Loading...
AGENDA DOCUMENTS CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM Requested City Commission Date Final Form Must be Turned Requested City Commission Date Final Form Must be Turned Meeting Dates in to City Manager's Office Meeting Dates in to City Manager's Office cg] December 16. ] 997 December 5, 1997 (noon) 0 February 17, 1998 February 6, 1998 (noon) 0 January 6. 1998 December 19,1997 (noon) 0 March 3,1998 February 20, 1998 (noon) 0 January 20. 1998 January 9, 1998 (noon) 0 March 17, 1998 March 6, 1998 (noon) 0 February 3. 1998 January 23, 1998 (noon) 0 April 7, 1998 March 20, 1998 (noon) RECOMMENDATION: Please place the request below on the December 16,1997 City Commission meeting agenda under Consent - Ratification of Planning and Development Board Action, The Planning and Development Board with a 6-1 vote, recommended approval of the request below as submitted with no conditions. For further details pertaining to this request, see attached Planning and Zoning Memorandum No. 97-564. EXPLANATION: PROJECT: AGENT: OWNER: LOCATION: DESCRIPTION: Via Lugano - Melear PUD Donaldson Hearing Gene and Glick Management Southwest comer of Congress A venue and Sandalwood Drive Request for a variance to Chapter 2, Section 4.J.lofthe Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations to allow for construction of five foot high decorative fence and column sections within the 40 foot front yard setback of23 feet 11 inches. PROGRAM IMPACT: N/A FISCAL IMPACT: N/A AL TERN A TIVES: City Manager's Signature Department Head's Signature Development Services Department Name of' '- ~'.~-- ~,t ~ Planning and Zoning' / /(~/L \\CH\MAIN\SIIRD \ L\\PUNNING\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\MELEAR\vIA LUGANO\AGENDA ITEM REQUEST.CASE 242 l2-16-97,DOC EXIDBIT "C" Conditions of Approval Project name: Via Lugano aka Melear PUD (multi-family) File number: ZNCV 97-008, Case No. 242 (fence height and setback) Reference: Zoning Code Variance a1Jplication with an October 17. 1997 date. DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJE~I PUBLIC WORKS Comments: None X UTILITIES Comments: None X FIRE Comments: None X POLICE Comments: None X ENGINEERING DIVISION Comments: None X BUILDING DIVISION Comments: None X P ARKS AND RECREATION Comments: None X FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST Comments: None X PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 1. If the variance is granted, it is recommended that the height of the X fence. both pickets and finials, be limited to five feet. ADDITIONAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS 2. Delete comment number 1 X ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS 3. To be determined. TJH:dim J:ISHRDA T A IPLANNINGlSHAREDlWPIPROJECTSIMELEARIVlA LUGANOICOND OF APPROV AL.CASE242,DOC nEVELOPMENTORDER CITY L, BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 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: Zoning Code Variance (fence height and setback) 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 ~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 DATED: City Clerk J:\SHRDATA\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\MELEAR\Via Lugano\DEVELOPMENT ORDER-case 242,doc Meeting Date: Petition: File No: Location: Owner: Project Name: Variance Request: DEVELOPI~ENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM #97-564 STAFF REPORT PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND CITY COMMISSION December 1, 1997 Case No. 242 ZNCV 97-008 Southwest corner of Sandalwood Drive and Congress Avenue Gene & Glick Management P.A.C. Land Development Co. - contract purchaser Via Lugano Request for a variance from the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2 - Section 4.J.1, to allow for construction of five (5) foot high decorative fence and column sections within the 40 foot front yard setback at a setback of 23 feet 11 inches. BACKGROUND The subject property, the proposed Via Lugano apartment complex, is a multifamily portion of the Melear PUD, located on the southwest comer of Sandalwood Drive and Congress Avenue, see Exhibit "An - Location Map. The property is zoned PUD (residential). The proposed fence is located along Congress Avenue and Sandalwood Drive, the north east boundaries of the newly proposed Via Lugano, multi-family residential development, see Exhibit "B" - Site Plan and Exhibit "C" - Survey. The height of the aluminum picket fence is 5 feet 7 1/2 inches and the intermediate finials are 7 feet 4 3/8 inches high, see Exhibit "D" - fence design. Since the Congress Avenue side of the property was determined to be the front of the property and the code prohibits fences higher than four (4) feet in residential zoning districts, a zoning variance application was filed with the City, see Exhibit "E" - Application. I Page 2 Memorandum No. 97-564 Via Lugano - fence Case No, 242 -staff report The following is a description of the zoning districts and land uses of the properties that surround the subject property: North - Sandalwood Drive right-of-way and farther north is a multi-family residential development called Sandalwood (also part of the Melear PUD), zoned PUD. South - LWDD L-20 canal right-of-way and farther south is Mahogany Bay apartment complex, zoned PUD. East - Congress Avenue and farther east is a single-family and multi-family residential development (Dos Lagos), zoned PUD West - Undeveloped single-family portion of the Melear PUD, zoned PUD. ANAL YSIS The City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2 - Section 4.J.1 states as follows: "Fences, hedges and walls shall not exceed six (6) feet in height, above finished grade, in residential zones, except that from the building line to the front line the maximum height shall be four (4) feet." The fence along the front yard (Congress Avenue) is hidden within an elaborate landscape buffer containing dense vegetation and a berm. Therefore, the visibility of this fence will be somewhat limited. Also, the applicant states that this variance can be looked at from the standpoint of a height variance or a setback variance. This is because the above code section sets up a relationship between height and setback; the deeper the setback, the higher the fence allowed. Therefore, this request can be considered a height variance of 3 feet 4 3/8 inches (the difference between the maximum height allowed of 4 feet and the maximum height requested of 7 feet 4 3/8 inches) or a setback variance of 16 feet 1 inch (the difference between the minimum 40 foot setback required and the maximum proposed setback of 23 feet 11 inches. In statistical terms, the height proposed is almost double what is allowed and the setback is proposed to be reduced by 40%. The size of the development and design considerations are hardships. The hardship explanation is further elaborated in Exhibit "F" - Statement of Special Conditions. ~ Page 3 Memorandum No. 97-564 Via Lugano - fence Case No. 242 -staff report The code states that zoning code variances cannot be approved unless the board finds the following: a. