Loading...
LEGAL APPROVAL (J:1U City of 'Boynton 'Beach 100 ~. tJJoynton tJJeadi tJJoufevard P.O. tJJ~310 tJJoynton tJJeadi, !fforidil33425-0310 City 9iafl: (561) 375-6000 !f>1X: (561) 375-6090 December 19, 1997 Donaldson Hearing 1070 E. Indiantown Road Jupiter, Florida 33477 Re: Via Lugano aka Melear PUD (multi-family) File number: NWSP 97-019 - 54 Sheets identified as 2nd Review, New Site Plan Location: Southwest corner of Sandalwood Drive and Congress Avenue Dear Mr. Hearing: Enclosed is the City of Boynton Beach Development Order regarding Commission approval of your site plan request, regarding the above property. Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact this office at (561) 375-6260. Sincerely, ,.-. 'J'II ( JO' . './'. (fLU- ( wcVcltu c{u...... I l,'-\"'-' 10... . I' / _ o { I Tambri J. Heyden, AICP Planning and Zoning Director TJH:jbg Attachment Xc: Central File J:\SHRDA T A \Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\MELEAR\Via Lugano\NWSP\Dev Order letter .doc 5tmemas gateway to tfu gufjstream DEVELOPMENT ORDEP-- C. ( OF BOYNTON BEACH, FL.....RIDA C!e: ~~ ~/c'~~ iOO ~ @ ~ ~ W ~ iN! ! J ' : I PLANNltlG A~:- d ZONING DEPT PROJECT NAME: Via Lugano apartments at the Melear PUD APPLICANT: Thomas Cavanaugh, P.A.C. Land Development Corporation APPLICANT'S AGENT: Donaldson Hearing APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: Suite 402, 1070 E. Indiantown Road, Jupiter, FL 33477 DATE OF HEARING BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: December 16, 1997 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: New Site Plan LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Southwest corner of Sandalwood Drive and Congress Avenue DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO. THIS MATTER came on to be heard before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida on the date of hearing stated above. The City Commission having considered the relief sought by the applicant and heard testimony from the applicant, members of city administrative staff and the public finds as follows: 1. Application for the relief sought was made by the Applicant in a manner consistent with the requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations. 2, The Applicant .lL. HAS HAS NOT established by substantial competent evidence a basis for the relief requested. 3. The conditions for development requested by the Applicant, administrative staff, or suggested by the public and supported by substantial competent evidence are as set forth on Exhibit "B" with notation "Included". 4. The Applicant's application for relief is hereby . .lL. GRANTED subject to the conditions referenced in paragraph 3 hereof. DENIED 5. This Order shall take effect immediately upon issuance by the City Clerk. 6. All further development on the property shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of this order. 7. Other \ \\\\ \ 11111/ 111111 :-,.\\ Y II/, . / ,,/.: Le~A ~.~' ~o N.,.O I'~ DATED: /c#//9/??, ~~~,/~~~'''' fo~,,"-;;'eiti.'!'<s;%;. City Clerk g .).. ..~cp ~" (<\ ~ ::- I- 1--.;: '0\ 7 -= --I .0- J.\SHRDATA\Planning\St-'.ARED\WP\PROJECTS\MELEAR\Via Lugano\NWSP\DEVELOPMENT ORDER.~cP \ J :z: ~ % ..... 1920/ j ~ .... .. s ~ I:' ......... ~ ~/II. (OR\O~ \"~ 111/11/" 11\ \\ \\ \\ EXHIBIT "B" Conditions of Approval Project name: Via Lugano apartments at the Melear PUD File number: NWSP 97-019 Reference: The plans consist of 54 sheets identified as 2nd Review. New Site Plan. File # NWSP 97-019 with an October 20 1997 PlanninlZ and ZoninlZ Department date stamp markinlZ . DEP ARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS Comments: None UTILITIES Comments: 1. All utilities easements shall be shown on the permit set of rectified landscaping X drawings so that it can be determined which trees may interfere with utilities. In general, palm trees will be the only tree species allowed within utilities easements. Canopy trees may be planted outside of the easement so that roots and branches will not impact those utilities within the easement in the foreseeable future. LDR Sec, 7.5-18.1 gives public utilities the authority to remove any trees that interfere with utility services, either in utility easements or public rights-of-way. 2. Department of HRS permits will be required for the water and sewer systems X serving this project. (Sec, 26-12), 3. Fire flow calculations will be required demonstrating compliance with the city X code requirement of 1500 g.p,m. as stated in LDR Chap. 6, Art., Sec. 16, or the requirement imposed by insurance underwriters, whichever is greater. (See Sec. 26-16(aa)). Please submit these calculations with your HRS permit submittal. 4. Sec. 26-34(E) of the city code requires that a capacity reservation fee be paid for X this project either upon the Utility Department's request for signature on the Health Department application forms or within 30 days of site plan approval, whichever occurs first. This fee will be determined based upon final meter size, or expected demand. 5. Comp Plan policy 3C.3.4 requires the conservation of potable water. City water X may, therefore, not be used for irrigation where other sources are readily available. 6. Provide an engineer's written certification that drainage will conform to all rules X of the city and the South Florida Water Management District. (LDR Chap. 4, Sec. 7F). 7. Water and sewer lines to be owned and operated by the city shall be included X within utilities easements. Please show all proposed easements on the engineering drawings, using a minimum width of 12 feet. The easements shall be dedicated via separate instrument to the City as stated in Sec. 26-33 (a) of the code. Page 2 Via Lugano aka Melear PUD (multi-family File No. NWSP 97-019 DEP ARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT 8. LDR Chap. 6, Article IV, Sec. 16 requires all points on each building to be X within 200 feet of an existing or proposed fire hydrant. Please demonstrate that the plan meets this condition, by showing all hydrants. 9. Appropriate backflow preventers will be required on any fire sprinkler line if X there is one, in accordance with Sec. 26-207. 