LEGAL APPROVAL
-, r;~
~
I~ C~a
IJiJsP ~
PAGE 01 r
09/25/1997 15:50
954-351-8003
,J T ACCURATE
,;
,.
-",
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND
FOR PALM BEACH, FLORIDA
CASE NO. CL 96-2600 AD
RHS CORPORATION,
I
... ~ r.....
r./ .) r.- 7 !
_.~ c/ J
/ '
CI:J~ (> fF)-
ll;;::~
~~k 91ft frr7t
&J/d5/11
Plaintiff,
'. va.
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
and CLEAR COPY, INC.,
Defendants.
SUBPOE~A FOR DEPOSITION
To: Ms. Tambri Hayden
Boynton Beach City Hall
100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd.
Boynton Beach, FL
YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED to appear at the office of: Boynton Beach City
Hall, 100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd., Boynton Beach, FL on September 30t 1997 at 2:00 p.m. and
to have with you the following:
DUCES TECUM: ANY AND ALL LETTERS, MEMORANDUMS, NOTES, REPORTSt
PREPARED BY YOU OR RECEIVED BY YOU CONCERNING THE PROPERTY
LOCATED 660 WEST BOYNTON BEACH BLVD., BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA OR
THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT 650 WEST BOYNTON BEACH BLVD., BOYNTON
BEACH, FLORIDA. THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR THE CITY
OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA.
ANY AND ALL REPORTS, ANALYSIS, STUDIES, INSPECTIONS, STATEMENTS,
INCLUDING ANY AND ALL DOCUMENTS IN YOUR POSSESSION OR OTHERWISE
THAT YOU HAVE PREPARED OR RECEIVED A COpy OF CONCERNING THE
PROPERTY LOCATED AT 660 WEST BOYNTON BEACH BL YD., BOYNTON
BEACH, FLORIDA, KNOWN AS CLEAR COPY, OR 650 WEST BOYNTON BEACH
BL YD., BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA. '
IF YOU FAIL TO:
~',',/'.;;~\:..~,~:;,. ~,;':"<t:" -'\,''''. :',:' I
," ~', . '
09/25/1997 15:50
954-M1. -800?
J T ACCURATE
PAGE 02
1. appear as specified; or
2. furnish the records instead of appearing as provided
above; or
3. obj ect to this subpoena;
you may be in contempt of court. You are subpoenaed by the attorney whose name appears on
this subpoena and unless excused from this subpoena by the attorney or the Court, you shall
respond to this subpoena as directed.
DATED ON:
C1 t ,ql 0,4.-
PAUL M. ADAMS, ESQ.
Florida Bar No. 977810
For the Court
PAUL M. ADAMS, ESQ.
Fla. Bar No. 977810
Dickstein, Reynolds & Woods
224 Datura Street, Suite 1100
West Palm Beach. Florida 33401
Telephone: 561/832+6860
fZ^-
""-----.-------...- -- -.- -,-----
ag!~5!1997 15:50
'354-351-12003
J T ACCURATE
PAGE 03
-
.'
:;.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE
15TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND
FOR PALM BEACH, FLORIDA
CASE NO. CL 96-2600 AD
RHS CORPORATION,
Plaintiff,
va.
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
and CLEAR COPY, INC.,
Defendants.
/
NO~~~B or TAXING DEPOSITION
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that pursuant to the Florida Rules of
Civil Procedure, before Royal Palm Reporting, a court reporting
service, Notaries Public, State of Florida at Large, or any other
officer authorized by law to take depositions in the State of
Florida, the Plaintiff will, upon oral examination, take the
deposition of the following named, indicating the corresponding
date and time, to wit:
~:
~:
nMS:
TAMBRI HAYDEN
Tuesday, September 30, 1997
12:00 p.m.
pLACE:
City Hall
100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd.
Boynton Beach, FL
Such oral examination will continue from day to day until
completed. You are hereby notified to appear and take part in
said examination as you may be advised, and as shall be fit and
proper.
,I"','
, ~: ,.., .. ,
09/25/1997 15:50
'354-3:~_ -8003
J T ACCURATE
PAGE 04
Such oral examination will continue from day to day until
completed. You are hereby notified to appear and take part in
said examination as you may be advised, and as shall be fit and
proper.
This deposition is being taken for the purposes of
discovery, for use as primary evidence at trial or for such other
purposes as are permitted under the applicable Statutes or Rules
of Court.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the
foregoing has been furnished by U.S. Mail, to Thomas J. Woolley,
Esquire, 639 East Ocean Avenue, Suite 408, Boynton Beach, FL
33435, and Leonard Rubin, Esquire, 3099 East Commercial
Boulevard, Suite 200, Fort Lauderdale, FL 33408, and Jim Gheroff,
Esq., 100 E. Boynton Beach, FL 33426, this \~~day of
September, 1997.
DICKSTEIN, REYNOLDS , WOODS
The Harvey Building
224 Datura Street, 11th Floor
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
(561) 832-6
PAUL M, ADAMS, ESQUIRE
Fla. Bar No. 977810
~' .
AUG-04-97 13:15 FROH:JOSIA5 GOREN ET AL
10:8547714823
PAGE
2/2
-h'L- ~., j
CCV.1 ~
/Jic/jIJ
II
l7lL
JOSIAS, GOREN, CHEROFt DOODY & EZROL. R A.
....TTORNEYS AT L.AW
SVIR ~OO
:so.. ~T C;:OMMERClAL ~""'o
FORT L.6.VZ>ERDA.LIE, FLOIUPA 33308
ST~~N ~, .Io$IAS
...... Pole.. $. OOIltEN
........E. A. CKC"OP'
OQNAU) J. OooOY
KEIt"Y i.. ~OL
TCU"140NE (Si54) 771 .4500
FACSIMILE (9!W) 771-....23
I..CONARD 13. lIt\,lltlN
RO.E~T w. VA.LE
..U.....N c. VANESKAHI....N
MICI1ACI. O. C:IRIJ..I"O. .lR.
August 4, 1997
,r:'J' U; "
, i U. I-"~"
'i!If~
, VIA FACSIMILE AND U.s. MAIL
Thomas J. Woolley, Jr.
Post Office Drawer JJ
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425
, .,~,,: :
Re: RHS CorDoration ". City of Bovnton eeach/Clear Copy
Dear Mr. Woolley:
By letter dated June 2, 1997, you were informed that in order to comply with
the Writ of Certiorari issued by the Palm Beach County Circuit Court, your client, Clear
. Copy, Inc., was required to resubmit an as.built site plan for its property. At that
time, the City requested that the new site plan application be submitted "as soon as
practicable. n
I have been informed by Tambri Heyden that while your client has submitted
some materials, the site plan application is not yet complete. As over two months
have elapsed since the City's first request, the City must set a deadline for completion
of the application. Please be advised that if your client does not complete its site plan
application within fourteen (14) days of the date of this letter, the City will be
compelled to take all appropriate legal and administrative measures to bring this matter
to a timely conclusion.
Thank you for your anticipated cooperation. Should you have any questions,
please do not ,hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely yours,
~'/~
__--::::- --r~
LEONARD G. RUBIN
Assistant City Attorney
LGR/lmh
95OCOC7IWOou..EY5.LTR
cc: James Cherof, City Attorney
Kerry Willis, City Manager
T ambri Heyden, Planning Director
\ ,,1 -
~i-~
-'~~
~ NtJ5P
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
APPELLA TE DIVISION (CIVIL)
CASE NO. AP 95-8266 A Y
AP 96-4870 A Y
MARK E. ROBERTS &
RHS CORPORATION,
_ ."r~_,",-
.. \
Appellants,
v.
~~s
f2
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH,
/
~n'''. M'~""
p,r__1. ' .'- ..l!--_ --- -.-'
Appellee.
Opinion filed February 25, 1997.
Petition for Writ of Certiorari from
the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach.
Reginald G. Stambaugh, Esq.,
West Palm Beach,
for Appellant, RHS Corporation.
,J
~
Randee S. Schatz, Esq.,
Palm Beach,
for Appellants, RHS Corporation & Mark E. Roberts
James Cherof, Esq. &
Leonard Rubin, Esq.
Ft. Lauderdale,
for Appellee
PER CURIAM.
The Petition for Writ of Certiorari is GRANTED.
We find that Petitioners, Mark E. Roberts ("Roberts") and RHS Corporation
("RHS") were denied procedural due process by Respondent's, the City Commission of
~'
Boynton Beach ("City Commission"), failure to issue proper notice of the rehearing set for
September 19, 1995. Respondent does not take issue with the impropriety of the notice, but
asserts only that Roberts and RHS waived their right to appeal the issue due to their
appearance at the hearing and their failure to raise the issue of notice at that time. However, if
"notice is so lacking that [a party] was unable to fully prepare for the hearing to voice an
objection or where the [party] can otherwise demonstrate prejudice, the courts will refuse to
find a waiver or estoppel." Schumacher v. Town of Jupiter, 643 So. 2d 8, 9 (Fla. 4th DCA
1994). Here, Roberts and RHS were not notified of the hearing until the day before the
hearing was to be held, and even then, it was only through their serendipitous efforts that they
were afforded notice. One day's notice is not sufficient time to prepare for a hearing
presentation.
Furthermore, the City Commission's approval of the site plan at issue in this
cause constituted a departure from the essential requirements of the law. Article 4, Section 10
of the Boynton Beach City Code ("City Code") states in pertinent part:
Sidewalks shall be four (4) feet wide within local streets rights of way and five (5) feet
wide within all other streets.
The site plan as presented to the City Commission represented sidewalks of only some two (2)
feet in width along the intersection of the site. This is an obvious and patent nonconformance
with the City Code. Respondent's only argument in rebuttal is that there is no provision of the
City Code which deals with sidewalk widths at intersections." This argument is strained at
best. The City Code at issue clearly states that sidewalks must be at least a minimum of four
feet wide. If Respondent's line of reasoning is adopted, the City Code provision would be
,)
...
rendered utterly meaningless, as anything could become an exception since the code section is
so generally stated.
Accordingly, we quash the approval of the site plan by the City Commission.
We decline to reach the additional procedural issues brought forth in the
subsequent and consolidated Petition for Writ of Certiorari in AP 96-4870 A Y, as they are
now moot, due to our granting of the Petition for Writ of Certiorari on the issues presented in
AP 95-8266 A Y .
COOK, MARRA, & CARLISLE, JJ., concur.
~!~~;~,;.~:~~; ,
~ 'V~ ,'.". _ >,
t:'~"'> ..:;-: .
~11' ~.~ it .
:;: -',
~,~\ ""~~'
)1-" '" ..JI
. J\n:'"'~ :':I~"'~":::;J'~
.... ~..)..". _~ 1 :,.,:~.,..
",W...-
F-JJ.tJ EE.~C:-.: r-:~:.~..~~ - ~;'\IT .::-:- ;1...C;~~....\
".:.._f!.J- ,!~wjl
'4~~Cd:f&J1 D4
:J
., '..
" .
CLeA~ ecl"'/ -r~C.1
;1.// >. red. /lu...,y
~o/ /V70N f3ve ~ c" ;:=-/ ~ ~ V5-S-
DEC-08-t995 11:t8am 95-396567
ORB 9034 pg 1047
II '.."U'''''.''
DECLARATION AND RESTRICTIVE COVENANT REGARDING ROAD IMPACT FEE
This Declaration and Restrictive Covenant (hereinafter
referred to as "Declaration"), i~ executed this I'J day of .
1Je~~/1Jb(!..'" , 1995 by CL'~/Jr CJo/'y::r,bC./~"".e'" '7 /Y4/~ A'\
/ '"
(hereinafter referred to as "Owner"), and by Palm Beach County, a
political subdivision of the State of Florida (hereinafter referred
to as "County").
RECITALS
WHEREAS, County is empowered and authorized to adjust the
amount of the Fair Share Contribution for Road Improvements fee
(hereinafter II impact feell) pursuant to Article 10 of the Land
Development Code and the laws of the State of Florida; and, both
the County and the Owner have determined that it is in their best
interests to execute this Declaration, and that this Declaration
will further the aims of the Fair Share contribution for Road
Improvements Section, Article 10 of the Land Development Code
(hereinafter referred to as "Article 1011); and
WHEREAS, Owner is developing a certain parcel of land
(hereinafter referred to as IIParcel"), a legal description of which
.
is contained in Exhibit "All, attached hereto and incorporated
herein by reference. The land will be us'ed as a ~/Ur )Ao;<:
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the County's
adjusting the impact fee amount and the promises made by the
parties hereto and other good and valuable consideration, the
sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged by the parties, the
parties hereto do covenant and agree as follows:
/,,,
A I,
'/., /';:1" /",.~
. . ~ "" .' .
,r/< ".~
....-.... ,/"", ~ jI' "'"
.,...
/'
'- '., ,_^';:,~... 7"'~':"..<l1' t: t. " J'~: '. ,...."ft.. ..
~~~ -( .. ... :~
..:;"~ "... ,~~~, /'
:..,..,.,....~--
1
ORB 9034 P9 1 048
1. The county computed the impact fee for the use of
the Parcel based on the traffic generation data for a ~/U77~5 ~US/~~~
as provided by qualified engineers. This traffic generation data
has been submitted to and accepted by the County Engineer and the
Impact Fee Coordinator pursuant to Article 10, section 10.S.E.1.
The approved, trip rate for this land use is ;; 0" O~ /7/'f}.
2. The county and Owner agree that the use of the
Parcel may at some future time be converted to a use which may
generate more traffic than originally estimated, provided it is in
compliance with all laws, ordinances, and regulations. If such a
conversion does occur, and the future use generates additional
traffic, then, at that time, the Owner, or its successors in
interests or assigns, covenant and agree to pay additional Article
10 impact fees as necessary to proceed with the conversion under
the terms of Article 10, as amended.
3. The County and Owner agree that no future building
permits for additional square footage will be issued, and no change
of use to a more intensive use will be permitted, until a statement
by the County Engineer verifies that any such changes will comply
with Article 10.
4. Upon receipt of the County Engineer's statement and
upon payment of the additional fees required by-the Ordinance, as
amended, the Planning, Zoning and Building Department of Palm Beach
County will issue the necessary permits. Any fees originally paid
by Owner will be credited to Owner towards the payment of these
additional fees.
2
ORB 9034 P9 1049
5. This Declaration may be amended or cancelled in a
properly executed and recorded document, indicating mutual consent
of the parties to this Declaration or by their successors in
interest. The Impact Fee Coordinator must execute the document.
6. If a provision of this Declaration is rendered ~oid
or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction or by any act
of the Legislature, the remaining provisions shall remain in effect
to the degree they can be given effect.
7. This Declaration shall be and constitute an
obligation on the property of the Owner, running with and binding
on the Parcel, regardless of the title or ownership thereof, and
regardless of any changes which may take place therein.
8. The terms of this Declaration shall be effective on
the date of recording, and shall be binding upon and shall inure to
all successors in interest to the parties to the Declaration, and
shall run with the Owner's land.
9. within fourteen (14) days after the parties have
approved and executed this Declaration, the Developer shall record
this Declaration with the Clerk of the Circuit Court, Palm Beach
County, Florida. No permit shall be issued or use commenced on the
Parcel until a certified recorded copy of this is delivered to the
Palm Beach county Impact Fee Coordinator.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Owner has executed this
Declaration the day and year first
above written.
:~E~2I ~
~.~
. 7:
3
~1 .. "
ORB 9034 P9 1050
STATE OF b- L-c-t Icill
- / -'2- 'l
COUNTY' OF' J ~~jl-I ) J (! ~ (' 1..1
,
I HEREBY' CERTIFY' that on this day, before me, an officer
duly authorized in the state and the County aforesaid to take
acknowledgements, personally appeared \-G~ /) t-- t-t. ~:'E:j~ () /II/ N
to me known to be the person described in and who executed the
foregoing instrument and he acknowledged before me that he executed
the same under authority duly vested in him.
WITNESS my hand and official seal in the State and County
last aforesaid this '/ day of i/r{
(
, 1995~ /
.-' - /'
) / /
/ / ,/
.^ ..' ,:, 0' ~ ,.',' _/? -~ -:: ;"
,/ / I
'--~~~IJ' ,......~~~
.,r~{J .: May:r.J.199l1
'I / iif.... BONOI:D THRU 1TlOY FAIN IISlIWD, Ie.