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district. b. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. c. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this ordinance to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district. d. That literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of the ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant. e. That the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure. f. That the grant of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this chapter [ordinance] and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Unlike other development applications, the code does not require staff to make a recommendation regarding whether an applicant meets the above criteria warranting a variance to the city's ordinance. However, if the Planning and Development Board and City Commission approve this request, it is recommended that the variance be subject to the conditions of approval included in Exhibit "G" - Conditions of Approval. A variance allowing a five foot high fence is a 25% increase in height above what the code allows and better relates to the scale of the project, while maintaining a residential character. xc: Central File J :\SHRDA T A \Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\MELEAR\Via Lugano\staff rep-242-vialug.doc A ::) EXHIBIT "A" 4 - r - lC-~ II CITRUS PUC ~1AA A"'-JAL ~) V 1t '~ LOC\TION MAP VIA LUGANO '~ . .0 1/8 m TIll 1 II ~'O 400. '800 FEET tV J.'LL....!..__~_, '.' . /1-9; EXHIBIT "B" {; if It I f :veal!; . ell> lD I b'< ::T . 0 lC II> 5 ~ ., it i. I; I . c o CD "tI1'"" !=~ 9g C') o ::l n a. '" o .. CD .. . . . . c . '" c . r Pil .... . ~ i~'" ~il oj! i~~ d~ Ii: ~&~ is: i . i iii I , I I CJ) . -. ..... CD !O~ ::J .--.. r r-" I. ~ Ilnt'l to " III "tI lI\ II o~ -<!. IIIJ' III Cll It ~ The CIty Of Boynton Beach. FIortda US! iIll = CJ, [ nIt f ~ Q d f i =.0 .- [ 1 t :J :::: ~ 0:.'" EXHIBIT "c" <{ ;i~' " '. i ;:1; .; ~ ~ _i ."...~ in-..~. .... n. ;i;~ I~iii !ii.: i I'iil ~', 'J" ,I, ,.1, .' ~ .c .." ..J. "I'" ..."~' = ro~ :... ~~: .~..,.:~ z :'=i ':'1 =u I"n 1:11 Ii .-1 .-1 II" I! hi, , m~ ~=u MI I. i ':'1 DI ""'I ~'I" 'I" .:; b!1 1":- II i ~ii i". · '~il - .'! ii' .;!' ! b.e I Illi 1~li Ii" Ii ~ !;I'-! ~ i~!i !~i; .~! 'i : ;i I t ,"is :'~Q !~! I i =ici ' i !I'. III. ~". :l. -I" S of!" .=i; ,~. · ~ ~s: , : 'i 'u .=~ i I i'; i I .. . i=l! c'.' II~i II." II, :11= I=i . :. ~ =; j~:;::" -:::::. r~-:;("' ..~::.::::~.::~ ii:,;;;iii;;j;,;;;;;\'ii!';I'j;;\'i;I'!';;;;;;;I';;;I'I' ~ ;';:lii '!lr~llllilll Ii:!; 'jim::imll~ I r ill ~II ;Il .: i ~ . i ~ I P' ~ : , r1'1oi I . f .. lJo ""< ro : .. I ","~ . ". r t ,,~i:: Ii.. t:: ..:: I ::.. "i~: nir i . S!~: ! ;~:!i! = . lill" : .. ii-! ! it "i- ,"" ..- E ;!~ .... ~.. i! :0 .i I: I) ~NOTPUno\ '\ ~! ... .~ !~ Ii "-// / -----..-..- - I :=-1 g~ ~ -.r--'~ .. ~ I I I ... I 1.5 \: I 1-:; ~ ' I ioi~, ~ . \ii~ . i I!~I\;: . '\)$~ ~ i , . .. .1 I :1 i I I. " \!L A' I ! ~, ;] I !. ~ I '!I ~ \ ! ~___________4':-M-===' ~--.... 1_~':I,""'" ~ - - t.- - - -.... - ~.,.....~ - - - _.- ::.;~:. _ cOHIIIEn AYaaII '-....&.-.-.""'....... ---------------------- - .- .....- '; I", .In <I.. hil -I! I'" !~ - II> :: ;0 -. I _z_ o 0, I _z:_ "- - ~ mllll:~li iii~;;:li 11 ~ ~iliill:11 1~'li r !IIIII!I II II! Jldl!! ,I !II lllJ'III;:111 !a ! i II ' 'laI1d,II' Ul. !I~'I~ I 11ft 1111 (I . I · ~iil a ! M II ,51 I ~. I ~i ~ ~! ~ I q EXHIBIT "0" IG CA5T STONE CAP FINIAL AND VENEEJIIl ~ g' i '" AW'1N.M FENCE " rt I r. .... ( I ) ~,Ii I 1 . I' ~ I: '" il\ "l' II r- I '1 ill ( r ~ , ... I 7 w .. ~Cl! I~TICIN llU!I!\II! (\IO!I!F!Jlt TO ItllIlIICiA TICIN !"LAN6) /1 EXHIBIT "E" /2 r-- RECEIVED BY STAFF MEMBER: #2 APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE DATE: FEE PAID: RECEIPT NUMBER: CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH ZONING CODE VARIANCE APPLICATION SUBMITTAL DEADLINE: SEE SCHEDULE OF DATES FOR BOARD MEETING AND SUBMITTAL DATES: Please Print (in ink) or Type Submittal Date: October 17, 1997 The undersigned owner(s) hereby respectfully petition(s) the Planning and Development Bard to grant to petitioner(s) a special exception or variance to the existing Zoning or Sign Code of said City pertaining to the property hereinafter described and in support thereof state(s): Property involved is described as follow: Lot(s) Block I Subdivision Plat Book Not Platted Page N/A or otherwise described as follows: Property Address Phase II Melear PUD SW Comer of Congress and Sandlewood. Variance requested Variance to allow fences and walls greater than 4' in front yards of Residential Districts (LOR Ch 2, S-4.J.1 ). The following documents are required to be submitted with this application to form a single package. Incomplete package will not be accepted: 1 . Two sealed surveys by a registered surveyor in the State of Florida, not over six (6) months old, indicating: . A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. All property lines North arrow Existing structures and paving Existing elevations Rights-of-way I with elevations Easements on or adjacent to the site Utilities on or adjacent to the site Legal Description Number of acres to the nearest one-hundredth (1/100) of an acre Location of sketch property Surveyor's certificate 2. Two site plans properly dimensioned and to scale showing: /3 Page 2 . '. Zoning Code Variance ApplicatIon A. All proposed structures B. All existing structures that are to remain on site C. Setback lines tor all structures drawn perpendicular from the property lines to tr closest vertical wall of structures D. Use ot each structure (or uses within multiple occupancies) E. Use of adjacent properties including right-ot-way lines for all streets and alley~ sidewalks, turn lanes and driveways F. Elevations of the lowest finished floor of all structures on the site 3. Certified list of names and post office addresses of property owners and legal descriptions c their property within 400 feet of subject property, as recorded in the County Courthouse. Sucl list shall be accotnpani~d by an Affidavit (see attached) stating that to the best of th~ applicant's knowledge, said list is complete and accurate. 