10. The off-site water and sewer mains serving this parcel were oversized, at city X expense, to accommodate the future development now proposed. Section 26-34 of the city code allows the city to recover this cost, plus interest, from developers. The costs per equivalent dwelling unit are as follows: Potable water = $441.39 Sewer = $161.29 The costs are in addition to the regular capital facilities charges for water and sewer, As a partial offset for these fees, credits are due for the donation of the parcel containing the water storage tank on Miner Road, The credits cannot be calculated until we have a firm number for the total number of units allowed for the entire Melear P.U.D. FIRE Comments: None X POLICE Comments: 11. The plans show a proposed median cut and left turn lane for northbound traffic to X make a left turn into Via Lugano, This has been approved. The plans also show a left turn lane for southbound traffic at the same median break on Congress A venue. The Police Department does not recommend this left turn lane. There are no logistics behind this maneuver. Dos Lagos condominiums are located to the east of this site and is fully developed, There is no ingress to Dos Lagos in this area, thereby making this a u-turn only location. 12. The Police Department recommends a Congress A venue right tum/deceleration X lane for southbound traffic turning into the driveway. ENGINEERING DIVISION Comments: 13. Need to show locations of stop signs and stop bars at all intersections. Locations X include egress lanes between buildings and main loop road. [LDR Chapter 4, Section 7.B.2,] Page 3 Via Lugano aka Melear PUD (multi-family File No. NWSP 97-019 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT 14. Five foot concrete sidewalk needs to be installed along Sandalwood Drive [LDR X Chapter 6, Article IV, Section 10.T.] 15. Swale and sod needs to be installed along Sandalwood Drive between proposed X sidewalk and existing edge of pavement from west property line to Congress Avenue. [City Standard B-91004 and LDR Chapter 6, Article IV, Section 7.1.] 16. Provide a typical section of bulkhead wall at lake section. [LDR Chapter 6, X Article V, Section 4.B.2.d.] 17. Provide typical detail of handicap fine sign (minimum fee $250 fine). [LDR X Chapter 23, Article I, Section 5.B.5.] 18. Add note to plans stating that circulation and parking are to be in conformance X and compliance with Palm Beach County Thoroughfare Plan and Traffic Performance Ordinance. [LDR Chapter 4, Section 8.C.7. and 8,] 19. Pavement markings on Sandalwood Drive are needed for left turn lane to north X parcel. [6 inch solid white line, turn arrows, 6 inch (6-10) ships white] [LDR Chapter 6, Article III, Section 16] 20. Plat submission and required improvements (paving and drainage, water and X sewer) to be submitted through Engineering Department for processing in accordance with LDR Chapter 5, 21. All plans submitted for specific permits shall meet the city's code requirements X at time of application. These permits include, but are not limited to, the following: site lighting, paving, drainage, curbing, landscaping and irrigation. Permits required from other permitting agencies such as FDOT, PBC, SFWMD, DERM, LWDD, DEP and any others, shall be included with your permit requests, 22. Need to obtain county permit for Congress A venue turn lane improvements. X [LOR Chapter 23, Article II.H.6.] 23. Lake construction will require excavation/fill permit or a modification to existing X permit (LOR Chapter 8, Article III] BUILDING DIVISION Comments: 25. To ensure compliance with the handicap accessibility code, add to Sheet 6 of 18 X the accessible path leading to the recreation amenities from Building 9. Also, extend the accessible path shown at the perimeter of the recreation area to the handicap entrance of the recreation building, pool and tot lot/volley ball area. Also show on the plans the accessible path leading to the tennis court, car wash building, trash compactor, mail building and gatehouse. Page 4 Via Lugano aka Melear PUD (multi-family File No. NWSP 97-019 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT 26. Correct the inconsistency between the site plan and engineering plans with X respect to the parking area east of the northeast portion of Building 12. 27. The sign code (Article IV, Section I.D.) specifies that the total maximum sign X area allowed for each wall sign shall not exceed 32 square feet. Reduce the size of the proposed wall signs to comply with the code regulations. 28. The sign code (Article IV, Section I.D.) specifies that the maximum height X allowed for a wall sign is six (6) feet. Reduce the height of the proposed 8 foot I inch wall sign to comply with the code regulations. PARKS AND RECREA nON Comments: None X FORE STER/ENVIRONMENTALI ST Comments: 29. Revise the plans to reflect all of the medians on Congress Avenue to be X landscaped by the developer, Correct discrepancies in the planting list and the landscape plans., Comprehensive Plan Policy 2.4.5, p42 and 3.2.7.2,2.a. 30. With the permit set of drawings submit littoral and upland planting plans for the X proposed lake on the project. A lake management plan should also be included in the document, Comprehensive Plan Policy 2.4,5., p 42 and 3.2,7.2.2.a, . PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 31. Any roof top equipment shall to be screened from view at a distance of 600 feet. X If such equipment is planned, indicate its location and the height of the equipment above the roof level. Provide elevations of the structure showing the roof top equipment and the required screening (all reduced to a small scale) and draw in on these elevations the lines-of-sight connecting the highest point of the equipment with the eye level from a distance of 600 hundred feet from the building (LOR, Chapter 9, Section 11.E), 32. The property is being subdivided from the parent tract of land, Since previous X splits already took place, a subdivision plat shall be submitted, processed and approved prior to issuance of the first building permit. (LOR, Chapter 5, Article I). 33. Land Development Regulations require that the landscape plan submitted as a X part of the site plan submittal shall be drawn to the same scale as the site plan. With the permit set of drawings provide a landscape plan meeting this requirement. (LOR, Chapter 4, Section 7.C.l). I Page 5 Via Lugano aka Melear PUD (multi-family File No. NWSP 97-019 OEP ARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT 34. The landscape plan shall contain all existing and proposed easements on the X property. With the permit set of plans include a landscape plan containing these information. (LDR, Chapter 4, Section 7.C.l). 