REVIEW COMMENTS
r T IfO/L5 c::.t- f IV +F /1 Jr 5 rC j( l}.I- AjoL
/)cfc / W:rO Tit of fRFVATI::- j( oA DS I 5f Ti3lrd: 5
) \) ti,<.\\
,~"l-
:' .
I 3~
0\- y-.
O'~'5,
T I~E ~ u#D itocASE )rf'? EMU To BE toeA: re D ::r)/ rite
foR rF',,)J of Tltf f}/Tk !tAte E Ro!t iJ W tI-+c!f +.5
p fA f3 G+C t
fJ1f:F:.C<.f!JCY )rafss ~+!t+Tff) To A- 5:r)./ctt-G
f NT R- Jr)JC (= ~
C C,{ L- DES A:c R-kD+u.J !t-DEQ Ll.:tTE ~
PfD ESTR-+Jr-N A-cc r; 55 / 5+ Pf::()/ JrL !::-J;
/. 5i3cl :pv),J jOy iY. 2{fJ
-f L~rl).::R- To pGfr:R ColvcfR.IJ:r:)Jcc fl-+y){{5Nf Tv ow);fR
Fo/<
~
T:r J1 C:;o L [J f)J
~ 0 IT) v); i- ~ 1') C /~
0-;-- ;7/
I C ~ (:l----- ! (~\. -:2-:1. :~: -'\
;;e/J/~) I/a IJa ~a 'I
~ ~Va..
. . ih II CJ. Vffw a ur~
vllle JlIf,.,~Itc/~
M. KOfC-:2..; V-c)('-.:
_ Z [lCHO~J
_.P~L1B 1?1f!!T
r I- I\-- )))J :;JJ (
I ELE Plt-vN E
73g -7i-1o
P~8r"-)
7 ?!f r' 7 '-/2
, ,
? ,.J
1& I? 1< 5
73 ~- 74J1c
736-74B7
/3tf-~/{f Y3J
Z" if- ~S-'J
e1.16/NEl:!r,e/N6
;::::; I? 6" fJ..l':;.:"f.!'T~-
l ! .,ot....r.,... ~-(~ \ :
fJ()Jiu f)~fJr
{~c;/l C OJ (~&-
-;:)
I u ~ L.. I '- W Q (v<....s
73~ .7q~ 0 X d--;). <&
fl~~-7l.f2~
I...... . \
, ,- .
i
," !
1
!
/1 Eft of( ItN D cAJ1
d(- foJ
(f)
[JA-Tf3
To: (~^'.VvytA~ &t...J /1<'. ~ {e. VJ J
PI" ~~':J ,,~J z."':'; (J.~-
,F /C f9 /1: C" v""o '" s. A vL '" ~ f i: ' ~ f.
p / -1. III '" f:J /), v~ c- fp r .
e f ( ~ ~ .. ",l a"'-, f t> e v <- [ p .....0.. f.
!< 5: C i f v Vc f P 'I. V h V/ ( W V"e? V ~~ as c',' f V'PlJ"
C- (e ~ p h ~ 50- Jl:) -
/{u.'" ~J R'I"'~ l-
T " f- v. J. c f, ~.. : I?J <.- S ~ C. ~ s. i'\ J <' j , "f {a.--
8?'~, 1-. '" )Jo: rs,^:".f~ A- F(rv,)"" U, vLF"- (
f .. .- I- vw's (~J I 5 r y ~ u J':J 'f t "- f- f- ~ e r <5 ~ ~
t? !~" {. V' 1- ke, C' f "<5 0-/'] ~ ?(~~VLC~ .fA.Vl/ f
/J 'v, ! '(;?' IN< , " f. tee ~ ~ .1.' {., t , 45 (, II <) w S ·
\I:': ~ C I~!
J) e (..., '".... .('~" <) f .1- Cp, vp .~. J f,'ve C s.J
C{ L ~<' t?" C [. c(?" v t r {,., L ~ I s /. I ('.{f "'^ t, ",,-
W I f- k .~ [~ CI ~ c... V (! 'l.... I"? VI. -L r c;{ eM. e IlL {~ I, e.> I VI
E (~ t4<\., '^ {. ,,<(, S c L.. ( "f' \I, f <7 C n J e <(,
( A 'J < "CO" r, c t:?' H k. (A (I ! ~.
,
;2 ) i he V, <'! e t C '^ 'A .), CO"" f f v~ w. (06 1'1,
/1 J W)I t-k a. ,carve st?~" J':J I vLc .0 "de:' .I VI
,-']V , ~ 5 e Vl 5, 1.7 -f V. w. 3. 6' r of W'.' .II ' ::; .
CA lA, fs t'U . . v "'J. V (' t" 'J. cU, J We. (f, J ""', I-~
CJ1 e 'V a. (, v e......' ct "--
3) e r: "^ e.'''' ~ te i- c.c? "" Cj': f/ n · II Q,"",e < t. ~
1-. (, Ins Cc/e vt <'~ 5KiJ t"~ · ~!~ )
A J f" V' f [e f ~ 1-, v", ~! s f v (' "- f / ~7" ~ t "'"
1t'f'5'" "" f ,.C Pvt/),
(1' ' '5 ., f j- C ~ e':,.~ (~ ,,~Jt0;. VZ-.o H J CM -<(I 1-, \r
~ L ~ Vl.-1 f" v '1--. h. e . [I f V.>t5 P ~ v ~ IrA;). C(tt. be.
Vii !" ,,1 A) 1\ 1= (
o "'- l"L i V\ ,e y:. k I. r / /r 4 f OJV'; ~ ,. Go\. vi- ~. V- j
e tl'- ! '" "' ~ ,I ( ~ '^ ~ f .,. f e t7'< c:' " >, ' c, C .{ J U ~"'
T-ke ~ (, ( ~ VC f .5 j '" S f., {, ( "- l '" V1 J/~ /t #(,J c:.