The terms and conditions of the foregoing Declaration and
Restrictive Covenant Regarding Road Impact Fee, to the extent the
same are binding on Palm Beach County, are hereby accepted by the
undersigned on behalf of Palm Beac~County as its duly authorized
representative this 7 day of J)Et!.E/I)f!)ER , 199~.
"
-f r'l If-( V
behO(uh ~lerrYlOn
Typed or Printed Name
By:
restrctv.cov
AS TO FORM AND LEGAL
4
Name
Address:
ORB 9034 p~ 1051
OOROTH'y H. WILKEN, CLERK P8 COUNTY, FL
Property Appraisers Parcel Identification (Folio) Number(s):
Nrn:PPf"t...."'!.TC8<?4). Rq: 1816.1
This instrument prepared by:
Record &: Return to: j
JEFF TOMBBRG, ESQ,
TOMB ERG &: SPALL, P .A.
P. O. Drawer BE
Boynton Beach, FL 33425
DEC-30-1994 4:55pm 9Lr--L~3231 ~
ORB 8567 P9 910
I 1111.11 ..lUll 111.1111
Con 45,000.00 Doc 315.00
WARRANTY DEED
'l'BJ:S WARRANTY DEED Made the ;).."8' ;t....-day of ~ A.D. 1994
by ROBERT G. BEANE and CAROLYN S. BEANE, his wife, an undivided one-third
interest, LUCIEN SAMYN &: MARY ELLEN SAMYN, his wife, an undivided one-third
interest and RONALD G. LINKOUS TRUSTEE of Ronald G. Linkous Living Trust
u/t/d 3/14/88 an undivided one-third interest, as Tenants irA Common,
hereinafter called the Grantor, whose post office address is: c/o Ronald G.
Linkous, 906 S.W. 28th Avenue, Boynton Beach, FL 33435
to CLEAR COPY, INC. a Florida corporation, hereinafter called the Grantee,
whose post office address is: 1194 S.W. 27th Place, Boynton Beach, FL 33426
WJ:T.NESSBTH: That the Grantor, for and in consideration of the sum of
Ten and nO/100 Dollars and other valuable considerations, receipt whereof
is hereby acknowledged, hereby grants, bargains, sells, aliens, remises,
releases, conveys and confirms unto the Grantee all that certain land
situate in Palm Beach County, State of Florida, viz:
Lots 24, 25 and 26, Block 2, LAKE BOYNTON ESTATES, Plat 1, a
Subdivision in the City of Boynton Beach, Florida, according to the
Plat thereof recorded in the office of the Clerk of Circuit Court in
and for Palm Beach County, Florida, in Plat Book 13, Page 32.
Subject to easements, restrictions, reservations and covenants of
record.
TOGETHER, with all the tenements, hereditaments and appurtenances
thereto belonging or in anywise appertaining.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD, THE SAME IN FEE SIMPLE FOREVER.
AND the Grantor hereby covenants with said Grantee that the Grantor is
lawfully seized of said land in fee simplei that the Grantor has good right
and lawful authority to sell and convey said land, and hereby warrants the
title to said land and will defend the same against the lawful claims of
all persons whomsoever; .and that said land is free of all encumbrances,
except taxes accruing subsequent to December 31, 1994.
:IN wrrNBSS WHEREOF, the said Grantor has signed and sealed these
presents the day and year first above written
'.'..
,'l'~
-
-
-
III
((~Ctl;VW fQ;~
1t$af '::f-~
,
j? tff.tMtJ1tt-Ki{
IN THE CITY COMMISSION
BEACH, PALM BEACH COD
CASE NO:
RHS CORPORATION,
Appellant,
. \
'~~l
Appellee.
1.l'1,..~..J;''''''i'''l ",~t~:
, -'
nCT 19 1tnr:
tJu 'I i"1;": .>-:, J.UtiJ
I:/i';::: ::f.." ,J
tPl ':",;:.."'"
vs.
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH,
/
NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL
Notice is given that Appellant, RHS CORPORATION, appeals to the Circuit Court of
the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, the administrative
action of the City Commission of Boynton Beach, Palm Beach County, Florida, and the
granting of the Motion for Site Plan Approval on September 19, 1995, regarding the request
for site plan approval for the Project known as "Clear Copy, Inc.", located at the Southeast
comer of Boynton Beach Boulevard and Northwest 7th Street, seeking approval to construct
a 3,780 square feet, two..story building on a .225 acre parcel at said location. A copy of the
Minutes of the Regular City Commission is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". The nature of
the administrative action by the Boynton Beach City Commission is approval of a site plan
for commercial property located in Boynton Beach, Palm. Beach County, Florida.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished
by service of process to the Clerk of the City of Boynton Beach, Boynton Beach City Hall,
Boynton Beach, Florida 33436.
KRAMER, ALl, LAMBERT, FLECK & CAROTHERS
Attorneys for Appellant
14155 U.S. Highway One, Suite 205
Juno Beach, Florida 33408
Telephone: (407) 627..1122
'\ ' ,.
" 'r... .O~' ,.
p t 1 I'"
'1" i (-
B - '..';, "." ~II !.,)f>
y: ,. f ...,.v./ /.. ' {,.
..
WILLIAM A. FLECK
Florida Bar No: 340707
:x: ;E~<: S ~~~ t4-;~
. ~ .... (:)
l't1 . ~~:-t ~
.. ~ -... ti <n~l")'..
z . 1.11 :tJ '" ...."'''l
a < fli"" z ::t::- ~ lI\ -. ltii ~ ~
- ..
z ~ 1110(J) tll:~ ~
.. >> ~Ol~S ~
'" ~tii!
. .. r ~~<Jl
~ z I~~ (j) ~li~~
.... G~Ol ~S~ ~
~ ~ 'i .
>> - ~~
z_ Il\~~ 'I . :<~!'\
a . ~"
>> - Ill.... ,/ ~p ~
. ~ @~!:J !
a II~g
. (/\~ ';~ bQ
a ~(:)
. :!t~"
. 0\ ~'b
~ ::b _. ~ ;:::,,-;1\)
U) ~ V b~ ~n IBQ)t91\)G\~ ,..~ l
~' !.l1:t:flot tJW'P
~(j) tJ\~ '~.:-o tn I. ~)J~
~~ ~~ :b~~~8~~ )j ~
~ ,,); o~ ~..... ~!tl~ is--
:<1111 1C)~~~~i ~ 5~~ ~ m {):;;/
,III 'O/!'Itlo ~~~ s~
h ~~ ,tjr-: ~ ,.,~'1 r-.
!IUl~~f{ ~~ ~ 1\). ~
I tIl!'l ~
:l> IU"''' .~;; tj III
~ 00 ...."'. ~
:-t \' ~~~('~~~
!J) "'...
'qc..~
"'f-+
~ {lo. f
(l)Ut~ ~
() s' . . . 'I
~- I ' I =ti
'1~ tb~"
~g ~~g
"'o~ ~()
~~ ........ ~ ,.. '~
~~lI) ~~
<~ tJ~::-I n~
~~ . ~ . 0
~ , fIl
, 1"1 ....
~ ~ <-i
11I $it
I
tJI-
NO
s: S'
~-
?<~
~ ...'" ~ ...\..tN~
"'l=..t"''''~[e:'''CI 1Ill='"
C ......i: ""E!"''''
i::t"'n~2:t"'ili:? PIt"'...
>n~ n",C),.,......os:n
n~ "'=> t"'.... O~
... ~...<t"',., ...O~
> "'~ON"'C'"
.. t'" 101 0 '"' '"'
04...:::lt"'''' ~Cli;n. s:...
,",lot ~2: 0"''''
liI"'o" '"' "'S:21lllo-t
ct tII m=>e-t::J=N
101 '"' t"'na004'" "'N
U =o>lIIi! ?...~~21....
~n"':J:PI"'Plo "''''
,..""'..... ....~PI""'t-f....-..~
:. o~M~=~"'i:l~;l~P:i:
U "'~;l0~:::l"'''':::C:~~~
~ -ctowl....M.......~.....: en
en ....0""" no-
0 tl ~ C) ~;;;!~2:."t"'CI~~t"'...
Ul ~ ~ .... '" 2:0lotC' ... "'i:'"
~ . '{ ~t""'cn. ~McnCllcnN .....
~.. .. M ..... tII.....O...cO
- ~ =:to\~~~(DiJ=~~~
I\) ~
- ~ ~.g' ;E;!ZS -""...~!:~
to ~(') 04... n '"' C'"'''' ,.
. i: ="'= ...~~;.,,~
.... ~ c...'Z"" ...
i _~~ t"'... "... o!l!o
> ...""'" ~t"'~..,
~ ." ~~~~~ n...::ilil
! U\ "'\ ... cnr- t""ocno UJ
~ i ...'" . 'Z'"' 101
;i~ o ~o~ ..,=~
~~;! o~ ~
c r-. ~ 101 >0-I......;:1!:! :l
tJ)~ry,~ ~ n. '" n"lt
01 nr-s: > '"'c...-
I : JJi ?:. ~~ ~ 0 E:....<~.., oC:z:cn
;t '" ,",:O:IOl"'~ '"' ~n
CO ~~ . ... :0:" 0
0" '"' ... > PI. ... "'0
.... ti ?:;" ~ ~ "'N '"' azlOl
o 0"'111 ~ccncn
o 1l-t)J fl; n.....z. E ...::1;:l"l
0 ,.:0:...
o ~ tJ Ii) E n ......no
~ }>tJ\ - =>< .... tiJ::a....'"
~ ... 2: ... ....
,,1 ::: ~r-> C) ,,"on
...'" "''''':lIO
..~ E t"';:tc) 0 ~~~f5
;u ..,
t"''''C o-t... t'"
~ s' i .... ....0 PI
'" ... 0 ill:; PI
11 z
" "''"' ...
~ t) ='"' 0 0
"".. ... ... .., ...
~ ~5:!" '"'
Q .... ::! >
Pi ....
...... t'"
(ri :i ..., ~
6 ~
~
111
~ G\
.... ~
)t ~
B b,~
CII
~ ~ --i
~ ~
~
.~
"1 11
~ ;:;
~1 ti
G\
~ '"
~
~
:d
~
~
~
n,
~
"""
l'"\
I:::
'i VI
~
:b
tD
~
r<<>
, .~
~
-
UJ
10 I-
W
6' w
:t
6\ , UJ
0 .. We)
z W - 0 I-
~ ~ W ..... .J~ Z W ~
u ~lU ~ II m W
It W :t
0 :t 0< UJ~ 0 UI ~
U ~ ,
~
I&.
0
..
\;
I
,) ilL(LOv )XV j 8S0S-86L(L017)
.T 1.1 'lpuaH wlud lSaA\
,;.1.1. II!Auoodd!4A\ SZ8
~1!~U3 ~U!llnsuoJ
flUS U01Jng 71
r::;':.. :
I L t.c-C_ '
I f""
I~;I ~
t ---', t-
.\ [T,!"", 1, ~'..J
@;
,.
\
, I
'I
Ie....:
l;d~:,l
.. ,".!:JC' l
I' ':0;
I" ~~~:l\
\:::,:::::;
{J-f""~
..-"" \ i
L\ V .LSl 01\\ ON
~
~~
=-
Eo--6
o=:
Eo--~
~o~
~r-~
r-::c:<
~u~
-<~
~~e
~~~
=z
~o~
=r-S
o'Z ~
r- > .
~~~
=:~~
<o~
~>=:
St:o
r-U~
__.__________..__._.~~-=~...~.~ __ =.~-----t,~, ,
'. ----- \ -"-'"
"".L '..., ,
. '. \>,,~, " I
, ~~I~, I
)nv A\~OIS IS A\3N .L:JfUl.LSNO:> '" <~ ''\.,
,oooos "'. )(
"~ .n {~';:
~~
x
-
c:r..
o
M
..J\
~
1:2
,~j
i}-
I
I
I
..
, ,
~. !
.,
,
.t1,
'..1
"'!
,I
. , 7..
-.:.,
,"'
e:
=:
r-
~
~
g.,
<
U ...
~ l.r,
~ 'f\
z
<
~
or.
1f 'S
'r
...
~
o
=:
c=:
<
~ =:
= in
S; IN\\.'
~ .';, I
Q - \- ,.
~ '....."-":::.
Eo--
z
-
1--
'-
'"
~
Z Z ,,"
o '-W
~e:=
....~U
Q:U<
<.;<. -.
)..
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
,)
Consensus
There was a consensus of the Commission to leave these items on the table.
Attorney Cherof administered the oath to everyone who would be testifying during the following
proceedings.
Description:
Clear Copy, Inc.
George C. Davis
Bob Feldman
Southeast corner of Boynton Beach Boulevard and N.W. 7th
Street
NEW SITE PLAN: Request for site plan approval to
construct a 3,780 square feet, two-story building on a .225 acre
parcel
c.
Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Gene Moore, representing the applicant, advised that there has been total compliance with all of the
Ordinances and statutory requirements. He urged the Commission to adopt and endorse the
recommendation from the Planning and Development Board, the TRC and staff that this matter be
approved.
Ms. Heyden advised that a new sketch was received today regarding the sidewalk which supersedes
the sketch in the back-up material. The sketch was reviewed by the Engineering Department. Mr.
Davis reworked the area, and it still meets Code. It has been accepted by Engineering.
e
With regard to traffic concurrency, Ms. Heyden heard from Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering
today, and the applicant is okay with the traffic study. Mr. Davis submitted a letter dated August 3,
indicating the additions he will add to the building.
MarkRobert~65(Lw..-R~ton Beach Boulevard, distributed information to the Commissioners and
requested a copy of the sketch which was submitted today. He spoke in opposition of this site plan,
and feels it should be rejected because it does not fit in with the other commercial buildings on
Boynton Beach Boulevard. The building will be the only one which is only 30' deep and set back from
the road only 30'. It will be the only two-story building between 1-95 and Congress Avenue which is
commercial. It is the only building whose back faces Boynton Beach Boulevard. The roof pitch
proposed is low and not consistent with any buildings on surrounding blocks. Dr. Roberts advised that
teens congregate on his property and harass the neighbors. A two-story building will shield the two
properties and may cause an increase in loitering and crime. Dr. Roberts does not believe Clear Copy
meets all building ordinances, safety and utilization issues. In addition, he feels it should be denied
because it is too large for this piece of property, and he does not believe the building can ever meet
the required building Codes.
Dr. Roberts referred to the Code relative to perimeter landscaping on abutting properties. The
proposed hedge on the eastern side is non-conforming and does not meet the requirement sections of
,
14
T
,
-
e
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
the landscape code. The hedge is 10" short of the required 30" width. Approving this site plan
indicates that the Ordinance is being selectively enforced in this case. According to the Code, Clear
Copy is not exempt from placing a conforming 30" hedge buffer on the property. Clear Copy should
be required to uphold what is required, or should be given credit for the existing 20" and only have
to make up the missing 10" of the planting area.
Dr. Roberts referred to the issue of the sidewalk width. The drawing in the back-up material would
require modifying the turning radius of the existing street to 25'. This would be a Code violation and
requires a variance because Clear Copy would lose a parking space.
In addition, Dr. Roberts stated that it is impossible for the garbage trucks to enter, leave and service the
property without violating the land development Codes. If the use of the building changes, it may
never be able to have adequate garbage pickup. Public Works states that Clear Copy will generate
three cans or less of garbage. Therefore, they will provide curbside pickup. Dr. Roberts contacted
printing shops and found that an 800 square foot shop generates two cans of garbage per day during
a busy winter season.
The fire inspector, after reviewing the revised site plan, agrees that it is impossible to service the
property with the smallest fire trucks without illegal ingress and egress to the site. Many of the standard
delivery trucks such as CPS or standard flatbed trucks contracted by the City for towing will not be able
to access the site.
Clear Copy has not submitted the drainage design. The site plan does not address the fact that the east
side of the property has an elevation 4' higher than the west side of the property. Since the property
is only 50' wide, in order to drain properly, either the west side of the property must be raised requiring
a retaining wall which will encroach on the planting area, or the east side of the property must be
lowered. A engineered wall must be constructed in order to prevent damage to the doctor's property.
