t)rTtllrttll::l
rt ::: QJ lCl ::t rt
,I-" Hl tll 1-" (t) (t) .... rT
o 1-"::: ::: DJ ::r
::: ::: 0 (t) 0 1-1 ::s ([)
tll([)o..tll(t)
o I-' '0 rT en p"
Hl 1-" llJ 0.. QJ (t) 0 (t)
NO (t)O::l::t<:
rt (t) 0 m 1-" rt 0 ([)
::r 0.. (1) '0 rt 1-" 0 I-'
(t) ml-'.l<:o.....O
Hl m rT :::.. '0
/-f0 rort ro
(t)/-f- OQJ~'1
N H1 C /-f::t
o /-f 0 m m (t) .....0
~(1)/-f(1)(1)/JIOH1
1-" <: I-I::t
::: 1-" rT 0 <:
to (t)::tH'l(t)
~ (1)
/-fllJm'O'O~oo
(t) ~ 0 /-f I-' 1-'--
No.::tO/JIrt'
o 00~::t
~Q.0(1)::I 8
..... 0 I-' m (1) /-f ::r
:::0 mQ.(t)/JI
IQC'O O('"t
El/-fOHlO
0(t)000/-f'O
'1P'OEl/-fa..O
a.. rt' (t) '0 tll 1"'1
1-'. en /-f I-' 00 rT rT
::s rt (t) 0 1-" 1-"
llJ eno.c:: rt'::tO 0
:::::r (t)0::::::
OI1l~o..O
([) I-' 1-" I-' 0 0
I-'rtl-'- HIHI
::T:::C
tr mrtrt
([)rtO([)::t::r
::t /-f ([) (t)
00 (t) p" m
C (t)::t.....1"'I
trm/-fOJ\OO
9 C I-' CO III
..... tr rt' I-' W a..
rt u. 0 :t:
rt (t) tr '0 OJ
(t) 0'0 (t) 1-'1<:
IJ., rt /-f QJ
Ol1lrtrt
"0 '0 '0 tr ::t
/-f /-f (t) III 0 /JI
1-" 0 /-f ::: H1 eT
o '0 I-' 0..
/-f(Ol<:on~
/-f ::: (t) QJ
rtrt'OJ (t) 0..00
o o.c:: m 0.. DJ
00.. I-f IJ.,
III (t) (t)
0.. S tll :l:1 0..
o >-3 tr ::: 1-'-.....
'0 ::t I-' 0.. 0.. 0
rt(t)(O IQI1l
1-" m rt ([) rt
O(t)rt::t (t)
P ::t(Otr.lo..
tll(o m
0'0 Crtrt
HI '0 (t) ::: III 0
I-' X ..... rt
rt' 1-'- 1-'- rt (t) rt
::t 0 en o.c:: m ::t
(t) III rt' .. (t)
rt 1-'- 0
1-" ::: HI tr '0
OlQ s::c:
::: rtrttr
00 1-" ......
rt ::::s 1-"
~,O~
~ .
-'\'
~ "
t --'
Hl '1 I-'- /-f .... ,..,. "tl 11 -..l
...... IJ.,([)::::s::::s ......(t)-
([) a (1) .0 0.. 0 QJ .Q
......'1::::sCI-'-......:::s::
IJ., It rt ,..,. 0 C 1-" 8
OJ....I1QJIJ.,:l:1I1::T
rtHlrort(O(t)(O([)
.... ..... s"", <: 0..
OO(1)OCI-'- m
::s OJ ::: ::: rt' (t) 1-'......
r1" rt 1-" ~ ::: rt
lI......mo....... ([)
.....0.. HI,..,. rT
II ::: rt::t '0
5J QJoO'C::):Iro......
IDO:::O tll
::JHlQ..S([)Hlt"4:::
rt '0 III (1) III
III '0 rt ...... en ~ ::: ,..,.
.. QJ::t 1-" (1) 0.. rn
I-f(1)QJSO
l>>;>;' ::S(1)HlOP"
::JI-'-......o::: (1)([)
Q,:::QJ([)rtrt<:Hl
.0 0 ::T (1) .....
'0 ;>;'~......([)......o
l>> HI ...... 0 0 1-'.
11 /JI 0 rt 0 Po '0 ([)
rtO H'l::rOJ(1) a:::
.....1-'- rtHl(t)rt"
C) ...... '0 :I: I-'- ..... :::
C......OJQJOOrtO
.... rt /-f ::: :::..... Hl
lit 1-" ;>;' 0.. m (1) :l:1
11 (1) I-'- I-'- .. ::s (1) a
/-Jm::lO OtOQJ
'< lQl1ltr.....s:::::
...... '0 s:: (1) ...... 10(
rt ::: m I-'- rn QJ
::r rT '0 n...... rT IJ.,
It (I) QJ 0 0............ (1)
::IOIJ.,I-'-::::SOrT
~ Q.. (1) (1) ::: 0..::1 QJ
o (1) lQ I-'- I'Jl ......
OIJ.,OQJ 0........
I-' O::::S(OQJ 00
rTS::lJ.,l-'rt()
lIfO::: (1)(1)::r0
::1 rtHl<PoI1l'1
O'l'Jlm.....QJ '0
(I) '1rttrrtO
m '1 QJ (1) ..... '< ([) '1
0<::: 0 '1.....
s:: ([) IJ., m ::: m rt
rt (1)mrttl:>o(1)
::tQJ '0" QJ.. '1
(I)...... QJ Hl I-'-
11...... 11 Hl en QJ
::l QJ .....
rt rt"DJ
tr ,..,. (1) m
l>> 0
.... :::
/-J
\
"'.
~~
Ort'1CT1
rt::r(1)-
::r([)0
(1) '1
11:::......n
(t) (1) 0
'1 0 ::: :::
(1) (1) rtm
o m /JI .....
'1mrto..
(1) ,..,. I-'- (t)
QJrtOI1
rt 10( ::: QJ
...... rt
o H1 0 1-"
:::01'1\0
11 :::
HI rt
/JI 0 ::r 01
0::t(1)::t
1-" 1-" QJ
............HlI-'
......o..C......
rtl1rt
......(1)ctr
(1)::S 11 (1)
01 (1)
rt to
o ('0 ,..,.
1-'<
0('0(1)
l1a
O('OrT
01:::0
O1rt
QJI1
rt'1(1)
::t I<: 0..
(1) (1)
rn01
'0 0 1-"
QJ ::r lQ
'10::1
;>;'0
,..,. I-' 0
::I HI
lQ......
::SrT
QJ ::t
110('0
(1)11
QJ 0. /JI
(1)1-1
1-'-11(1)
::: QJ
rt..
QJO
o 0
OQJI1
(1) <
rno
m .....
..... Po
:::
IQ
"..."......,.,..
::t
(1)
El
o
Z
o
I.D
U1
I
N
CTI
00
I
CTI
I
C..j
s::
:::
(1)
I.D
.....
I.D
I.D
U1
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
MEMORANDUM
Tambri J. Heyden
Planning and Zoning Director
Michael E. Haag
Zoning & Site Development Administrator
February 2, 1995
Cedar Ridge Estates PUD - File # MPMO 94-009
Master plan modification (revised density, acreage, unit
type, layout setbacks and roads)
Please be advised of the following planning and zoning comments
relative to the review of the resubmitted plans for the above-
referenced request for master plan modification approval:
1.
2.
3.
4 .
5.
6.
7.
c9
/
O?,,-;f.
9.
10.
11.
To properly evaluate whether there are enough parking spaces
provided for the recreation facilities, specify on the plan
the gross floor area of the meeting hall. Revise the plan to
show the gross floor area and depict on the plans no less than
the number of parking spaces required for the recreation
facilities by the zoning code.
Show on the plan the total area of the site without the land
being transferred to the school. Also, identify the density
of the PUD after removing the area being transferred to the
school.
Clarify, on the plan, the difference between the 20 foot side
corner setback shown on the typical townhouse lot setback
chart and the 10 foot side corner setback identified on the
typical setback chart. If the width of the end unit lot is at
a minimum 10 feet wider than the interior unit lots, dimension
same on the typical townhouse lot drawing.
With a distinguishable symbol show and label the perimeter of
Parcel "0".
Show and label with dimension lines the perimeter setbacks
around Parcel "0".
On the plan, label Parcel "B".
Specify on the plan the width of the streets proposed for the
townhouse project; a minimum of 22 feet of pavement is
required.
The subdivision and platting regulations require streets to be
terminated with a cul-de-sac. All but one of the streets
(between bUilding 2 and 3) has been revised to replace the T-
turn around with a cul-de-sac. Unless otherwise permitted by
the city Commission, the remaining T-turn around shall be
replaced with a cul-de-sac meeting city standards.
Place the following note on the plan: "All parking spaces,
with the exception of the two (2) spaces required for each
townhouse unit, shall be designed in accordance with the
requirements of the parking lot regulations.
Replatting is required to subdivide the multi-family portion
of the PUD into townhouse lots.
The 1983 recorded and legally constituted maintenance
association agreement needs to be revised to require
imprOVing, perpetually operating and maintaining all common
facil i ties; including streets, drives, parking areas, open
space and recreation facilities depicted on the requested
master plan modification drawings. These documents are
submitted to the Engineering Division, which coordinates
review of the documents by the Planning and Zoning Department,
Engineering Division and legal staff. After approval by
~~
Page 2
Cedar Ridge PUD
File # MPMD 94-009
February 2, 1995
( con t I d. )
11. staff, the documents shall be recorded, prior to final plat
approv'al.