4, Proof of ownership of property by petitioner(s), such as deed or purchase contract agreement If an a ent is submittin the etition a notarized co of a letter desi natin him a~ such must accomDanv the Detition. 5. Statement of special conditions, hardships or reasons justifying the requested exception 01 variance. Respond to the six (6) questions below (A-F) on a separate sheet (Please orint or tyoe) : C. D. E. F. .. A. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district; That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant; That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands, buildings or structures in the same zoning district; That literal interpretation of the provisions of this chapter would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of the Ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant; That the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building or structure; That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this chapter and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. 8. 6. An application fee in the amount of $400.00, payable to the City of Boynton Beach, must accompany a completed application. The $400.00 application fee covers a request to vary one (1) section of the Code. Seeking relief from more than one section of the Code will require payment of $100.00 for each additional Code section. /I,t Page 3 . '. Zoning Code Vanance APPlicatIon 7. Name and address of owner:_ Gene & GliCk Manaq:ement 8. Name of applicant P.A.C. Land Deve.loptnent, Donaldson Hearing _ Agent Applicant's address: 730 Bonnie Brae Street, Winter ParI!:, FL 32789 Applicant's phone #: ~ ( 40 7J 6 _ 3 065 Date: October 16, 1997 - Signature of Applica . Agen = . ":: 1. TO BE COMPLETEO BY THE BUlLOING OFFICIAL OR REPRESENTADVE Property is presently Zoned: formerly zoned: 2. Property Control Number. 3. Denial was made upon eXisting ZOning or sign requirements (list sectlon(s) of Code from which relief is required): '4'411&[, ~ C tl'( . i' -j . 4. Nature of exception or variance required: Date: Permit denied - Building Department 5. Case Number: Meeting Date: .. /~ EXHIBIT "F" /(7 ,- ( , - Via Lugano at Melear PUD Boynton Beach, Florida The applicant is requesting relief from Chapter 2 Section 4.J.1 to allow for the use of a five foot decorative fence and column sections within the front yard setback (20 feet from Congress Avenue) of the Via Lugano project and to allow the entrance feature walls and decorative elements to exceed the 4 foot height limitation. The building front yard setback for Via Lugano (Phase II of the Melear PUO) was established on the Master Plan as 40 feet. The applicant proposes the use of five foot fence column sections located 20 feet from the property. The fence sections are for decorative purposes only and are not continuous. The fence sections are not intended for security or buffering purposes. The applicant also has proposed Artistic Decorative Wall features on either side of the entrance road and a focal fountain element within the median. A literal interpretation of the above code section would allow the portion of the walls within the building setback (40 feet from Congress Avenue) to be 6 feet for walls and 45 feet for accessory structures but limits that portion between 40 feet and the proposed 20 foot setback to 4 foot. The applicant also seeks relief from Article IV Section 1.0 of Chapter 21 of the LOR (Signs Allowed). This code section allows residential and condominium developments to erect single faced signs on each side of a community's entrance walls. This section limits the height to a maximum of 6 feet with the sign area not exceeding 32 square feet for each face. The applicant's proposed decorative wall features exceed 6 feet in height and are integral to the project's entry design. The sign faces (lettering), which are less than 32 square feet, are proposed on each side of entry feature. While signage is a part of the walls, it is only a minor component of the overall entry feature expression. In the case of Via Lugano, this signage is located approximately 35 feet from Congress Avenue due to existing easements granted to the City. This is substantially greater than the minimum 10 feet allowed by the code. A. Special circumstances do exist which are peculiar to the subject property. A 20 foot utilities easement, which was dedicated to the City by the original developer of the Melear PUO, limits the placement of proposed fence and entry features. Proposed fence sections are located a maximum of 20 feet from the Congress Avenue right-of-way. The artistic entry feature in the entrance median is located 25 feet from the property line and the signage face is located 35 feet from the property line. Due to these constraints, and in keeping with the scale of the project, the entrance feature and fence sections exceed 4 feet, and the archway of the wall containing the sign exceeds 6 feet. . Concerning the walls on either side of the main entrance, it should be noted that the applicant proposed a column, wall and fence combination. The heights are e: \prOJed\gen....alla~\mele&rllUdvariance,dOc /'7 Via Lugano at Melear PUD Boynton Beach, Florida varied to create architectural interest and character. The columns and archway of the sign wall is a maximum of 8 feet 1 inch high. The majority of the wall is 2 feet 7% inches high with a picket fence on top averaging 5 feet overall. Chapter 2 Section 4.J.1 of the LOR's is intended to regulate buffer walls and buffer fences. The applicant's features are intended to be aesthetic and sculptural in nature and are not used as a buffer. In our opinion, the Land Development Regulation did not anticipate such elements and are intended to protect the adjacent property owners from adverse impacts resulting from large barrier walls. It is the applicant's opinion that the proposed Via Lugano fencing and hardcape elements, including the proposed