This will encroach on the back-up space required for the parking lot, thereby requiring another
variance.
Dr. Roberts said Clear Copy stated that this project will have very little traffic. The traffic impact study
they submitted to the County shows that Clear Copy will have as many as 116 cars per day based on
the trip generation of three other print shops. The County stated that if the property is to be used for
a print shop, a restricted covenant must be placed on the property.
Dr. Roberts feels the City is leaving itself open for a possible conflict by approving a project which
requires variances. He feels they should devise a new site plan or file for the variances everyone else
had to file for when their properties were developed.
Mr. Moore pointed out that the doctor would have problems with any development plan submitted
because he feels the development of the property will impede the visibility of his building from
eastbound traffic on Boynton Beach Boulevard. Mr. Moore asked that the Commission interpret the
City's Ordinances based on the recommendations of the City's experienced and technical staff. This
applicant is in total compliance with all of the City's ordinances. He urged the Commission to approve
this project.
15
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
\
SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
o
Commissioner Jaskiewicz confirmed with Mr. Feldman that the property, when purchased, had an
unusual configuration. When he purchased the parcel, he had other ideas for development; however,
every attempt to develop was knocked down by Planning. At this point, he has satisfied every request
made by the City.
In response to Commissioner Jaskiewicz' question, Mr. Feldman advised that the majority of the waste
generated by this business is recyclable. Garbage will probably amount to one can per week.
Mr. Feldman further advised that 90 percent of his business is pickup and delivery at country clubs.
His customers do not come to his shop. There is very little traffic generated at his business. He offered
to prove this statement by showing the last five years' bills. The retail area of this building is only 300
square feet. The second floor contains the offices.
Commissioner Jaskiewicz searched the land development regulations in an attempt to find something
which would provide the City Commission with the ability to deny this development. She could not
find any reason to deny this request with the exception of how this project conforms to the existing
area. At that point, she checked Gateway Center and found that the height of the Center in certain
areas is 30'. Mr. Feldman's building is 25' in height. With regard to the 30" hedge, Building
Department Memorandum #95-267 explains that the problem evolved because of the landscaping strip
on the existing property. The neighboring property should not be penalized for the paving on Dr.
Roberts' property being too close. In addition, Commissioner Jaskiewicz feels this development might
provide more security to the neighborhood than the present vacant parcel. 0
Mayor Pro Tem Matson reminded the applicant that she was very vocal about this project when it first
appeared. She pointed out that she cannot vote against this project because it is a two-story building.
She was concerned with areas where she felt variances were required. A letter was sent to the City
from Mr. Davis rectifying a majority of the problems. With regard to the overhead doors, the Planner
stated at the last meeting that the way the Code reads is different from her intent. Mayor Pro Tem
Matson is still expecting to receive a new ordinance so that this loophole is eliminated. Mr. Davis is
willing to change the overhead doors to side-hinged doors to make it come into compliance. She had
a problem with the light pole; however, the relocation of that pole eliminates the need for a variance.
She pointed out that she is not an architect or a planner. Concurrency has been received which
eliminates the problem of traffic. Mayor Pro Tern Matson was concerned about the problem with the
ingress, but by Public Works using smaller trucks, the problem has been eliminated. Most of her
concerns have been addressed.
With regard to the 10" hedge issue, Attorney Cherof explained that this is a unique situation. This
property owner cannot be required to remedy a defect on an adjacent property. The City's approval
of the hedge on the adjacent property in less than full compliance with the Code works to estop the
City at this point.
Vice Mayor Bradley feels the improvements brought back by Mr. Davis are a nice addition to the
building. There are many tight constraints on this site. He questioned why the applicant will be having
9' ceilings instead of 8' ceilings which will provide more pitch to the roof.
.
16
I
(
-
()
t
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
Mr. Feldman said he prefers 10' ceilings for ventilation. However, in this case he went with 9'. He
stated that he might gain an additional foot if he decides to have a wooden floor rather than a concrete
floor on the second floor. Mr. Davis will make that determination.
Commissioner Rosen questioned whether or not an approval for drainage exists. Ms. Heyden advised
that the Engineering Department has not changed its opinion and they feel the applicant meets the
drainage requirements. Ms. Heyden referred to Page 2 of Memorandum 95-325 where she summarizes
the drainage issue.
Mayor Pro T em Matson disclosed that she spoke with Kathy Shabotynskyj of the Chamber' of
Commerce and Naomi Wilson about this project. She told them she was against this project, but had
not seen the back-up material at that time.
Michael Barr, 206 Scarhrough lane, echoed the concerns of Dr. Roberts particularly with regard to
the conflict with the architectural profile of the area.
Attorney Cherof advised that Dr. Roberts' should be provided with an opportunity to ask Ms. Heyden
a question on testimony she offered.
Dr. Roberts indicated that he spoke with Mr. Hall of the Engineering Department. In his opinion, it will
be impossible at permitting to comply with the drainage unless a retaining wall is built. If the retaining
wall is built, it will further encroach on the turning area or the planting area of the property. Dr.
Roberts inquired whether or not this statement was correct.
Ms. Heyden advised that she had never heard those remarks until this point.
Dr. Roberts questioned Mr. Eichorst relative to the length of trucks that pick up recyclables.
Attorney Cherof advised that Mr. Eichorst has not testified and is not subject to cross examination.
Commissioner Jaskiewicz confirmed with Ms. Heyden that the trucks are smaller and will be able to
maneuver.
Dr. Roberts questioned whether or not the site plan would have to be reapproved if the drainage
cannot be designed. Ms. Heyden explained that if there is a problem with the retaining wall which
causes another problem on the site, a variance would be required. If the recycling truck cannot
maneuver on site, a determination will be made relative to the method of garbage pickup.
Motion
Vice Mayor Bradley moved to approve the site plan for Clear Copy subject to staff comments.
Commissioner Jaskiewicz seconded the motion.
Commissioner Rosen assumed that the matter of drainage was included in the motion, and Mayor Pro
Tem Matson asked for confirmation that the motion includes all of Ms. Heyden's stipulations. Vice
17
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
\
SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
Q
Mayor Bradley stated that the motion is subject to staff comments.
The motion carried unanimously.
, ~
~~OR TAYLOR DECLARED AT TEN-MINUTE RECESS. THE MEETING RESUMED AT 8:30 P.M.
D.
Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Description:
Grove Plaza
Charles W. DeSanti/Julian Bryan
Dr. Walter H. Janke and Mrs. Alice Fay
Southeast corner of Hypoluxo Road and Lawrence Road
MASTER PLAN: Request for master plan approval to
subdivide a commercially-zoned parcel into six lots for future
development
Jerry Knight, representing the applicant, requested approval of the master plan for Grove Plaza. This
parcel is eight acres in size and is located at Hypoluxo Road and Lawrence Road. In 1992, the City
annexed this property and the City Commission amended the Land Use Plan to reclassify it as Local
Retail Commercial and rezone it to C-3.
The master plan shows six freestanding buildings sharing four access openings and cross-access
easements. The City Commission will review each individual parcel for site plan approval and plat
approval. e
Julian Bryan, representin~_thenappfu:ant, advised that the applicant agrees with all of the staff
comments. This is probably the first non-residential master plan being reviewed by the City
Commission. It provides enough information to allow the safeguards needed for interior circulation,
setbacks, landscaping, open space, etc. One of the significant things offered by the plan is
approximately three times the landscaped yards adjacent to the rights-of-way of Hypoluxo Road and
Lawrence Road. It provides for a 20' landscape easement on the rear. Each of the six freestanding sites
has an access drive on one side or the other in an effort to minimize interior traffic circulation. The rear
drive is one-way eastbound so that residential users heading north on Lawrence Road can make a right
turn into the property and access any of the facilities. Westbound traffic can turn at the existing median
which is approximately 1000' east of the intersection. One of the main reasons for the access road was
staff's concern for garbage pickup. All garbage pickup will be provided on the rear of the property.
This project will consist of 29,500 square feet of gross leasable building area.
Ms. Heyden advised that this is the first step in the subdivision of this commercial property. The next
step will be platting. This sets forth the concept plan for the subdivision. Ms. Heyden spoke with Palm
Beach County Traffic Engineering relative to dedication of rights-of-way. There is a Lake Worth
Drainage District canal between Hypoluxo and the applicant's property. There could be some
problems dedicating that additional right-of-way. However, there will be no additional problems for
the right-of-way for Lawrence Road.
THERE WAS NO ONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO SPEAK AT THE PUBLIC HEARING.
.
18
.~
., c '.'__ ..."..,.,
~.........
...,.-
, .~ . .~.--. --
1
~_,i
.,
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
I
(
SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
- Consensus
--
..-There-wa~ cl ('OII~t:II~U~ 6f the L.ommi~slo1T1trteawnhe5e-items-1)rrthe-table;---
Attorney Cherof administered the oath to everyone who would be testifying during the following
proceedings.
c.
Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Clear Copy, Inc.
George C. Davis
Bob Feldman
Southeast corner of Boynton Beach Boulevard and N.W. 7th
Street
NEW SITE PLAN: Request for site plan approval to
construct a 3,780 square feet, two-story building on a .225 acre
parcel
Description:
Gene.Moore, representing the applicant, advised that there has been total compliance with all of the
Ordinances and statutory requirements. He urged the Commission to adopt and endorse the
recommendation from the Planning and Development Board, the TRC and staff that this matter be
approved.
Ms. Heyden advised that a new sketch was received today regarding the sidewalk which supersedes
the sketch in the back-up material. The sketch was reviewed by the Engineering Department. Mr.
Davis reworked the area, and it still meets Code. It has been accepted by Engineering.
With regard to traffic concurrency, Ms. Heyden heard from Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering
today, and the applicant is okay with the traffic study. Mr. Davis submitted a letter dated August 3,
indicating the additions he will add to the building.
Ma[k...B.aherts~65..<l.W.-BA}11ton Beach Boulevard, distributed information to the Commissioners and
requested a copy of the sketch which was submitted today. He spoke in opposition of this site plan,
and feels it should be rejected because it does ~ot fit in with the other commercial ,buildings on
Boynton Beach Boulevard. The building will be the only one which is only 30' deep and set back from
the road only 30'. It will be the only two-story building between 1-95 and Congress Avenue which is
commercial. It is the only building whose back faces Boynton Beach Boulevard. The roof pitch
proposed is low and not consistent with any buildings on surrounding blocks. Dr. Roberts advised that
teens congregate on his property and harass the neighbors. A two-story building will shield the two
properties and may cause an increase in loitering and crime. Dr. Roberts does not believe Clear Copy
meets all building ordinances, safety and utilization issues. In addition, he feels it should be denied
because it is too large for this piece of property, and he does not believe the building can ever meet
the required building Codes.
Dr. Roberts referred to the Code relative to perimeter landscaping on abutting properties. The
proposed hedge on the eastern side is non-conforming and does not meet the requirement sections of
14
Exhi bit "A"
.-...----.-------------
- - -'I.
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
"
(~.
SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
rhe landscape code. The hedge is 10" short of the required 30" width. Approving this sire plan
indicates that the Ordinance is being selectively enforced in this case. According to the Code. Cledf
Copy is not exempt from placing a conforming 30" hedge buffer on the property. Clear Copy should
be required to uphold what is required, or should be given credit for the existing 20" and only have
to make up the missing 10" of the planting area.
Dr. Roberts referred to the issue of the sidewalk width. The drawing in the back-up material would
require modifying the turning radius of the existing street to 25'. This would be d Code violation dnd
requires a variance because Clear Copy would lose a parking space.
In addition, Dr. Roberts stated that it is impossible for the garbage trucks to enter, leave and service the
property without violating the land development Codes. If the use of the building changes, ir may
never be able to have adequate garbage pickup. Public Works stares that Clear Copy will generate
three cans or less of garbage. Therefore, they will provide curbside pickup. Dr. Roberts contacted
printing shops and found that an 800 square foot shop generates two cans of garbage per day during
a busy winter season.
The fire inspector, after reviewing the revised site plan, agrees that it is impossible to service the
property with the smallest fire trucks without illegal ingress and egress to the site. Many of the standard
delivery trucks such as GPS or standard flatbed trucks contracted by the City for towing will not be able
to access the site.
Clear Copy has not submitted the drainage design. The site plan does not address the fact that the east
side of the property has an elevation 4' higher than the west side of the property. Since the property
is only 50' wide, in order to drain properly, either the west side of the property must be raised requiring
a retaining wall which will encroach on the planting area, or the east side of the property must be
lowered. A engineered wall must be constructed in order to prevent damage to the doctor's property.
This will encroach on the back-up space required for the parking lot, thereby requiring another
variance.
Dr. Roberts said Clear Copy stated that this project will have very little traffic. The traffic impact study
they submitted to the County shows that Clear Copy will have as many as 116 cars per day based on
the trip generation of three other print shops. The County stated that if the property is to be used for
a print shop, a restricted covenant must be placed on the property.
Dr. Roberts feels the City is leaving itself open for a possible conflict by approving a project which
requires variances. He feels they should devise a new site plan or file for the variances everyone else
had to file for when their properties were developed.
Mr. Moore pointed out that the doctor would have problems with any development plan submitted
because he feels the development of the property will impede the visibility of his building from
eastbound traffic on Boynton Beach Boulevard. Mr. Moore asked that the Commission interpret the
City's Ordinances based on the recommendations of the City's experienced and technical staff. This
applicant is in total compliance with all of the City's ordinances. He urged the Commission to approve
this project.
15
..... .....
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, flORIDA
\.
c-
SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
Commissioner Jaskiewicz confirmed with Mr. Feldman that the property, when purchased, had an
unusual configuration. When he purchased the parcel, he had other ideas for developmenr; however,
every attempt to develop was knocked down by Planning. At this point, he has satisfied every request
made by the City.
In response to Commissioner Jaskiewicz' question, Mr. Feldman advised that the majority of the waste
generated by this business is recyclable. Garbage will probably amount to one can per week.
Mr. Feldman further advised that 90 percent of his business is pickup and delivery at country clubs.
His customers do not come to his shop. There is very little traffic generated at his business. He offered'
to prove this statement by showing the last five years' bills. The retail area of this building is only 300
square feet. The second floor contains the offices.
Commissioner Jaskiewicz searched the land development regulations in an attempt to find something
which would provide the City Commission with the ability to deny this development. She could not
find any reason to deny this request with the exception of how this project conforms to the existing
area. At that point, she checked Gateway Center and found that the height of the Center in certain
areas is 3D'. Mr. Feldman's building is 25' in height. With regard to the 30" hedge, Building
Department Memorandum #95-267 explains that the problem evolved because of the landscaping strip
on the existing property. The neighboring property should not be penalized for the paving on Dr.
Roberts' property being too close. In addition, Commissioner Jaskiewicz feels this development might
provide more security to the neighborhood than the present vacant parcel.
Mayor Pro Tem Matson reminded the applicant that she was very vocal about this project when it first
appeared. She pointed out that she cannot vote against this project because it is a two-story building.
She was concerned with areas where she felt variances were required. A letter was sent to the City
from Mr. Davis rectifying a majority of the problems. With regard to the overhead doors, the Planner
stated at the last meeting that the way the Code reads is different from her intent. Mayor Pro Tem
Matson is still expecting to receive a new ordinance so that this loophole is eliminated. Mr. Davis is
willing to change the overhead doors to side-hinged doors to make it come into compliance. She had
a problem with the light pole; however, the relocation of that pole eliminates the need for a variance.
She pointed out that she is not an architect or a planner. Concurrency has been received which
eliminates the problem of traffic. Mayor ProTem Matson was concerned about the problem with the
ingress, but by Public Works using smaller trucks, the problem has been eliminated. Most of her
concerns have been addressed.
With regard to the 10" hedge issue, Attorney Cherof explained that this is a unique situation. This
property owner cannot be required to remedy a defect on an adjacent property. The City's approval
of the hedge on the adjacent property in less than full compliance with the Code works to estop the
City at this point
Vice Mayor Bradley feels the improvements brought back by Mr. Davis are a nice addition to the
building. There are many tight constraints on this site. He questioned why the applicant will be having
9' ceilings instead of 8' ceilings which will provide more pitch to the roof.