12. All previous, unresolved conditions of approval for the
project are still in effect.
63..3)
;-J
i.t,
D'f~l
14.
13.
14.
15.
r;6J.
,~ ./
,
J
(nfl.,
The approval of the master plan modification to omit lots 35
through 45, associated streets and Parcel "B" is subject to
approval of the recently submitted rezoning application for
assemblage of these lands with the Lake Worth Christian School
to the north.
A revised master plan which reflects all staff comments and
conditions approved by the city Commission and Planning and
Development Board shall be submitted in triplicate to the
Planning and Zoning Department, prior to permits being issued
for any of the residential developments within the PUD.
upon approval of this request, the city Commission shall
establish the fair market value of land within the PUD for
purposes of calculating the recreation fees owed. To do this,
it is recommended that verification of the 1993 purchase price
be 'received.
Per the comprehensive plan, roads within development projects
shall align. At minimum, Redwood Court and Elm Way shall form
a proper intersection.
The private recreation area shall be accessible to all units
within the PUD.
With the exception of item #1, which is superseded by
Recreation and Parks Memorandum No. 95-048, the attached
November 18, 1994 letter from Tambri Heyden to Dennis Koehler,
itemizes additional requirements that must be fulfilled, prior
to applying for building permits for any of the single-family
units within the PUD.
RECOMMENDATIONS
17. It is recommended to replat the entire project to vacate the
blocks, lots, easements and public rights-of-way desired to be
extinguished as depicted on the master plan submitted with
this request. In lieu of replatting, an abandonment
application shall be submitted and approved.
18. It is recommended to only have one chart that represents the
setbacks for the project.
19. It is recommended that this master plan modification exp1re 18
months from the date of it. approval by the City Commi.sion,
in the event an application for replatting of the multi-family
section has not been submitted or an application for site plan
approval has not been submitted or a time extension has not
been filed or a subsequent master plan modification
application has not been submitted.
NOTE: If the above recommendations are approved, compliance
shall be incorporated with the submittal of the revised master
plan.
)!
O"Y', r (J.:>/Y' .ML~ '-) 1~
II- 0 J /. L', I)>/v ~~,,.,.., ",~':J
a I~ "'/c.;J reI?. L../ f .
/ ., <-)1 ''1.'1
/_____,. , /)!",.,.)~ 0<. '
/.1-"" /, Vi, (..::..c";(;
/I/ft.c ., ~ "
a: MPMDCedar.mem
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
ill
00
JII.l.
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
ENGINEERING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. 96-19
Tambri 1. Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
~ HuJilll, p ,E" City Engineer
June 7, 1996
CEDAR RIDGE TOWNHOMES - SITE PLAN 2ND REVIEW
We have again reviewed subject project and find the following comments from our March 27
Memo (96-106) have not been completely addressed on the latest drawings:
2.
3.
4.
5.
7.
8.
10.
1.
All plans submitted for specific permits shall meet the City's code requirements at
time of application. These permits include, but are not limited to the following~
site lighting, paving, drainage, curbing, landscaping, irrigation and traffic control
devices. Permits required from agencies such as the FOOT, PBC, SFWMD and
any other permitting agency shall be included with your permit request.
Revise documents to reflect all comments.
Project shall have underground facilities to residential units. Chap.2.5, Sec.9E, pg.
2.5-7
Provide relationship of development to proposed LUI rating. Chap.2.5,
Sec.10A3g, pg.2.5-8
Provide a statement that all utilities are available and will beprovided by
appropriate agencies. Chap.3, Art.lV, Sec.3R, pg.3-5
Provide a master stormwater management plan. Chap.3, Art.lV, Sec.3T, pg.3-6
Plat review and approval required. Chap.5, Art.lI, Sec.1, pg.5-l
Establish deed restrictions providing for a property owners association to pay for
the operation of a street light system within the development. Chap.6, Art.lII,
Sec.14, pg.6-4 and Chap.5, Art.V, Sec.2A4, pg.5-9
Sidewalks are required on both sides of all local and collector streets. Chap.6,
Art.III, Sec. 1 1 A, pg.6-3
Provide Certification by Developer's Engineer that drainage plan complies with all
City codes & standards. Chap.6, Art.lV, Sec.5A, pg.6-7 and Chap.23, Art.IIF,
pg.23-8
Parking lot section must conform to City code including, but not limited to,
parking spaces for each townhome. Chap.6, Art.lV, Sec.lOF, pg.6-l2
Minimum street right-of-way width for a local street with 2 mountable curbs is 50
feet; with swales minimum right-of-way width is 60'. Chap.6, Art.lV, Sec.lOC,
pg.6-ll
Need SFWMD & L WDD acceptance prior to Engineering approval. Chap.6,
Art.VII, SecAB, pg.6-24
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Dept. of Development, Engineering Div. Memo No. 96-199
Re: Cedar Ridge Townhomes - Site Plan 2nd Review
June 7, 1996
Page #2
18. Photometrics must be approved for both pedestrian and parking lot lighting before
building permit can be issued. Chap.23, Art.II,Ala, pg.23-6
19. Provide a satisfactory lighting plan. Chap.23, Art.IIA, pg.23-6
20. Parking lot dimensions, striping, aisles, stalls, radii, signs, landscaping, etc. must
conform with City codes and standards. Chap.23, Art.II, pg.23-6
22. Landscaped areas in parking lots must be protected by wheel stops or curbs.
Chap.23, Art.lIE, pg.23-7
Recommendations:
A. Locate meeting hall as close as possible to related parking facility and east of
proposed pool.
B. Extend pedestrian walkways for lefthand entrances out to point accessible to
driver.
C. Forest Road now a public road but may become a private road with consent of
Cedar Ridge PUD to the north including maintenance responsibilities.
D. For safe pedestrian circulation and access to recreation area consider a sidewalk or
jogging path at these locations:
1. Behind building's 3 & 4
2. North-south path between building 9,10,11 & 12,13,14
3. East-west paths between buildings 9 & 10 & 10 & 11
E. Two car garage parking spaces should be 20' wide.
WVH/ck
C:CEDRDGE2
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 96-289
TO: Tambri J. Heyden
Planning and Zoning Director
FROM: Jerzy Lewicki -:j L-
DATE: June 3, 1996
SUBJECT: New Site Plan - 2nd Review
Project: Cedar Ridge Estates
Location: Between 1-95 and High Ridge Road, just north
of High Ridge Commerce Park PID
Agent: P. Karekos of Paramount Engineering Group, Inc.
File No.: NWSP 96-002
The following is a list of comments regarding the second review of
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 unresolved comments either from the first
review or new comments as a result of the second review. To show
compliance with these comments will not substantially alter the
configuration of the site and design of the buildings. The second
category is a list of recommendations I believe will enhance the
aesthetics and function of the project.
All comments and recommendations can be rectified on the plans at
time of permitting if the site plan request is approved. The
applicant must understand that additional comments may be generated
upon review of the documents and working drawings submitted to the
Building Division for permits for the proposed project.
I. SITE PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS:
1. Submission of a rectified master plan showing compliance
with the conditions of approval for the project will be
required prior to City Commission meeting. The
rectified master plan should be submitted in triplicate
to the Planning and Zoning Department~
2. One of the conditions of the Master Plan approval is to
submit a plat to the Development Department of the area
to be developed. This plat shall vacate any existing
streets within the PUD that are desired for private
ownership.
3. The submitted boundary survey does not meet the
requirements of Land Development Regulations, Chapter 4 -
Site Plan, Section 7.A. The survey should include, but
not be limited to, all easements that were established on
the site. The submitted survey contains a surveyor note
that the property was not researched for the easements
and other restrictions. Provide a current survey (within
6 months) showing all easements and other restrictions.
The survey that includes locations of existing trees on
the site, Sheet 25 of 34, is dated January 19, 1995,
which is not acceptable by the city.
4. To comply with the Land Development Regulations, Chapter
4 Site Plan, Section 7. E provide percentage
distribution of the site data. Also break up the
category "paved areas" into vehicular use area (parking
and driveways) and other paved areas (sidewalks, etc).
5. On the Site Plan, sheet 2 of 34, draw in all setbacks per
approved Master Plan.
6. Indicate on the site plan the method of trash pick-up.
7. Colored elevations of proposed structures are required by
Land Development Regulations, Chapter 4 Site Plan,
Page 2
Memorandum No. 96-289
New Site Plan - 2nd Review
Cedar Ridge Estates, NWSP 96-002
Section D, and shall be submitted to the Planning and
Zoning Department prior to the Planning and Development
Board and the City Commission meetings.
8. On the Site Plan, Sheet 2 of 34, include the 27 foot
required dimension for the back-up space of the parking
serving the recreational area.
9. Amend Homeowners Association document by inclusion of a
provision regarding unobstructed access to the t-turn
around at the western portion of the development.
Indicate a method to ensure constant operability of the
t-turn around. Provide amended Homeowners Association
document.
10. Provide parking calculations for recreational facilities
and include information regarding:
-square footage of the water area of the swimming pool
-number of dwelling units located within a five hundred
to eight hundred foot radius
These two above factors will determine parking
requirements for the recreational facility. Include the
calculation on the site plan.
11. Provide samples of all exterior building materials to be
used for construction prior to the Planning and
Development Board and the City Commission meetings.