architectural walls in which the signs are applied, are consistent with the spirit and intent of the LOR's and with the policy objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. B. The special circumstances that exist do not result from the actions of this applicant. Easements were needed to better serve the majority of the City of Boynton Beach residents. The easements where in place at the time the applicant purchased the land. Additionally I we believe the code is silent on the height of aesthetic elements in the landscape. It is the intent of the PUD zoning to encourage "creative design and an improved living environment. n We believe Via Lugano meets and exceeds these directives. C. The granting of the requested variance will not in any way confer special privileges on the applicant that is denied other lands. The subject property is a Planned Unit Development which is intended to encourage unique design. A 20 foot utility easement along the front of residential properties is greater than what is commonly found. D. Literal interpretation of the LOR Chapter 2 Section 4.J.1 and Article IV Section 1.d would limit the applicants ability to successfully market a high end residential development in the City of Boynton Beach. E. The variance sought are the minimum that will make possible the desired aesthetic appearance. Fence Sections Columns are 5 feet with a decorative finial measuring a total height of 7 feet % inch. The picket fence is 5 feet 0 inch. Fence sections are setback 20 feet from Congress Avenue. F, ~ The granting of this variance is harmonious with the general intent and purpose of the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations and the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan to encourage upscale housing development. The hardscape feature proposed is simply an extension of the overall landscape expression of the Via Lugano project. LOR Chapter 2 Article IV Section 2.0.1 limits signs to a height of 10 feet. Considering the sign lettering is located at a height less than 5 feet and an average 35 feet setback, the visual perception of height would greatly diminished. /<J EXHIBIT "G" /9 CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH AGENDA ITEM REQUEST FORM Requested City Commission Date Final Form Must be Turned Requested City Commission Date Final Form Must be Turned Meeting Dates in to City Manager's Office Meetinll; Dates in to City Manall;er's Office ~ December 16, 1997 December 5,1997 (noon) D February 17, 1998 February 6, 1998 (noon) D January 6,1998 December 19, 1997 (noon) D March 3, 1998 February 20, 1998 (noon) D January 20, 1998 January 9, 1998 (noon) D March 17, 1998 March 6, 1998 (noon) D February 3, 1998 January 23, 1998 (noon) D April 7, 1998 March 20, 1998 (noon) RECOMMENDATION: Please place the request below on the December 16, 1997 City Commission meeting agenda under Consent - Ratification of Planning and Development Board Action. The Planning and Development Board with a 5-2 vote, recommended approval of the request below subject to staff comments. For further details pertaining to this request, see attached Planning and Zoning Memorandum No. 97-563. EXPLANATION: PROJECT: AGENT: OWNER: LOCA nON: DESCRIPTION: Via Lugano - Melear PUD Donaldson Hearing Gene and Glick Management Southwest comer of Congress Avenue and Sandalwood Drive Request for a variance to Chapter 21, Article IV, Section l.D - signs of the Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations to allow the height of a monument sign to be increased from the maximum of 6 feet to 8 feet I inch. PROGRAM IMPACT: N/A FISCAL IMPACT: N/A ALTERNATIVES: Department Head's Signature City Manager's Signature ~~I \ \CH\MAIN\SHRDA T A \PLANNING\SHARED\ WP\PROJECTS\MELEARWIA LUGANO\AGENDA ITEM REQUEST -CASE 243 12-l6-97,DOC EXHIBIT "B" Conditions of Approval Project name: Via Lugano aka Melear PUD (multi-family) File number: ZNCV 97-009, Case No. 243 (sign wall height) Reference: Zoning Code Variance application with an October 17. 1997 date. I~~MFN~S INCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS Comments: None X UTILITIES Comments: None X FIRE Comments: None X POLICE Comments: None X ENGINEERING DIVISION Comments: None X BUILDING DIVISION Comments: None X PARKS AND RECREATION I Comments: None X FORESTERT;-.;VIRONMENT ALIST Comments: None X PLANNING AND ZONING Comments: 1. I f the \ariance is granted, the maximum height cannot exceed 7 feet 6 X IncnC'~~. ADDITlCJ:\\L PL\NNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS 2. NONE, X ADDITION:\L CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS 3. To he determined. TJH:dim J:ISHRDATAIPL/lJ,\i!NG :'VC,REC:-:::P'PROJECTSIMELEARIVIA LUGANOICOND OF APPROVAL.CASE243,DOC DEVELOPMENT ORDER CITY <.. BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME: Via Lugano aka Melear PUD (multi-family) 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: Zoning Code Variance (sign wall height) 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 1- 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 1- 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 DATED: City Clerk J:\SHRDA T A\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\MELEAR\Via Lugano\DEVELOPMENT ORDER-case 243.doc Meeting Date: Petition: File No: Location: Owner: Project Name: Variance Request: DEVELO.. ..tlENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION MEMORANDUM #97-563 STAFF REPORT PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD AND CITY COMMISSION December 1, 1997 Case No. 243 ZNCV 97-009 Southwest corner of Sandalwood Drive and Congress Avenue Gene & Glick Management P.A.C. Land Development Co. - contract purchaser Via Lugano Request for a 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 feet to 8 feet 1 inch. BACKGROUND The subject project, Via Lugano, is a planned apartment complex located at the southwest corner of Sa.ndaiwood Drive and Congress Avenue, within the Melear PUD (see Exhibit "A" - Location Map), The prooo3ed entrance signage for Via Lugano consists of one sign on both sides of the main entrance from Congress Avenue (see Exhibit "B" - Site Plan and Exhibit "e" - Survey). The entrance signs are part of the 8 foot 1 inch (8'1 ") high decorative walls which become part of the decorative fence that encompasses a majority of the project (see Exhibit ''0'' - decorative wall design). Since the code