35. On the site plan depict proposed and required setbacks for all buildings. (LOR, X Chapter 4, Section 7.C.l). 36. On the site plan, show traffic control markings within the vehicular use areas as X required by LOR, Chapter 4, Section 7.B.2. 37. Submit to Planning and Zoning a presentation board containing samples of all X exterior building materials to be used for construction. (LOR, Chapter 4, Section 7.D). 38. Submit to Planning and Zoning color elevations of all buildings and signage. X (LDR, Chapter 4, Section 7.D). 39. A future request for additional signage will require a sign program to be X reviewed by the Planning and Development Board and the City Commission, (Chapter 9 - Community Design Plan, Section 10. I. and Chapter 21 - Sign Code, Article IV, Section 7 of the Land Development Regulations), 40. On the elevation drawings indicate the height of all buildings as required by the X code. (LDR, Chapter 4, Section 7,D.1). 41. Depict color code and manufacturer on all exterior finishes on elevations of all X buildings and structures including, but not limited to roof tiles, door and window frames and all decorative elements. (LDR, Chapter 4, Section 7.D). 42, Reduce the height of the aluminum picket fence to the maximum of 4 feet as per 'X the approved master plan. 43. No fences or walls are allowed to be higher than 4 feet in front yards of all X residential districts. Reduce the proposed height of the fence accordingly. (LDR, Chapter 2, Section 4.1.1). 44. Indicate the dimensions of all proposed fountains in compliance with LDR. X Chapter 2, Section 4.J(12). 45. The code requires that the dumpster/rrash collection area be screened with a wall X and accent shrubs be placed along all three sides of the enclosure. Provide the required hedge along the northwest wall of the trash compactor screening wall. (LDR, Chapter 9, Section 10.B). 46. Provide unified control documents as required per LDR, Chapter 2,5, Section 6. X Page 6 Via Lugano aka Melear PUD (multi-family File No. NWSP 97-019 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT 47. With the pennit set of drawings provide the square footage of the proposed entry X feature and limit its height to 9 feet (LDR Chapter 2. Section 4.J.18). 48. Parking spaces abutting garage doors shall confonn to mInImUm size X requirements as stated in LDR. Chapter 2, Section 11.H.2. ADDITIONAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS 49. Delete comment number 11, X 50. Delete comment number 12. X 51. Delete comment number 27. X 52. Delete comment number 28. X 53. Delete comment number 31, X 54. Delete comment number 42, X 55, Delete comment number 43, X 56. Delete comment number 44. X 57. Delete comment number 47, X ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS 58, T~ 98 Q8teFfRiaetl. ~A/G X TJH:dim J:\SHROATAIPlANNING\SHAREO\V\lP\PROJECTS\MElEAR\VIA LUGANOINWSPlCONO. OF APPROVALOOC MEETING MINUTES, REGULAR CITY COMMISSION BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 16, 1997 PI~ and Cedar Ridge PUD Subdivision, and authorizing the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a disclaimer for said abandonment and requiring disclaimer be recorded in the Public Records of Palm Beach County 4. Proposed Resolution No. R97-204 Re: Accepting as a City street, the proposed access road from NE 6th Street into property owned by the Banana Boat Restaurant upon completion of construction of the road by FOOT in connection with State Project No. 93200-3505, accepting a quitclaim deed from FDOT upon completion of the access road, and naming said roadway "Banana Boat Way" D. Ratification of Planning & Development Board Action: 1. New Site Plan for Alhambra North (Application Denied by Planning & Development Board on August 26, 1997) ................... POSTPONED TO 12/16 CITY COMMISSION MEETING Upon recommendation of the City Attorney, Item D.1 was deleted from the agenda. See discussion under Item I.D.1. 2. Via Lugano - Melear PUD - Variance from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 21, Article IV, Section 1.D - signs allowed, to allow the height of a monument sign to be increased from the maximum of 6' to 8' 1" Item 0.2 was removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion by Commissioner Bradley. 3. Via Lugano - Melear PUD - Variance from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2 - Section 4.J.1, to allow for construction of 5' high decorative fence and column sections within the 40' front yard setback at a setback of 23' 11" Item 0.3 was removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion by Commissioner Bradley. 4. Harry Woodworth - Request for variance from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2 - Zoning, Section 4.J.1 - Fence Height, which restricts fence heights to 6' for fences located within the required setbacks of residential properties to allow a 4' high fence on a 3' 6" retaining wall 5. Via Lugano - Melear PUD - Site plan approval to construct 13 apartment buildings containing 364 dwelling units, clubhouse, office, recreation facilities, and associated parking for 767 spaces on 12.58 acres of land Item 0.5 was removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion by Commissioner Bradley. E. Approve Change Order #2 for Mangrove Park for Construction Technology for changes in fencing to make the park safer, additional curbing to control street ~ MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 16, 1997 drainage runoff,' four additional car stops against the landscaped areas, deletion of one bench and additional walkway necessary for the completion of the project, in the amount of $8,200 F. Authorization to advertise a Request for Proposal (RFP) for Lead Hazard Abatement for the City of Boynton Beach Police Department Pistol Range located at 3501 North Congress Avenue. Item F was removed from the Consent Agenda for discussion by Mayor Taylor. Motion Commissioner Tillman moved to approve the Consent Agenda with the exception of Items 0.1, 0.2, D.3, D.5, and Item F. Vice Mayor Titcomb seconded the motion that carried 4-0. Items for discussion: 0.2. Via Lugano - Melear PUD - Variance from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 21, Article IV, Section 1.D - signs allowed, to allow the height of a monument sign to be increased from the maximum of 6' to 8' 1" D.3. Via Lugano - Melear PUD - Variance from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2 - Section 4.J.1, to allow for construction of 5' high decorative fence and column sections within the 40' front yard setback at a setback of 23' 11" D.5. Via Lugano - Melear PUD - Site plan approval to construct 13 apartment buildings containing 364 dwelling units, clubhouse, office, recreation facilities, and associated parking for 767 spaces on 12.58 acres of land Commissioner Bradley expressed concern about the variance the Planning & Development Board granted to allow the maximum height of the monument sign for Via Lugano to be increased from 6' to 8' 1" when that Board is only permitted to grant a variance for 25% over the amount allowed. He is fearful we are not following the protocol in our Land Development Regulations. Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director, explained that there was a great deal of discussion during the board meeting about this project and these variances, and the developer made many comments in response. Some of the units in this project are two stories, and others are three stories high. The developer feels it is necessary to have higher scale appurtenances and amenities to compliment this higher scale project. The developer also feels this higher scale translates to a higher dollar value he can command for his apartments. The Planning & Development Board members' comments somewhat mirror Commissioner Bradley's remarks. Some of the board members did not feel the height of the sign would offer more success in renting these units. 5 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 16, 1997 The developer also reql:lested a variance for the height of the fence along Congress Avenue. There were comments made about the 20' height of the unmanned guardhouse that is 20' setback into the project. Everything about this project is large; however, it fits together in a large scale. Staff included a reminder to the Board members in staff comments that only certain degrees of size variance and height variances can be granted by the Board. That protection would limit this sign height to 7' 6". Rob CottIer of Cottier & HearinQ. was present on behalf of the applicant. He advised that Don Hearing had another meeting to attend. He was expected to arrive at any time. He requested delaying approval of these items until Mr. Hearing arrived if a detailed discussion was required. He explained that the applicant was aware of the fact that the Board could only act on 25% of the allowable height. The applicant agreed to a height of 7' 6" during the Planning & Development Board meeting. The applicant feels this height is necessary because there is a utility easement along the front of the property that limits everything 20' from the right-of-way. The fence sections will be approximately 22' from the right of way, and the signs (because they are at a 45-degree angle) will be approximately 25' to 30' from the right-of-way. This project has large buildings and the developer wishes to make a large statement In addition, rental projects "live and die" by their signage. Mayor Taylor confirmed with Mr. Cottier that the applicant is willing to accept a sign height of 7' 6". Commissioner Bradley feels the tastefulness of the sign is more important than the size of the sign. Other projects along Congress Avenue are also within the same setback range and their signs are smaller. He feels this project will look too big. Mr. Cottier displayed a drawing and pointed out that the signs step up on each side, The sign will be of cast stone, and only one portion of it is higher than the height restriction. Scaling it down will result in the letters being reduced to a size that cannot be read from the roadway. The sign letters are within the Sign Code. . Commissioner Bradley feels the size is larger than it should be and it will look out of place. He will vote against this request. Mayor Taylor requested that the record reflect that if the Commission approves this request, it will be for a height of 7' 6" and not 8' 1" as indicated on the agenda. Motion Vice Mayor Titcomb moved to approve Items D.2, 0.3, and D.5. Commissioner Tillman seconded the motion that carried 3-1. (Commissioner Bradley dissented.) () MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 16, 1997 Item for discussion: F Authorization to advertise a ReCluest for Proposal (RFP) for Lead Hazard Abatement for the City of Boynton Beach Police Department Pistol Range located at 3501 North Congress Avenue. Mayor Taylor confirmed with the City Manager that if the Commission approves this item, it is only providing approval to go out for an RFP. Mayor Taylor expressed concern about the amount of money involved and questioned whether this is the only way to correct the situation. He asked for input on whether other organizations use our pistol range, and whether or not they can contribute to help offset the cost of the cleanup. Wilfred Hawkins, Assistant to the City Manager, advised that others use this facility. Mr. Hawkins explained that if approval is granted to clean up this pistol range and we continue to use it, we should consider charging for the use of the range. This pistol range is one of the few modem indoor ranges in the area, and it is popular among federal and local officials. There is no reason for us not to charge for its use in the future. That money could be used toward future maintenance. Mr. Hawkins advised that Judith Ensor and Dr. Michael Landman are working with the City on this project. The City will be investigating the use of lead-free bullets that can be used in the future. Marshall Gage, Chief of Police, reported that at least three or four other agencies are using the pistol range on a regular basis. They have not been charged for that usage. We anticipate modifying this in the future. He does not believe we will be successful in soliciting their help to clean up the range. In the future, however, they will understand that there are ongoing maintenance costs that will have to be shared by any agency wanting to share the facility. He does not anticipate a problem in that regard. We will also look at an aggressive and regular maintenance program that will preclude anything like this happening again. This situation elevated because we did not maintain it from the beginning. Some of the filtration systems that were in place were not optimal. In addition, we will be looking at the use of bullets that are lead-free or do not have the high level of lead. Chief Gage assured the Commissioners that the employees have been tested and they are fine and healthy. Judith Ensor advised that we can prevent this from happening again in the future by having a maintenance contract with a certified lead professionals to monitor and make sure the range is cleaned correctly. This maintenance will be done on a monthly, bi-monthly or quarterly basis, depending on the amount of activity at the facility. Mayor Taylor realized that a maintenance contract would be necessary that would require additional expense. Ms. Ensor anticipates there will be a large number of companies bidding on this project. 