12. A drainage permit issued by South Florida Drainage
Management District designates Veronica Lake as a dry-
retention area. Amend drawings to comply with the
district requirements. If the retention is to be
entirely wet, provide an alternative location for the
required dry-retention, and verify approval from the
South Florida Drainage Management District.
13. Provide for review an agreement between the developer and
the Lake Worth Christian School regarding the use by the
school of the retention area located within the PUD.
Provide a statement by the registered engineer that the
drainage capacity is sufficient to include the school
area, the PUD and the PID areas.
14. Provide for review an agreement between the developer and
the Lake Worth Christian School regarding access by the
school through the Cedar Ridge Estates development.
15. Eliminate discrepancies between the Landscape Plan, Sheet
26 of 34, and the site plan, sheet 2 of 34. Major
differences appear to exist specifically in the
common/recreation areas.
16. On the Landscape Plan, Sheet 26 of 34, draw in all
utility easements. Remove all landscape material from
these easements or provide an authorization to allow
planting in these areas from the users of these
easements.
17. City's Land Development Regulations, Chapter 7.5
Landscape Code, Article II, Section 5. C sets out the
minimum standards of the planting material.
Specifically, this part of the code provides general
requirements regarding physical characteristics of the
trees and shrubs, such as height, spread, and spacing.
Amend your tabulations and include these characteristics
in your planting material specification for every item
that is proposed.
Page 3
Memorandum No. 96-289
New Site Plan - 2nd Review
Cedar Ridge Estates, NWSP 96-002
18. For all sub-areas provide a key map to allow
identification of these sub-areas in relation to the
entire site. Include the same on the Landscape Plan,
Sheet 26 of 34.
19. On the Landscape Plan, Sheet 26 of 34, make a note
regarding the source of water for irrigation.
20. On the Landscape Plan, Sheet 26 of 34, amend the tabular
summary of the planting material to include a "landscape
material required by the code" category. Also, provide
relevant calculations for this category. Indicate with
an identifiable symbol all native species.
II. RECOMMENDATIONS
21. Different color schemes are proposed and indicated in the
enclosed project documentation. On the Site Plan, Sheet
2 of 34, delineate housing clusters that would have the
same color designation.
NOTE:
If recommendations are approved, they shall
incorporated into the working drawings required
permits for the project.
be
for
JL:bme
xc: Central File
a: CEDRD2CQ,NSP
-"'\f-li-[--ow ~ rnl
IW MAY 29_ l!U
BUILDING DIVISION
PlANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
MEMORANDUM NO. 96-199
May 29, 1996
To:
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
From:
Al Newbold, Deputy Development Director
Re:
Cedar Ridge - Parcel D
7000 High Ridge Road
New Site Plan - 2nd Review
After reviewing the submitted documents, signed 5/8/96, for the above project I find that there is
no response to my 1st Review comments (Memorandum No. 96-096 - attached).
The applicant should be advised that the Building Division reviewed the plans for site review
issues only. Building review and comments will be handled at the time of permit application
submittal.
AN:mh
Attachments: 2nd Review Plans
Building Division Memorandum No. 96-096
cc: William V. Hukill, P.E., Development Director
C:\ WPWIN601 WPDOCS\ TRC\CEDARRDG, WPD
..." -
IRe
BUILDING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM NO. 96-096
March 14, 1996
To:
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
From:
Al Newbold, Deputy Development Director
Re:
Cedar Ridge Townhomes - Site Plan Review
7000 High Ridge Road
Per your request the Building Division reviewed the submitted plans for the above project and
offer the following comments:
1.
All signs and entry walls or fences must be shown on the Site Plan in compliance
with the code.
2.
Parking at the Clubhouse or Recreation Building shall comply with Chapter 2,
Section 11, E. (12) of the Land Development Regulations.
~~
Al New
AN:mh
~Q'. I)Jv}1j "D~v D:y.
c:\ WPWIN60\ WPDOCS\MISCMH\CEDARRDG. WPD
"/
fo)~@~nl f[
1Jl1 .. II. ~
RECREATION & PARK MEMORANDUM #96-266
TO:
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
John Wildner, Parks Superintendent r
Cedar Ridge Estates - New Site Plan
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
May 28, 1996
The Recreation & Park Department has reviewed the Cedar Ridge Estates - New Site Plan. There
are no recreation related comments. The project may continue through the normal review process.
JW
RECREATION & PARK MEMORANDUM #96-263
J
"~li Illi~:~_~; : rn 11~
;:..11.,. I .
PLANNiNG AN\)
ZONING DEPT.
TO:
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
Kevin J. Hallahan, ForesterlEnvironmentalist ~~ 1--
Cedar Ridge Estates - Parcel D, 2nd Review
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
May 28, 1996
The applicant has requested the preservation area site be moved from south of the entrance road
(Cedar Ridge Road) to the southwest comer of the property. This action is in following the
recommendations ofthe Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission and the environmental
consultant for the applicant. This should be indicated on the engineering and landscape drawings
submitted by the applicant.
The applicant should remove all improvements and utility easements from the newly located
preserve area. The preserve area should also have a management plan for before, during and after
construction.
KH:ad
xc: Skip Milor, Chief Inspector - Utility Department
Bill Cavanaugh, Inspector, Fire Department
File
FIRE PREVENTION MEMORANDUM NO. 96-265
TO: Tambri Heyden, Director
Planning & Zoning Dept.
FROM ';;~~~~ Cavanaugh, FPO I 11l/~ Cavat "-LL'f-
DATE: May 24, 1996
RE: Cedar Ridge Parcel D - 2nd Review
7000 High Ridge Rd
NWSP 96-002
We have reviewed the fire hydrant locations, and have no other objections.
cc: Chief Jordan
FPO II Campbell
File
~.~,..~
\0), rn ~ ~ n w ~ JT\.
l\ill MAY 2 A 1996 : l~) !
PLANNiNG ANO
ZONING OEPT.
MEMORANDUM
Utilities # 96-185
TO: Tambri J. Heyden,
Planning & Zoni
FROM: John A. Guidry,
Director of Utilities
Date: May 23, 1996
SUBJECT: Cedar Ridge - Parcel D
New Site Plan, Second Review
Staff has reviewed the above referenced project and offer the following comments:
1. City water will not be supplied for irrigation. Please clearly show water
source for irrigation, (City Compo Plan, Policy 3C.3.4).
2. Only Palm trees will be permitted within Utility Easements, (Sec. 26.33(a)).
3. Sanitary sewer, as shown, does not connect to the existing sewer system.
4. All previous Utility comments still apply.
It is our recommendation that the plan proceed through the review process.
rn
~~tN!'."
PLANNING A~"
ZONING DE
If you have any questions regarding this subject, please contact Skip Milor at 375-6407 or
Peter Mazzella at 375-6404.
sm/cedtown2
xc: Clyde "Skip" Milor"
Peter Mazzella jV
File
RECREATION & PARK MEMORANDUM #96-257
It~"[f@ ~ D W ~
:,il,U
f' ;j
I, i ~,4,~V 22 1996
/U "11
I
I
m
PLANNING AND
ZONING DEPt
TO:
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
f1)~
FROM:
Kevin J. Hallahan, Forester/Environmentalist
RE:
Cedar Ridge Development
Moving the Location of Preserve Area
DATE:
May 22, 1996
The attached letter indicates that the applicant would like to pursue the possibility of moving the
location of the on-site preserve area shown on the approved master plan. The newly proposed
location has been deemed by the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission to be a superior
ecological site for the gopher tortoise. Combining the applicants preserve area with the contiguous
preserve area on the Kilpatrick project site benefits the total preserve set aside areas.
The applicant would like to make this switch in the preserve area location, provided it is considered
a minor change to the master plan. The applicant will not request the change in preserve location
if it delays the project.
Please contact me to discuss how we may be able to accomplish the request of the applicant.
KH:ad
Attachment
MAY-21-96 TUE ~2:27 PM C+N ENY CONSULTANTS INC 4~77442887
~.~1
C&N
d:e1'1/lfltiw~tat rtOtjuud<<~J1//4, d1'ltO.
:222 [PealA ': :'L:Jl. ;Y{;?I-"'(JaY -i, !l}(i/.e 201 't/!1..~'a, fllla<<(g SS4fi9 *(M7) 741-,7420 *Jjax (407) 7-~4-28~b
May 21, 1996
VIA FAX 407/375-6090
Kevin Hallahan
Urban FOre~!ler
City of Coymon Beach
100 E, Boyrton Beach Blvd.
Boynton Be:; eh. FL 33425~031O
Re: Ceda' Ridge Development
Dear Mr. B :lllahan:
I rec,cntly conducted an. ellvironmental assessment on the above re.ference.d parcel at the reque,st of
Mr. Tom St eel Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission (PGFWFC). and the developer, Mr. Joe
Basile. Onf~ active gopher tonoise (Gop'lerus polyphemus) burrow was observed approximate.ly 10' south
of the Cedar Ridge parcel within the Kilpatrick preserve area. Upon further evaluation of the Cedar Ridge
parcel. the I',abitat adjacent to the Kilpatrick Preserve was determined to be of com:iderably higher
ecological (1' ,Iality than the area currently slated for preservation.