prohibits signs higher than six (6) feet in residential zoning districts, a zoning variance application was filed with the City (see Exhibit "E" - Application). The following is a description of the zoning districts and land uses of the properties that surround the subject property: j" Page 2 Memorandum No. 97-563 Via Lugano - sign wall height Case No. 243 -staff report North - Sandalwood Drive right-of-way and farther north is the completed portion (first phase) of the Melear PUD known as Sandalwood; South - LLWD L-20 canal right-of-way and farther south is the Mohagany Bay apartment complex, zoned PUD; East - Congress Avenue, and farther east is Dos Lagos, a multi-family and single family community zoned PUD; West - Remaining (vacant) portion of the Melear PUD, and farther west is Sunny South Estates, a manufactured home community within unincorporated Palm Beach County. ANAL YSIS The City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 21, Article IV, Section 1. D states as follows: "A condominium or residential development may erect single faced name signs on each side of all entrances on site walls or one (1) freestanding monument sign for each entrance. These signs are not to exceed thirty-two (32) square feet in area, nor be more than six (6) feet in height" Chapter 21, Article II, Section 1.B assigns the board the following powers in regard to granting increases in the height of signs: "Allow the area and/or height of a sign to be increased by up to twenty-five (25) percent of the maximum allowable height or area" Therefore, the maximum allowable height of the sign wall, ifthe variance is granted, is 7 feet 6 inches (7'6'). The applicant has stated that the sign regulations present him with a hardship. In summary, the applicant justifies this application based on the minimum setback of the wall and sign, which is affected by the existence of a utilities easement located along the front side of the project. Alternatively stated, the applicant requests the additional sign height to achieve a desired level of visibility, which is only necessary to offset the greater setback distance created by the utility easement. The applicant also ;( Page 3 Memorandum No, 97-563 Via Lugano - sign wall height Case No, 243 -staff report justifies the necessity of this variance based on consistency with the overall scale and design of the project. It is the applicant's opinion that the wall and sign, as proposed, "are consistent with the spirit and intent of the LOR's and with the policy objectives of the Comprehensive Plan (see Exhibit "F" - Statement of Special Conditions). The Land Development Regulations state that zoning code variances cannot be approved unless the board finds the following: a. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district; b. That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant; c. That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special privilege that is denied by this ordinance to other lands, buildings, or structures in the same zoning district; d. That literal interpretation of the provisions of this ordinance would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of the ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant; e, That the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure; and f That the grant of the variance will be in hannony with the general intent and purpose of [his chapter [ordinance] and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Unlike ether development applications, the code does not require staff to make a recommendation regarding whether an applicant meets the above criteria warranting a variance to the city's ordinance. If the Planning and Development Board and City Commission approve this request, it is recommended that the variance be subject to conditions of approval, which are included in Exhibit "G" - Conditions of Approval. 3 Page 4 Memorandum No. 97-563 Via Lugano - sign wall height Case No. 243 -staff report xc: Central File J: \SHRDA T A \Plann ing\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\MELEAR\Via Lugano\staff rep-243-vialug-bak.doc 1- EXHIBIT "A" 5' LOC~~TION MAP VIA LUGANO ~fliiiii ~ ~Ei~H33E163ID~{.- ~,---~__ ---....IL. ~ !,.1.~l~!D ::::H:ss'a,")..~ / I I I 11 ~ I ~ , .' 'f'.( \' ,~. J = litH M.l ~#-.!:..---_.._.::..:;: )J~, I '- 11"0 =~ ~ 11 III.IIIIU~ ~;.w-~ ~~~. . - . (~SW_~ ~S II I I 111111111" ,.....-l ~( , ".J -= '. I ~~,,'_""tl"~, 'r""" ~'" "'.__~~ _ _"L~. '.M''''~IV _ _ " _ I ~ '\. ~L~ , ' ,.... I T I' .n .' ~ ~ .. ~~ : r ;',' mill~ i=1~ I '" ' ''''''00''-$_ .~~ I'. J'J ~ / ~_-1"'C::: C ~ lilll '~ ~' ...}1 T liiH -~ ~ I \ ~ -...:~! - .. I." =- ~ ' IT ~ ~..::y/ ~ -< /1 OIIID _= ( -1 \--- ~ ~ rr~..... Illl 'to: j lc 1 ~ ::::;::: , \~\ t= rr~rTl III' ~I / T I "Ill 1 I I I I \ i/ j 1 , -., ,^,ii.- i. - ~I ~ w 0, J:>. ...,....ii ~ (~r I ~l (iL~O '~I '~r-,~'...'." ~'^" (jj ~k \ 11 Pl ~<"1i7f:CP ~ r-. , t.. 'I-I LUI,:r-ws- ~~", {~Jb ~ ~c;: =f/li:;t11 \ '--..--, . A '" -----I S\ ~ \ . -:.-,/ } \TIT I "MEL:Io=-\~1, -j ~ ~ ~ '{2'~' ~L, I~ ~ j)',~~1 ~ B ~':~~J \j p~)I7.-'lJ rJ1~ \\ 6 _ -~I ~ \iVY ' . _. - .. ~ ..--.... .. _ _ r... A AJ-A L ~..1.- ;:-' Q':~'~ ::'.~~ L ) ~....,.. ~, 0 rE 1 '. 'Ii:l~_~ C3 ~'~ > ~':;:.:.., )~~ L ! : '~ '~ , .. . ~ '0 1/8 m l\11I II w ~O 400. '800 FEET ffi ...,.,.,. P~f'l/Nlf'I/{, OEPr; /1-9 --~._.__._---~---_._-------- ~ ~ ,-....,AL .~_~~._j .-,..-L...'.:II......._..... B.B(2-r:~~,9} ~Dl wL c~~I,' ca II >"I.v u~a,~ 4 -- =-~[-_."---~m'L 1) ~~"Y""", .~ ~,\1 1~1 w. -> ~ r~-~'c,'~ wL l'IIIJn.r a I !II-~"-)llr"'l'll?! -.. '11 ~)~ '-~-:-1" n ~ . " ,",~h ;,...:..!c" .t--::l r~- ~~ rr lC-=d 11,,11 rfr'rT frr lit I1~r::rZJ l@,':---' - J ~1I11 ,,-' _.,;,r~....'f':, ~ 3~--.-",~~~~ "., ' ~ - \' i --=1o.~"" / ~ U~SC<" ~ \\) i ')~.::-:~'~~ .." 'L \ 'I' \.--;c,;;. ^ v"" ~~\ I- 1 '.1 ~ I / ':~ ,., r-& ~ " k'~1."-~~', t-, 1 _ I ;aT ;.... .~ '.'-1" -"," -...:... 1-4. -I' - .....- ~:;:;.~'; ? ':"=::~ ~.: -.:~ ~.., c (\~,= "~, ,r:, ,r,' , ,:" ~~-,"1 r 'l~' (; ~\l~ ~ == 1-- IICITRUS GLEN 2" ~ ~ ~ PUC LUI:4.0 ~ :: -( e:&1AA SITE ... "\- , '. . . . \ . , I ;_ .,.. W rn~~J / ..---. MILE'S(/ ~ EXHIBIT "B" 7 c o c.o :VI; ~cc co , c.o o o ;:) Q. o c.o i I Ii I I \ : I \ ' I : , I ,I - :<> '" :;; i~ ~i . C I'll I'll iii, f ~ '< ~ I- Iii I I ~ I II can a \ / /r 11' ~-I" --c.:~~"=-='~"~~I';,;-'~m:-~~"~ ;' ','- ==.~ . ~. , .., .c ,', J....i.