( L (/ ft. ( , f t'( ,\ V
v~ Ie v- ;-0 e f..- k.i fA r B,
:+ f ''(4) 1-ke Ju <.~' ~., .. t-f- C, W (, : <. <. {. I., S~ {~,'i
t C, .>;V'" v'[" c 5 ~ ( "q ..c ~'l<' r ',~ J v-,J C e v f C t .r.:{
l<H.> f e v (1' (~'" Wt. J," {, ( <. Y' '" v ")n J. e ioJt C.t: :<f 1-:';c~
'" f t- k e c k . :J d ~ vr 0 fC l '" ~J, 1,,, V, <<e T ~ ~
t (WL e VI' U f.5 '" ~ Ie loOp VO C U-f. t L ' .5 t?' v(:'u 5"'e r , ~. l
~ 1- kc c ~ < :J "-f~"- ,f. e of' e t, v IM..' Vl e) ,I. t" S<. C r ~ 'f, \'
f'frE~:::",~~C~I) >" ~ ""() He) u{ 5, "- <Nt <-' f., VZ? r."" ""," j / { c < t"."
f 1/\ "'" 0 v.,[ < ~'c ;W' 1- C r; 'J f, ." !~ "' fAct", ~ J, K
fJ (/ f f [e [q j ~ 0 r 0 v t ~.( ~(e ->) -
Q)
j . I. 1. ,
",-VYQlAh liA <(",...If C{r< d.otl Zo,"",,^ c-O~i^L.JC!C;
/ ,-' (' ,,' cr II · A_ f! f (' l'
, Q (:0-..' I ':' V\. t4A ~. I ~ e I, ~ / i _C,_.~_..,G~ /T ~:' r r ~J i- k.(
s ~ L) ,c f- If/' <va e / 10 1- L I< dV 1- ~ I 5 1-- ~c C, f V"> ?: fe .
f ( ~ '" "" -1 () ", f /) ~ vel P"'" c ~ I- ;f". C ~ L I, {<< ,vvc " l' t
( ~,' ~ ) eVe (rV c) /r C; v., " ~ J '.5 . F " Je p v' .5 ( .5 ~
A L. fJ'":J t k" y" i) , · It? ~ cc ( l, t k *' f ,-<.5 f I S
f L j"""f Sod kr E.5f~ J,-'. eM; (/'1 Lf' ~~cr.v,,-v/
z,;; ~ ~ (< 5 {S I :; ! e 1- f ~ !Nt r 1;;. f-, c ~ ( J?, ~ . / ~ r.) t V1
f'" {"'- q, ~,[ r n " ~, A, L! r J f. L .5'~ f;,. 'c -;
/C> c( v (~. l yL f- ,^" S Q << 1-- { ut:I < "" - ~ ! ~ v y je ~. ~o 0 j
0( 6 ~ ( .L {' r F . ;. .., /, I ~ /
/, : : ~ c R - A-If , ... S,- 0 ~ e - '-;- fM.,' ;;' Is. t! J ( C "1 t I ~ '
A , "Fr, ~ f f ~ C f" C/ 'c 1- ~ oed l-u1- [e VV"yf f i5-
'fJ i!. V f;'-1. { 0 t - w '/' f 0 v !";,V v~ "'-'" /} U , J
~fAvf f;e v 10 f(e "Y's!} a, Vor.> i",ovv"",-[C ~O~ )
I ,f "'-- L '" \'" 1M eVe' -< IJI vce "' ""5 fA v Y (fJ ?jrt! 0 01
;1/u v.>,~ n' c 5 ~ Z\Q ~e, A R /\ ( 1J v, c ~ /' I '1 v~
j( u. J!, "' I u I ) r.. P ^ I "< 1/,. -<c L t:<<" ~,
, ~~.' \ /. "
y" [ t ,,,/ . / l {S v,/, "".5 t. [0 v v C 2>7; I vtj l.s & c ( VI. 1
I vi / . . F"
/J2 v P ( t 5 51 (' , I (' C V\.> 1 .,> t ~ , V\.', cv I'f. :; e ~ 'f I 0; 1" c. Cl ,
(, .-1-c:. "l? '^-1 f K /1-) z. 07 VI.)'^1 c:: vt /-/" f {~d/ ~((Of.(,;'" v~ ~.\ ~5 (
') I j )1 ,I -----.J. I) tis ./ '
/ {Clvt /tLM.<!"". 0"-<,,,,, 7-sJ /(cC:Q"'tji' .5 PlVl i Pc roV\.
) .) I. (1 './ ) ,
/0 ~ f A-cli.fe:"), x- /3- II"" "" , U VL, I b( v.e & .CIt1]' t
f" L f ({/ r(;1) J! { { 7
e ,VI. 'f I {- I t' -1 , - v v (tv '- V\. v c .> c "r Z <.I (,'\. I . VI. J q:;:r e{ "'-
-to P G{ D ..il '--
@
(''''{iv<l,~,,'voJ)A~ - f",J~v,- L,,~J dsc~
Tke tl? (, fA", + 'St/"V?:"S'''') 1~V;e~;"~ 1-.t.. /",<<D
{. V t'k~ t7~ C'SC D f 5 <A C:S-t-<<" t, ~IV ~ t 1-, v r"J '
+ C "'" A.> ~, V c?l ( ~". T k c '^ '" ~ "- ,~ (,_,:;; f' ~, ~ (> Q ~ '~
IN,.t k "'- L ~...{ cL,,- :r "".,I, r'" fy - "F w, 1/ M. f,.