The preserve area designed on the site plan has been disturbed by perimeter c1earing~ road
construction and off-road vehicular traffic. No gopher tortoises reside in the area. The proposed preserve
area has suf:'ered little disturbance due to edge effects and the cumulative area achieved by re.siting the
Cedar Ridge preserve contiguous with the Kilpa.trick Preserve would significantly reduce edge effects and
greatly bene 'it the vi::l.bility of th~ preserves as wildlife habitat. Tom Stice of the rOrWFC concurs to the
benefits of El larger preserve area rather than two small parcels separated by development.
A m~l1agement plan is being prepared to address the sand pine scrub community located throughout
the southwc~ t ponion of the property. Upon notification of the location of the preserve area, a detailed
manage.mem prescription will be written to address the parcel's specific management needs.
If yo.! have any questions, please feel free to call me.
Sincerely.
C&N ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULT
CMCJaj
95-025
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
SUBJ:
DATE:
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM #96-114
Tambri J. Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
Robert Eichorst, Public Works Director t.--
Larry Quinn, Sanitation Superintendent
New Site Plan - 2nd Review - Cedar Ridge - Parcel D
May 22, 1996
-
roJJ~ & fl U IV fl fn1
I ua NAY 23. /!!J,
-
PZLANN/NG A!\ID
ON/NG DEPr.
-
The previous comments sent from Public Works have been satisfied in reference to the above site
plan. The plans s uld be forwarded to the Planning and Development Board for consideration.
Larry Quinn
Sanitation Superintendent
LQ/cr
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
REF:
fD)rn@rnuw~
Uti MAY 2 0 i9Qi
BOYNTON BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT
TRAFFIC UNIT
~NING A~D
TAMBRI HEYDEN, PL~%..wNING DIRECTOR
SGT. MARLON HARRIS - /' ~
20 MAY 96
CEDAR RIDGE - PARCEL D NEW SITE PLAN - 2nd REVIEW
MEMO #0234
...;:....~.;...;.;....:.;.~....
I have reviewed the above plans. Then~,J~ttJ.6":tnifflc,~trQ.I ~nage or roadway striping shown
on these plans, other than the parki9g;::~~::6tui~:p~0~: area..~)t :):;;~::~::::},
/:;{~ ;:";1:::::?::::;}~{t;..::' ",,,,,,; {~~",::/" ",,:
:/::",::::::::):, ;<::'::,!~,~,
::.~:. .' .
I~ n " 0.,
~:.;..:.:~ '~"X":';''';,:/ J
~tI-j \~ 'u
;:...............;...;....:.;.....
~ *;..:.;.:.;.:x....~ "~:.
I L""".""":,:::<~~;
, ..
i[~:.;.;.;.:.:.;.:.;...:-'..".~...? fJ
t::::::::::::;;::;:\
<::::;:::~)
..:.......:~. .
(~
G:\WP\TRC\C\TRC0234.WPD
~~
r'I:::::::::::;':~~:)
:: .~
tJ
r....w.............:.:~...:::\.
wL,)o
:",l;;}~;,;:;~;);"'';::::::::~:;~~'';:::
:'",,;:,' L,;,i' :l':,i:
@l})
ft Ii~
\1 rti~~;{/
:~..},
fm!
L:J1
\
I
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 96-284
TO:
Tambri J. Heyden
Planning and Zoning Director
~~~W\l
FROM:
Michael E. Haag
Current Planning Coordinator
DATE:
May 20, 1996
SUBJECT:
Conditional
Project:
Location:
Use Approval - 1st Review
Riverwalk Shopping Center
1600 N. Federal Highway (S.E. corner
Woolbright Road and U.S. Highway 1)
or
Agent/
Applicant:
File No. :
Michael Carey
COUS 96-003
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 and/or 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 development. The applicant shall understand that all
documents and plans submitted for site plan review are subject to
additional comments. I recommend that the applicant/agent contact
me regarding questions related to the comments. If the applicant
is not intending to correct code deficiencies and'they request that
the proj ect 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. Modify the location of the west driveway located on Woolbright
Road to show and dimension a minimum distance of 180 feet from
the intersection of US#l and Woolbright Road or request a
variance to the parking lot code requirement to reduce the
required 180 foot distance.
2. Modify the site plan and landscape plan at the following
interior property line locations to show a continuous
landscape strip that is a minimum of 2.5 feet wide. Also
specify and show on the landscape plan that within the
landscape strip there is a continuous hedge that contains
hedge material that is spaced a maximum of 2 foot on center
and at time of installation is 18 inches tall:
i. where the subject property abuts the south and east sides
of the N.I.C. property located at the intersection of
US#l and Woolbright Road,
ii. south property line between the east side US#l and the
landscape area west of the dumpster area,
iii. the southeast corner of the site east of Local Retail "A"
and
iv. east and north of the loading zone and dumpster located
east of Local Retail "B"
Page 2
Memorandum No. 96-284
Riverwalk Shopping Center
caDS 96-003
~~~~~
If the applicant is requesting to use the existing hedge, as
noted on the plan, a note shall be placed on the landscape
plan indicating that the city landscape inspector will verify
that the existing hedge is in compliance with the code
regulations. If the existing hedge is not in compliance, the
subject property owner will modify the subject site and record
documents to provide the required landscape strip and
landscape material.
3. Show and dimension on the site plan a five (5) foot wide
perimeter landscape strip, along US#l, between the two
driveways, located west of the Walgreens tenant space. Also
specify and show on the landscape plan, that within the
landscape strip there is a continuous hedge that contains
hedge material that is spaced a maximum of two (2) foot on
center and at time of installation is 18 inches tall:
4. Dimension on the site plan the width and length of the
parallel parking spaces located east of the proposed Winn-
Dixie tenant space (note; minimum width is 9 feet and the
minimum length is 25 feet).
5. On the site plan indicate the size and use of the areas
identified with a dashed line:
i. area west of the southwest corner of the Walgreens tenant
space,
ii. area south of the Winn-Dixie tenant space and east of
Local Retail "A" and
iii. both areas located on the east side of the Winn-Dixie
tenant space and
iv. the area north of Walgreens and Major 3 and the area
located on the west and north face of Winn-Dixie and the
Winn-Dixie future expansion area.
Also show and identify these areas on the elevation view
drawings. The floor plan of the Winn-Dixie indicates the
areas identified ,above as ii. and iii. are roofed, therefore,
the line shall be changed to a solid line rather than a dashed
line and the area be added to the site data. Amend the site
data, plans and parking data accordingly.
6. Amend the site data found on the site plan to include the off-
set area located on the west side of the Winn-Dixie; comparing
the area shown on the site plan to the survey indicates that
this area has not been accounted for in the site data.
7. Add to the site plan drawing a typical detail drawing of the
required gates, block and stucco dumpster enclosure. Specify
on the plan the overall height, width and depth dimensions of
the enclosure. It is recommended that the dumpster enclosures
be enlarged to accommodate recycling receptacles. Contact
the Department of Public Works for the minimum inside
dimensions of enclosures. Also identify the color of the
stucco walls of the enclosure and including the color and
material proposed for the required gates.
8. Either provide elevation view drawings and a floor a plan for
the 4,115 square foot out-building or place a note on the site
plan indicating that the out building will require a separate
site plan review.
9. To avoid a conflict regarding landscape material and fire
Page 3
Memorandum No. 96-284
Riverwalk Shopping Center
COUS 96-003
~~&~\\
hydrants, drainage structures and site lighting poles, show on
the site plan and landscape plan, with a distinguishable
symbol, the location of the fire hydrants, drainage structures
and site lighting poles. If the site lighting poles are
located with the parking area, show and dimension the base of
the pole. The pole base shall not encroach into the corner of
a parking space by more than one (1) foot.
10. Show on the site plan a symbol that represents the location of
the curbing required to protect the landscaping.
11. Either submit a variance application to reduce the required
100 foot distance along both sides of a major driveway to the
first parking space or access aisle for the north driveway on
US#l or relocate and redesign the major driveway.
12. Add to the site plan a typical stripping detail drawing
showing the regular and handicapped parking space stripping in
compliance with the city's standard drawing B-90012.
13. Show on the site plan how the traffic flow for the two lanes
of vehicles that are exiting the drive-thru lane, located west
of the Walgreens, merge into the traffic flow for the project.
14. Submit for review, elevation view drawings of both pylon signs
and proposed wall signage for all tenants. Place a dimension
of not less than ten (10) feet from the leading edge of both
pylon signs to the adjacent property line. Also include with
the elevation view drawings, the size and color specifications
for all tenant signage including the pylon signs.
15. Show on the site plan, the location of' the buffer wall
required along the south interior property line, where the
subject commercial zoned property abuts the adjacent
residential zoned property. Also include a typical detail
drawing of the buffer wall including size, material and color
specifications consistent with the zoning code regulations.
16. Submit for review, elevation view drawings of all sides of all
buildings including the structure proposed for the dri ve-
through window area. Also, include on the drawings the color
name, color code and color manufacturer for all exterior
materials depicted on the elevation view drawings. Prepare
the drawings in compliance with the exterior building design
regulations listed in the Community Design Plan.
17. Add to the elevation view drawings and plan view drawings the
location and height of all roof mounted equipment. The code
requires all roof mounted equipment to be screened and not
visible from a distance of 600 feet. Where applicable, show
and describe on the elevation view drawings the location, type
and color of the required screening.
18. The N.I.C. property located in the northeast and southeast
corner of the site is land locked, therefore, provide on the
site plan an ingress/egress easement to the property from an
adjacent right-of-way. This easement shall be shown on the
site plan and recorded in Palm Beach County. Submit for
review to the Engineering Division of the Development
Department a copy of the document prior to recording.