-- ' ,,,;7. t '\ II ,...,;.c. , _ I.' ~/ 'Ib.'" _:q .:."" '" ,.,,1,' " II " i ~, . _\ :jj . i __ .' '. I \ - /. I'::"" , I , ....,.( "_-:" ... ~ ~,' i ~_ -4 "..., ~ . I ~ ---;,ej- ,~ r~: : l~ Ii ~: i ....., , :::J :::L ... ='.1'-0< ... -i el'll ::;;a . 0 \:..., !::l~ ....., - ::::: -.\ \ ",; .3 Ii ~j: Ii .'.: ....., I'. - J.-' b ::j o' -J 1'1 -< r ... ;j: n o o . .. . . - ~ c . . c . " I iI il .1 'II . ~ 'J! :>>0 !" ,. '% ~ ii>H ~iloo ih!~ ;..;;:1 ~~iua ~IJQ. i!1~ii - il"~" ~Hi~ "3E!i ! Q~~ ; t{1 ii'll f -!j .. i ~tt~ t[1l ~ g 0 ~d fd ~.g g · 00..... , , I~ i~ 1111 91 II I} ~ I , en -- r"'t" CD I~ s.::2 r---- ~ ~s:>> 1/ 1:J ~cn III III :::.&. 3 !!. !i " \'I'i i o I'hl rJl " '1'1-0 "I jl,\ n~ "\t lIil!' II' c.o It ~ \ II11I1 I l~~l Via Lugano The City Of Boynton Beach, ROOda EXHIBIT "c" 9 . JI'C ~ Ilillil:illi I rU.i; Cx II - ~ 11 , .:::= , 1;'1 r" ;~ 1':!,,I.llj! ~ II: Ilj'iillill!j, il! 0 - ~I- I; I :=11'11: c :0- I Ilil.1 'I i ~! d _. :lil!I~= Ef- Jd ~- II !li!riIU i 'I' .~o , , ~I :bllm I i UI \ - 1:1 ~n ~ \ I 1'1 -%- 1=1 11\ I ! i: ~ i::;; I.' "I ~ I ~ I i~! , . _z_ !.... ~ .. Ci ' .. U <II ~~. --J'- r .1 u~ ~Il w_ --. ._......._........1--..,. JNlJA' UJIIMO:) _ _ - - - .::a...--___.'-dJI1I' - JrIdo - - - -" - - ~ loUnCl1u...,...... ro'" ......... . '=:::':2,7 :- -;.;;-~.~=~~ -- 'lli~ t ,. b : - \ w- ,.I ~I ~~ ::;1 ~i ii- ~. .~ -:--:..-....---- .. It =1 ~~ ;1 w. ~. :- " \.. /0 I i \ li 41 I ,~ I I; ! IL\ I! ,~ ,!~ I ! I! I Ir' I : ~(l ! : \! ~ i I ~ "~1\ .. U" ~ ;. Il;G I It. ~:~ I 'I r\ I" I I , ~ . ~ >oj :t. ;1- fi~ ~h ".- ~I ~~ ,. .. ~l ..~ .... 0.. ~.. :0 ~ lDUY'. ~Oll \ r.1 il'l '10. · tll :'1 I :i .f I i :.! III;. II.. I! : 5 !i: ~. :31 ril' !III I r'l. r I i-S ii' i." r m: i .nil" I!!' flilr I .-.& I II 5. ;!jl i r I. ;;!'i" o!rn~i ;1"II~. Ill' .. - i. 1".- a r,', ! :1 h'l lit, ~i,= Ii; lih i II lib I~!: !~il~ 2. .I_~ . :- !;ti ri..a ~~ ~ . .. 0_,. ' _~ ..-a "."' w' , i~ li5_ ! i- !:il !!f. r:!: : I~ Ii!; ! ..a:... :...ur ~!~~ -..... .. 11,-1 n I ,I: ~lll' 1'111 \,1 : 1'1 i . 1!!!I..1 I. l.l HII ' I .L'j nch....... '.h~.~ ~ .,1 ,.JlI. u,;: . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~:~~~ll ~~~~~~!i;~;) i~~~:'lt ~ Ii ;:;~~~: :~';::.. ..l~:_.j. ::::...; -: ~~!~: ': I. EXHIBIT "0" 1/ 4e. DIAMETER CAST STONE MEDAU..IAN BT 'PlNEAPFLE aROVE' ","IoN-"'" CUT CCRAL STONE VENEER " 'PALITtNO' FONT STTLE. BEVEL-CUT JNTED 1/4" OR' EXI5TINQ WALL :U1T14 A PAINTED aREEN PATINA FINI51-l . 2' j 2' 1'-,. 1"-11- . /2 2' . "'j A " "'j ill il t EXHIBIT "E" /3 #1 APPLICATION ACCEPTANCE DATE: C."\ " .' ._- , " FEE PAID: RECEIVED BY STAf:F MEMBER: RECEIPT NUMBER: CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH ZONING CODE VARIANCE APPLICA nON SUBMITTAL DEADLINE: SEE SCHEDULE OF DATES FOR BOARD MEETING AND SUBMITTAL DATES: Please Print (in ink) or Type Submittal Date: October 17. 1997 The undersigned owner(s) herebv respectfully petition(s) the Planning and Development Bard to grant to petitioner(s) a special exception or variance to the existing Zoning or Sign Cod~ of said City pertaining to the property hereinafter described and in support thereof state(s): Property involved is described as follow: Lot(s) Block I Subdivision Plat Book Not Platted Page N/A or otherwise described as follows: Property Address Phase II Melear PUD SW Comer of Congress and Sandlewood. Variance requested Variance to allow sign wall greater than 6' in height. Sign code (Article V Section 1.d) The following documents are required to be submitted with this application to form a single package. Incomplete package will not be accepted: 1. Two sealed surveys by a registered surveyor in the State of Florida, not over six (6) months old, indicating: . A. B. C. D. E. F. G. H. I. J. K. All property lines North arrow Existing structures and paving Existing elevations Rights-of-way, with elevations Easements on or adjacent to the site Utilities on or adjacent to the site Legal Description Number of acres to the nearest one-hundredth (1/100) of an acre Location' of sketch property Surveyor's certificate 2. Two site plans properly dimensioned and to scale showing: If I ( Page 2 . Zoning Cooe Vanance Application A. All proposed structures B. All existing structures that are to remain on site C. Setback lines for all structures drawn perpendicular from the property lines to the closest vertical wall of structures D. Use of each structure (or uses within multiple occupancies) E. Use at adjacent properties including right-at-way lines for all streets and alleys sidewalks, turn lanes and driveways F. Elevations of the lowest finished floor of all structures on the site 3. Certified list of names and post office addresses of property owners and legal descriptions 01 their property within 400 feet of subject property, as recorded in the County Courthouse. Such list shall be accompanied by an Affidavit (see attached) stating that to the best of the applicant's knowledge, said list is complete and accurate. 4. Proof of ownership of property by petitioner(s), such as deed or purchase contract agreement. If an aaent is submittin the etition. a notarized co of a letter desi natin him as such must accomoanv the oetition. 5. Statement of special conditions, hardships or reasons justifying the requested exception or variance. Respond to the six (6) questions below (A-F) on a separate sheet (Please orint or tvo e): C. D. E. F. .. A. That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure or building involved and which are not applicable to other lands, structures or buildings in the same zoning district; That the special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant; That granting the variance requested will not confer on the applicant any special priviiege that is denied by this Ordinance to other lands, buildings or structures in the same zoning district; That literal interpretation of the provisions of this chapter would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning district under the terms of the Ordinance and would work unnecessary and undue hardship on the applicant; That the variance granted is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasona-ble use of the land, building or structure; That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general intent and purpose of this chapter and that such variance will not be injurious to the area involved or OTherwise detrimental to the public welfare. 8. 