C ~. . J e. T h 't?" V c;" f cJ J e ~ f' i)' {3, "f oZ J 7(' It, ";
G\ '" '. I- s {"" e v '" c eV C )J-f ~ ~J1 C e {. IA/ .1- C,~ Ii,{, if oZ, o-f We If;.
t( ,^, 1.5 CUe. V~'M' Un ' 1'\ ~...., t- ['7 ex, -> 'J L-.!.</
!J e IAf' 1; j(, f' uf, K f, a It." ... --1 ()fU<<./-z.r /'.
Ca ~ v" f C K f' v"- PI < ~ - To ( t; T ~ e. {" I{ '" "" K i
('. t?' V c ,,,, f " V C P / ." a. , ' ( , c 5 '" V C v" (Q V" '" I I",
f k '-> v c ~. "L r .K 1 Vt: ~, sf.
.11 7 ~ C 0)1 P. e JtEAI.s~ V ~ f> ~~o)/
;;r.o~)c "Vl,,,,j/~Ai<v<':J~ "f t~5'~ cL,;,s.'
/( f' "or v ,eJ~ '" -' '^: 1-) C r~ (/ 'V;j.' 'M r?" v rev. '" 1M" ... fl.'" '" If
. f' ! . ,1 '
!I\ e ~ k ~ 0 v ~ fj OJ .. \\ 0-.
t<{. f' "', v;1] ~ Jy "~jc.' 'P" 't p" ''j ",...J V/-u Vi A r ~1~
"/' L, '/-' U;<< ~ -'W" ?(" WlS Yo .JVVl e e. r f1r-e Vt (:~.5
6J or- ~ VI." 5 C V\ t tK.. Vl.;f '( O'L l- i.{ v(' eft:.~ ( t' Vl t.5 ~ 0 ~ 7)
Cr CO)',)," "fe, t C e~ Vv ,vr~',: \1 "'. f V'r, vcr" a
'" vc . v, c ,v c "/if I . Vl {<" (, ~ I '.J . iN, t ~'''' VL/ CA/ ,.
~ v, v ~ ~, of ~ Vc (/r, v<1 e ., f !. ;/ Vlf <<vJ 'l"' ,jAr""" Ie
V"'J< ~f VuVc" :;..,." W~v ,,"lA' 'f,Cf' (? 7.
(( p~. v) e {~v c: F{, c. t' ... I " ... j 5' -. (~ "" '" "Q "'" " l-
I r 'L)\ )
W I of- k I <<-1. of- L-t c. c, ~/ ~ (? 7
@)
/1<86 E V4 L uJr r:[oN t !Jf.j'>j( J-Is>tL- ^ [ZpoRT
47 3.4.3.3. Neichborhood Parks
"Neighborhood parks are Intended to be "walk to" parks so their
service area should not be bisected by arterial streets with thoroughfar
traffic. School playgrounds In some cases can be effectively used as
neighborhood parks. The recommended supply of neighborhood park areas
2.5 acres per 1.000 persons. However, In areas where single family
development predominates the standard should be increased due to the
larger proportion of school age chi Idren. Three to five acres' Is
considered minimum depending on the type and range of activities
accomodated. As with mini parks, the service radi I should not exceed a
walking distance of one-quarter to one-half mile'"('~#J~\
47 3.4.3.6. Current and Future Park Needs Summarv
-The most commonly accepted national standard of ten acres of
park per' ,000 residents indicates that the City of Boynton Beach Is
'deficient in the provision of recreational areas within the city limits.
Based on an estimated current popUlation 0136,000. the current need is
10r 360 acres. By 1990, demand 10r park area wi II increase to 570 acres.
Compared with the City's current inventory 01 sl ightly more than 60 acres
, of parks. it would appear that he City Is greatly deficient. However. b~
I
considering several f~ctors relating to use characteristics and planned
park projects. this apparent demand/supply imbalance is greatly reduced.
~hen consideration is given to park development potential by park type,lr
the region as wel I as in Boynton Beach. It Is concluded that the greatest
need Is for the provision of properly located and developed neighborhood
parks. In the longer-term future, however, the provision 01 district
parks in neWly developed areas wi II increase In importance." ~.1'{-7)
o
I r r; <1 ,P R (7 P 0 5 ED Colt PRE ff-ENS + V f__ t/--A-1I_
C. Continue to utilize and improve school parks.
Public schools in Boynton Beach continue to constitute an
important public recreation resource due to the public use of
their recreation facilities, and, in the case of the Congress
Community School, through the use of classrooms for adult
education. As with the ROlling Green School improvement project,
all schools should continue to be examined for their potential as
sites for recreation facilities.
In addition, the recreation facilities of private schools (and
churches), should be considered as a temporary alternative for
meeting park and facility needs. If located within an area that
is experiencing a deficiency in a facility or park acreage, the
owners of a private institution should be negotiated with to
create an acceptable public use pOlicy, until similar facilities
can be supplied by the City. The potential for such a joint
program exists with St. Joseph's School, which is located within
Neighborhood Planning Area #17. Public use of such private
facilities should be secondary, however, to the school's use.
As indicated previously, schools supply a high proportion of
several recreation facilities, therefore; these facilities should
be maintained to ensure that they function properly. Inspections
of school facilities should be undertaken regularly and funds
allocated for needed repairs and facility reflacements.
(~. If- ( S '{'>t? b v t 010 ( vt WI. C ~ I-J J V 0/' i )
v
2. Citrus Glen Dedicated Site (2000)
This site was acquired through the subdivision ordinance and
should be developed or designed jointly with Elementary
School "P", which abuts this site to the south.