16
,
,-- ~
\.
co
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
Mr. Feldman said he prefers 10' ceilings for ventilation. However, in this case he went with 9'. He
stated that he might gain an additional foot if he decides to have a wooden floor rather than a concrete
floor on the second floor. Mr. Davis will make that determination.
Commissioner Rosen questioned whether or not an approval for drainage exists. Ms. Heyden adVIsed
that the Engineering Department has not changed its opinion and they feel the applicant meets the
drainage requirements. Ms. Heyden referred to Page 2 of Memorandum 95-325 where she summarizes
the drainage issue.
Mayor Pro Tern Matson disclosed that she spoke with Kathy Shabotynskyj of the Chamber of
Commerce and Naomi Wilson about this project. She told them she was against this project, but had
not seen the back-up material at that time.
Michael Barr, 206 Scarbrough Lane, echoed the concerns of Dr. Roberts particularly with regard to
the co.nflict with the architectural profile of the area.
Attorney Cherof advised that Dr. Roberts' should be provided with an opportunity to ask Ms. Heyden
a question on testimony she offered.
Dr. Roberts indicated that he spoke with Mr. Hall of the Engineering Department. In his opinion, it will
be impossible at permitting to comply with the drainage unless a retaining wall is built. If the retaining
wall is built, it will further encroach on the turning area or the planting area of the property. Dr.
Roberts inquired whether or not this statement was correct.
Ms. Heyden advised that she had never heard those remarks until this point. '
Dr. Roberts questioned Mr. Eichorst relative to the length of trucks that pick up recyclables.
Attorney Cherof advised that Mr. Eichorst has not testified and is not subject to cross examination.
Commissioner Jaskiewicz confirmed with Ms. Heyden that the trucks are smaller and will be able to
maneuver. '
Dr. Roberts questioned whether or not the site plan would have to be reapproved jf the drainage
cannot be designed. Ms. Heyden explained that jf there is a problem with the retaining wall which
causes another problem on the site, a variance would be required. If the recycling truck cannot
maneuver on site, a determination will be made relative to the method of garbage pickup.
Motion
Vice Mayor Bradley moved to approve the site plan for Clear Copy subject to staff comments.
Commissioner Jaskiewicz seconded the motion.
Commissioner Rosen assumed that the matter of drainage was included in the motion, and Mayor Pro
Tern Matson asked for confirmation that the motion includes all of Ms. Heyden's stipulations. Vice
.-
I I
MINUTES
PLANNING & DEVElOPMENT BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
OCTOBER 10, 1995
I. Time Extension for Palm Walk - The City Commission approved
the time extension subject to staff comments.
J. Clear Copy Site Plan - The Cit~: Commission approved this
project subject to staff comments and after the applicant offered
additional items.
B. Filing of Quarterly Report for Site Plan Waivers and Minor Site Plan
Modifications
The Quarterly Report was transmitted for the period through September 30, 1995. When the
last Quarterly Report was issued, the board requested that a list of approved waivers and
modifications be included. This report includes a separate list of those items. The next
Quarterly Report will contain a separate list by category - commercial versus residential.
Chairman Dube noted that Longhorn has submitted a request to enclose their porch. He
inquired as to their plan to accomplish this enclosure. Ms. Heyden was not able to answer
that question at this time.
6. OLD BUSINESS
None
7. NEW BUSINESS
A. PUBLIC HEARING
Rezoning
Description:
Boynton Commons
Robert A. Bentz
Land Design South
Bill Ray Winchester & Elsie A. Winchester
The southwest corner of Old Boynton Road and
Congress Avenue
Request for zoning and master plan approval to
construct a 186,130 square foot retail complex on
23.03 acres of land in connection with a rezoning
from C-3 to Planned Commercial Development
(PCD)
1.
Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
3
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
y
SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
Consensus
There was a consensus of the Commission to leave these items on the table.
Attorney Cherof administered the oath to everyone who would be testifying during the following
proceedings.
Description:
Clear Copy, Inc.
George C. Davis
Bob Feldman
Southeast corner of Boynton Beach Boulevard and N.W. 7th
Street
NEW SITE PLAN: Request for site plan approval to
construct a 3,780 square feet, two-story building on a .225 acre
parcel
c.
Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Gen~MoO[~ representing the applicant, advised that there has been total compliance with all of the
Ordinances and statutory requirements. He urged the Commission to adopt and endorse the
recommendation from the Planning and Development Board, the TRC and staff that this matter be
approved.
Ms. Heyden advised that a new sketch was received today regarding the sidewalk which supersedes
the sketch in the back-up material. The sketch was reviewed by the Engineering Department. Mr.
Davis reworked the area, and it still meets Code. It has been accepted by Engineering.
With regard to traffic concurrency, Ms. Heyden heard from Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering
today, and the applicant is okay with the traffic study. Mr. Davis submitted a letter dated August 3,
indicating the additions he will add to the building.
Mark Rob~650 W. Boynton Beach Boulevard, distributed information to the Commissioners and
requested a copy of the sketch which was submitted today. He spoke in opposition ofthis site plan,
and feels it should be rejected because it does not fit in with the other commercial buildings on
Boynton Beach Boulevard. The building will be the only one which is only 30' deep and set back from
the road only 30'. It will be the only two-story building between 1-95 and Congress Avenue which is
commercial. It is the only building whose back faces Boynton Beach Boulevard. The roof pitch
proposed is low and not consistent with any buildings on sur~ounding blocks. Dr. Roberts advised that
teens congregate on his property and harass the neighbors. A two-story building will shield the two
properties and may cause an increase in loitering and crime. Dr. Roberts does not believe Clear Copy
meets all building ordinances, safety and utilization issues. In addition, he feels it should be denied
because it is too large for this piece of property, and he does not believe the building can ever meet
the required building Codes.
Dr. Roberts referred to the Code relative to perimeter landscaping on abutting properties. The
proposed hedge on the eastern side is non-conforming and does not meet the requirement sections of
14
'--
---
MINU~
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
..,
SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
Dave Beasley,_515 SW 2 Ave" is a member of the Planning and Development Board. He has a
problem with the Community Design Plan or the way in which it is interpreted. His opinion is quite
different from staff's. There are a number of issues on the agenda this evening that deal with the
Community Design Plan. Mr. Beasley feels this Plan leaves too much interpretation and personal
opinion. In some cases, staff attempts to totally redesign buildings. Buildings have been denied when
people feel they are not attractive enough. They may comply with every Code and not require any
variances, but they are still denied. He feels this is a problem. He requested direction from the
Commission relative to what is expected from the Planning and Development Board regarding the
Community Design Plan.
Commissioner Rosen suggested addressing this issue at a workshop meeting.
Mayor Taylor agrees that the Community Design Plan needs clarification.
JefLlis, of Catalfumo, presented the City with a copy of an ad which was run in Florida Trend
magazine thanking the City of Boynton Beach and Motorola for their exceptional cooperation and
professional assistance in timely permitting, design approval, construction inspection and CO at
Motorola's new 100,000 square foot office facility. Mr. Lis said it was an exceptional experience
working with City staff. The cooperation was phenomenal and the project was a success.
Mayor Taylor congratulated Mr. Lis for the great job done on that new facility. It is being used as an
example to other people interested in coming to Boynton Beach.
VIII.
PMENT PLANS: ~
:~ .e~~~~EQUEST=::~bO~~'~ABL~'c;crOBER"i7,"i'995T ABlED
Agent. Interplan Practice, ltd. '\
Owner: Papa Johns USA "'-
Location: Northeast corner of N.W. 7t..h Court and Boynton Beach
Boulevard "
LANDSCAPE APPEAL: R~est for a landscape code
appeal to overhang a required lands~pe strip with bumpers of
parked cars '\,
\
apa John's ............................................~
TO BE TABLED IINTIL OCTOBER 17,
Int Ian Practice, Ltd.
Papa hns USA
Northe t corner of N.W.
Boulevar
NEW SITE AN:
construct a 1,1
Description:
A.
Description:
Request for site plan appro I to
square foot take-out pizza store on .22 a es.
B.
Project Name:
APPLICANT REQUEST
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
The applicant has requested that Items A and B remain on e table until October 17, 1995.
13
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
the landscape code. The hedge is 10" short of the required 30" width. Approving this site plan
indicates that the Ordinance is being selectively enforced in this case. According to the Code, Clear
Copy is not exempt from placing a conforming 30" hedge buffer on the property. Clear Copy should
be required to uphold what is required, or should be given credit for the existing 20" and only have
to make up the missing 10" of the planting area.
Dr. Roberts referred to the issue of the sidewalk width. The drawing in the back-up material would
require modifying the turning radius of the existing street to 25'. This would be a Code violation and
requires a variance because Clear Copy would lose a parking space.
In addition, Dr. Roberts stated that it is impossible for the garbage trucks to enter, leave and service the
property without violating the land development Codes. If the use of the building changes, it may
never be able to have adequate garbage pickup. Public Works states that Clear Copy will generate
three cans or less of garbage. Therefore, they will provide curbside pickup. Dr. Roberts contacted
printing shops and found that an 800 square foot shop generates two cans of garbage per day during
a busy winter season.
The fire inspector, after reviewing the revised site plan, agrees that it is impossible to service the
property with the smallest fire trucks without illegal ingress and egress to the site. Many of the standard
delivery trucks such as GPS or standard flatbed trucks contracted by the City for towing will not be able
to access the site.
Clear Copy has not submitted the drainage design. The site plan does not address the fact that the east
side of the property has an elevation 4' higher than the west side of the property. Since the property
is only 50' wide, in order to drain properly, either the west side of the property must be raised requiring
a retaining wall which will encroach on the planting area, or the east side of the property must be
lowered. A engineered wall must be constructed in order to prevent damage to the doctor's property.
This will encroach on the back-up space required for the parking lot, thereby requiring another
variance.
Dr. Roberts said Clear Copy stated that this project will have very little traffic. The traffic impact study
they submitted to the County shows that Clear Copy will have as many as 116 cars per day based on
the trip generation of three other print shops. The County stated that if the property is to be used for
a print shop, a restricted covenant must be placed on the property.
Dr. Roberts feels the City is leaving itself open for a possible conflict by approving a project which
requires variances. He feels they should devise a new site plan or file for the variances everyone else
had to file for when their properties were developed.
Mr. Moore pointed out that the doctor would have problems with any development plan submitted
because he feels the development of the property will impede the visibility of his building from
eastbound traffic on Boynton Beach Boulevard. Mr. Moore asked that the Commission interpret the
City's Ordinances based on the recommendations of the City's experienced and technical staff. This
applicant is in total compliance with all of the City's ordinances. He urged the Commission to approve
this project.
15
J.,
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
.....,
SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
Commissioner Jaskiewicz confirmed with Mr. Feldman that the property, when purchased, had an
unusual configuration. When he purchased the parcel, he had other ideas for development; however,
every attempt to develop was knocked down by Planning. At this point, he has satisfied every request
made by the City.
In response to Commissioner Jaskiewicz' question, Mr. Feldman advised that the majority of the waste
generated by this business is recyclable. Garbage will probably amount to one can per week.
Mr. Feldman further advised that 90 percent of his business is pickup and delivery at country clubs.
His customers do not come to his shop. There is very little traffic generated at his business. He offered
to prove this statement by showing the last five years' bills. The retail area of this building is only 300
square feet. The second floor contains the offices.
Commissioner Jaskiewicz searched the land development regulations in an attempt to find something
which would provide the City Commission with the ability to deny this development. She could not
find any reason to deny this request with the exception of how this project conforms to the existing
area. At that point, she checked Gateway Center and found that the height of the Center in certain
areas is 3D'. Mr. Feldman's building is 25' in height. With regard to the 30" hedge, Building
Department Memorandum #95-267 explains that the problem evolved because of the landscaping strip
on the existing property. The neighboring property should not be penalized for the paving on Dr.
Roberts' property being too close. In addition, Commissioner Jaskiewicz feels this development might
provide more security to the neighborhood than the present vacant parcel.
Mayor Pro Tem Matson reminded the applicant that she was very vocal about this project when it first
appeared. She pointed out that she cannot vote against this project because it is a two-story building.
She was concerned with areas where she felt variances were required. A letter was sent to the City
from Mr. Davis rectifying a majority of the problems. With regard to the overhead doors, the Planner
stated at the last meeting that the way the Code reads is different from her intent. Mayor Pro Tem
Matson is still expecting to receive a new ordinance so that this loophole is eliminated. Mr., Davis is
willing to change the overhead doors to side-hinged doors to make it come into compliance. She had
a problem with the light pole; however, the relocation of that pole eliminates the need for a variance.
She pointed out that she is not an architect or a planner. Concurrency has been received which
eliminates the problem of traffic. Mayor Pro Tem Matson was concerned about the problem with the
ingress, but by Public Works using smaller trucks, the problem has been eliminated. Most of her
concerns have been addressed.
With regard to the 10" hedge issue, Attorney Cherof explained that this is a unique situation. This
property owner cannot be required to remedy a defect on an adjacent property. The City's approval
of the hedge on the adjacent property in less than full compliance with the Code works to estop the
City at this point.
Vice Mayor Bradley feels the improvements brought back by Mr. Davis are a nice addition to the
building. There are many tight constraints on this site. He questioned why the applicant will be having
9' ceilings instead of 8' ceilings which will provide more pitch to the roof.
16
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
Mr. Feldman said he prefers 10' ceilings for ventilation. However, in this case he went with 9'. He
stated that he might gain an additional foot if he decides to have a wooden floor rather than a concrete
floor on the second floor. Mr. Davis will make that determination.
Commissioner Rosen questioned whether or not an approval for drainage exists. Ms. Heyden advised
that the Engineering Department has not changed its opinion and they feel the applicant meets the
drainage requirements. Ms. Heyden referred to Page 2 of Memorandum 95-325 where she summarizes
the drainage issue.
Mayor Pro Tem Matson disclosed that she spoke with Kathy Shabotynskyj of the Chamber of .
Commerce and Naomi Wilson about this project. She told them she was against this project, but had
not seen the back-up material at that time.
Michael Barr~ 2Q6_Scarbrough lane, echoed the concerns of Dr. Roberts particularly with regard to
the conflict with the architectural profile of the area.
Attorney Cherof advised that Dr. Roberts' should be provided with an opportunity to ask Ms. Heyden
a question on testimony she offered.
Dr. Roberts indicated that he spoke with Mr. Hall of the Engineering Department. In his opinion, it will
be impossible at permitting to comply with the drainage unless a retaining wall is built. If the retaining
wall is built, it will further encroach on the turning area or the planting area of the property. Dr.
Roberts inquired whether or not this statement was correct.
Ms. Heyden advised that she had never heard those remarks until this point.
Dr. Roberts questioned Mr. Eichorst relative to the length of trucks that pick up recyclables.
Attorney Cherof advised that Mr. Eichorst has not testified and is not subject to cross examination.
Commissioner Jaskiewicz confirmed with Ms. Heyden that the trucks are smaller and will be able to
maneuver.
Dr. Roberts questioned whether or not the site plan would have to be reapproved if the drainage
cannot be designed. Ms. Heyden explained that if there is a problem with the retaining wall which
causes another problem on the site, a variance would be required. If the recycling truck cannot
maneuver on site, a determination will be made relative to ~he method of garbage pickup.
~)
Vice Mayor Bradley moved to approve the site plan for Clear Copy subject to staff comments.
Commissioner Jaskiewicz seconded the motion.
Commissioner Rosen assumed that the matter of drainage was included in the motion, and Mayor Pro
Tem Matson asked for confirmation that the motion includes all of Ms. Heyden's stipulations. Vice
17
~
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
'WI
SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
Mayor Bradley stated that the motion ;s subject to staff comments.
The motion carried unanimously.
MAYOR TAYLOR DECLARED AT TEN-MINUTE RECESS. THE MEETING RESUMED AT 8:30 P.M.
D.
Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Description:
Grove Plaza
Charles W. DeSanti/Julian Bryan
Dr. Walter H. Janke and Mrs. Alice Fay
Southeast corner of Hypoluxo Road and Lawrence Road
MASTER PLAN: Request for master plan approval to
subdivide a commercially-zoned parcel into six lots for future
development
Jerry Knight, representingJheapplkant, requested approval of the master plan for G rove Plaza. Th is
parcel is eight acres in size and is located at HypoJuxo Road and Lawrence Road. In 1992, the City
annexed this property and the City Commission amended the Land Use Plan to reclassify it as Local
Retail Commercial and rezone it to C-3.