19. Show and dimension on the landscape plan the line-of-sight
triangles required on both sides of all ingress/egresses.
Also indicate in note form, the space between thirty (30)
inches and six (6) feet within the line-of-sight triangles,
contains landscape material that shall be installed and
Page 4
Memorandum No. 96-284
Riverwalk Shopping Center
COUS 96-003
lIDrn~~~
maintained to create an unobstructed cross visibility.
20. Add to the site plan symbols, notes and dimensions indicating
the location and width of the proposed sidewalks.
21. The survey shows an easement transversing the east portion of
the site from south to north that is within the building
footprint of the proposed Winn/Dixie. this condition will
require an abandonment or and abandonment and relocation of
the easement. Obtain, complete and submit an abandonment
application with appropriate fee to the Planning and Zoning
Department.
22. Omit the drive-thru window from the west side of the Walgreens
tenant space. The community design code has a restriction
from placing a drive-thru on the facade of a building that
abuts a right-of-way. A request may be filed to appeal the
Community Design Plan regulations regarding location of drive-
thru windows or modify the drive-thru area to comply with the
proposed amendment to the community design plan regulation
regarding location of drive-through windows. Contact the
Planning and Zoning Department or the City Clerk regarding the
proposed changes to the community design plan regulations.
23. Show and specify on the landscape plan, hedges along the south
and east property lines of the proj ect shall be spaced a
maximum of two (2) foot on center. Either indicate the
diameter of the circler symbol that identifies the material
listed under shrubs in the plant list or add to the plant list
the required spacing specifications on the shrubs.
24. Add a note to the landscape plan, indicating, the landscape
material will be irrigated with an automatic water supply
system.
25. If the proposed total gross square footage (square footage of
all roofed and walled structures) exceeds the present total
gross square footage, a traffic analysis shall be submitted
that verifies the proposed new square footage (even if it is
one foot of additional square footage) meets the Palm Beach
County Traffic Performance Standards. If a traffic analysis
is required, six (6) signed and sealed copies shall be
submitted for review as soon as possible to not delay of the
site plan review process. The analysis will be reviewed by
staff and sent to Palm Beach County for their review. Palm
Beach County is allowed 30 days to perform their review. A
project that requires traffic review by Palm Beach County is
not forwarded for board and commission review until the
results have been received by the city. Please note the
total project gross square footage is used for determining
compliance with the code and whether a traffic analysis is
required. Gross leasable square footage is used to determine
the quantity of required parking spaces. The only square
footage shown on the submitted plans that can be deducted from
the project gross square footage, to establish total leasable
square footage, is the meter room shown on the Winn/Dixie
floor plan located in the southeast corner of the building.
Amend the site data to show total gross leasable floor area
and total gross floor area.
26. Omit from the Winn/Dixie floor plan the loading dock area
shown on the southeast corner of the extended rear portion of
the building. This loading dock will place the vehicle
unloading facing the wrong direction within the one-way north
vehicle use area. If this loading area is to remain,
delineate it on the plan with dimensions and show the location
Page 5
Memorandum No. 96-284
Riverwalk Shopping Center
COUS 96-003
\IDlli~W~
of the vehicle that will be located at the loading dock area
facing in the proper traffic flow direction. Also dimension
the proper access aisle width between the east edge of the
loading space and the west edge of the parallel parking spaces
located along the east property line.
27. Either omit the loading dock from the north side of the same
area as identified in the above comment or show a 27 foot
back-up space dimension from the west edge of the parking
spaces located along the east property line to the east edge
of the loading area. Show and dimension the loading area.
The back-up space shall not encroach into the loading area.
28. It appears that the configuration of the site plan submitted
does not match the submitted floor plan for the Winn/Dixie
tenant space at the east edge of the building. Amend the
plans accordingly. The plans show a loading dock at the
northeast corner of the Winn/Dixie tenant space. This loading
area is not delineated on the site plan. Amend the site plan
to show with dimensions the loading area. Note; the loading
area shall not encroach into parking spaces or access aisles.
II. RECOMMENDATION(S):
29. For control of traffic flow in the area of the diagonal
parking spaces, it is recommended that a landscape island be
shown on the plans at the east end of the diagonal spaces
located at the rear of the Walgreens tenant space and at the
east end and west end of the diagonal parking spaces located
at the rear of the Major 3 tenant space.
30. It is recommended that additional landscape material other
than sod be added to the landscape islands located north of
Walgreens and Major 3 and in the sodded areas east of the
outbuilding.
NOTE:
If recommendations are approved,
the working drawings required
project.
incorporate them into
for permits for the
MEH:dim
xc: Central File
a:Riverwak,SP
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 96-256
TO:
Robert Eichorst, Public Works Director
Al Newbold, Deputy Building Official
Bill Cavanaugh, Fire Prevention Officer
Clyde IISkipll 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
Tambri J. Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director ~~-
May 13, 1996
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
New Site Plan - 2nd Review
Project: Cedar Ridge - Parcel D
Location: 7000 High Ridge Road
Parcel "C" & Parcel liD II of Cedar Ridge,
a P.U.D., and High Ridge Commerce Park,
a P.I.D.
Agent:
Peter M. Karekos
c/o Paramount Engineering Group, Inc.
File No. :
NWSP 96-002
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 May 21, 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.ced
. -
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 96-157
TO: Tambri J. Heyden
Planning and Zoning Director
FROM: Jerzy Lewicki :J L-,
DATE: April 22, 1996
SUBJECT: New Site Plan - 1st Review
Project: Cedar Ridge Estates
Location: Between 1-95 and High Ridge Road, just North
of High Ridge Commerce Park PID
Agent: P. Karekos of Paramount Engineering Group, Inc.
File No.: NWSP 96-002
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 and/or 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 development. The applicant shall understand that all
documents and plans submitted for site plan are subject to
additional comments. I recommend that the applicant/agent contact
me regarding questions related to the comments. If the applicant
is not intending to correct code deficiencies and they request that
the proj ect 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. Submission of a rectified master plan showing compliance
with the conditions of approval for the project will be
required prior to City Commission meeting (see attached
master plan approval comments). The rectified master
plan should be submitted in triplicate to the Planning
and Zoning Department
2. One of the conditions of the Master Plan approval is to
submit a plat to the Development Department of the area
to be developed. This plat shall vacate any existing
streets within the PUD that are desired for private
ownership.
3. Provide a Landscape Plan of the entire site drawn at the
same scale as the Site Plan (Land Development
Regulations, Chapter 4 Site Plan, Section 7. C .1) .
Include on the survey existing planting material. The
lack of the Landscape Plan submittal precludes
determining whether the proposal meets the standards for
landscaping. Additional comments may be generated when
the required landscape plans are submitted.
4. The submitted boundary survey does not meet the
requirements of Land Development Regulations, Chapter 4 -
Site Plan, Section 7.A. The survey should include, but
not be limited to, all easements that were established on
the site.
5. Land Development Regulations, Chapter 4 Site Plan,
Section 7.E requires the following information be
provided in a tabular form. Comply with this
requirement, specifically provide the following:
Page 2
Memorandum No. 96-157
1st Review - New Site Plan
Cedar Ridge Estates
Net buildable area in acres and square feet
Housing units characteristics including number of
bedrooms and bathrooms and gross square footage of
each typical unit
Square footage and percentage distribution of the
total project site, landscape open space, vehicular
use areas, other paved areas, etc
Calculations regarding provided and required
parking spaces in residential and common areas
Height of buildings
6. Indicate on the site plan the method of trash pick-up.
7. Colored elevations of proposed structures are required by
Land Development Regulations, Chapter 4 Site Plan,
Section D.
8. On sheets A103 and A104 identify color of all exterior
building materials to be used for construction. Depict
their color codes and manufacturer's name.
9. Indicate location of all sidewalks as required by the
Land Development Regulations, Chapter 6 Required
Improvements, Article III, Section 11.A.
10. According to the city's design standards, the minimum
depth of a back-up space for a parking lot is 27 feet.
Amend the Site Development Plan appropriately.
11. Amend Homeowners Association Document by inclusion of a
provision regarding unobstructed access to the
t-turnaround at the western portion of the development.
Indicate a method to ensure constant operability of the
t-turnaround.
12. On Sheet 2 of 3 provide dimensions and square footage of
recreational facilities.
13. Provide parking calculations for recreational facilities.
On Sheet 2 of 3 delineate parking spaces associated
directly with the recreation area.
14. Provide samples of all exterior building materials to be
used for construction.
15. A drainage permit issued by South Florida Drainage
Management District designates Veronica Lake as a dry-
retention area. Amend drawings to comply with the
district requirements. If the retention are is to be
entirely wet, provide an alternative location for the
required dry-retention, and verify approval from the
South Florida Drainage Management District.
16. Provide an agreement between the developer and the Lake
Worth Christian School regarding the use by the school of
the retention area located within the PUD. Provide a
statement by the registered engineer that the drainage
capacity is sufficient to include the school area, the
PUD and the PID areas.
17. Provide an agreement between the developer and the Lake
Worth Christian School regarding access by the school
through the Cedar Ridge Estates development.
II. RECOMMENDATIONS
18. Due to large number of units, use different color schemes
Page 3
Memorandum No. 96-157
1st Review - New Site Plan
Cedar Ridge Estates
for different housing clusters to provide II sense of
place II .
