Loading...
AGENDA DOCUMENTS VIII DEVELOPMENT PLANS C cc: Plan Dev PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM NO. 95-184 Agenda Memorandum for May 2, 1995 City Commission Meeting TO: Carrie Parker City Manager FROM: Tambri J. HeYden~J Planning and Zoning Director DATE: April 27, 1995 SUBJECT: Lighthouse Grille Restaurant - File #794 (Request for additional time to resubmit site plan satisfying recommended approval conditions) Janet Hall is the owner of the property planned for a future restaurant to be known as the Lighthouse Grille and to be located on the north side and eastern terminus of Boynton Beach Boulevard (partially under the former, proposed Boynton Beach Boulevard bridge). On June 7, 1994, the Commission reviewed a request from Mrs. Hall to waive a second resubmittal applica~~9n fee that had been collected during the site plan review of~proposed restaurant. The waiver was submitted for review because based on the extensive number of staff-generated site plan comments and the magnitude of the issues involved (mangrove preservation, incomplete traffic study report and pending resolution of the Boynton Beach Boulevard bridge location issue) which resulted in a negative recommendation from staff for approval), Mrs. Hall had requested withdrawal of her application at the May 9, 1994 community Redevelopment Advisory Board (CRAB) so that she could resubmit her plans at a later date after she had an opportunity to address the issues of concern. Realizing that it may be some time before she could resubmit plans that were in an approvable form, Mrs. Hall requested a waiver of the second review fee she had paid. At the June 7th meeting, the Commission tabled action on Mrs. Hall's fee waiver request until such time after she resubmits plans, giving her until April 1995 to resubmit, at which time the Commission would take action on the fee waiver basing their decision on whether the resubmitted plans are significantly different and on the cost of the additional staff time necessary to complete review of the resubmitted plans. Mrs. Hall is now requesting additional time to resubmit the plans due to problems with getting the information from her architect in time to resubmit prior to the Commission's deadline of May 1, 1995. Please place this request for consideration on the City Commission agenda for the May 2, 1995 meeting. tjh xc: Ann Ford, Downtown Development Coordinator Michael Haag, Zoning and Site Development Administrator central File A:LGrilTEx )_1. C, IW ." April 12. 1995 Carrie Parker. City Manager Boynton Beach City Hall 100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd. Boynton Beach. FL Re: Extension of Time to Correct Restaurant Plans Dear Carrie: The architect I hired to design restaurant plans for my property at the end of Boynton Beach Blvd. has been unable to forward corrections requested by city staff. As you know. he has moved out of state and it is difficult to coordinate. I am currently working with Kevin Hallahan. City of Boynton Beach Forester. and the appropriate environmental agencies to attempt to meet the environmental regulations pertaining to this site plan. It will be necessary for me to request an additional extension in order to comply with regulatory agencies. I intend to work with a new architectural firm. Robert G. Currie and Associate~ to expedite the process with the use of a local firm. As you know. the regulatory process is a lengthy one. Therefore. it is necessary for me to request another extension. I am sorry to inconvenience both you and the Planning Department. but appreciate your assistance with this matter. Sincerely. ~C~/~ Jan~t Hall MINUTES - REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDI- - JUNE 7, 1994 Mr. Frederick advised that the City will have to revise the master plan and it will take architectural work. Further, it will be necessary to. develop a phasing type program and costs. When the City is ready to bid out the project, construction drawings will be necessary. Commissioner Aguila suggested retaining Gee & Jenson to modify the master plan. When that is complete, if the City then wishes to retain another firm, that would be the time to do it. Commissioner Aguila stated that no other firm will touch Gee & Jenson's plan just to make an addition. Gee & Jenson can modify the master plan on a hourly basis. Mr. Frederick reminded the Commission that our contract with Gee & Jenson allowed for a continuation. He assumes the fees will continue. Vice Mayor Matson stated that she felt there was a consensus that the Commission wants those fees to remain since it is an open-ended contract. Consensus There was a consensus of the Commission to retain Gee & Jenson to modify the master plan on an hourly basis using the fees stipulated in the open-ended contract. Vice Mayor Matson advised that Ms. Hall's request would now be considered. IX. E. Review of ~anet Hall's request to ~ive second application tee tor Lighthouse Grill Restaurant City Manager Parker reported that in January, 1993, Mrs. Hall submitted her Lighthouse Square project for