7 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 16, 1997 Motion Commissioner Tillman moved to approve Item "F". Vice Mayor Titcomb seconrjed the motion that carried 4-0. v. CITY MANAGER'S REPORT: A. Incentive Awards - Presentation(s) to be awarded based upon Committee recommendations City Manager Willis thanked the Commissioners for the opportunity to allow the employees to report on what they have done in terms of running City government more like a business. This year, we budgeted $15,000 to encourage the employees to accomplish greater customer service efforts that would enHance levels of service of existing operations, and to run government like a business. We concentrated on our major goals to reduce the cost of operations to produce operational efficiencies and to encourage the employees to perform studies in-house versus using consultants and other ways to produce annual operating savings. There were 12 submittals; six of which have not yet been implemented. Those submittals will be included in the next round of this program that will be budgeted next year. The total savings resulting from these submittals will produce an annual operating budget reduction of $278,000. City Manager Willis introduced Wilfred Hawkins and Hank Ackermann, two members of the Committee that ranked the submittals. Mr. Hawkins advised that this program was implemented as a way to look at many different efficiency measures, and to allow the employees the opportunity to give management good ideas on how they can improve their service delivery. Many of the employees responded positively to the program. In selecting the winners, the Committee looked at the submittals to see how they addressed customer service improvements, cost efficiency and savings, improvement in operations, increased levels of service, and cost avoidance. Hank Ackermann, Neighborhood Project Specialist, said the Committee was made up of City Manager Willis, Wilfred Hawkins, Assistant to the City Manager, Mike Pawelczyk, Assistant City Attorney, Bulent Kastarlak, Director of Development and himself. This is the first year of the Incentive Award Program. This program is designed to recognize and reward programs that have been developed and implemented as a team effort. Although all of the 12 submittals were good ideas, some of them must still be implemented in the future. All of the submittals were good team initiatives to better serve the citizens of Boynton Beach in a more efficient, proactive way. The Committee decided to make the awards in three ~tegories. The first category is awarded to the Sanitation Division of the Public Works Department. The second category is shared by the Planning & Zoning Division and the Warehouse. The third category is shared by the Animal Control Division of Public Works, Meter Reading Division of Utilities, and the shopper hopper bus service of Public Works. Certificates of recognition were developed for each of the employees who were involved in a submittal. ~ ~ MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 1, 1997 Motion Mr. Aguila moved to approve the request for a variance to Chapter 21, Article IV, Section 1.D - Signs of the Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations to allow the height of a monument sign to be increased from the maximum of 5' to T 6". Ms. Frazier seconded the motion. Mr. Dube confirmed with the applicant that he agrees with the height of T 6". A roll call vote was polled. The vote was 5-2. (Messrs. Myott and Rosenstock dissented.) B. SITE PLANS New Site Plan Description: Via Lugano - Melear PUD Donaldson Hearing Gene and Glick Management Southwest comer of Sandalwood Drive and Congress Avenue Request for site plan approval to construct 13 apartment buildings containing 364 dwelling units, clubhouse, office, recreation facilities and associated parking for 767 spaces on 12.58 acres of land. 1. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: Chairman Wische asked the applicant to discuss only those comments that are of concern or that require clarification. Mr. Dube asked if objections remain from the first review, Ms, Heyden was unable to respond. Mr. Dube pointed out that the first review is always ignored and the same comments appear on the second review. He recommended that these issues be addressed between the first and second review. Mr. Kastarlak explained that staff is going through the entire process of plan review and the permit process within the department. Staff is hopeful that some of the unnecessary steps will be eliminated through a streamlined operation for the benefit of the applicant and the City. Ms. Frazier questioned when the applicant received the conditions of approval. Mr. Hearing said the package was provided to the applicant last Tuesday. Mr. Hearing complimented staff on their handling of this application, He explained that a number of the comments are standard comments that are informational to the owner. Other comments are a matter of coordination between the engin!er's plans and the applicant's plans. There are only a few comments that need to be addressed. Mr. Dube pointed out that the Planning & Development Board does not need to see the standard comments. Mr. Myott explained that there was a list dated October 17th attached to the plans that explained how the applicant addressed the first round of comments. 