{r:?' ~J. 5" W~ v f }f; ( "- 1M ~ C< 1-5 J V 0 !. / )
(f) eJ"~ (v, S.2 : T~e ,C If' 5' L Ifc,] v:J", ~"ur t.s
,( ,,-y v, c v, ~ t ,e "'" f~ < ; C 1)" e.5 I V\ dt ceo v !! flC C f+. ., W. /I 1-:yC
/ . ! .. ( See (I ie IM.""'-o<. ell ~ Q ve
.) ~ CM.. 1M. <>t v / R e c <0 v.t lM e V\. ~ or I f? t.1D~ f 1 f'(c:~ tJ 5 (' ^
P H ~ 0 ev, (t1' 1M , ". f s~ L. ~\~ [ej ~ ~ t . ~ '" Fie' lly
}J n ! > .? "" we "^ .. v X . !' ( "."'" ~ 0< ~; J 0 te :/' -- I .
f,^ ,~ [, j f. 1> ( v,J'!;? Me" ft T L (, f..; ~ i ,~ lr [/'" ~ ~ k .
f~ .d 0 w~ fi L fv'C,c "J p ~ v k j), v< It? ,,,"" I- >< L eI~
if c Fe Vc IA c c J CA- (G V(: ). .
Q)
:r S.5 IA~.> / /) -L...LC0 .> S i 0 V1: s' c> c- l r ~ 1-\ cr.. c.. 7 0 it '
A((7 , ':' r Xc. ~ - z v '\' ~ <P f- 1- ke, c. J e c f J0l Vro / IA 4. "t-(e.,J
V f/~ '" v u t- De e v" i '^ ~ 'j I "':' <>.f f' i < ~, k ~' "", ""'-, e ", +5/
ti e c C h' "'1.'. V t'/'> l-{ e J 1- 5' c;{ 1 <'t ( ~..s f C vJ' e {o V I "- V. e I ~ i ~ -f
/<. ('.~ {I . '-.-. r \ /.t {
I d -r Vl" I r '''( ". > r L '. c. .~ \IV <' " (, Ve 5 '^ ,r V 0 "'1
t-he.WeV'<lV<c "" 5~,L Vn,,;~15' T~u", .
ell', :/-. i!1 Ir' ~ t7\.~]J.." e v~ f '^ ~ f I ~., .<0 f f Ce l ''tfi"M 1-5
w ,e L C W" K (. ' V (' .5 ~ I f- { ''i./VI 1-. Lo',y vr u 5 e .y
J" V (' (V tM <' " f "- v" PC J I. I v "'-' ef ·
a. Whether the proposed rezoning would be consistent with
applicable comprehensive plan policies. The Planning
Department shall also recommend limitations or
requirements which would have to be imposed on
subsequent development of the property, in order to
comply with polIcies contained in the comprehensive
plan.
~ I
T ~ e V v v '5" J V' 0 Co I/L':J fl' / "; ".-5 I 5 'h ~ ? WI' i ~
["{j,;,>VC ,e '^-JI VC,/'>c (<''It/# {, C' u W, 'I- ~~Verf L, f
"".J'C-{ V<.: CiC> \.-1.~
w. ~ ( I 111. f, "- , L 0 I/L -' I 5 J. "" f '" 1ft "" 'V' I/o ,L " .... -' I ~l
t:? (':" ~. i, L' < -\ '" 0 lA, e V" I "1 f k,,{" V" Vlt r 0 vt ~ t
/""C L~ r:.ec{v,ul-Iof {,u'(,"1-uJ-5vJ IStt- <:. {f vc:.
t1f'C { V c /U vt. G . i C. /\l A V I::: . " .J' /~ Vie/I.. (, 5" c I 110 :p t- CL'! 't-l / ~.1 < I
,L ' C 'I' [/ (' J r( f7
{?-('~V Vi? Vro,,--,( 5cc "t-i<SJV\ el"- " f U~., . (~':t'4 \..~ t!VLlr vet
f ! < ~- T" "f II /0 V "- -' "\IM~' '/" f 1'/1 y. < t cu" f,; "~-"
{o ~ ((' '-' ~.' 11\ r f) ~ <,7' v" v, .5 ' g., 0) G '" i.r I , C V Ct v, "- i," <1
{~ (,' r. i I~t s ~
(f;
b. Whether the proposed rezoning' would be contrary to the
established land use pattern, or would create an
isolated district unrelated to adjacent and nearby
districts, or would constitute a grant of special
privilege to ~n individual property owner as contrasted
with protection of the public welfare.
T~'-t1'~t1,qIJ,v~l,,^,e"1J I~,{""-""'S f'l'^ f 1,>-4 ;t-ke.l
e > f '" C li'f ~ e..1 I) <A/ :.J e ,11 f' Ir, V u' .0" 1--, ~ J "- ~ f )1
CA.! ~.~ 't)-(! v~ ~ If\. f1 W'fV](J Vt. ~ ~ ve ~ ,l-e -<)1 50 t.^" t-i) \ j
.,,{,.sJ-V( G f IA_V< I ~ 1-. , +0 <<r~'~'~" f C[, ~,~.../o'fU-{V"
f [ I v.:J" ... ;'- i I · "- l' F 1- Lev<< (, f, c<v " v ~ J "w e(< '=I
U/<J "" C L _, f,e f T tf'vcnr ~ 0 w"" Y cL r 1-- k e
f't"c- "'.<"c 0 f 1- L e (."" ~ C t, C iV\ J" "', v "- (.
(f)
c. Whether changed or changing conditions make the
proposed rezoning desirable.
enJ: t I,'~ Vcf L vc Vt .},c L2J'J 5, ~<e J- Ce .
t?IJ v ~ v ~ ( <' f t- L tV v ~ ' ~ ~ ( I"< <J + t v 0" (.. {<7 V 1-- C e
(~fv.; Cr,,, ff fl."",) U,,: f J),~< !'t? v<c. I-.
@
d. Whether the proposed rezoning would be compatible; with
utility systems, roadways, and other public facilities.