permits, received staff comments and paid the ori- ginal fee. Mrs. Hall's architect moved out of town and there were modifications which were required by staff. A significant time period elapsed between the staff comments and the review. The time period set forth in the Code has lapsed, and Mrs. Hall has been advised by staff that a second application fee is required. She is requesting a waiver of the fee. The major outstanding item which has caused a great deal of the delay is that the property is adjacent to the Boynton Beach Boulevard bridge right-of-way. FOOT has been negotiating with oEP on the location of the bridge. They have been reluctant to move on any projects in relation to the bridge. The parking plan submitted by Mrs. Hall shows parking on the FOOT right-of-way. Staff advised that they cannot approve that unless we have written approval allowing that parking on the bridge right-of-way, or an alternative agreement such as parking under the bridge span if the bridge is located at Boynton Beach Boulevard. Mrs. Hall and her architect have been attempting to work with FOOT to get this approval. So far, they have been unsuccessful. There is an another ninety-day time period set forth in the Code for staff to process this request onto the Community Redevelopment Advisory Board. It was processed to the CRAB Board because there was no administrative means of tabling it from a staff position. There were major items still outstanding at that time and Mrs. Hall requested the CRAB Board table the application so that she would be able to address the items before moving forward. The application was tabled. Mrs. Hall is requesting additional time and that this time be considered under her first fee submittal and a second application fee not be required. - 24 - BOn BEACH:-FloRirij nu,u__- ..,. JUNE 7, 1994 ...", Commissioner Aguila expressed concern over waiving the fee. He would be more comfortable tabling this item for a certain period of time in order to allow resolution of some of the issues. He feels this project was submitted before it was ready to be reviewed by anyone. He would support tabling this item for six months to allow them to seek the necessary approvals and address the comments without additional fees, but if, as a result of the reviews and permits, the project changes substantially and the review is being done again, the City should then consider a fee. Janet Hall. 326 SW 1st Avenue, said that part of the prOblem is that this parking with the-Sridge has been discussed for the past ten years. This involved a standing agreement that if the parking inside the property was lost, she would be allowed to use the area under the bridge for parking. When the plans were first submitted, and the comments received, her architect moved to New York. Also, her engineer transferred his offices to Texas. When the plans were finally resubmitted, she found a number of the items originally brought up had not been taken care of by either the architect or engineer. She was unaware of this and stated that it was beyond her control. She requested relief from the Commission. Vice Mayor Matson noted that she did not want to penalize Mrs. Hall for some- thing not of her doing. Mayor Pro Tem Bradley feels the Commission must be careful not to set a prece- dent with regard to waiving fees. He supports tabling this item for an extended period of time. Vice Mayor Matson explained that the Commission has waived fees in the past and would not be setting a precedent. The agenda back-up package contained informa- tion on previous fee waivers by the Commission. However, she also supports Commissioner Aguila'S recommendation so that if this application is resubmitted with a lot of modifications, it will be proof that the project was originally submitted too soon. In response to Commissioner Katz' question about whether or not any of the pre- vious fee waivers were similar to Mrs. Hall's, Ms. Parker said they are not, and nor are they similar to each other. Each one is considered on a case-by-case basis. Ms. Parker pointed out that Mrs. Hall paid $750 in 1993 for the first review, and $1,500 in April of 1994 as a new fee. One review and one resubm1t- tal of plans has occurred under that $1,500. Commissioner Katz feels the Commission should not waive fees, but pointed out that the time to consider the fee waiver may be when the plans are resubmitted and the modifications are reviewed. Ms. Parker pointed out that one of the outstanding issues with this project is that it is in an environmentally-sensitive area containing a large amount of mangroves on the property. One of the items the staff submitted as a comment is that the City will not comment on the environmental issues for this project, but forward those issues to the State agencies for review. If everything else is resolved, the environmental issue will still remain outstanding and will go through the process as outstanding at the City level. This will have to be rereviewed for environmental issues, and that will be considered a new submittal to the City when it comes back from the State agencies. - 2S - BOYNTON BEACH. FLORIDA ~UNE 7. 