6 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 1,1997 Mr. Hearing reported that he would address the following comments: #11, #12, #14, #15, #27, #28 (#27 and #28 were resolved as a result of the variance), #31 (not applicable because the project has no roof-top mounted equipment), #33, #42, #43 (#42 and #43 were resolved as a result of the variance), #44, #47, and #48. . Comment #11 - This comment relates to the median access onto Congress Avenue. The County has requested that the applicant provide a left-turn into the project and the ability for a car travelling southbound to be able to make a "U" turn to return northbound. This is a County standard. Since the County is the permitting agency, the applicant must abide by the requirement. Therefore, the applicant requested that this comment be rejected. Ms. Heyden explained that our Police Department has a problem with the access to this project on Congress Avenue. Comments #11 and #12 are recommendations - not Code requirements. The Police Department feels this will encourage an unsafe condition. Mr. Rosenstock explained that Congress Avenue is a County street. Therefore, they have jurisdiction on setting the median cuts, access and egress. This comment should be deleted. With respect to Comment #12, Mr. Aguila pointed out that there is no deceleration to turn off Congress Avenue to Sandalwood Drive for southbound traffic, Mr. Rosenstock added that there is no turn lane from Congress into the Mall or the Publix shopping Center. This comment should be deleted. . Comments #14 and #15 - These comments deal with the sidewalk on Sandalwood Drive. The original master plan for the Melear PUD approved a sidewalk/bike path combination on the north side of the road along Sandalwood Drive, To accommodate this combination, there was an additional 10' easement added on to the right-of-way. No sidewalk was planned for the south side of the road. The applicant feels this condition has been satisfied by way of the original master plan. Therefore, they request deletion of Comments #14 and #15, which are interrelated. Ms. Heyden explained that the master plan was approved in the early 1980s, There has been no construction on this PUD in ten years. The master plan does not provide vesting for design requirements. The issue of sidewalks on both sides of the street was debated when the LDRs were updated last year. The TRC feels strongly about the need to have sidewalks on both sides of the roadway to provide pedestrian access. The County is now also beginning to address this on a regional issue. In addition, this is a Code requirement that has been in place for almost one year. Messrs. Aguila, R~stock and Ms. Frazier agreed with Ms. Heyden's remarks. Mr. Hearing said the core road infrastructure was constructed including the bike path and sidewalk on the north side of the road. This construction was part of the 80' right-of-way and the land dedications. Mr. Hearing's interpretation is that it is vested. On 80' rights-of-way, the County allows a developer to do exactly what the applicant is requesting. Mr. Rosenstock pointed out that this project is in the City of Boynton Beach and must comply with our Codes. This comment will not be deleted. 7 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 1, 1997 . Comments #27 and #28 - These comments will be deleted as a result of the variance request for the sign. . Comment #31 - The project does not have any rooftop equipment. This comment will be deleted. . Comment #33 - This comment deals with the scale of which the landscape plans are drawn in relationship to the site plan. The landscape plans are one inch equals twenty feet (1" = 20'). The plans are prepared in this large scale to show all of the necessary detail. The Code requires that the landscape plan be drawn at the same scale as the site plan so that the drawings are coordinated. The site plan is drawn at one inch equals fifty feet (1" = 50'). Mr. Hearing advised that the plans are computer generated and they are totally coordinated. The site plan and landscape plan are drawn on the same computer file simultaneously. Therefore. the applicant requests that this comment be deleted, He offered to submit to the Building Department a plot of the landscape plotted out at 1" = 50'. Mr. Aguila said he was very impressed with the quality and quantity of the landscaping. Because of the magnitude of this project. Mr. Aguila feels Mr, Hearing's statement was very valid. Staff will be unable to read the plan at 1" = 50'. It would be unreasonable to have the plan at a different scale. Attorney Pawelczyk pointed out that there is a Code requirement that mandates what the applicant must do. The applicant has agreed to prepare a computer-generated plan to comply with the Code. . Mr. Kastarlak realized that the 1" = 50' would be very difficult from a practical standpoint. He recommended that a computer-drawn map be generated for the record along with a sample section of the PUD. Attorney Pawelczyk recommended that the Code section not be varied, He agreed that the computer drawing could be produced for record keeping and Code purposes, but stay with the same landscape plan that was submitted for reference purposes for staff. Mr. caVJnaugh pointed out that he would not be submitting a landscape plan as part of his site plan su mittal. He already submitted that plan to the Building Department as part of the building permits. He recommended that the comment be removed and he will deal directly with the individu I departments. Attorney Pawelczyk recommended that the comment be included and the applicant needs to comply with the COOe, He suggested that this issue be investigated for a possible Code change. Mr. Kastarlak explained that staff is trying to have the City gain an exemplary development. Whatever the applicant can do in concert with the City will be to our benefit. He can produce the computer-generated drawing for the record. This will relieve staff's anxiety. The applicant was willing to provide this one additional drawing. 