NOTE:
If recommendations are approved, they shall
incorporated into the working drawings required
permits for the project.
be
for
JL:bme
xc: Central File
a:CEDRD1CO.NSP
RECREATION & PARKS MEMORANDUM NO. 96-168
F~~~~""~-;-'~'-'-'~"-~,~"'----i:;~;':
! I. ' II il
:. " , II
, (Ii
. i i,-r( 5 1996 ' ,:
",' I
'-'--.'
~
J
PWmli'lG A"J[)
,.-10N 101Q..:2tfI.
TO:
Tambri Heyden, Director of Planning \ ~
Kevin J. Hallahan, ForesterlEnvironmentalist 'f-... '1 'f:-
April 4, 1996
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Cedar Ridge Townhomes at Cedar Ridge
The applicant should respond to the previous memorandum in reference to the following:
1. environmental concerns
2. lake plantings
3. tree management plan
4. tree survey
The project should continue in the normal review process.
KH:cm
FIRE PREVENTION MEMORANDUM NO. 96-238
\.I..NN\NG (i.ND
\lZONING OEPT.
TO: Tambri Heyden, Director
Planning Department
FROM: William D. Cavanaugh, FPO I
Fire Department
DATE: March 29, 1996
/Ut;~;L
RE: Cedar Ridge Townhomes
High Ridge Rd. & Cedar Ridge Rd.
NWSP 96-002
We would like to have for review a fire hydrant location plan. We have no other objections.
cc:
Chief Jordan
FPO II Campbell
File
f'
~ <:/~-u;: / p
, J(.-' r I ( A-,
~'88
!n ~
,!OJI
d nIl
; ! j! Ij
; i,; LJ 1
, ~ ~ \Yl rnw '~l
I I i Board 01 Supervisors
[ 'I C. Stanley Weaver
":' ~ Kermit DeJl
i tJohn I. Whitworth III
_ j ! SecllItary/Manager
---PLj,NNI;'~G MW i William G, Winters
zor':;~~G DEPT ; Assistant Manager
'" --,,,"---"--"--~"-,~,.-- Richard S. Wheelihan
Attorney
Perry & Schone. PA
LAKE WORTH DRAINAGE DISTRICT
13081 MILITARY TRAIL
DELRA Y BEACH. FLORIDA 33484
March 28, 1996
LI.ODD.-
j ('
/p~/)/, Jr ~:.Jp.-'{>lI:("'L\
-....J '...Jrtr__ - f~'-"..a.
Tambri J. Heyden, Director
City of Boynton Beach
Planning and Zoning Department
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, FL 33425-0310
/1/t!.L'r- "
/1/,/1.-1.:, ",'.';J'->
h.Q..~ r '/0~,D.A../S.L;,,/; II
b/',~A ,-"/,'
l7 f- / -.-F'l__ I,IV l.:'
/'>,r.., A / _,/ ...,... _-I
1('/ ~v :)1- 'I'-"i"- ~/. t-J1U; /"
Dear Ms. Heyden:
4p ( , C ~ ,..;..,,~~,
Lc~/, .v\.:::
_ t ~.:.. ,~~ "',;:. ~~.0 L- {;::, r
,
/ ..:,,. ,-~ /1;1.-5 ...n / ,"" I, 'Ai.
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 Townhomes - Not is the L WDD 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/mfb
c:
Patrick A. Martin, P.E., District Engineer, L WDD
Delray Bead1 & Boca Raton 498-5363 . Boynton Bead1 & West Palm Beach 737-3835
FAX (407) 495,9694
/
DEP ARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
ENGINEERING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. 96
ill' ~ II: '.
J .
~
I',
LS ~:
PlANNING A,ND
ZONING DEPT.
FROM:
Tambri J. Heyden. Planning & Zoning Director
lM~ Hukill, P.E,. City Engineer
March 27, 1996
TO:
DATE:
RE:
CEDAR RIDGE TOWNHOMES - SITE PLAN 1ST REVIEW
We have reviewed subject project and have the following comments:
1. All plans submitted for specific permits shall meet the City's code requirements at
time of application. These permits include. but are not limited to the foliowmg:
site lighting, paving, drainage, curbing, landscaping, irrigation and traffic control
devices. Permits required from agencies such as the FDOT, PBC, SFWMD and
any other permitting agency shall be included with your permit request.
I I . . 2. Revise documents to reflect all comments.
I ~ -t'vJ '2-~;I-'" ;7---;T.---'-p~~j~ct shalrh~, n erground facill.IiCS to residential units. Chap.2.5, Sec.9E.
ft/l,.L'V ''&.-4~~ C -:=:-:.
fIV - . V~ ') pg.2',5-7 --
, 6'\..- II- I 4~'vldG H~lauonshlp of dcvdupUlcnt to pmpused LUI ratIng. Chap..L..3, .....
1/ --S~".lg} 38, pg" 5 S ...
.: 1ft.-.. 0 5. Provide a statement that all utilities are available and will be provided by
tJ ,1. ~/< 'fr appropriate agencies, Chap.3, Art.IV, Sec.3R, pg.3-5
r tJ;. . J, ~~. // . Provide Traffic Impact Analysis. Chap.2, Sec.9C4h(5), pg.2-85 and Chap.3,
V' ~ ~tb' Sec.3S, pg.3-5
tJgv' v" th 7. Provide a master stormwater management plan. Chap.3, Art.IV, Sec.3T. pg.3-6
.~ . \JY!'/ 8. Plat review and approval required. Chap.5, Art.II, Sec.l, pg.5-1
~, ' ,,tl 9. Provide a certified property survey indicating those characteristics as specified.
,j)I , ChapA, Sec. 7 A. pgA-4 and Chap.23, Alt.1, Sec.5B2, pg.23-4
10 Establish deed restrictions providing for a property owners association to pay for
# the operation of a street light system within the development. Chap.6, Art.III,
Sec.l4, pg.6-4 and Chap.5, Art.V, Sec.2A4. pg.5-9
11. Provide landscape plans for buffer areas to the south and west of project. Chap.6,
Art.III, Sec.3, pg.6-2
12. Sidewalks are required on both sides of all local and collector streets. Chap.6,
Art.III, Sec.lIA, pg.6-3
13. Provide Certification by Developer's Engineer that drainage plan complies with all
City codes & standards. Chap.6, Art.IV, Sec.5A, pg.6-7 and Chap.23, Art.IIF,
1 --f~ pg.23-8
_ bo, ./. .~, ~} 4., Parking lot section must conform to City code including, but not limited to,
/)1JIr' 'u....~-?,......- v{v;~ ? parking spaces for each townhome. Chap. 6. Art.IV, Sec.I OF, pg.6-12
i) l.,tJ
~r
Dept. of Development, Engineering Div. Memo No. 96-106
Re: Cedar Ridge Townhomes - Site Plan 1st Review
March 27, 1996
Page #2
Minimum street right-of-way width for a local street with 2 mountable curbs is 50
feet; with swales minimwn right-of-way width is 60'. Chap.6, Art.lV, Sec. 1 OC,
pg.6-11
Need SFWMD & L WDD acceptance prior to Engineering approval. Chap.6,
Art.VII, SecAB, pg.6-24
Specify clear sight triangles at all driveways and adjust landscape plan if needed.
Chap.7.5, Art.lI, Sec.5H2, pg.7.5-17
Photometrics must be approved for both pedestrian and parking lot lighting before
building permit can be issued. Chap.23, Art.lI,Ala, pg.23-6
19. Provide a satisfactory lighting plan. Chap.23, Art.IIA, pg.23-6
20. Parking lot dimensions, striping, aisles, stalls, radii, signs, landscaping, etc. must
conform with City codes and standards. Chap.23, Art.!I, pg.23-6
21. Provide stop signs and stop bars in accordance with the "Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices". Chap.23, Art.lIB2, pg.23-7
22. Landscaped areas in parking lots must be protected by wheel stops or curbs.
Chap.23, Art.IIE, pg.23-7
In addition, we have the following recommendations:
Locate meeting hall as close as possible to related parking facility and east of
proposed pool.
B. Extend pedestrian walkways for lefthand entrances out to point accessible to
I r r ,L driver.
.rrr- , lac ~ Forest Road now a public road but may become a private road ~tb consent of
,[) L pt~-t " Cedar RIdge PUD to the north mcludmg mamtenance responslbll1tles.
v,:\ J\Y'p _ I P:z.-. ~or ~afe pedestrian circula~on and access to recreation area consider a sidewalk or
/ ~lA..~ ,~~ . ,Joggmg path at these locations:
1rt;'<,.-JAk ~ {- ~~l f. Behind building's 3 & 4
,V:-r IX'" i. North-south path between buildings 9,10,11 & 12,13,14
3. East-west paths between Buildings 9 & 10 & 10 & 11
Two car garage parking spaces should be 20' wide.
. .
A.
fiL ~--- E.
,,-yru- L 1~~/
~ ~,C p-
WVH/ck
C:CEDRDGEI
\.
DEP ARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
ENGINEERING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. 96 06
;FoJ~-@-~-lJ' ", -,_.,
UIJ MAR 2 8 /996
PLANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
TO:
Tambri J. Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
lM~ Hukill, P,E., City Engineer
March 27, 1996
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
CEDAR RIDGE TOWNHOMES - SITE PLAN 1ST REVIEW
We have reviewed subject project and have the following comments:
1. All plans submitted for specific permits shall meet the City's code requirements at
time of application. These permits include, but are not limited to the following;
site lighting, paving, drainage, curbing, landscaping, irrigation and traffic control
devices. Permits required from agencies such as the FDOT, PBC, SFWMD and
any other permitting agency shall be included with your permit request.