As", ~ t- C" .} I '" t- L. ~ f t H L. 5,t ~ l f ? f '''' '" e .
I'Vl. e )L ~,' C: J r, [J" f ke t? vT 0 -,. . e (, "" ( ,,~ j; ~:Vl c: f
t C. t? ~ c t c 'i g ~ j f/ J t. l4( "". . / ~" nu f ~ Il. /-. 0)'
o f "'-t? v' v~ h >("(H' Ity" /r1 t. wt eve. {~I 'reJ(
e Vt-te Vj C "-LV "'-Lee $5 j", 1- k, , of e v~ !;:;?- ""'-e<< ;.
'- /
To [3(5 Ca}-tI'L~r/3-D
kFTeR f Rile
-
YitrfF Co){J1G)/J
To Ir P P ~;,f-f<. :r AI
[; y:: tf:r s :r T IJ; P
@
Whether the proposed rezoning would b~ compatible with
the current and future use of adjacent and nearby
properties, or would affect the property values of
adjacent and nearby properties.
FI(.,... ~ / A~J ~{' S ~Hl-o or '" ~ f. ~ "? v u <'Ie J
<>(,,J f~ tVe IAfe .of"""'/~'C7f",,^- '{l~R~ /"- .
O'/vre v, ' '-5 f<' ,v /0 W of e "'-f, Ie Vu,,,,,( e " ij, Ii , ,
~p v '- {(;? 1ft< ~ ," t '. If~., we ve vJ. J* '-< P Vr,~ S e.A ~ L' "" '. ~ ~ 1,.
p~tCe(",^,[[q .v~,wo~( ?~V'V, "rei;;-
v,v ( vt"' tL . ",e> CIl: r '\(c-) 'tlA e. _ 7-<tf v w k, c ~ IS
o ,d ; ":' J r 1- ~ e C <7 tv" Co c" S T ve " f f " vt ~ r r; e
- - ' . ~ f {t c- t c) ~c? vr ~I ~/ v~ ' V{ e S 6''1 f
dt- /CI{(.Cvt! ,,~) ~eH.~rt;Xjfv_"'J. /slj.;rf<~
j" ,ev~ ~:" f"." t ~ ~'" Vi. I ",.. IT <p ~ '1-.-1 f~ t,
5 'J "",' J ( C ...< I,
e.
@;
. v
f. Whether the property is physically and economically
developable under the existing zoning_
TkG- {L/' Va jv.J We <LL to I? (~~ {. vI 1"- ~f c: t V<5 t;!~"
rt f' I ~ 'H"-' C{ ", I /J 0 v"- (p <M.t . "'- d - ws I. v f.keA
1 e V Q ItV'; 1M r " .~ 0 f (~{ s, ~ 1,,- - f de "' " ~ Jot ~ < ~,.)
'2 ~ V tJ (" f- i,iA. ~ fA IAI f 5 ~
@
g. Whether the proposed rezoning is of a scale which is
reasonably related to the needs of the neighborhood and
the city as a whole. I
r ~ e{J) Vtlq S e J VU"o "'-':'oj I: /'" q f V"'''SO/~ ~ [~)
V e (f ?,) f ~ 1-- Cc VI ee.:r; <17 f f- C t '" e ~ {q ;jt I
<'t ~...( f- (, "- ,c f I;r; "'.r "'- Vv!. q /,~ Jj '" t- [, "- . I of P Y f ye
fell e f , ,) 0 ~t Q F r ~ e i, .J CO ~ { (, <- vec v L' ~ 'f- r <) Vi
.yoHe. ,,~] {~" (, ,/" s.
@
h. Whether there are adequate sites elsewhere in the City
for the proposed use, in districts where such use is
already allowed.
T L_ w 0-0 vel c: + v-s c: f'e M +t Wo ~~f, {?' ! ~,~
c'^ VVe '^- f, y, '" If, W5 /0 v)t Cf ole v~ ({? w., " ~ ". f
/0 ( .s , ":-.1/ ~ - r... "\' ~ -.,1- '^< [~.1 2 e;o (0 f- t ",e
c.(lA, :f-;.." kc ""Jevf;':J ,'ff,':'@ 1<1. fc'5 ~e~c""J. '
rc /-, f, of Cd ~ e v O<5W/" f he vo v 00 f-; I- wo<< ~
f, V"r '" ( vet"''' (, cC" ~ v t '" '" ^ f- k:C' "-, t (, c v" rt
5 r: 5.' te w...;, c.v C 'c. C :c v Vu .fCe.c~ rr k j I ( k k7-, 1- c,,-
c' f V"5 t, {c '" de ~J (, f,,:~: f rt /1 k(?' v~J/f < 5 f"
E!t . \M.i.' ol -f fl. 7 S-c- C a cJ I f t:t "t...r ~ (..-0 v. .J!~.5 et V\
(1< Ie v"',. J, ve CM e < "5 ~ <> I e !Me J(> "' y a: u C' .5.5 '"
1- ke L r' !- v,t-r> ! <( v Ie ! (Ai) r
(~ '" (.
@
(ciC' In
-' r 0 t-Ls f( J
e(,Q(I\;f~C~ <(, t ~
tf<:>~S
Ill>
c
J
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 95-100
Al Newbold
Deputy Building of~tc~al
Michael E. Haa~f/~
Zoning and Site ~evelopment Administrator
March 30, 1995 ~
Transmittal of Development Orders
;I'O=
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT:
Accompanying this memorandum you will find documents regarding
development plans that received final approval.