1994 Ms. Parker stated Mrs. Hall and her architect felt the City was holding up the project. The City was willing to review it for compliance with City Code, but the State agency review would necessitate major site plan changes that would require an entire rereview by staff. The City has agreed to put its comments on paper so that Mrs. Hall will have a starting point; however, the environmental issues will not receive any City comments. Ms. Parker suggested the City Commission put a timetable of approximately one year on this for the DOT situation and any other outstanding Code items which must be addressed by Mrs. Hall. After that, it should be a new submittal. The April, 1994 fee will hold until April, 1995, to allow sufficient time to get the minor Code comments taken care of and the application will move forward. Anything after that date will be a new review. Mrs. Hall stated that she never felt the City was holding up the project. The delay was on the part of the architect and engineer. She appreciates the compromise and hopes this will be resolved before April, 1995. Motion Commissioner Aguila moved that this fee will last for the reviews for the Code comments that she currently has outstanding. She has until April 1, 1995 to get those resolved under the current review system. Commissioner Katz seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. D. Other: 1. Stttl...nt ot Ewell M'ller Clai. This is for ratification of settlement of a claim involving charges of malicious prosecution and civil rights violation against the City and two Fire Inspectors. Vice Mayor Matson reminded Ms. Parker that in the past, she requested fonner City Manager Miller provide a breakdown of how the claim is comprised. She would like a chronological listing of the events of the claim and the costs associated with those events. Mr. Hawkins advised that this claim is still open. It is important to look at how much information the City puts in the document. City Manager Parker asked for clarification on what information the Commission wishes to see in the agenda back-up material. According to fonmer City Manager Miller, Ms. Parker has included the following: 1) the original demand; 2) the amount of the 11111 fees; 3) how much in City costs has been incurred; and 4} the projected cost if the City goes to trial. Vice Mayor Matson asked that Mr. Hawkins attempt to have Sewell, Todd & Broxton, Inc. provide the Commission with the same type of synopsis Roberts & Reynolds provides. The information from Roberts & Reynolds is confidential and is sent to the Commissioners under separate cover. Motion Commissioner Aguila moved to settle this per staff recommendation. Mayor Pro Tem Bradley seconded the motion, which carried unanimously. - 26 - FFU'11 (]"t.j I FFI>< Board of County Commissioners Ken L. Poster. Chairman _- Burt Aaronson, VIce ChairmAn Karen T: Marcus Carol A. Roberts Warren H. Newell Mary MCCarty Maude Ford Lee TOI 4ld' ".,....ti 70459 APR 13. 1995 9:54AM ~ P.B1 County AdmJnistrator Robt'l'l Weisman ,., ..., April 13, 1995 Departmonl of Environm.nt.1J RelOurc.. Mt'lntl8omClJ1t Ms. Ann Ford City of Boynton Beach 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard Boynton Bc:adl, FL 33425 Dear Ms. Ford: SUBJECT: PREAPPLlCATION MEETING. WATERFRONT LOT AT THE EXTREME EASTERN END OP BOYNTON BEACH BOULEV ARC This Jetter i. to oonfirm that a preappUeltloft meetiDS w. eonduc:ted Oil Pebnaary 22. 100.5 at the subject addreu by Ms. Deniso Malone oEttle Department to discuss wttJlDd permJttina ilIUM for Ms. Janet Hall. It we can be of t'unher asslstanee, pleue d(] not healtate w call Ms. Donlao Malone or me at (407) 233~2400. Sincerely, ~L'Q<J6 Barbara J. Co IUD)' , Environmem&l ProIf8lD Supervisor Coa$taland Wetlands Division . "An Equ<ll Opportunity. AHirm<Hivt) Action Employ~r' @t>I>fI(tJd:M~~ 3323 I.'Jlll~d~tc Road, Bldg. 502 We$t Falm Buch, Florida 33406 !407) 233.2-100 Suncom 274.2400 ~R-13-19~5 15:~1 4~7 ~21 4~b7 P.~2 TeRRe AprillJ, 1995 . treQlure .<. COOlt reo'Qnal plOnnlQ, 0 council Ms. Ann Ford, Community Development Director The City ofBoyntOD Beach 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard. Boynton Beach, Florida 32425 Dear Ms. Ford: As part of the Boynton Bead1 Chatrette study. the Treamre Coast RqponaJ P1ltftft"'B Counci11Udf all'Veyed the downtowD and SU1'1'OU:DdiDg area ofBoymon Beach. Included in the surwy WII8 the Janet Hall property located at the end of Boynton Beach Boulevard on the lntnKiouta1. The charrette plan suggests tbat a building could be located on the Janet Hall property that may be suitable for a waklnont restaurant or other non- residential use acceptable to the City. It is stair 8 undenstandiDa that the property omacr Us eum:Dtly worldna with the appropriate CDYiroamaJuJ ~cies to make sure that developmem of the site would be compatible with and meet all envimamentlJ requirements. Coordinator JZ2I ..W. ~n dawn_ blvd- sun. 201 . ~..e. bolt ~ DGlm ellV. flOria MttO DIlOl'lIt (4CI7J Z:Z~ .- ..~ AftA" ,,_ ,."'" .....A .tIIlIa, TOTAL P.02