The master plan shows six freestanding buildings sharing four access openings and cross-access
easements. The City Commission will review each individual parcel for site plan approval and plat
approval.
Julian B~)lan, J'epresentin~1he._appJkant, advised that the applicant agrees with all of the staff
comments. This is probably the first non-residential master plan being reviewed by the City
Commission. It provides enough information to allow the safeguards needed for interior circulation,
setbacks, landscaping, open space, ete. One of the significant things offered by the plan is
approximately three times the landscaped yards adjacent to the rights-of-way of Hypoluxo Road and
Lawrence Road. It provides for a 20' landscape easement on the rear. Each of the six freestanding sites
has an access drive on one side or the other in an effort to minimize interior traffic circulation. The rear
drive is one-way eastbound so that residential users heading north on Lawrence Road can make a right
turn into the property and access any of the facilities. Westbound traffic can turn at the existing median
which is approximately 1000' east of the intersection. One of the main reasons for the access road was
staff's concern for garbage pickup. All garbage pickup will be provided on the rear of the property.
This project will consist of 29,500 square feet of gross leasable building area.
Ms. Heyden advised that this is the first step in the subdivisiQn of this commercial property. The next
step will be platting. This sets forth the concept plan for the subdivision. Ms. Heyden spoke with Palm
Beach County Traffic Engineering relative to dedication of rights-of-way. There is a Lake Worth
Drainage District canal between Hypoluxo and the applicant's property. There could be some
problems dedicating that additional right-of-way. However, there will be no additional problems for
the right-of-way for Lawrence Road.
THERE WAS NO ONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO SPEAK AT THE PUBLIC HEARING.
18
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
SEPTEMBER 5, 1995
Attorney Cherof read Proposed Resolution No. R95-142 by title only.
Attorney Cherof advised that Section 1 of the proposed budget indicates an appropriation of $31,889,175.
MAYOR TAYLOR ANNOUNCED THE PUBLIC HEARING. THERE WAS NO ONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO
SPEAK.
Motion
Mayor Pro Tem Matson moved to approve Proposed Resolution No. R95-142. Commissioner Rosen seconded
the motion which carried unanimously.
Attorney Cherof advised that the final budget hearing will be on Tuesday, September 19, 1995, at 7:00 p.m., in
Commission Chambers.
VII. PUBLIC AUDIENCE:
This portion of the agenda was disposed of prior to the Public Hearing.
VIII. DEVELOPMENT PLANS:
A.
Project Name: Papa John's................................_........................ TABLED
APPLICANT REQUESTED TO BE TABLED UNTIL SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
Agent: Interplan Practice, Ltd.
Owner: Papa Johns USA
Location: Corner of NW 7th Court and Boynton Beach Blvd.
Description: LANDSCAPE APPEAL: Request for a landscape code appeal to overhang a
required landscape strip with bumpers of parked cars
..
B.
Project Name: Papa John's.................................-:........................T ABLED
APPLICANT IEQUESTED TO BE TABLED UNTIL SEPTEMBER 19, 1995
Agent: Interplan- Practice, Ltd.
Owner: Papa Johns USA
Location: Northeast corner of NW 7th Court and Boynton Beach
Blvd.
Description: NEW SITE PLAN: Request for site plan approval to construct a 1,142 square
foot take-out pizza store on .22 acres
Items VIII-A and B will remain on the table until the September 19, 1995 City Commission meeting.
C. Project Name: Clear Copy, Inc.
VOTE IS FOIl RECONSIDERA TION ON! Y
Agent: Bob Feldman, Owner
Owner: George C. Davis
Location: Southeast corner of Boynton Beach Boulevard and NW 7th
Street
Description: NEW SITE PLAN: Request for site plan approval to construct a 3,780 square
feet, two-story building on a .225 acre parcel
11
~~
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
SEPTEMBER 5, 1995
City Manager Parker advised that Vice Mayor Bradley requested this reconsideration within the three-day limit.
Motion
Vice Mayor Bradley moved to reconsider the site plan approval for Clear Copy. Commissioner Jaskiewicz
seconded the motion which carried 4-1. (Mayor Pro Tem Matson cast Ihe dissenting vote.)
Gene Moore, representing Mr. Feldman, asked for clarification of this action for reconsideration.
Mayor Taylor explained that it was necessary for one of the Commissioners on the prevailing side to bring this
issue back for reconsideration. This item will now be scheduled on the agenda. Attorney Cherof said property
owners who have requested notification if the matter was raised again will be notified. This item is now set for
a time certain of September 19, 1995.
D. Nautica Soundr formerly known as Knollwood Grows PUD - Master Plan determination of
substantial or non-substantial change ......................_............................................. TABLED
Motion
Mayor Pro Tem Matson moved to remove this item from the table. Commissioner Rosen seconded the motion
which carried unanimously.
Attorney Cherof advised that this would be a quasi-judicial hearing. He administered the oath to all who would
,.
be speaking on this matter.
Mayor Taylor disclosed that he visited the Nautica site on Lawrence Road to inspect the houses and view the
layout. While there, he spoke wdh Mr. Kilday. Vice Mayor Bradley and Commissioner Jaskiewicz disclosed the
same information as Mayor Tay1or.
Mayor Pro Tem Matson disclosed receiving a telephone call from Howard Shepherd of Meadows 300 and
Willowbrook, and a phone call from AI Karp: She spoke with Mrs. Karp with reference to this project and with
Mr. Kilday. .In addition, the residents submitted a list of questions for which they would like answers from the
developer.
Commissioner Rosen disclosed that he received a phone call from Mr. Kilday.
Mayor Taylor urged the applicant to keep his presentation to ten minutes in length.
Kieran Kilday advised that he prepared his presentation to deal with two issues the Commission raised at the last
meeting.
The Utilities' issue involved the provision for a lift station and a concern about the number of cul-de-sacs. At a
follow-up meeting with Utilities, these issues were worked out. A memorandum has been published by the
Utilities Department indicating resolution of the issues.
The second issue involving lat size has also been addressed. The Commission requested investigation to
determine the feasibility of upg~ading the smaller lots.
The previous plan contained 76 lots in the 4,000 to 4,500 square foot range. All of those lots have been
12
- ,~
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
~
Motion
JULY 18, 1995
Vice Mayor Bradley moved to table this to the next meeting. Commissioner Jaskiewicz seconded the
motion.
Mayor Pro Tem Matson suggested that the motion incorporate the receipt of drainage plans and the
approval of those plans, and the acceptance of plans which detail the disparity in the elevations, the
cross-access parking agreement with Wendy's, and the minor alignment with Wendy's to accommodate
the turn radius.
Attorney Cherof disagreed, but advised that this is a clear message to the applicant that the motion to
table is being made to give them the time to address those concerns before the Commission votes on
this matter.
The motion carried 5-0.
A.
Project:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Description:
Motion
Papa John's
Interplan Practice, Ltd.
Papa Johns USA
Northeast corner of NW 7th Court and Boynton Beach Boulevard
LANDSCAPE APPEAL: Request for a landscape code appeal to
overhang a required landscape strip with bumpers of parked cars.
Vice Mayor Bradley moved to table the landscape appeal. Mayor Pro Tern Matson seconded the
motion which carried unanimously.
c.
Project:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Description:
Clear Copy, Inc.
George C. Davis
Bob Feldman
Southwest comer of Boynton Beach Boulevard and NW 7th Street
NEW SITE PlAN: Request for site plan approval to construct a 3,780
square feet, two-story building on a .225 acre parcel
George Davis, 1100 S. Federal Highway, introduced Steve Feldman, 211 S. Federal Highway. Mr.
Davis explained that this is an odd-shaped piece of property, but the applicant has managed to comply
with the setbacks and all other requirements without having to seek variances. This application was
approved by the Planning and Development Board. The traffic survey shows that this use will produce
very little traffic. He urged the Commission to approve the project.
Ms. Heyden advised that the recommendation from the Planning and Development Board was a 5-1
vote for approval subject to staff comments. There was a great deal of discussion at that meeting with
regard to dumpster accessibility and egress onto NW 7th Street. Ms. Heyden has confirmed with Mr.
Eichorst, Public Works Director, that although it is a "tight squeeze", he will be able to service the
25
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
JULY 18, 1995
dumpster. Therefore, staff recommends approval subject to staff comments.
Mayor Pro Tem Matson said" that in researching the project after receiving telephone calls from citizens,
there were Engineering memos from May 15 and May 18 to Ms. Heyden from Ken Hall whereby
comments were submitted stating that the driveway is too close to the right-of-way line of Boynton
Beach Boulevard. Per Chapter 23, Article 2.H.3, an application for a variance is required because 180
feet is required. She pointed out that Wendy's and Texaco requested variances. She questioned why
those businesses were required to seek variances, but this project is not.
Ms. Heyden stated that she has researched this issue herself and there are three or four projects where
the driveway distance of 180 feet is not measured on the side street. It is measured on the thoroughfare
(Boynton Beach Boulevard). Based on that historic interpretation, this project is consistent with how
that has been done. Therefore, a variance is not needed and the City Engineer concurs with that
statement.
Mayor Pro Tern Matson said the frontage shown on NW 7th Street has only 22 feet of easement from
the sidewalk. Per our code, minimum frontage should be 30 feet.
Ms. Heyden stated that the setback of the building from NW 7th Street meets code. This issue was
debated very early on when this site plan was submitted. Originally, they were requiring a Board of
Adjustment variance. However, they changed the building design which negated the need for a
variance. This building meets code.
Mr. Feldman added that the setback is the frontage on Boynton Beach Boulevard which is 30 feet. The
side of the building which faces NW 7th Street is considered the side setback which requires a 20 foot
setback. Ms. Heyden explained that the front of the building is on Boynton Beach Boulevard. Mayor
Pro Tern Matson pointed out that no entrance is shown on Boynton Beach Boulevard. Ms. Heyden
responded that the measurements have nothing to do with entrances. It is calculated by looking at the
rest of the lots on the block and determining which side of their property is called the frontage.
Commissioner Jaskiewicz questioned whether or not this meets height requirements since it is the only
building in that area which is two stories. Ms. Heyden advised that this project is within the height
limitation for the zoning district. She pointed out that although the buildings on both sides of this
project are only one story in height, both of them have towers on top of their buildings. Gateway
Center has a building height of 30 feet.
Mayor Pro Tern Matson feels this is a very poor plan. It is the only two-story building from 1-95 to
Congress Avenue. In addition, she is concerned about the lighting. It appears that there is a light pole
taking up one of the parking spaces. Mr. Davis advised that the light pole is in the landscape strip.
Mayor Pro Tem Matson added that another problem she has with this project concerns the fact that
there are no overhangs and there is no roof pitch. She does not believe it will meet the code
requirements relative to overhead garage doors.
MA YOR TAYLOR ANNOUNCED THE PUBLIC HEARING. THERE WAS NO ONE PRESENT TO
SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT.
26
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
JULY 18, 1995
Mark Roberts, property owner in the medical building, feels the property owner should be allowed
to develop this property, but feels this site plan should be rejected since it does not fit in with other
commercial development along Boynton Beach Boulevard. He reiterated remarks made by Mayor Pro
Tem Matson regarding the building height, building frontage setbacks, architectural appeal, and roof
pitch.
Mr. Roberts owns the property next door. He explained that many times neighborhood children
congregate on the property. This proposed project will shield the back part of the lot, thereby
decreasing visibility and probably resulting in rising crime.
Mr. Roberts stated that the site plan does not meet the land development regulations and variances
should be obtained for the location of the egress driveway on SW 7th Street. The lighting design will
not permit the required number of parking spaces. The light fixture pole locations will not allow the
required 27 feet of unobstructed backup for each parking space. The adjacent property to this project
does not meet the landscaping requirement; therefore, this project is required to provide the additional
buffer zone. If the applicant is required to provide the additional buffer zone, a variance will be
required because it would not leave the required 27 foot back up area. In addition, the code requires
that the sidewalk be 10 feet wide. At the southwest corner of the project, the plan calls for the sidewalk
to narrow down to almost 2 feet at the intersecting points of NW 7th Street and NW 1 st Avenue. If the
sidewalk continued at 5 feet, there would not be enough room for one of the parking spaces.
Eliminating that parking space will leave the project with one too few spaces.
Mr. Roberts pointed out that according to code, buildings along Boynton Beach Boulevard shall not
have overhead doors on the building facade that faces a public or private street. The code also requires
a minimum setback of 30 feet from the front of the building. The proposed building has only 22 feet
to the property line.
Mr. Roberts believes this site plan should be denied.
Mike Barr, 206 Scarbrough Lane, objects to this building because of its inconsistency with surrounding
architecture. He is especially opposed to the building being two stories and the lack of aesthetics
facing Boynton Beach Boulevard.
Jose Aguila, 800 SW 1 Court, feels there is a difference between meeting code and approving a
project. He feels that the codes are guides and minimum standards for the review process.
Mr. Aguila feels this is another case of too much on this site. He expressed surprise that Mr. Eichorst
can service this area. He also feels there is a lack of sensitivity to the neighbors. Sensitivity to the
neighbors to the south has been ignored. The building design is too bland. Many things need to be
done to improve this design. The scale of the building needs to be lowered. The color is not
compatible with adjacent buildings. The color is too pink. The applicant put shutters on some
windows, but ignored the majority of the windows. A great deal more can be done with stucco
banding, sills and shuttering all of the windows. The roof pitch is too short and needs an overhang.
Tile accents could be added along with a false chimney.
The handicap parking space is very difficult to maneuver. It is against the egress to the site and will
27
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
JULY 18, 1995
result in a vehicle backing into traffic when exiting the site. He does not understand how a printing
company can have only one dumpster. The requested sign on Boynton Beach Boulevard is too large.
Additional landscaping is needed.
The property owner should be allowed to develop his site, but if the applicant will not improve on the
layout and design, then the Commission should ensure that the project is one which the community
deserves. Mr. Aguila recommended that the Commission request that the applicant increase the roof
pitch, provide an 18 inch overhang on all four sides of the building, provide raised stucco bands, raised
sills on all windows, decorative shutters on all windows, modify the building color to a more orange
or tan base to be compatible with the roof tile selected on the adjacent buildings, not to place any
signage on the lower roof above the entry door, consider a chimney, cupola or some other
ornamentation on the roof, reduce the site sign by providing a 3' x 6' sign on a 4' x 6' base with
foundation planting, increase the hedges at planting to 30 inches, increase all trees at planting to 12
feet, and provide much more landscaping along 7th and 1 st Avenues and Boynton Beach Boulevard.
Mr. Aguila further recommended that the architect make the modifications and present them to the City
Commission as opposed to working them out with staff.
Hugo Sentmanat, 633 NW 1 Avenue, said he is dose to the doctor's office on 7th Street and 1 st
Avenue. He is concerned with the children who congregate in the parking lot. He feels this two-story
building will shield this activity from the view of the police.
THERE WAS NO ONE ELSE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO SPEAK AT THE PUBLIC HEARING.
Mr. Davis reminded the Commission that the applicant came to this meeting with staff approval subject
to staff comments, and he is overwhelmed by tonight's remarks. Some of the things mentioned cannot
be done. He felt it was the Commission's decision to either listen to the remarks of the residents, or
trust staff's recommendation.
Ms. Heyden wished to respond to remarks regarding the following items: 1) landscape strip adjacent
to the medical office building; 2) the lack of a parking lot variance for the driveway on 7th Street; and
(3) the overhead doors.
With regard to the landscape strip, if there is a landscape strip on the adjacent property to screen
parking on an adjacent property, our landscape code does not require another landscape strip. This
was brought up at the first round of comments, and the applicant put on his plans that he had to verify
that the landscape strip met code. If the width of the landscape strip does not meet code, then it is a
code violation of the property owner. Staff verified that the existing landscape strip meets code.
With regard to the parking lot variance, the regulations state that parking lot driveways shall be
constructed at least 30 feet from the intersection of right-of-way lines along local streets and 180 feet
on streets of a higher classification. On the map, Ms. Heyden indicated that Boynton Beach Boulevard
is considered a street of a higher classification; therefore, any rights-of-way onto Boynton Beach
Boulevard must be 180 feet from the intersection. Driveways on local streets (NW 7th Street is a local
street) only require 30 feet from an intersection. The last two projects on Boynton Beach Boulevard
with driveways off the side street are Kentucky Fried Chicken and the Agnello building. Those
28
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
JULY 18, 1995
driveways did not need 180 feet and did not require a variance.