1. Project Name:
Type of Application:
Planning and Zoning
Department File No.:
Staff Report and Comments:
Control Plans:
Color Elevation Drawings:
Planning and Development
Board Approval:
City Commission Approval:
Resolution No.:
Ordinance No.:
2. Project Name:
Type of Application:
Planning and Zoning
Department File No.:
Staff Report and Comments:
Control Plans:
Color Elevation Drawings:
Planning and Development
Board Approval:
City Commission Approval:
Resolution No.:
Ordinance No.:
3. Project Name:
Type of Application:
Planning and Zoning
Department File No.:
Staff Report and Comments:
Control Plans:
Color Elevation Drawings:
Planning and Development
Board Approval:
City Commission Approval:
Resolution No.:
Ordinance No.:
4. Project Name:
Type of Application:
Planning and Zoning
Department File No.:
Staff Report and Comments:
Control Plans:
Color Elevation Drawings:
Planning and Development
Board Approval:
City Commission Approval:
Resolution No.:
Ordinance No.:
MEH:pab
Attachments
Woolbright Place PUD
Master Plan Modification
MPMD 94-003 & MPMD 94-005
28 and 16 pages respectively
2 sheets
N/A
9/13/94 meeting minutes
12/13/94 meeting minutes
8/16/94 meeting minutes
12/06/94 meeting minutes
N/A
N/A
Citrus Park PUD
Master Plan Modification
CNTE 94-002 & #284
8 pages
5 sheets
N/A
12/13/94 Time Ext. minutes
9/19/89 meeting minutes
12/20/94 Time Ext. minutes
N/A
N/A
Brisson Medical Office Building
Major Site Plan Modification
MSPM 94-008
15 pages
4 sheets
Yes - Drawings in Planning &
Zoning Department
2/14/95 meeting minutes
2/21/95 meeting minutes
N/A
N/A
Brisson Medical Office Building
Landscape Appeal
LAAP 95-001
6 pages
N/A
N/A
2/14/95 meeting minutes
2/21/94 meeting minutes
N/A
N/A
a:TrsmtPln.lOO
J",J'"
.,.r
MEMORANDUM
October 20, 1989
TO:
FILE
FROM:
James J. Golden, Senior City Planner
Citrus Park - Sidewalk Variance
RE:
The above-referenced request was added on to the October 19, 1989
Technical Review Board agenda and was distributed to Building,
Engineering, and Utilities one day prior to the meeting. The
other members of the TRB received their copies prior to the
meeting. This item was added to the agenda at the request of
Roger Saberson, attorney for the owner's of Citrus Park, based
upon a request from the Palm Beach County School Board (see
attached correspondence).
Prior to the TRB recommendation, the Building Department
representative (Mike Haag) objected to the manner in which this
application was being processed. Mr. Haig's objections were as
follows:
1) That this request had not first been submitted to the
Building Official for a recommendation.
2) That the fee for this request had not been submitted to the
Building Department.
3) That the TRB could not act on this request without a
recommendation from the Building Official.
The response from myself and other members of the Technical
Review Board were as follows:
1) That sidewalk variance requests that were part of a site
plan or a subdivision approval had always been submitted to
the Planning Department in the past as a matter of
convenience.
2) That Chapter 22, Streets and Sidewalks, does not require the
variance request to be submitted to the Building Department.
3) That the required $100 fee had been submitted.
4) That the Building Official had ample opportunity to make a
recommendation to the TRB pursuant to Section 22-25(b)
either through the Building Department representative or by
personally attending the meeting.
~
5) That, pursuant to Section 22-25(b), even if the Building
Official had made a negative recommendation, it was not
incumbent upon the TRB to accept the Building Official's
recommendation.
~ k J1.QL
U James J. Golden
JJG:cp
t
I
t
MEMORANDUM
----------
i.
'.
October 10, 1989
TO:
Betty S. Baroni, City Clerk
FROM:
Raymond Rea, City Attorney
RE:
Public Road Dedication for School Access
Citrus Cove Elementary School
In regard to the above entitled matter, herewith I
enclose the original Right-of-Way Deed and ask that you
record the same in the Public Records of Palm Beach County.
~~~.
Raymond Rea, City Attorney
RR/r
Ene.
cc: George Hunt, Interim City Manager
Carmen Annunziato
P ~4..
(j, d l?
-.L~
" ..:.J-~'
C'
.t ~
/ __',:- ir ..
c/ ,. . '.. _.....
..-~ .,.-.-:---
----.! .,-"".
- " , :Ls8 C'
)(), ' \ .
PLAtH ~(.,'....: ,
r.
---...
...
----.--~..
,Wi,'
.-
~
t,
I
!
THE SCHOOL BOARD
OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, flORI DA
3323 BELVEDERE ROAD
P.O, BOX 24690
WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33416-4690
407,684-5(0)
THO'v'IAS J. MI LLS
SUPERINTENDENT
OF SCHOOLS
October 3, 1989
Mr. Raymond Rea, City Attorney
City of Boynton Beach
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, FL 33425
Re: Public Road Dedication For School Access
Citrus Cove Elementary School
Dear Mr. Rea:
Pursuant to an agreement between the School Board, Boynton
Nurseries and the City of Boynton Beach, attached find
dedication of parcel of land for right-oi-way purposes.
Also enclosed find a map showing the access to the school at
the northwest comer of the site. This is an 80' right-of-
way, being dedicated to the City by Boynton Nurseries and
the School Board.
A s A.
ernment Llalson
Growth Management Center
AAH:dg
Attachments
cc: George Hunt
Carmen Annunziato
WPC3\ES,CCE
RECEIVED
OCT J 0 JS69
PLANNING DEPT.
-
-
~
~
..
J
2:
....
t~.~~
i: lIlIi ,()o'
:." 1J'l. .C(;t
\..
.~
~
~
\U
:z.
..
--q"
~ "-
"
-
,
(l.
::;
~
{t~
')-bI.
~~
"Z<
3~
~~
~~
Ft,l
Ou
~0
)--;:.