6. An appiication fee in the amount of $400.00. payable to the City of Boynton Beach, must accompany a completed application. The $400.00 application fee covers a request to vary one (1) section of the Code. Seeking relief from more than one section of the Code will require ::avment of $100.00 for each additional Code section. (S Page 3 . Zoning Code Vanance APPlication 8- 7. Name and address Of oWner._ Gene & Glick Manaqement .. 8. Name of applicant: P.A.C. Land Deve1Dpment, Donaldson Hearing _ Agent APPlicant's address: 730 Bonnie Brae S~reet, Winter ParI!:, FL 32789 -3065 .. ... ... .-:<'~~~~~, :~-~". Applicant's phone #: Date: October 16, 1997 Agen = . .' '..: TO BE COMPLEIEo BY THE BUILOING OFFICIAL OR REPRES NTAnvE ~':~:~:~.:f:j~:-,~~~~:~-~;::~.~4~:~ ..; .. ~ 1. Property is presently Zoned: .->~~~.~. , formeriY,~ned: 2. Property Control Number: ':,' ::~.: ~"~-";:~ 3. Dehial was made upon existing zoning or sign requirements {list sectfon(s) Of COde from which relief is reqUired): . . .... .". . -:- _.....~.-t::.:;.;. _4;. 4. Nature of exception or variance required: Date: Permit denied - Building Department 5. Case Number; Meeting .Date: . 1& EXHIBIT "F" /1 Variance #2 - Sign Code Article IV Section 1.0 Chapter 21 LOR Via Lugano at Melear PUO Boynton Beach, Florida The applicant is requesting relief from Article IV Section 1.0 of Chapter 21 of the LOR (Signs Allowed). This code section allows residential and condominium developments to erect single faced signs on each side of a community's entrance walls. This section limits the height to a maximum of 6 feet with the sign area not exceeding 32 square feet for each face. In the case of Via Lugano, this signage is located approximately 35 feet from Congress Avenue due to existing easements granted to the City. This is substantially greater than the minimum 10 feet allowed by the code. A. Special circumstances do exist which are peculiar to the subject property. A 20 foot utilities easement, which was dedicated to the City by the original developer of the Melear PUO limits the placement of signage. The columns and archway of the sign wall is a maximum of 8 feet 1 inch high. The majority of the wall is 2 feet 7% inches high with a picket fence on top averaging 5 feet overall. Additional height is required due to the setback of the proposed sign wall and in order to achieve the desired aesthetic appearance. It is the applicant's opinion that the proposed Via Lugano fencing and hardcape elements, including the proposed architectural walls in which the signs are applied, are consistent with the spirit and intent of the LOR's and with the policy objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. B. The special circumstances that exist do not result from the actions of this applicant. Easements were needed to better serve the majority of the City of Boynton Beach residents. The easements where in place at the time the applicant purchased the land. Additionally, we believe the sign code is silent on the height of aesthetic elements in the landscape. It is the intent of the PUO zoning to encourage"creative design and an improved living environment." We believe Via Lugano meets and exceeds these directives. C. The granting of the requested variance will not in any way confer special privileges on the applicant that is denied other lands. The subject property is a .. Planned Unit Development which is intended to encourage unique design. A 20 foot utility easement along the front of residential properties is greater than what is commonly found. The sign face is located 35' from the Congress Avenue property boundary. e:\project\general\a-m\melearvar-2. doc /1 Via Lugano at Melear PUD - Varlallc Boynton Beach, Florida Page 2 of 2 (~ D. Literal interpretation of Article IV Section 1.d would limit the applicants ability to successfully market a high end residential development in the City of Boynton Beach. E. The variance sought is the minimum that will make possible the desired aesthetic appearance. Entry Feature Walls The columns of the entry feature are 5 feet with a finial for a total of 7 feet 4 3/8 inches. The walls and planter are 2 feet 7% inches with a 3 foot picket fence section on top. The overall height has been reduced approximately 1 foot form the original submittal. The Entry Feature Walls are located at a minimum of 20 to 49 feet from the Congress Avenue right-of-way. . Sign Wall Face The average height of the wall is 5 feet with a decorative cap and an archway which extends to 8 feet 1 inch. The height has been reduced from 11 feet previously proposed. The Sign Wall is located on average 35 feet from the Congress Avenue property line. The signage lettering is located below 5 feet and is less than 10 square feet (8'6" x 14" letters). F. The granting of this variance is harmonious with the general intent and purpose of the City of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations and the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan to encourage upscale housing development. The hardscape signage feature proposed is simply an extension of the overall landscape expression of the Via Lugano project, LOR Chapter 2 Article IV Section 2.0.1 limits signs to a height of 6' with a setback of only 10 feet. Considering the sign lettering is located at a height less than 5 feet and the sign walls are setback 35 feet, on average, the visual perception of height is greatly diminished. .. /1 EXHIBIT "G" ;;10 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT gOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 1,1997 Harry Woodworth, property owner, recently received a Certificate of Occupancy for a new home he built at 685 NE 15th Place. In order to complete the landscaping and finish the project, a fence is needed along the north boundary. This property has a 220' common border with the Seaview Trailer Park, Mr. Woodworth's request is to put a fence along that property line. However, the Code only allows a 2' high fence on top of cinder blocks. This will not contain his toddler or offer security. Mr. Woodworth asked for consideration of his request to allow him to construct a 4' fence along the rear of his property, Motion Mr. Dube moved that we APPROVE the request for a variance to Chapter 2 - Zoning, Section 4.J.1 - Fence Height of the Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations which restrict 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. Ms. Frazier seconded the motion that carried unanimously. Description: Via Lugano - Melear PUD Donaldson Hearing Gene and Glick Management Southwest corner of Congress Avenue and Sandalwood Drive Request for a variance to Chapter 2, Section 4.J.1 of the Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations to allow for construction of a 5' high decorative fence and column sections within the 40' front yard setback of 23' 11". 2. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: CHAIRMAN WISCHE ANNOUNCED THE PUBLIC HEARING. THERE WAS NO ONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO SPEAK ON THIS APPLICATION. Donaldson Hearina. Cottier and Hearina. 1070 East Indiantown Road, Jupiter. Florida. was present and introduced Tom Cavanaugh of PAC Land Development, Mike Scorer, Engineer, and Robert Cottier, Landscape Architect. Mr. Hearing explained that this variance is relative to the height of fencing and associated bollards along the Congress Avenue frontage for this project. The Code allows a maximum of a 6' high fence, wall, or hedge. However, when this feature is within the front yard setback, the maximum height is limited to 4'. The request for a variance is based on the following two reasons: 1. The front setback of this fence treatment is 20' from the right-of-way. - - When this PUD was originally developed, the master developer dedicated easements in favor of the City for sewer mains and water mains. Therefore, this fence would have to be setback 20'. 2. This is an aesthetic treatment. There will be a series of fence sections with bollards at the end of each fence section. Using the exhibits that depicted the front entrance, Mr. Hearing indicated the fence section. The applicant is proposing a 5' white picket fence with 5' columns and 2'-4 3/8" finials at the ends of 3 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING & DEVELOPME~, tSOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA DECEMBER 1, 1997 each section, This treatment is not a buffer wall or security fence. It is an aesthetic edge treatment to the landscaping that will be backdropped by lush landscape features. Mr. Rosenstock questioned whether only the columns will be over 6' in height. Mr. Hearing responded affirmatively. The total fence height from the ground will never be higher than 5'- 71/2". Motion Mr. Rosenstock moved that the project known as Via Lugano - Melear PUD, located at the southwest comer of Congress Avenue and Sandalwood Drive, and their request for a variance to Chapter 2, Section 4.J.1 of the Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations to allow for construction of a 5' high decorative fence and column sections within the 40' front yard setback of 23' 11" not to exceed 7'-4 3/8" and not to occur more often than 40' on center. Mr. Aguila seconded the motion. Mr. Aguila said he seconded this motion because it did not include staff comments. The motion carried 6-1. (Mr. Myott dissented.) Description: Via Lugano - Melear PUD Donaldson Hearing Gene and Glick Management Southwest comer of Congress Avenue and Sandalwood Drive Request for a variance to Chapter 21, Article IV, Section 1.0 - 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 8' 1". 3. Project: Agent: Owner: Location: CHAIRMAN WISCHE ANNOUNCED THE PUBLIC HEARING. Nancv Mavberry, a resident of Sandalwood, requested that this project be tastefully constructed. CHAIRMAN WISCHE CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING. Mr. Rosenstock questioned why the applicant wants to build a sign that is so high. Mr. Hearing explained that the sign is small. The entry statement that is being constructed has higher proportions4sed on setbacks, scale and magnitude of the project. The Sign Code limits the height of walls to a maximum height of 6'. In addition, the signage is limited to 32 square feet. The applicant is proposing an entrance feature. The walls, columns, guardhouse, trellises, and planters are part of the entry architecture. In order to accommodate the scale of the surrounding area, the applicant requested that the top of the arch on the back of the sign be allowed at a height of 8'_1". Since that request was made, staff explained that the maximum variance this board is permitted to grant is 25% (7'_6"). The applicant agrees with that height if the board will grant the variance. 4 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 1.0 - 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 7' 6". Ms. Frazier seconded the motion. Mr. Dubs confirmed with the applicant that he agrees with the height of 7' 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. Dubs 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. Kastartak 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. Dubs 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 17tr1 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 I #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, Rosenstock 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 recordkeeping and Code purposes, but stay with the same landscape plan that was submitted for reference purposes for staff. Mr. Cavanaugh pointed out that he would not be submitting a landscape plan as part of his site plan submittal. 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 individual departments. Attorney Pawelczyk recommended that the comment be included and the applicant needs to . comply with the ctide. 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 "1tJpport 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 lI'l1t 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. ~.~ . 7fJ.::prain~o -- Deputy City Clerk (Two Tapes) 11 PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM NO. 97-592 TO: Ken Hall Eng. Plan Check Inspector Tambri Heyden, AICP -r--fll Planning and Zoning Director THROUGH: FROM: Jerzy Lewicki '------ \1 _ Senior Planner ~ DATE: December 4, 1997 SUBJECT: Preliminary Plat review - 1 st review Project: Via Lugano Location: Melear PUD (multifamily) File No.: PLAT 97-005 The following is a list of 1 st review comments regarding the subdivision plat for Via Lugano development in Melear PUD. COMMENTS 1. Provide Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions of the proposed development for staff review prior to recordation. xc: Central File S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTSIMELEAR\Via Lugano\PLA TI1st-rev com plat vialug.doc