8 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 1, 1997 Ms. Heyden asked for the scale of the paving and drainage plans. Mr. Hearing said the detail sheets are cut to 1" = 40'. Mr. Aguila explained that these drawings are for the person who is building. Different disciplines provide different information and different levels of detail. The scale is selected to provide detail at a certain level of clarity. The reason this is in the Code is that we want to make sure the drawings are large enough so that we can do our jobs. Ms. Heyden said this is a new Code requirement. This Code requirement came about when we were having a problem comparing landscape plans of different scales. We were having difficulty detecting conflicts with utilities and lighting plans. Ms. Heyden offered to work out this problem with the applicant. It was agreed that the comment would remain. . Comments #42 and #43 :- These comments are no longer applicable as a result of the variance that was approved. These comments were deleted. . Comments #44 and #47 - The applicant does not believe this Code section is fully applicable and requested deletion of these comments. Mr. Hearing said this is an accessory structure within the accessory structure setbacks of the site plan. This is setback 20' from the main entrance that includes the planter, the steps, and the vertical structure. This accessory structure includes a fountain. The structure is 16' 8 7/8" to the top of the arch. This is a complimentary size with the other arches and trellises in this project. The Code requires the maximum height of a fountain at 9'. The applicant agrees, but sees this as an accessory structure. Mr. Cavanaugh explained that this fountain feature is a "sister structure" to the main entrance at Ballen Isles at PGA Boulevard. Mr. Myott feels all of the entry elements are very tall. Although the fountain is beautiful, it is very large. Mr. Cavanaugh pointed out that the guardhouse is 80' to 100' back from the entrance. There is a distance of 150' to the gates. Mr. Reed referred to Comment #45 and questioned whether or not the applicant has considered providing enough room for future recycling dumpster requirements. Mr. Cavanaugh explained that he plans to detach the recycling. Mr. Hearing said the dumpster area is very well done with trellises over the top. With respect to the fountain feature, Mr. Aguila said he does not have a problem with the proportions when he looks at how it relates to the entrance feature and the guardhouse beyond - that point. He will "!lIpport deleting Comments #44 and #47. In Mr. Myott's opinion, the applicant was pushing the limit on these entrance features considering the fact that variance requests were made for the fence height and sign. These variances do not comply with the standards that have been set. . Comment #48 - Mr. Hearing does not believe this Code section applies to this project. This section applies to all required residential parking spaces not within an enclosed garage. The majority of the parking spaces are at grade. However, there are some spaces within 9 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 1,1997 garages. The first space must be a minimum of 12' wide and 18' long exclusive of public or private rights-of-way. All other spaces where multiple vehicle parking is required must be a minimum of 9' wide and 18' long. All of the parking on this project is multiple parking. In Mr. Hearing's opinion, this Code section refers to single-family or duplex housing. He requested deletion of this comment since he cannot figure out how it would apply for multi-family projects. Ms. Heyden requested an opportunity to review this comment more closely. In addition, Ms. Heyden reminded the members that the board could not grant a variance with respect to this comment or Comments #44 and #47 since no variance was applied for. The applicant would have to come back at a future date. This section of the Code was recently rewritten to make it clear. It is obvious that it is still not clear. Mr. Hearing agreed to work with Ms. Heyden on Comment #48, but requested that the board delete Comments #44 and #47 this evening. Ms. Heyden said she would prefer to sit down with the applicant to discuss items that are not in compliance with the Code. These are new sections of the Code and there may be some maneuverability with respect to interpretation. Mr. Aguila felt it would be fair to give Ms. Heyden and the applicant an opportunity to discuss these items. In Mr. Cavanaugh's opinion, Ms. Heyden and Mr. Lewicki had ample opportunity to discuss these issues. To go back through the process again and have staff decide a variance is required will delay him more than a month. This board has the ability to determine whether or not an item meets Code or whether or not a Code section applies. Mr. Kastarlak admitted that there are issues that arise at these meetings that should have been brought out earlier. This is a lack of communication between the applicant and the staff. Mr. Kastarlak is a proponent of a pre-application conference between the applicants and staff. This conference is very desirable since many of these problems will be brought up in advance so that decisions can be made early on. Mr. Kastarlak apologized for any oversight on the part of his staff, but offered to sit down and discuss these issues with the applicant. Mr. Hearing concurred that a meeting would be of value. He further added that staff has been terrific. Motion Mr. Aguila moved 1n1t we approve the request for site plan approval to construct 13 apartment buildings containing 364 dwelling units, clubhouse, office, recreation facilities and associated parking for 767 spaces on 12.58 acres of land subject to staff comments less the following: Comments #11, 12,27,28,31,42,43,44,47, and 48. Ms. Frazier seconded the motion. Mr. Rosenstock said he would not support the motion since it should be subject to a discussion between Ms. Heyden and the applicant. 10 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 1, 1997 A roll call vote was polled and the motion failed 4-3. (Chairman Wische, and Messrs. Rosenstock, Myott, and Friedland cast the dissenting votes.) Motion Mr. Rosenstock moved that we approve the request for site plan approval to construct 13 apartment buildings containing 364 dwelling units, clubhouse, office, recreation facilities and associated parking for 767 spaces on 12.58 acres of land subject to staff comments less the following: Comments #11, 12,27,28,31,42,43,44, and 47. Mr. Aguila seconded the motion. Mr. Dube pointed out that if the Planning and Zoning Department decides that Comment #48 is not applicable, it would go away. The motion carried unanimously. C. OTHER None 8. COMMENTS BY MEMBERS Mr. Dube reminded the members that the Walgreen's at Alhambra is on the City Commission agenda for tomorrow evening. Although it appears that item will be tabled again, Mr. Dube explained that if it goes forward, he would like someone to speak at that meeting since neither he nor Mr. Reed will be able to attend. That applicant made a statement that the Planning & Development Board voted down their site plan without considering the facts. That issue needs to be addressed. In addition, Walgreens