~'.u
>~
3~
J_
~~~
K,-::
p.)o-\-
~-
~g~
8"~~
~~\\:}
lU
\-
UJ
---\:t
O~
0:-
:I:t(i
0~
cn~
l,.~w~c..e ~"^D
I~
I
...--t,~
I
~
..
~
8
\R
~
~\
~~
~~
\l.:)~'
tl.
\n:;:):::'
~Z\lJ
~:z:-::
<~\-
~~~
"bl\O;I:
q~\~
t::!1-~
,..
I
I
I
\
.
cO
&)
q..
~
tIl.
~
,
..J
-l
-=
':Z
'<
.J
t;
~
~
o
~
==
<
~
~
.~
~
-
~
0.
~
I~
'3
~
\P
,::J.
<
~
\
RIGHT-OF-WAY DEED
This INDENTURE Made this 2t?z:( Day of --!:~ ,A.D.,
19-G., between School Board of Palm Beach County and State of Florida, party of the
first part, whose mailing address is 3323 Belvedere Road, Building 503, West Palm Beach,
Florida, 33402 and the City of Boynton Beach in the State of Florida, as party of the
second part.
WITNESSETH, that the party of the first part, for and in consideration of the sum of
One Dollar and other valuable considerations paid, receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, does hereby grant, remise, release, quit claim and convey unto the party of
the second part, its successors and assigns forever the following described land, situate,
lying and being in the County of Palm Beach, State of Florida, to-wit:
A parcel of land for right-of-way purposes, lying in Section 18,
Township 45 South, Range 43 East, County of Palm Beach,
State of Florida, and more particularly described as follows:
The North 20.00 feet of the East 310.00 feet of the West 350.00
feet of the South one-half (S 1/2) of the Southwest one-
quarter (SW 1/4) of the Northwest one-quarter (NW 1/4) of
Section 18, Township 45 South, Range 43 East, County of Palm
Beach, Florida.
Containing 0.143 acre, more or less.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD THE SAME, together with all and singular the
appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise incident or appertaining, and all the estate,
right, title, interest, and claim whatsoever of the party of the first part, in law or in
equity, to the only proper use, benefit and behoof of the said party of the second part,
its successors and assigns.
MLK:dkh 7\27\89
IIIpd8\ronns\rlghtway,doo
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said party of the first part has hereunto set hand and
seal the day and year above written.
Signed, sealed and delivered
in our presence:
SCHOOL BOARD OF PALM
BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
C2~ k~~
c7
/~~~.
Arthur W. Anderson, Chairman
y.t~ r/ d!~
-----~
/4'/ ~
Thoma~ls, Superintendent
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
Revie~~d : l
8y:(-\
,') \ )
Office of General Counsel
. ), '. '
Attomey
I HEREBY CERTIFY, that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized in the
State aforesaid and in the County aforesaid to take aCknowledgements, personally appeared
tltU~/~ ~a~
I'
"
to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument
and aCknowledged before me that he executed the same.
WITNESS
my hand and official seal
day of,dr~
in the County and State last aforesaid this
d,(;d
, A.D.,
19 ff
.
-iJLi~ --l. ~
NOTARY PUB~IC
This instrument prepared by:
My Commission Expires:
, Notill'v Pubfic, State of Rcr'~" .
MV Commission Exp;res June i~, ;.'.;;
BQpded Thru Troy f.in . lnlurence Inl.
MLK:dkh 7\27\89
wpd8\rorma\rlghtway.dee
RIGHT-OF-WAY DEED
This INDENTURE Made this Zo If Day of ~ r;r/""' , A.D.,
19 ?f , between School Board of Palm Beach County and State of Florida, party of the
first part, whose mailing address is 3323 Belvedere Road, Building 503, West Palm Beach,
Florida, 33402 and the City of Boynton Beach in the State of Florida, as party of the
second part.
WITNESSETH, that the party of the first part, for and in consideration of the sum of
One Dollar and other valuable considerations paid, receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, does hereby grant, remise, release, quit claim and convey unto the party of
the second part, its successors and assigns forever the following described land, situate,
lying and being in the County of Palm Beach, State of Florida, to-wit:
A parcel of land for right-of-way purposes, lying in Section 18,
Township 45 South, Range 43 East, County of Palm Beach,
State of Florida, and more particularly described as follows:
The North 20.00 feet of the East 310.00 feet of the West 350.00
feet of the South one-half (S 1/2) of the Southwest one-
quarter (SW 1/4) of the Northwest one-quarter (NW 1/4) of
Section 18, Township 45 South, Range 43 East, County of Palm
Beach, Florida.
Containing 0.143 acre, more or less.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD THE SAME, together with all and singular the
appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise incident or appertaining, and all the estate,
right, title, interest, and claim whatsoever of the party of the first part, in law or in
equity, to the only proper use, benefit and behoof of the said party of the second part,
its successors and assigns.
MLK:dkh 7\27\89
wpd8\tonns\rlghtway,<Iee
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said party of the first part has hereunto set hand and
seal the day and year above written.
Signed, sealed and delivered
in our presence:
SCHOOL BOARD OF PALM
BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
'-
~ ~~-Ac~
c;:7 ,
/ ;:l/}/~
Arthur W. Anderson, Chairman
~~. d diyd
/....~/~
~c." :=:
Thomas J. Mills, Superintendent
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
By:
Reviewed :i
{ Ii
. Office of General Counsel
1 1 . i .
Attome.y
-
I HEREBY CERTIFY, that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized in the
State aforesaid and in the County aforesaid to take acknowledgements, personally appeared
1/,1) !h-~ ~
~(j
I'
~
"
to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument
and acknowledged before me that he executed the same.