In reading the language regarding overhead doors, it is easy to see how someone might interpret that
the overhead door on the applicant's south elevation is not permitted. When this language was written,
that was not Ms. Heyden's intent. The section indicates the streets in the City where overhead doors
are not permitted.
Ms. Heyden feels the comments regarding architecture are very good, and staff made comments
regarding the color of the building.
In response to Mayor Pro Tern Matson's question concerning the trash trucks, Mr. Eichorst stated that
45 feet are required to turn the vehicle. Whife this is a very tight turn, the trucks can make it.
Mayor Pro Tern Matson stated that our Community Design Plan requires that the facades of buildings
that face major roads are to be designed as attractive as the front of the building. Ms. Heyden agreed
and displayed the elevation which faces Boynton Beach Boulevard.
Commissioner Jaskiewicz questioned whether or not the applicant could improve the aesthetics of the
project. Mr. Davis explained that the reason for the lack of a pitched roof is the 25 foot height limit.
There are two ceilings which are between eight and nine feet each. With regard to overhangs on
commercial properties, the overhangs must go to the setback lines. For every foot which overhangs,
the building must be set back. This is the minimum size building necessary for the applicant to
conduct his business.
Ms. Heyden confirmed for Mayor Taylor that she wrote the language regarding overhead doors. Her
intent was not to prevent overhead doors on a side street. She identified the streets where overhead
doors are not permitted, but she realizes that the language could lead someone to interpret that this
overhead door is not permitted.
In response to Mayor Pro Tern Matson's question, Ms. Heyden confirmed that the overhead door
cannot face Boynton Beach Boulevard. However, in this case, the overhead door faces the south.
Mayor Pro Tern Matson said her problem with this project is that it is going into the area the City is
trying to revitalize. She is concerned with Puhric Works servicing this site and the signage planned for
the site. This property should not be the only two-story building in this area and she does not feel it
is aesthetically pleasing to the surrounding community.
Motion
Mayor Pro Tem Matson moved to deny the project. Vice Mayor Bradley seconded the motion which
carried 3-2. (Mayor Taylor and Commissioner Jaskiewicz cast the dissenting votes.)
D. Approve request for dredge permit for 930 Greenbriar Drive
City Manager Parker referred to the back-up material which reminds the Commissioners of the fact that
the Land Development Regulations require Commission approval of this item. Staff recommends
29
MINUTES
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
JULY 11, 1995
Description:
Clear Copy, Inc.
George C. Davis
Bob Feldman
Southwest corner of Boynton Beach Boulevard and
NW 7th Street
Request for site plan approval to construct a 3,780
square foot, twc ~~ory building on a .225 acre
parcel.
2.
Project Name:
Agent:
Owner:
Location:
Mr. Haag made the presentation and advised that this is a new site plan applicatipn. The
surrounding land uses and zoning include Boynton Beach Boulevard and Wendy's restaurant
zoned C-2 to the north; NW 1 st Avenue and single-family residences zoned R-l-A to the
south; a medical office building zoned C-2 to the east; and NW 7th Street and Gateway Center
zoned C-2 to the west.
The proposed use is a printing business and most of the business involves pickup and delivery.
With regard to traffic, verification has not yet been received from Palm Beach County, but staff
does not anticipate any problems. If a problem does arise, the applicant is aware that he will
be required to make improvements if the County indicates they are necessary. Insufficient
drainage information was submitted to the Engineering Department to certify compliance with
the City's drainage levels of service; however, they are recommending that this be postponed
to time of permit review. There is a one-way ingress located on NW 1 st Avenue, and a one-
way egress onto NW 7th Street. The applicant has provided the required parking spaces (13)
including one handicap space. The proposed landscaping is in compliance with the code and
the development meets the requirements of the building and site regulations. Building height
is 25'. The proposed color of the two-story stucco building will be light pink with white trim,
doors and window shutters. The roof will be brick colored S-tile. The colors are generally
compatible with the colors of the neighboring structures which are predominantly of a
Spanish/Mediterranean style. However, the shade of pink selected for the stucco does not
appear to compliment the brick colored roof tile; therefore, a more orange shade of pink is
recommended. A free-standing sign is proposed between Boynton Beach Boulevard and the
front of the building.
The Planning and Zoning Department recommends approval of this site plan request subject
to the permit plans for the project being amended to show compliance with staff comments
and the City of Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances.
Chairman Dube inquired as to the location of the double dumpster. Mr. Haag responded that
the Public 'Norks Department has allowed the recycling containers to be on wheels at some
24
MINUTES
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
JULY 11, 1995
facilities. The applicant is proposing a garage door on the south side of the building. He may
be able to work with Public Works to have the dumpster put inside, as long as they take it
outside for servicing.
Vice Chairman Golden questioned whether or not there is an opportunity to work out the
dumpster issue behind the loading zone. The applicant knows there is a conflict and must
work it out with Public Works.
Vice Chairman Golden also questioned whether or not there is any concern that people will
turn in the egress driveway, Mr. Haag stated that staff wanted the ingress driveway off NW
1 st Avenue with the egress off NW 7th Street. The problem which surfaced at the TRC
meeting was the realization that people coming off Boynton Beach Boulevard trying to get into
the project would cut across the traffic going northbound on NW 7th Street. Staff worked with
the appl icant and decided to move it to NW 1 st Avenue. The applicant will confirm that there
is not a great deal of traffic associated with this use.
George Davis, 1100 South Federal Highway, introduced Bob Feldman, owner of the project,
of 211 South Federal Highway. Mr. Davis advised that this was not an easy site to work with
due to the odd shape of the property, the setbacks and the parking requirements. A decision
was made not to seek variances, but to work within the appropriate City requirements. The
appl icant feels he has conformed to those requirements, and they are happy to have received
a recommendation for approval from the Planning and Zoning Department.
Chairman Dube questioned the recycling pickup. Mr. Feldman said he spoke with Mr.
Eichorst who advised that trash would be picked up between 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. twice
a week before the business opens. The containers and paper goods will be kept inside the
building. Mr. Feldman advised that he has received two citations because of dumping on the
site since he purchased the property in November of 1994. He wants this property to work
for him.
Motion
Mr. Rosenstock moved to approve the applicant's request. Mr. Wische seconded the motion.
Mark Roberts, 650 W. Boynton Beach Boulevard, said he looked at the site and does not feel
a truck can get to the dumpster unless it enters through the exit. This will be the only two-
story building on Boynton Beach Boulevard. It is only 30' deep and it will be close to the
street. The design is very bland and he feels there will be a drainage problem. This 4,000
square foot building is too large for the parcel. This building will not enhance the look along
the Boulevard. He feels the building needs more planning.
25
MINUTES
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
JULY 11, 1995
Gary Lehnertz used the overhead projector to display a plan he drew quickly while he
listened to the presentation. His plan indicated the difficulty which will be. experienced in
accessing the site. Mr. lehnertz claims he has never seen dumping on the site. He feels the
intersection is too constrained for this project. Although this project may fall within the traffic
standards, it does not speak to the congestion it will create because of the design of the
median. He urged the members to deny this request.
Jose Aguila stated that he drives by this site everyday and has never seen trash on the site. In
his opinion, the property owner messed up his own property and is now throwing this
problem on the City. The architecture of the building is very bland and not conducive to the
architecture being planned forthis area. Traffic problems will be worsened with the inclusion
of this project. Mr. Aguila is also concerned about the two driveways at the intersections. He
does not feels the distance requirements have been met. In addition, this project will cover
up the nice design of the podiatrist's office. He urged the board to reconsider the motion and
deny this project.
Another resident of the area was concerned that drainage infonnation was unavailable. She
would appreciate more business activity in that area, and supports this application.
Vice Chairman Golden agreed with Mr. Roberts' remarks about the turning radius. He feels
the methods of ingress and egress are inappropriate and the locations of the dumpster and
loading zone are a problem. This is a crammed site. He feels the applicant should attempt
to work out a better design. In addition, Vice Chairman Golden feels the shutters on the
building seem inconsistent with the surrounding buildings. He is opposed to this request as
presented.
Mr. Rosenstock withdrew his motion and Mr. Wische withdrew his second,
Motion
Vice Chairman Golden moved to recommend denial of the site plan for Clear Copy submitted
by George Davis to construct a 3,780 square foot, two-story building on a .225 acre parcel.
Mr. Rosenstock seconded the motion.
Mr. Burton realizes that this is a small, irregular shaped parcel which will be difficult to
develop. He feels Mr. Feldman has done a good job of figuring out what can be done with
it. This is a clean business and it will not generate a great deal of traffic.
Vice Chairman Golden feels there is good opportunity here, but thinks something else can be
worked out.
26
MINUTES
PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
JULY 11, 1995
Mr. Feldman reported that he could produce documented proof to the members that off-the-
street traffic is not more than three to four a day. Ninety-nine percent of his business is pickup
and delivery. Three trucks per week deliver paper and UPS delivers once a day. That is the
total amount of traffic entering his business. It may generate slightly more than that, but it will
not be much more. Mr. Feldma:i employs a gentleman who arrives for work at noon, loads
the work and delivers it to clients. While he is out on the road, he picks up new work. Mr.
Feldman stated that the upstairs of the building is office space for himself and his son and one
dark room. The retail part of the business is 300 square feet. The remainder is a print shop.
He offered to provide the documentation to prove his statements.
Mr. Beasley understood that this business will not have the type of activity generated by a
place such as Kinko's.
After listening to Mr. Feldman, Vice Chairman Golden realizes that the use will not be as
intense as he expected, but he still expressed concern that something more intense might
come in at some point in the future.
Chairman Dube voiced his support for the project.
The motion to deny failed 1-5. (Vice Chairman Golden voted in favor of denial.)
Motion
Mr. Beasley moved to approve Clear Copy's site plan as presented. Mr. Burton seconded the
motion.
Vice Chairman Golden advised that he is not opposed to the use. He feels it is appropriate,
but he has some concerns about the parking lot design.
Mr. Wische said he changed his position because he believes what Mr. Feldman said about
the amount of traffic that would be generated.
The motion carried 5-1. (Vice Chairman Golden dissented.)
E. OTHER
27
MEETING MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
JUNE 18, 1996
MAYOR TAYLOR ANNOUNCED THAT HE WOULD ACCEPT COMMENTS ON THESE
TWO APPLICATIONS EVEN THOUGH THE APPLICANTS HAVE REQUESTED THE
CONTINUANCES. THERE WAS NO ONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO SPEAK ON
EITHER PROJECT.
Motion
Commissioner Titcomb moved to accept the applicants' requests for continuance. Vice
Mayor Jaskiewicz seconded the motion which carried unanimously.
VII. PUBLIC AUDIENCE:
Anne Centi. Vice Chairperson of the Education Advisory Board. 502 SE 5th Circle.
said it has taken her 50 years to learn three words--"/'II be there". She thanked everyone
for being there for the Visions 20/20 Conference, Dr. Kowal's presentation to the City, the
playground, and the School Board rally. She particularly thanked Mayor Taylor for
travelling 3,000 miles to be there, and Commissioner Titcomb for producing the great logo
for the tee shirts. She suggested that the logo, "Together We Make a School" be used for
the cover page of the next edition of Funfare Magazine.
Mayor Taylor said approximately 70 people rallied at the School Board meeting, and it was
a good showing for Boynton Beach. He thanked Mrs. Centi for her suggestion for Funfare
Magazine.
Mark Roberts. 650 W. Bovnton Beach Boulevard. appeared to notify the Commission
that he and RHS Corporation submitted applications of appeals for the Clear Copy project
to the Planning and Development Board and the Board of Zoning Appeals. He has also
made repeated requests for the City to respond to the applications. He said Carrie Parker,
Tambri Heyden, and the City Attorney's Office have all refused to respond to the
applications, and this is a violation of his and RHS' civil rights.
,/
The Land Development Regulations afforded them the right to submit the applications for
appeal. It is Dr. Roberts' belief that the Clear Copy project does not meet the City's
regulations. Regardless of what the City believes, it has the legal responsibility to have the
appeals heard.
Since the City refuses to hear the properly-filed appeals, it is intentionally violating their civil
rights. Dr. Roberts is committed to having the City held accountable for its actions or lack
thereof. Litigation is an option that is costly for all parties involved. If after receiving this
notice the City chooses not to hear the appeals, it is Dr. Roberts' intent to file a civil rights
lawsuit against the City for violating their civil rights.
13
MEETING MINU. 3
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
JUNE 18, 1996
Dr. Roberts submitted a copy of his letter to the clerk to be given to the City
Commissioners, City Manager, and City Attorney. Dr. Roberts had additional copies for
The Palm Beach Post and the Sun-Sentinel.
City Manager Parker advised that, upon advice from the City Attorney, Dr. Roberts is to be
directed to the City Attorney's Office. That is the reason why staff has not returned his
phone calls. The City Attorney is handling this situation.
Attorney Doody advised that prior to the next City Commission meeting, this matter will be
addressed by the City Attorney's Office. The City Attorney's Office will then be able to
assist the Commission in making a decision relative to what action is required.
Mayor Taylor advised that it is a normal procedure for all litigation items to be handled
through the City Attorney's Office.
VIII. DEVELOPMENT PLANS:
City Manager Parker advised that this item is ready to come off the table.
Motion
Vice Mayor Jaskiewicz moved to take the Citrus Park PUD project off the table.
Commissioner Tillman seconded the motion which carried unanimously.
At this time, Attorney Doody administered the oath to all who would be testifying on any of
the development plans to follow.
Description:
Citrus Park PUD TABLED
James A. Hamilton 1\1 - CCl Consultants
East side of Lawrence Road, approxima~ely 1,750 feet north of
Gateway Boulevard
MASTER PLAN MODIFICATION: Request to amend the
previously approved master plan to reduce the width of lots 22 and
23 from 55 feet to 51 feet; reduce the non-zero line side building
setback from 15 feet to 11 feet; reduce the rear pool setback on
lot 32 from 8 feet to 7 feet and reduce the rear screen enclosure
setback on lot 32 from 6 feet to 5 feet.
A. Project:
Agent:
location:
Richard Wohlfarth of CCl Consultants and Chris Reaaan. develooer were present to
represent the project. Mr. Wohlfarth advised that he was seeking consideration from the
Commission on three events. At the easel, Mr. Wohlfarth pointed out three already
existing units and one vacant lot in the PUD.
14
MEETING MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MAY 7, 1996
1. Captain Frank's Seafood
City Manager Parker reported that the City Commission imposed some conditions as part
of a site approval that Mr. Parsons cannot meet because of DOT regulations. Therefore,
it is requested that the restrictions be deleted, and implement the restrictions set forth in
Mr. Hukill's memorandum dated April 19, 1996.
Mayor Taylor pointed out that if the Commission approves the deletion of the conditions,
there should be a time limit imposed. City Manager Parker advised that the City is holding
a Code Enforcement case. Mr. Parsons will be given 10 days to comply. Also, City
Manager Parker advised that a stop bar in addition to the stop sign will be put in place.
Motion
Commissioner Bradley moved that the items in the 'Apri/19, 1996 memo from Mr. Hukill
become the site conditions for Mr. Parsons at 435 West Boynton Beach Boulevard.
Commissioner Titcomb seconded the motion.
Mayor Taylor confirmed with City Manager Parker that the work will be done as soon as
possible.
The motion carried unanimously.
2. Appeal decision of the Board of Zoning Appeals. Clear Copy
Attorney Cherof advised that this appeal is before the Commission pursuant to Section 10,
Chapter 2 of the land Devetopment Regulations. This is a matter that was before the City
Commission previously and is in regard to the Planning and Zoning Director's
determination that a site plan was a minor modification rather than a major modification.