2. Revise documents to reflect all comments.
3. Project shall have underground facilities to residential units. Chap.2.5, Sec.9E,
pg.2.5-7
4. Provide relationship of development to proposed LVI rating. Chap.2.5,
Sec.10A3g, pg.2.5-8
5. Provide a statement that all utilities are available and will be provided by
appropriate agencies. Chap.3, Art.IV, Sec.3R, pg.3-5
6. Provide Traffic Impact Analysis. Chap.2, Sec.9C4h(5), pg.2-85 and Chap.3,
Sec.3S, pg.3-5
7. Provide a master stormwater management plan. Chap.3, Art.IV, Sec.3T, pg.3-6
8. Plat review and approval required. Chap.5, Art.!I, Sec.1, pg.5-1
9. Provide a certified property survey indicating those characteristics as specified.
ChapA, Sec. 7 A, pgA-4 and Chap.23, Art.I, Sec.5B2, pg.23-4
10 Establish deed restrictions providing for a property owners association to pay for
the operation of a street light system within the development. Chap.6, Art.III,
Sec.14, pg.6-4 and Chap.5, Art.V, Sec.2A4, pg.5-9
11. Provide landscape plans for buffer areas to the south and west ofproject. Chap.6,
Art.III, Sec.3, pg.6-2
12. Sidewalks are required on both sides of all local and collector streets. Chap.6,
Art.III, Sec.1lA, pg.6-3
13. Provide Certification by Developer's Engineer that drainage plan complies with all
City codes & standards. Chap.6, Art.IV, Sec.5A, pg.6-7 and Chap.23, Art.IIF,
pg.23-8
14. Parking lot section must conform to City code including, but not limited to,
parking spaces for each townhome. Chap. 6, Art.IV, Sec.lOF, pg.6-12
Dept. of Development, Engineering Div. Memo No. 96-106
Re: Cedar Ridge T ownhomes - Site Plan 1 st Review
March 27, 1996
Page #2
15. Minimum street right-of-way width for a local street with 2 mountable curbs is 50
feet; with swales minimum right-of-way width is 60'. Chap.6, Art.IV, Sec. 1 OC,
pg.6-11
16. Need SFWMD & L WDD acceptance prior to Engineering approval. Chap.6,
Art.VII, SecAB, pg.6-24
17. Specify clear sight triangles at all driveways and adjust landscape plan if needed.
Chap.7.5, Art.II, Sec.5H2, pg.7.5-l7
18. Photometries must be approved for both pedestrian and parking lot lighting before
building permit can be issued. Chap.23, Art.II,Ala, pg.23-6
19. Provide a satisfactory lighting plan. Chap.23, Art.IIA, pg.23-6
20. Parking lot dimensions, striping, aisles, stalls, radii, signs, landscaping, etc. must
conform with City codes and standards. Chap.23, Art.lI, pg.23-6
21. Provide stop signs and stop bars in accordance with the "Manual on Uniform
Traffic Control Devices". Chap.23, Art.IIB2, pg.23-7
22. Landscaped areas in parking lots must be protected by wheel stops or curbs.
Chap.23, Art.IIE, pg.23-7
In addition, we have the following recommendations:
A. Locate meeting hall as close as possible to related parking facility and east of
proposed pool.
B. Extend pedestrian walkways for lefthand entrances out to point accessible to
driver.
C. Forest Road now a public road but may become a private road with consent of
Cedar Ridge PUD to the north including maintenance responsibilities.
D. For safe pedestrian circulation and access to recreation area consider a sidewalk or
jogging path at these locations:
1. Behind building's 3 & 4
2. North-south path between buildings 9,10,11 & 12,13,14
3. East-west paths between Buildings 9 & 10 & 10 & 11
E. Two car garage parking spaces should be 20' wide.
WVH/ck
C:CEDRDGEI
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 95-157
TO: Tambri J. Heyden
Planning and Zoning Director
FROM: Jerzy Lewicki
DATE: March 25, 1996
SUBJECT: New Site plan - 1st Review
Project: Cedar Ridge Estates
Location: Between I-95 and High Ridge Road, just North
of High Ridge Commerce Park PID
Agent: P. Karekos of Paramount Engineering Group, Inc.
File No.: NWSP 96-002
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 and/or 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 development. The applicant shall understand that all
documents and plans submitted for site plan are subject to
additional comments. I recommend that the applicant/agent 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.
Rectify the approved Master Plan.
')
'- .
One of the conditions of the Master Plan approval is to
submit a plat of the area to be developed. File a plat
with the Development Department.
-:.
J.
Make a complete site plan submittal. Specifically
provide a Landscape plan of the entire site drawn at the
same scale as the Site plan is (Land Development
Regulations, Chapter 4 - site plan, Section 7.C.l). A
survey of the existing planting material should be turned
in. The lack of the Landscape Plan submittal precludes
determining whether the proposal meets the standards for
landscaping. Additional comments may be generated when
the required landscape portion of the submittal will be
turned in.
4.
The submitted boundary survey does not meet the
requirements of Land Development Regulations, Chapter 4 -
Site Plan, Section 7.A. The survey should include, but
not be limited to, all easements that were established on
the site.
5 .
Land Development Regulations, Chapter 4 -site Plan,
Section 7.E requires that certain information regarding
the project be provided in a tabular form. Comply with
this requirement, specifically provide the following:
Net buildable area in acres and square feet.
Housing units characteristics.
square footage and percentage distribution of the
total project site, landscape open space, vehicular
use areas, other paved areas, etc.
Page ::
Memorandum No. 96-157
1st Review - Major Site plan Modification
Cedar Ridge Estates
Calculations regarding provided and required
parking spaces in residential and common areas.
Height of buildings.
6. Indicate on the site plan a method of the trash pick-up.
7. Drainage plan submittal should meet the requirement of
the Land Development Regulations, chapter 4 - Site Plan,
Section 7.E.
8. Colored elevations of proposed structures are required by
Land Development Regulations, Chapter 4 si te Plan,
Section D. colors used for painting should be identified
by the color code and manufacturer's name.
9. Indicate location of all sidewalks as required by the
Land Development Regulations, Chapter 6 Required
Improvements, Article III, Section 11.A.
10. According to the city's design standards, the minimum
depth of a back-up space for a parking lot is 27 feet.
Amend the Site Development plan appropriately.
11. Provide Homeowners Association Document containing a
special clause preventing any parking on the
T-turnaround.
12. Provision of unobstructed access to the t-turnaround at
the western portion of the developemnt is critical for
the Fire, Police and Public Works departments. Indicate
the method that the Homeowners Association utilize to
enforce a constant operability of the t-turnaround.
13. On Sheet 1 of 3 provide dimensions of recreational
facilities.
14. Provide parking calcullations for recreational
facili ties. Indicate location and number of parking
spaces provided.
II. RECOMMENDATIONS
15. Due to large number of units, use different color schemes
for di fferent hous ing complexes to provide "sense of
placell .
NOTE:
If recommendations are approved, they shall
incorporated into the working drawings required
permits for the project.
be
for
JL:bme
xc: Central File
.,CJ:DRD1CO,NSP
RECREATION & PARK MEMORANDUM #96-144
[' "U:"') I f: (:~: I:
r- -"
11
.....-.........., ~ .'-
PIi'i 11:::(; AND
;'::!" DEPT.
~_.. ..,.. I
I
t
_i~jl) I
.\
TO:
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
FROM:
Kevin J. Hallahan, Forester/Environmentalist
~~\t
RE:
Cedar Ridge Townhomes - Site Plan - Revision
DATE:
March 22, 1996
The applicant has received these comments when the master plan was submitted and may be in the
progress of completing any item. The applicant should provide the following:
1. A letter from the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission that all gopher tortoises
have been removed by permit from the site.
2. A flora/fauna survey in conjunction with the tree survey of existing native tree species.
3. A tree management plan for the:
A. Existing native tree species to relocate tree "plugs" to the perimeter of the property.
B. Existing preserve area before, during, and after site construction.
4. A littoral and upland planting plan landscaping 50% of the lake perimeter with appropriate
native species. This area should also have a management plan for perpetual maintenance by
the homeowner association.
KH:ad
l,fDI- ~ ,~ ~,_.iJl ~l,.. rm I
\:.~{djll
RECREATION & PARKMEMORANDUM#96-147,UU\ L'f.q? 2 1996 \,~\
L__ ~'~'~-';-ii7:;:~I;; ._--~ .
To:
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
John Wildner, Parks Superintendent W
Cedar Ridge Townhomes - Request ~r Site Plan Approval
From:
RE:
Date: March 22, 1996
The Recreation and Park Department has reviewed theCedar Ridge Townhomes request for site
plan approval. There are no recreation related comments. The project may continue through
the normal review process.
JW
RECREATION & PARK MEMORANDUM #96-144
f'" ~\ 1 ~"1 (it \
Ii ~j rlj.'~ ,",
ill r, ? r, J~ !
u.J!', L ~ '
t
,
L..-,"'....-""'...,
pi
,.~_....-.,~~
::; AND
, i.JEPr
TO:
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
FROM:
Kevin J. Hallahan, Forester/Environmentalist
~~\t
RE:
Cedar Ridge Townhomes - Site Plan - Revision
DATE:
March 22, 1996
The applicant has received these comments when the master plan was submitted and may be in the
progress of completing any item. The applicant should provide the following:
1. A letter from the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission that all gopher tortoises
have been removed by permit from the site.