has a home page on the Internet that shows a separate line of pharmacies called Walgreens Rx Press. This is exactly what would fit on the lot in question, but they have never admitted they have used this design. This is another item that should be addressed. Ms. Heyden offered to address these items, 9. ADJOURNMENT There being no further business to come before the Planning & Development Board, the meeting properly adjourned at 8:40 p.m. '1rL. ~ 7fJ::prainilO - Deputy City Clerk (Two Tapes) 11 DEVELOPMENT ORDER f OF BOYNTON BEAC", LO ) 100/ [ !c~ ~ i "- PLANNING AND ZONING DEPT. , ~': ! , d'l'l I~J I PROJECT NAME: Melear PUD APPLICANT: James Bisesi and Gene Glick APPLICANTS AGENT: Donaldson Hearing APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: Suite 402, 1070 E. Indiantown Road, Jupiter, FL 33477 DATE OF HEARING BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: August 19, 1997 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT: Master Plan Modification (change access unit types and buffer width) LOCATION OF PROPERTY: Southwest comer of Congress Avenue and Miner Road between the LWOD L-20 and L-21 canals DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT ~A" ATTACHED HERETO. THIS MATTER came on to be heard before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida on the date of hearing stated above. The City Commission having considered the relief sought by the applicant and heard testimony from the applicant, members of city administrative staff and the public finds as follows: 1. Application for the relief sought was made by the Applicant in a manner consistent with the requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations. 2. The Applicant ~HAS HAS NOT established by substantial competent evidence a basis for the relief requested. 3. The conditions for development requested by the Applicant, administrative staff, or suggested by the public and supported by substantial competent evidence are as set forth on Exhibit ~B~ with notation ~Included". 4. The Applicant's application for relief is hereby -=:: GRANTED subject to the conditions referenced in paragraph 3 hereof. DENIED 5. This Order shall take effect immediately upon issuance by the City Clerk. 6. All further development on the property shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of this order. 7. Other \ \ \\\1'"" 1/111/ ~> Jill. ~,'\ ~-c; ON 8S' 1'0 ~ 0.... ........... "f" ~ S ....of4A r~o". ...~ ~ .:: <t) ..:t'J ... - ~ ':::0 4 ;; .. fa '. S . ~ = 0 :0 : = ~.,~ a~= :z ~j:: City Clerk % ~ ..~~"1)./ ~ ~ ~ ~"'\" .. Q ~ ~ ..., .....~, ~ ~ F' 0 ~ "I/, ... ~\\" ~111",fl/l\\\\\\\'\ DATED: /Z;f~~/J?; ~ /tf'? 7 J:\SHRDA T A\Planning\SHARED\VVP\PROJECTS\MELEAR\MPMD\OEVELOPMENT ORDER-doc I_OCATION tv1 ~p MELEAR PUD CX ;'/6/1 n :; 'L ur~ 2( (' i:.. ~~~ \ =-q- ~L \, ~\..... If"',\ ... ' ~i.~-":} ,- \\' 'I 1 i'~' ~ \ F, ' .'- ') '-'...,J I' ~. ,':-',.~ U"l p~~,~' ~/V'-':Yl LU I... ",(, ! / -'~.~:J '- I \." . . :i -, :; '~., ~-- -". .,' "MELE..AI=l\PR' ... '~__IL. , '--='--, ,,' 'I . , 5::i;LEN 11 - . :- ...-J'-- ,-_ :: :7 .r:~\ I' _ .... '.. ,:~'; " ~- ~'-." _:, __J ",-. .." . r..~' "-~\~- - !< .. n i: ~. , :'- ~ SITE ~:' , , :" \ , ;; l / \: , '~ ;. /... --1'" I'. " \". .1 \. ,- -;:: ,..... .. " "" ,'-...-:=: \ '.. " III \ -'- E J.1..1-;-~...; 1 ;0 ""-- 4.eA..:.~ ',1 \1 ',~ .~. 1/8 I I 400.800 FEET I IV IV , . . EXlllBIT "B" Conditions of Aooroval Project name: Melear PUD File number: MPMD 97-003 Reference: The olans consist 00 sheets identified as 2nd Review. Master Plan Modification File # MPMD 97- 003 with a Julv 22. 1997 PlanninlZ and ZoninlZ Deoartment date stamo markinlZ. DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS Comments: None UTILITIES Comments: None FIRE Comments: None POLICE Comments: 1. The plans show a driveway access for Phase 2 from N. Congress Avenue, Police department does not recommend this ingress/egress be granted. ~ Sandalwood Drive is currently a divided roadway and was designed to handle the egress from all phases of this parcel. An additional egress would create a hazardous traffic concern on Congress A venue, allowing more crossover movement. ENGINEERING DIVISION Comments: 2. The subject traffic analysis only addresses the traffic generated by the proposed new development and doesn't provide an overview of the area at V build-out. It is in the city's best interest to not modify the existing master plan which would allow access from Phase II of the PUD onto Congress A venue. Therefore, it is recommended that the proposed access to Phase II be relocated to Sandalwood Drive. BUILDING DMSION Comments: 3. Remove the note indicating that setbacks are to be determined at site plan vi approval. All setbacks are established at time of master plan. [Chapter 2.5 _ Planned Unit Developments, Section 9.B.] 4. To maintain the intent of the basic design of access points to units located vi within a planned unit development (PUD) project and to remain consistent with the location of the access points that are existing to the adjacent single family and multifamily planned unit developments (Meadows PUD and Dos Page 3 Melear PUD File No. MPMD 97-003 DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3.T. 11. It is recommended that the proposed 3 foot to 4 foot aluminum picket fence v' along Congress Avenue be replacedJ.\'itk a 6 €vol 1';151, 1l.1135RF)' "'111 12, Eliminate the conflict between the 20 foot wide utility easement and the V canopy shade trees, 13. If the Commission determines that the access onto Congress Avenue provides a safer traffic situation and therefore allows it, it is recommended that the developer escrow $45,000 for a signal at Sandalwood Drive and V Congress Avenue or submit a letter of credit for $45,000 for one year after the PUD is built out. At that time it will be determined whether a signal is warranted by the applicant requesting through Palm Beach County counts on Sandalwood and Miner Road. If a signal is warranted, it shall be installed and the access onto Congress closed. ADDITIONAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS 14. Delete comment no. 1. V 15. Delete comment no. 2. V 16. Delete comment no. 4. V 17. Delete comment no. 5. V 18. Delete comment no. 9. v' 19. Delete comment no. 13. V 20. Delete that portion of comment no. 11 regarding the six (6) foot buffer V wall. ADDITIONAL CI1Y COMMISSION CONDITIONS 21. To be determined. N'ew-4f"' V Ibme s:lprojectslcond of appr\