The RHS Corporation took an appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals. The record before
the Commission this evening is made up of the minutes of that Board of Zoning Appeals
meeting, the exhibits submitted by the City and the representative of the RHS Corporation,
Planning and Zoning Department Memorandum No. 96-143, and minutes of the City
Commission meeting of March 19, 1996. This is not a rehearing of the case. It is a review
of the decision made by the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Mark Roberts. reDresentlna RHS CorDoratlon. said he is appealing the decision of the
Board of Zoning Appeals because of misstatement of facts that were made, He said that
during the meeting, he stated that he had the correct plans which he received from the
Planning and Zoning Department on March 13,1996. Mr. Haag disagreed and stated he
did not know where the plans came from. Dr. Roberts showed the Commissioners the plan
which referred to Mr. Haag's statement that the back-up space is 26.5'; however, the Code
39
MEETING MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MAY 7,1996
requires 27'. Therefore, a variance is required.
Mr. Haag also testified that the City Commission approved curbside recyclable pickup for
the project. Mr. Roberts possessed a copy of an agenda memorandum for the September
19. 1995 City Commission meeting which states what the Commission approved. There
is a disagreement between what Mr. Haag testified was approved, and what the
Commission actually approved.
Dr. Roberts submitted a Public Records Request to the City for any motion approved by
the City Commission relative to curbside pickup. The law states that commercial
establishments must have containerized pickup. On September 19, 1995, the City
Commission approved curbside pickup for garbage, and recyclable waste pickup. Dr.
Roberts read the following which he stated was from Ms. Heyden directly: "Based on
additional information the Public Works Department obtained from the applicant regarding
type and quantity of solid waste anticipated to be generated, can pickup will be the method _
of solid waste disposal except for recyclables which will be picked up by the recycling truck. -
The City's recycling trucks are smaller and will be able to maneuver on the site: Dr.
Roberts provided documentation to the Board of Zoning Appeals showing that the City's
recycling trucks cannot maneuver on the site. Mr. Haag's testimony was incorrect.
On September 19, 1995, the City Commission approved the site plan. There was a
notation on that site plan that the City landscape inspedor will field verify the existing
hedge identified by asterick on the landscape legend. Plans and site will be revised to
meet proper vehicle area screening if existing material does not meet minimum standards.
The new plans do not have 1his notation. The plans were changed. Dr. Roberts requested
a copy of the plans that did not contain this notation, and the City was unable to provide
those copies. The plans he had with the notation were the correct plans.
The Land Development Regulations specifically define a minor site plan modification. It
is a non-impact modification which will have no adverse affect on the approved site and
no impact on adjacent properties. Dr. Roberts testified that the Planning and Zoning
Department recommended that the street adjacent to Clear Copy (NW 7th Street) be
restriped for traffic flow. This is an indication that adjacent properties are affected.
The new plans left off the buffer zone. The original plans approved by the City
Commission were changed to eliminate the proper buffer zone. Dr. Roberts learned that
the City Commission has the authority to approve something in violation of the Code by
granting a variance. Dr. Roberts submitted a Public Records Request to find out whether
the City Commission approved this variance. He was told no variance was granted to
eliminate the buffer zone. Clear Copy has no room to provide a landscape hedge without
significantly altering their plans.
With regard to the fire truck, Dr. Roberts presented documentation to the Board of Zoning
40
MEETING MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
,
MA Y 7, 1996
Appeals showing that it cannot legally access the site. Mr. Haag said the Fire Department
had no concerns about this situation, and this is the way it has been done in the past. If
there is a fire, since the truck cannot get on the site, it will have to park in the street,
blocking additional fire and rescue vehicles from getting to the site. This wfll affect Dr.
Roberts' property in addition to affecting the site. Dr. Roberts is also concerned about
hazardous wastes produced by Clear Copy that might affect his property.
With regard to recyclables, Mr. Haag testified that he was not familiar with the City
Ordinances. Dr. Roberts provided copies of the City Ordinances requiring containerized
refuse service on commercial properties.
This site plan has been revised to totally eliminate the dumpster area which violates the
City Ordinances. During a previous City Commission meeting, Mr. Feldman stated that this
4,000 square foot print shop, which is larger than Kinko's, will generate only one garbage
can per week in addition to the recyclables. The City approved curbside pickup. No other
print shop in the City has curbside pickup. They have Code required containerized pickup. ~-
Ms. Heyden testified that the truck that picks up recyclables is smaller. There is one
smaller truck, but it cannot pick up what is legafly required by City Ordinances. The
recycling truck cannot access the property.
Mayor Taylor pointed out that Dr. Roberts was presenting repetitive information to the City
COmmission. He requested that Dr. Roberts only go over information relative to the
appeal.
Dr. Roberts stated that he was providing the Commission with information that was
presented at the Board of Zoning Appeals. Mr. Haag said Dr. Roberts was not correct at
that time, and Dr. Roberts is proving that he was correct during his testimony.
Dr. Robert said what Mr. Haag presented was a misrepresentation of facts. This site plan
negatively affects the property itself. In addition, since the site cannot properly get rid of
garbage, it will affect his property. These are requirements under a determination of minor
or major site plan modification. Service vehicles cannot get on the property, and Mr. Haag
stated that it was up to the applicant to be able to get the vehicles into the loading zone.
The only way they can access the loading zone is to enter through an exit. There is an
Ordinance which prevents this. Therefore, it negatively affects the property. In addition,
there is a 6" electric meter which protrudes into the loading zone; therefore, it is not nearly
as wide as it was presented to be. The Land Development Regulations clearly state what
a minor modification is. To be a minor modification, it must be a non-impacting
modification with no adverse affects on the approved site plan and no affect on adjacent
properties. In evaluating the plans, four of the criteria clearly indicate this is a major
modification.
Dr. Roberts stated that the lighting plan is insufficient, and does not meet City standards.
41
MEETING MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MAY 7,1996
It adversely affects this site and his property. If the property itself, or adjacent properties
are impacted at all, the modification is major.
At the conclusion of Dr. Roberts' presentation, Mayor Taylor advised the Commissioners
that their duty was to either affirm or deny the Board of Zoning Appeals' decision to uphold
the Planning Director's determination of a minor site plan modification for this project.
Vice Mayor Jaskiewicz does not feel anything presented tonight was anything different
from what was presented in the past.
Motion
Vice Mayor Jaskiewicz moved that we confirm the board's recommendation that this is a
minor site plan modification. Commissioner Tillman seconded the motion which carried
unanimously.
Dr. Roberts stated that he will follow through with a lawsuit.
3. Update on the Bay Club
Attorney Cherof advised that after conferring with the Police Department and setting out
a strategy to deal with a number of problems in the vicinity of the Bay Club, all of which are
linked to the Bay Club operation, a seven or eight-fold attack has been prepared to
address the continuing problems. It is the consensus of City administration that what is
happening in the area will be a focus in terms of enforcement of our City Codes, the State
traffic laws, enforcement of the State Alcoholic Beverage laws, and Occupational License
violations.
A meeting is scheduled for Monday at Royal Palm Clubhouse with business owners and
residents to seek their help to allow us to post as many tow-away zone signs as possible
and to enforce that signage. We hope those activities will bring that operation into strict
compliance with how businesses ~hould be operating in Boynton Beach.
Commissioner Bradley would like to see emphasis inside the Club as well. He
understands alcohol is being served to minors. He asked if undercover operations could
be conducted as well as the items mentioned.
Attorney Cherof advised that there will be undercover operations at that location. If
violations are found, arrests will be made.
Vice Mayor Jaskiewicz was of the opinion that if such violations are found, they could come
under the jurisdiction of the Nuisance Abatement Board. If the operations persist, the
business could be closed.
42
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MARCH 19, 1996
Based upon what he had to go through, he requested that the lien be reduced to $250.00,
which equals the administrative costs.
Mayor Taylor asked if the original problem was that the buildings were brought in prior to
being permitted on that property. Pastor Sanderson said his plans had been submitted for
cursory review. The buildings were brought in because Pratt Whitney could not store them.
Motion
Mayor Taylor passed the gavel and moved to satisfy the lien with an additional $50.00, for
a total of $250.00. Commissioner Tillman second the motion, which carried 5-0.
3. Minor Site Plan Modification for Clear Copy
City Attorney Cherof stated that in September of 1995, the Commission approved a site
plan submitted by Clear Copy. An adjacent property owner, Dr. Mark Roberts, appealed
the Commission's approval of the site plan and raised a number of technical issues with
respect to compliance with the Code. That matter is still pending. A few weeks ago, Clear
Copy indicated that they wished to submit a modified site plan. There is a specific
procedure set forth in Chapter 4 of the Land Development Regulations (Section 9) that
deals with how the City evaluates a request for modification of a site plan. It either makes
a determination that it is a minor modification, which is handled administratively, or it
makes a determination that it is a major modification, in which case it is treated as an
original site plan. Under the terms of our Code, the determination of whether it is minor or
major modification is left to the discretion of the Planning and Zoning Director. In the
backup, there is an analysis made by the Planning and Zoning Director, and the conclusion
that this is a minor modification of the site plan and it is to proceed administratively.
The reason this is before the Commission is because the matter is pending in the Courts
on appeal, and the adjacent property owner, through his attorney, made a request that if
there was to be a determination of a minor versus major modification, that they have the
opportunity to come before the Commission in a public fashion and state their opinion and
have the opportunity to express their opinion to the Commission, perhaps to persuade the
Commission that staff had made the wrong determination in that regard.
Additionally, there was an issue with respect to interpretation of the Code, which is usually
not a matter left to the discretion of the Commission. Rather, the interpretation of the
Zoning Code is left to the Planning and Zoning Director. That involves an interpretation of
31
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MARCH 19, 1996
Chapter 2, Section 4, Subsection J of the Code, which provides with respect to structures
that house eaves shall not overhang or exceed the setback lines for more than two feet.
The beginning part of that section indicates that they are talking about structures in all
zoning districts, not specifically residential. Therefore, we construe the words "house
eaves" to mean structure eaves. In fact, Tambri Heyden or William Hukill will explain that
that interpretation has been consistently applied, or at least applied to some degree, by the
Building and Zoning Departments from time to time to include all structures, not simply
residential or house structures.
City Attorney Cheraf stated that this matter should be treated as a quasi-judicial
proceeding. At the conclusion of the presentation, all that the Commission is asked to do
is to acknowledge and ratify or endorse the interpretation by Tambri Heyden, or if the
Commission does not agree that the interpretation is correct, to direct her to reconsider it.
Additionally, with regard to the interpretation of the section of the Code that City Attorney
Cherof described regarding the eaves overhanging the setback lines, if the Commission
does not agree with his interpretation, he should be directed to provide an amendment to
the Code to clarify that. At this time, all those who intended to testify this evening were
sworn by City Attorney Cherof.
Ms. Heyden stated that she has been a municipal planner for over ten years. Prior to
coming to the City of Boynton Beach in 1987, she was a planner for the City of
Williamsburg, Virginia. She reviewed Section 9 of the City Site Plan Review Ordinance.
She said there are seven criteria that are spelled out in the Code that are used as
guidelines in making that determination. Using the overhead projector, she displayed an
overlay of the site plan that was approved in September of 1995. She reviewed each
criterion and compared the two site plans to show how she came up with this
determination.
In making a minor/major modification determination, the planning and zoning director shall
consider the following:
1. Does the modification increase the buildable square footage of the
development by more than 5 percent?
Ms. Heyden displayed the approved site plan and stated that there are two driveways that
were proposed (one an ingress only and one an egress only). The egress only was on 7th
Street. She pointed out the location of the building. It faces Boynton Beach Boulevard.
32
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MARCH 19, 1996
The square footage of the building has not changed. The parking that is provided is
exactly what is required by Code. There are no surplus parking spaces.
2. Does the modification reduce the provided number of parking spaces below
the required number of parking spaces?
Ms. Heyden advised that there are no changes in the number of parking spaces; just the
location of the parking spaces.
3. Does the modification cause the development to be below the development
standards for the zoning district in which it is located, or other applicable
standards in the Land Development Regulations?
Ms. Heyden stated that this modification does not change, and continues to meet, the C-3
zoning regulations (the building and site regulations). She provided the staff comments
that have been generated on this request, and she used the Technical Review Committee
form to generate these comments, which is unusual. However, in light of the pending
litigation, this was the quickest and most effective way of obtaining those comments for the
Commission this evening. Once compliance with those staff comments has occurred, this
will ensure that all safety and technical concerns, as well as the Code requirements, have
been met.
4. Does the modification have an adverse effect on adjacent or nearby property,
or reduce required physical buffers such as fences, trees, or hedges?
Ms. Heyden stated that the modifications include replacement of the N.W. 1 st Avenue
ingress only driveway for a N.W. 7th Street ingress only driveway. Instead of one driveway
onto 7th Street and one driveway onto 1 st Street, there is an ingress only driveway onto
7th Street and an egress only driveway onto 7th Street. Therefore, both driveways are now
on 7th Street. (There was a change in the driveway locations.)
There has also been a flip-flop of the location of the row of parking spaces with the access
aisle to the spaces. The access aisle was on the east side, and the parking spaces were
on the west side. They have now been reversed.
There has also been a switch of the handicap space location, and window sills have been
added to the building exterjor. Regular parking spaces have been switched as well.
33
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MARCH 19,1996
The driveway change meets the locational requirements of the Code, and does not
negatively affect adjacent properties. The changes to the parking lot and handicap space
are internal to the development and have no affect at all on the adjacent properties.
With regard to reduction of physical buffers, this is consistent with the September approval
wherein the City Commission determined that the existing landscape buffer between
Dr. Roberts' property and the Clear Copy property was acceptable.
5. Does the modification adversely affect the elevation design of the structure
below the standards stated in the Community Design Plan?
Ms. Heyden advised that the windowsills are consistent with the Community Design Plan.
In fact, she felt they enhance the elevation design.
6. Does the modified development meet the concurrency requirements of the
Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan?
Ms. Heyden advised that the modifications have no impact at all on the previously granted
concurrency certification.
7. Does the modification alter the site layout so that the modified site plan does
not resemble the approved site plan?
Ms. Heyden said this really boils down to assessing magnitude of change, and the
Department has consistently applied this criterion, as evidenced through its quarterly
reporting to the Commission.
Ms. Heyden stated that when you compare the original site plan with the modified site plan,
you will notice the following:
· There has been no change in the building location.
· The same building to parking relationship occurs. (The building is still in the
front, and the parking is still in the rear.)
· There has been one change in the number of driveways or type of driveways
(two-way versus one-way and ingress versus egress).
· The service areas are in the same general location and the method of refuse
collection has also not changed. We are continuing to allow curbside pickup
for the trash as well as the recyclables.
34
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MARCH 19, 1996
. The degree, quality, quantity, and location of landscaping has not been
changed.
. The type of parking spaces (90 degree, angle, parallel) has not been
changed.
. The location of impervious areas (parking lot, sidewalks, structures) has
virtually not changed.
. The building height, style, type, and use have not changed.
. The utility service modification is to the extent that it has no effect on other
site improvements.
In addition to ratification of her determination of minor modification, she sought a
determination from the Commission regarding the legislative intent when the house eave
section of the Zoning Code was adopted. She asked if it was the intent to allow this
section to apply to commercial buildings. Historically, overhangs on commercial buildings,
if they are detected at the inspection stage, have been allowed and have ranged between
one inch and four inches. They have included such things as the stucco on the buBdings
that adds a little volume or depth to the exterior, windowsills, and cornices.
The Clear Copy building's windowsills, com ices, and stucco extend beyond the setback
lines on the north, which is the front, and also the side property line on the east. Her report
indicated three inches, one and a quarter inches, and ten inches, respectively. However,
the applicant has submitted a package to the City Commission this evening. This package
shows some photographs and drawings of the overhang. There is a little confusion about
what the maximum encroachment or overhang is, ten inches or six inches. On the permit
plans, the section drawing was labeled a ten inch overhang. When we scaled it, it showed
six inches. She believes Mr. Feldman is going to tell the Commission tonight that it is
approximately four inches.
Ms. Heyden requested ratification of the minor modification determination, and a
determination of the Commission's legislative intent on the house overhang application.
Vice Mayor Jaskiewicz asked if there are any other buildings in the area that have a similar
overhang. Ms. Heyden advised that the adjacent building has a similar overhang situation
for gutters.