2. A flora/fauna survey in conjunction with the tree survey of existing native tree species.
3. A tree management plan for the:
A. Existing native tree species to relocate tree "plugs" to the perimeter of the property.
B. Existing preserve area before, during, and after site construction.
4. A littoral and upland planting plan landscaping 50% ofthe lake perimeter with appropriate
native species. This area should also have a management plan for perpetual maintenance by
the homeowner association.
KH:ad
.'~, ~'-"": ".
(:~; .'.<......j<''':.::...,....----
.! Ii:; f!/ !;::\ i' :"
MEMORANDUM
Utilities # 96-106
" ") ? 5 '99'~
. "t)
TO:
Tambri J. Heyden,
Planning & Zoni~irector
John A. GUidry,;",,~ ~
Director OfUtiliti~ '
March 22, 1996
FROM:
Date:
SUBJECT:
Cedar Ridge Townhomes - Parcel D,
New Site Plan First Review
Staff has reviewed the above referenced project and offer the following comments:
I. Please show existing and proposed utility easements, (Sec. 26.33(a)).
2. Palm Beach Health Department permits will be required for water and
sanitary sewer, (Sec. 26.12).
3. A Capacity Reservation Fee of$15.246.00 is due within Thirty (30) days of
Commission approval or upon request for my Signature on HRS/DEP forms,
(Sec. 20-34 [E]).
It is our recommendation that the plan proceed through the review process.
If you have any questions regarding this subject, please contact Skip Milor at 375-6407 or
Peter Mazzella at 375-6404.
sm/cedtownl
xc: Clyde "Skip" Milor
Peter Mazzella f5/
File
rrlr~ ~fJ~.T\\p; ~rm~ l
'\ 0 I ~ ,---",~:.;..-~ \\
l~ ~. "
I ! I j,
II MAR 2 I 1996 t ~)
I PLANNING A!'JO ·
f ZONING DEPT.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM #96-057
TO: Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
THRU:
Robert Eichorst, Public Works Director ~
FROM:
Larry Quinn, Sanitation Superintendent
SUBJ:
Cedar Ridge Townhomes - New Site Plan
DATE:
March 20, 1996
The "T" turnaround at buildings one thru four are unacceptable to the Public Works Department.
Experience with "T" turnarounds has shown that they are, more often than not, blocked by illegal
parking. This situation would leave our trucks to back up in the parking lot for a distance in
excess of three hundred feet. This unsafe practice would leave the City open to liabilities from
backing accidents.
Public Works would suggest a cul-de-sac be installed in place of the "T" turnaround. In lieu of
that option, a common area pickup at the north west comer of the playground would also be
acceptable. This would allow the trucks to service these residents and maintain their traffic flow.
arry Quinn
Sanitation Superintendent
LQ/cr
RECREATION & PARK MEMORANDUM #96-138
l'r'~~..r~ ~ ~. m U, W"W, I
! "',
n. 11
L II i ! I " . \ , 8 iSqFj
! ,'" ", I
~ "-,-.,---
TO: Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
FROM:
Kevin 1. Hallahan, Forester/Environmentalist
~it
RE:
Cedar Ridge Town Homes - Parcel D - Site Plan
DATE:
March 18, 1996
The applicant should submit (re-submit) the following in conjunction with the environmental review
of the project:
I. A tree survey indicating the location of native and non-native species of trees.
2, A tree management plan for the trees to remain on the site especially the "preserve" area near
the entrance road.
3. A letter of completion from the Florida Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission in reference
to any existing gopher tortoises.
4. A flora and fauna survey of the site.
K.H:ad
~ ~ UJ1 ~1~
I\]) MAR \ 9 916 ~
I PLANNING AND
! ZONING DEPT.
i
FIRE PREVENTION MEMORANDUM NO. 96-230
TO: Tambri Heyden, Director
Planning & Zoning Department
FROM: William D. Cavanaugh, FPO I /; Ail.
Fire Department /UL1V L1It
DATE: March 18, 1996
RE: Cedar Ridge Townhomes
7000 High Ridge Rd
NWSP 96-002
We have no objections to the information presented. Final comments are being reserved until we
review the water main plan.
cc: Chief Jordan
FPO II Campbell
File
W::D..':....lli.".[f-~~-[!W-~ I,"""'" n. .~
i' I . '~"---'111
I /!oWlIS_ 1i~1
Jl~
PLANNING A~O
ZONING DEPT.
BOYNTON BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT
TRAFFIC UNIT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
REF:
TAMBRI HEYDEN, PLANNING & ZONING DIRECTOR
SGT.MARLON HARRIS
16 MARCH 96
CEDAR RIDGE TOWNHOMES - NEW SITE PLAN MEMO #0214
.:~;......~~;~~~::~:.}
I have reviewed the above plans and reCPlnU'i-apdilie#'Otlowi:g.g:
,;~~~~::::~~~::~:~;;;;~::1 >\:.: l .~; ~~:;~~::.. .;~:~;:~;~~~:~.
-Signage (No Parking) t4bt:~:6~:~~t~he:e'~st (d'4l;~a)"ofSpruce Street. I view this
...~ .;. ...... ...-....;..... '~.' .;.>';. ":-. '::..
area as a designated turn arou:l# for vehicular traffic, and garbag((tpr6ks and fire trucks. It will
be inviting for visitors oftheC~lex to park in this area ifno{~4i~erlY posted.
r;::!T ~
re~~:;:::5~):
J [:::::':::::;~)
::~.:.~.:.:.:.:.:.:.:>.....~.:...,
i,IB,j,;,',~ ,,""c,', ~;,I,.w,i,~c~,,' JJ2tr,:"l'~)
%,:,,'..,,'..,r,:, ... .' -,'
.. .:-:.;.;.;.;.;.:0;.;.;........;.' ;:.;.:.:. :.:.:,,~ J';' ,:>:.:.; .'X~'~ ". '.
Sgt. Marion HaIJii'lt~,
(Ol:~;l
..~:.;:v....;..::"
c::::;:::~;:i;~:j
C::::::~:::~"j
.,;...:;0....'>;...:....
\Q)
{:";::a:
tlOIJ ,~,
:':"O;?
.;.0:"$
.:: -1'
BUILDING DIVISION
r,\\
n ~ @ ~ ~ \ilJt,\;'
~ MAR \ 5 \996
."..-..-.",.,-,..
MEMORANDUM NO. 96-096
____J-0't:;!i,\i';
March 14, 1996
To:
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
From:
Al Newbold, Deputy Development Director
Re:
Cedar Ridge Townhomes - Site Plan Review
7000 High Ridge Road
Per your request the Building Division reviewed the submitted plans for the above project and
offer the following comments:
1.
All signs and entry walls or fences must be shown on the Site Plan in compliance
with the code.
2.
Parking at the Clubhouse or Recreation Building shall comply with Chapter 2,
Section 11, E. (12) of the Land Development Regulations.
~~
Al Newb / '
AN:mh
C:\ WPWIN60\ WPDOCS\MISCMIDCEDARRDG,WPD
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 96-114
TO: Carrie Parker, City Manager
Clyde "Skip" Milor, Utilities Dept. Chief Field Insp.
Robert Eichorst, Public Works Director
John Wildner, Parks Superintendent
Bill Cavanaugh, Fire Prevention Officer
Sgt. Marlon Harris, Police Department
Al Newbold, Building Division
William Hukill, Director of Department of Development
Kevin Hallahan, Forester/Environmentalist
FROM: Tambri J. Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
;gAL
DATE: March 11, 1996
RE: SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCEDURES
1st Review - New Site Plan
Project
- Cedar Ridge Townhomes - Parcel D
Location
- 7000 High Ridge Road
Parcel "C" & Parcel "D" of Cedar Ridge, a
P.U.D., and High Ridge Commerce Park, a
P.I.D.
Agent
- Peter M. Karekos
c/o Paramount Engineering Group, Inc.
File No.
- NWSP 96-002
Find attached for your review the plans and exhibits for the
above-referenced project. Site Plan Review approval for this
project will be granted by the City Commission. To ensure that
the project stays on line with the review time frame, I request
that the plans and exhibits be reviewed and formal written
comments transmitted to the Director of the Planning and Zoning
Department no later than 5:00 P.M. on March 25, 1996. Do not
return plans and exhibits. Retain same for the review of the
amended plans (second review) .
Adhering to the following review guidelines will promote a
comprehensive review and enable the applicant to efficiently
obtain Technical Review Committee approval:
1. Use the review standards specified in Part III, Land
Development Regulations, Chapter 4, Site Plan Review,
Section 8 of the Code of Ordinances to review and formulate
comments.
2. The documents submitted for the project were determined to
be substantially complete based on the submittal
requirements identified in Section 7 of the Site Plan Review
Ordinance. However, if the data provided to meet the
submittal requirements is insufficient to properly evaluate
and process the project based on the review standards or the
documents show code deficiencies, additional data and/or
corrections should be requested by the reviewer through the
Planning and Zoning Department.
3. Each comment shall reference the section of the code that is
incorrectly depicted on the documents.
4. Technical Review Committee member(s) shall identify in their
comments when the plans depict or when the location and
installation of their departmental required improvements may