It seemed to Bob Feldman, the co-owner of Clear Copy, that Dr. Roberts brings up minute
things and makes them major. He reiterated that the original agreement showed a ten inch
overhang. He measured the overhang, and it is six inches. With regard to the parking lot,
35
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH. FLORIDA
MARCH 19, 1996
the handicap spot was too much of a slope at that point. For safety purposes, it was flip-
flopped back to make it a little more accessible. With regard to the color of the building,
Mr. Feldman stated that a tangerine color was approved by the City Commission.
However, after the building was painted, it looked a little more pink than tangerine. He is
currently trying to get that toned down a little. With regard to the color of the windows,
they were painted bronze because the windows on Dr. Roberts' property, Wendy's, etc.,
were bronze. He later found out that they are supposed to be white. He has a choice to
paint them white, which he feels will peel off in six months because the windows are metal.
He has bent over backwards since day one to meet City Code. Even though staff
determined this to be a minor modification which could be handled administratively, it is
before the Commission because of Dr. Roberts. He has been here 21 years. The City has
been excellent to him, but because of litigation involving Dr. Roberts, we are going back
and forth on every little item. Mr. Feldman said he will do whatever the City wants him to
do. He said he originally wanted a flat roof. There would have been no overhang at all.
However, the City required an S-tile roof. Therefore, it has to hang over a little.
Reginald Stambaugh of Miller and Woods, the attorney representing Dr. Mark Roberts,
advised that Dr. Roberts asked him and his mother, Commissioner Carol Roberts, to speak
on, his behalf. He said Dr. Roberts could not attend this meeting because he was only
notified of this minor modification on Friday and already scheduled an appointment out of
State. Mr. Stambaugh said practically everything that could be changed was changed,
except the building itself. He said this is a major modification. He did not think there was
good enough notice for him to be prepared to address everything as it has been presented.
He said all we are trying to do is follow the Land Development Regulations. He introduced
Commissioner Roberts.
Mayor Taylor welcomed County Commissioner Roberts to Boynton Beach. Commissioner
Roberts read a letter, dated March 19, 1996, from Mark E. Roberts, D.D.S. to Mayor Taylor
and Commissioners. In this letter, Dr. Roberts states that he believes this is a major site
plan modification. A copy of this letter is attached to these minutes.
Mr. Stambaugh focused on the key points in this letter which he believes would persuade
the Commission to ask staff to reconsider its determination of a minor modification.
Mr. Stambaugh said proper procedure is not being followed in this case. He said if we are
not going to follow the Land Development Regulations, then we should not have them.
The purpose of the Land Development Regulations is to deal effectively with future
problems which may occur as a result of the use and development of land. In the instant
36
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MARCH 19,1996
case, we are finding that there are problems being created. We are not following the
purpose in this instance.
Mr. Stambaugh reread the portion of Dr. Roberts' letter which lists the ways in which the
new site plan alters the approved site plan so that it does not resemble the approved site
plan. He stated that the new plans show the need for a I~nd dedication to the City. He
asked if the City staff, by mere determination of a minor modification site approval, is
approving the City's acceptance of a land dedication. He asked if the City Commission
allows this. He said this is a major modification. He stated that two other points have not
been remedied with this new modification. They are as follows:
1. The fire truck cannot legally access the property. LOR requires safe and
efficient access to be provided for emergency and service vehicles to this
property. This standard has been required of all commercial developments
in the past.
2. City ordinances governing garbage pickup require containerized garbage
pickup. There is a requirement for containerized receptacles for commercial
properties. Section 10-25 states as follows: "Containerized refuse service
shall be carried out by the city at commercial or multifamily residential
establishments in the promotion of improved sanitary conditions...."
Mr. Stambaugh said there is no more containerized commercial collection.
Mr. Stambaugh stated that there has not been an environmental review. Section 11.3 of
the Code states as follows: "... in all cases approval of the environmental review permit
shall precede approval of the site plan."
Mr. Stambaugh advised that the new plan has not submitted the required irrigation plan.
He was in possession of a report from Gee & Jensen stating that Chapter 481.321 of the
Florida Statutes requires that a licensed landscape architect prepare and sign all
landscape plans unless for a single-family home. The landscape plan was submitted by
an architect and this is contrary to State law. Therefore, the required landscape design is
incomplete. In Gee & Jensen's March 14, 1996 letter to Ms. Heyden, it states as follows:
. There is no landscape buffer proposed at the east side of the parking lot
requiring a variance.
. The dimensions of the parking lot are inconsistent between the site plan and
the construction drawing. In either case, a variance would be required.
37
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MARCH 19, 1996
· These changes are indicative of major plan changes.
Mr. Stambaugh read Dr. Roberts' March 19, 1996 letter addressed to Mayor Taylor and the
Commissioners regarding determination of the legislative intent of the zoning code. A copy
of this letter is attached to these minutes. Mr. Stambaugh advised that Dr. Roberts wants
City staff to take a close look at the Code and comply.
Mr. Stambaugh focused on the following three criteria when determining if a modification
is minor or major:
1 . Does the modification cause the development to be below the development
standards for the zoning district in which it is located, or other applicable
standards in the Land Development Regulations?
Mr. Stambaugh stated that we already have gone over some of the below standard
requirements. It does not meet the Code sections.
2. Does the modification have an adverse effect on adjacent or nearby property
or reduce required physical buffers, such as fences, trees, or hedges?
Mr. Stambaugh stated that there is no buffer. Therefore, a problem exists.
3. Does the modification alter the site layout so that the modified site plan does
not resemble the approved site plan?
Mr. Stambaugh referred to the changes in the parking and access, and the land dedication
to the City without Commission approval. He requested that the Commission deem this
to be a major modification.
Ms. Heyden advised that many of the changes that Mr. Stambaugh mentioned this evening
were necessary to meet the staff conditions of the original approval. Nine times out of ten,
when you approve a site plan, the site plan that gets submitted as part of permitting,
approved subject to staff comments, does not look like the approved site plan. That in and
of itself does not constitute a minor site plan modification. The site plan was approved
subject to staff comments, which included the change in the dumpster to can pickup. Light
pole changes oftentimes change between site plan approval and permit review because
the photo cell illumination plans are not required until time of permitting. Oftentimes that
38
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MARCH 19, 1996
requires some adjustment in the light pole locations. The buffer between
Dr. Roberts' property and this property continues to be the same buffer design that was
approved as part of the original approval, which was knowing that the width of the
landscape strip was less than two and a half feet. The loading zone was barely shifted in
an east/west direction, but is basically in the same location. This is a very insignificant
change. The driveway has changed from 15 feet to 12 feet. This still meets Code and is
a very insignificant change. Cans are considered containerized pickup. An environmental
review has been approved, subject to certain conditions. The conditions and the permit
are not issued until just prior to an occupational license being issued. Irrigation plans are
not required as part of a site plan. They are required as part of the permit review. In
conclusion, Ms. Heyden said the Legal Department informed her that they had notified
Dr. Roberts' personally via a telephone call on March 5th that this was considered a minor
modification and that it would be going before the City Commission on March 19th.
Commissioner Bradley inquired about the land dedication and the fire trucks. William
Hukill, Director of Development, pointed out the land dedication. Sometime in the.past,
because of the vehicular traffic on 7th coming from the fence company on the other side
of the tracks, the radius was made larger. As a result, there is a 21" triangular piece of
land where the sidewalks come together. This has to either be dedicated to the City to
make the sidewalk fit on City property, or an easement or waiver has to be granted.
With regard to access, Ms. Heyden said the Fire Department feels they have adequate
ability to access this property for fire protection.
With regard to accepting a piece of property of any size on behalf of the City Commission
and City, Mr. Stambaugh asked Ms. Heyden if she takes this lightly. Ms. Heyden stated
that that method of resolving that issue was not reviewed by her department. She felt it
would be appropriate to address this question to the Building Department. Mr. Stambaugh
asked the same question of Mr. Hukill. Mr. Hukill indicated that he does not take this
lightly. Mr. Stambaugh felt the City Commission should make the decision regarding the
donation of land, no matter what the size of the property.
Mr. Stambaugh asked for the Code Section that deals with trash cans/containers.
Ms. Heyden did not have a Code book in front of her. She stated that the City allows can
pickup as well as dumpsters for trash collection. Mr. Stambaugh felt you need to take extra
care with commercial properties. He said the Code spells out what a container is, and he
left it to City Commission to make that determination. Section 10-25 states as follows:
"Containerized refuse service shall be carried out by the city at commercial or multifamily
39
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MARCH 19, 1996
residential establishments...." Mr. Stambaugh said there is a contrast between 10-25 and
10-24 (residential noncontainerized collection), which appears to be regular garbage
collection.
With regard to the buffer zone, Mr. Stambaugh said just because the Code was not in
compliance the first time, does not mean that it should not be in compliance the second
time under an application for modification. Mr. Stambaugh requested the Commission to
follow the Code and consider this a major modification.
Ms. Heyden said the Commission has previously approved, in special cases, under certain
circumstances, can pickup for commercial properties. Also, we have followed the Code,
and by allowing this minor site plan modification in no way jeopardizes anything in the Land
Development Regulations. Over the past five years, we have been very consistent in
applying what is a minor modification and what is a major modification. This is nothing
more than we have done in the past.
Mr. Stambaugh stated that the Land Development Regulations spell out everything. City
staff was supplied with Gee & Jenson's reports. If the City Commission does not feel that
they have done any wrong, we are going to have to let the Courts decide this matter.
City Attorney Cherof stated that Mr. Stambaugh has invited the Commission to substitute
its opinion for the opinion of the Planning and Zoning Director, and to make a
determination that this is a major site plan modification. That would be in violation of the
Code. One of the provisions of the Code gives the Planning and Zoning Director the
discretion to interpret the Code. There is recourse to Dr. Roberts through the Code as
well. There is a provision in the Code that states that if any aggrieved party does not like
the interpretation of the Planning and Zoning Director on any issue, that they have
recourse to the Board of Zoning Appeals. The aggrieved party may obtain a reversal from
the Board of Zoning Appeals of the interpretation of the Code by the Planning and Zoning
Director. The Code does not always address each and every issue specifically on point.
That is why the Planning and Zoning Director has the power to make interpretation. The
Commission does not have the power to override the opinion of the Planning and Zoning
Director in interpreting the Code. The matter is before the Commission to listen to all of
this and suggest to the Planning and Zoning Director that she may want to reconsider it,
but the Commission cannot require her to do that and cannot override her.
With respect to the other issue regarding the interpretation of the overhang issue, City
Attorney Cherof said that is an interpretation that staff has made. The same recourse is
40
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MARCH 19, 1996
available to Dr. Roberts if he does not agree that that is the proper interpretation of the
Code by the paid professional administrators of the Code. Dr. Roberts has recourse to
the Board of Zoning Appeals. City Attorney Cherof stated that they are wrong with respect
to telling you that their recourse is to the court. There is an administrative remedy available
to them. It is built into the Code to specifically avoid putting people in the position where
they have to go to court to make their points of interpretation known to the advisory boards
then to the Commission. He suggested that if the Commission believes the Planning and
Zoning Director has made the proper interpretation, or wishes not to interfere with that
interpretation be it correct or incorrect, the Commission needs do nothing. The
Commission can simply ratify her interpretation.
With respect to the overhang issue, City Attorney Cherof stated that the only reason that
is before the Commission is if the Commission does not believe that staff has been
properly interpreting that in applying it to commercial properties, the Commission needs
to tell him so that he can clarify that provision of the Code.
Commissioner Bradley asked if the ratification is accomplished through silence or through
a motion. City Attorney Cherof said it could be by either. Mr. Stambaugh had a difference
of legal opinion on the interpretation of that clause. He believes a ratification constitutes
an action by the City Commission which would essentially override any of the actions which
the administration or City staff would be making. He said if this process is going to go
through as a minor modification, then it should be treated as a minor modification. City
Attorney Cherof took it from this comment that Mr. Stambaugh is asking the Commission
not to take any action. Mr. Stambaugh said we have had an opportunity to speak on this
issue, and we are requesting that the City Commission take the action of deeming this a
major modification. City Attorney Cherof advised the City Commission that it does not
have the power to do that.
George Wasser, a practicing architect for 33 years, State Threshold Inspector, and
Licensed General Contractor in the State of Florida, has been a resident here and in
operation here for about 23 years. He stated that he was called in some time ago as a
consultant for Clear Copy, to review some of the comments, look at the property, and see
if there was anything of merit in these complaints. He checked the property and made a
few recommendations. Later, he found out that the City had already made those
comments. Mr. Wasser found the items that Mr. Stambaugh brought up to be the same
kind of rhetoric that he read in Gee & Jenson's report. He said it ignores a lot of things.
There is simple, logical reasoning behind all of the City comments and approvals. In his
experience as a professional, he totally agreed with the Building Department and the
41
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MARCH 19, 1996
Planning Department. He also agreed with City Attorney Cherof that there is a discretion
involved in everything, and not everything is definable. That is why we have staff to
interpret and enforce the intent of the Code. He believes that has been done here.
Ciro Gomez, President of Ciro Gomez Inc., is a general contractor. He had the opportunity
to build Dr. Roberts' building, and found the City to be very cooperative. He said he was
sure that if he was to go back and review Dr. Roberts' building and found that one of the
setbacks was 15 feet, that he would have to shave off all the stucco because at the time
when the surveys were done to determine setback requirements, only cement block is up,
not stucco, bands, or any other exterior applications to enhance the building. He also said
that an eave to him, as a builder and professional, is a projection from a building that will
protect you from sun or rain, or could possibly be enclosed and enlarge the area of the
building without getting a building permit. He said what we have here is something that
was done within the original scale dimension by City staff and it was reduced by 40 percent
and still accommodates a requirement of cross ventilation for this particular building. He
has the task of building this building, but needs some direction. The eave was built. His
trusses and overhangs were inspected and passed. It was not until an objection was
raised in regard to the eaves that he was given a red tag. The projection from the stucco
band out is only two inches to accommodate this particular screen ventfng. We are not
looking at rain protection. He cannot see them later trying to enclose underneath that
eave. With regard to the color of the windows, the intent was to maintain a more
traditional, conservative, Mediterranean look. Bronzed window frames would enhance the
building much more than white window frames.
Vice Mayor Jaskiewicz stated that the word "house" in Section 4 seems to be causing a
problem. She suggested changing that word to "building" to avoid any misinterpretation
in the future.
Mayor Taylor said this is about the third time he has been through this matter in detail, and
he did not hear much that he had not heard previously. He said he has considered every
single one of these comments over and over again. He felt the Commission addressed
them adequately. He did not think anybody ever took it trivial. He felt staff were
perfectionists. He respected Dr. Roberts' opinion. He felt that staff has addressed many
of the items that Dr. Roberts had brought up. He felt a lot has been done to address some
of Dr. Roberts' concerns. He said Dr. Roberts' made it clear the very first time he appeared
before the Commission that he did not want this building to go up under any
circumstances. Mayor Taylor was comfortable with staff's recommendation. He felt we are
doing this within our Codes and in many cases, exceeding the Code.
42
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
MARCH 19, 1996
Motion
Commissioner Bradley moved to ratify the Planning and Zoning Director's determination
of minor site plan modification in this site plan review. Commissioner Tillman seconded
the motion, which carried 5-0.
The legislative intent of the house eaves was addressed next. Mayor Taylor and City
Attorney Cherof felt this section of the Code was clear.
However, to avoid any misinterpretation or confusion in the future, there was a consensus
of the Commission that the verbiage be changed. City Attorney Cherof will rework that
section of the Code with staff.
XI. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
None.
XII. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT
1. Finalization of Contract Extension with Edward Garcia re: Marina
Property
2. Settlement Agreement re: Meadows 300 Property
3. Executive Session re: Fire Union Contract
City Manager Parker hoped to finalize the real estate extension agreement with Mr. Garcia
by Friday. Therefore, next week, she will be requesting a brief Special City Commission
meeting to ratify that extension as soon as possible. Also, she will be requesting a date
for an Executive Session regarding the Firefighter Union negotiations next week.
City Attorney Cherof also requested a special meeting on Monday. He advised that
progress has been made on the language in the settlement agreement with the 300
Properties (Meadows Drive). He requested permission to bring this back to the City
Commission for review in order to expedite the resolution of this matter.
At Commissioner Bradley's suggestion, these items will be discussed at the March 25th
meeting at 7:00 p.m. The Executive Session was scheduled for 6:30 p.m.
43