WITNESS my hand and official seal in the County and State last aforesaid this 02LJd
day Of# ' A.D., 19/1
-/~ -f ~
NOTARY PUBLIC
This instrument prepared by:
My Commission Expires: '
Notary ('uMit, State of n~r!tI.,
My CORlllli$;[.:n Expires Juno 1~. 1'1'!~2
Iond.d lhr... Troy Fain. IDlullnc. inc.
MLK:dkh 7\27\89
wpd8\fonna\rlghtway,dee
0Ci - 13-1 ;'01
'~'.'l n 9- .....9,t: ..... -, 1
. l..:l':1I!l~.) L.. t' L_ L_ '
"I f'!:l
\..In[:'
6.225 f'9 1 41 '1
Con fG.OO Doc
J . "'I tl nll~'I""" "f roM'"~ ""8 ...."I.["IT\I ,...
Ghl't c, 12\.IIWLt,i'JLt:N\ - t . i"iJ\!I', 11' tL
~l'7
II: .'_
RIGHT-OF-WAY DEED
This INDENTURE Made this
~Ol{
Day of
~;;~
, A.D.,
19JL, between School Board of Palm Beach County and State of Florida, party of the
I)
: \
4
i(
{ ~. ,
first part, whose mailing address is 3323 Belvedere Road, Building 503, West Palm Beach,
Florida, 33402 and the City of Boynton Beach in the State of Florida, as party of the
. ~
J
it second part.
,
C) '.~ WITNESSETH, that the party of the first part, for and in consideration of the sum of
\'I'J :)
j, One Dollar and other valuable considerations paid, receipt of which is hereby
. ,
l'
acknowledged, does hereby grant, remise, release, quit claim and convey unto the party of
t.
~ ) the second part, its successors and assigns forever the following described land, situate,
.. '\ ", j
.~ '-- ~
lying and being in the County of Palm Beach, State of Florida, to-wit:
A parcel of land for right-of-way purposes, lying in Section 18,
Township 45 South, Range 43 East, County of Palm Beach,
State of Florida, and more particularly described as follows:
The North 20.00 feet of the East 310.00 feet of the West 350.00
feet of the South one-half (S 1/2) of the Southwest one-
quarter (SW 1/4) of the Northwest one-quarter (NW 1/4) of
Section 18, Township 45 South, Range 43 East, County of Palm
Beach, Florida.
Containing 0.143 acre, more or less.
TO HAVE AND TO HOLD THE SAME, together with all and singular the
appurtenances thereto belonging or in anywise incident or appertainIng, and all the estate,
I'
right, title, interest, and claim whatsoever of the party of the first part, in law or in
equity, to the only proper use, benefit and behoof of the said party of the second part,
its successors and assigns.
MLK:dkh 7\27\89
wpd8\forms\rightway.dee
~)
J
~;t? ;
Office ot the CIty Clerk
City ot Boynton Beach
p, 0, Box 310
noynton Beach. Florida
'.~~
33435
ORC c!.,225 p';:J 141.2
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said party of the first part has hereunto set hand and
seal the day and year above written.
Signed, sealed and delivered
in our presence:
SCHOOL BOARD OF PALM
BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
/))c ~-'-l /~c,<,_ hC1-___
~,-.,~"
/ d?'1/t2/~
Arthur W. Anderson, Chairman
.1
/
>79 a.t. /~ L.A;.,
L 7
(-",\'. (2\;..-P ~d
/L-~~/~
--
Thomas J. Mills, Superintendent
t.
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
Reviewed:
,
Office of General Counsel
I
Attorney
-
By: ,
I HEREBY CERTIFY, that on this day, before me, an officer duly authorized in the
State aforesaid and in the County aforesaid to take aCknowledgements, personally appeared
l/,tV &~'M<<
JI~ (j,
~
~
to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument
and acknowledged before me that he executed the same.
WITNESS my hand and official seal in. the County and State last aforesaid this 02L:Jd
day of4r , A.D., 19!7
~~_d~
NOTARY PUBLIC
,.
My Commission Expires: .. ;.-;:::::;r~\';;'~'7;:"
n.'by r,:/rir, ~1.1tC 01 n~(~:;",i,::,; '~. \:" "
lJ'v (:;!~L"j;.~,;:.;H f::~p~res Juno.1:::~",~;:..'_lI!I~ .:~' I 1(/:'" \~. )
. ~ .... /).
Bondod lhru Troy hin.. 'n,ui.nCt:i"'f,-i'~,<:'<' r..... .
. !~~fi\~\JJ;:;0~;fi :,'01'
This instrument prepared by:
MLK:dkh 7\27\B9
wpdB\forms\rightway,dee
fEOOFI) VERFlEO
PALM BEACH roJNlY. FlA.
JOHN 8. DUNKlE
a.ERK cllCUrr COURT
"
:..'.
,
(J-,,{,</u_,\U C)a-+ {
i
I
I
i
1
MEMORANDUM
I
j
I
21 September 1989
TO: Raymond Rea, city Attorney
THROUGH: George Hunt, Interim City Manager
FROM:
Carmen S. Annunziato, Planning Director
RE:
City of Boynton Beach - Conveyances from Boynton
Nurseries and The School Board of Palm Beach County re:
Ingress to Citrus Park and School Site
I have had the legal descriptions which accompanied the
right-of-way deeds reviewed, and have found the descriptions to
be correct. Dedication of this right-of-way is consistent with
the approved master plan for citrus Park.
~
~~.:- ~~
CARMEN S. ANNU rATO
/bks
;'
" .
.: i
I.
MEMORANDUM
, ,
August 21, 1989
TO:
Citrus Park File No. 247
FROM:
James J. Golden
RE:
Citrus Park - Rezoning
,.
On August 15, 1989, the City Commission approved this request
subj,ect to staff comments.
-1:". t. ~
ES J. GOLDEN
JJG:frb
f!"':
\\
AGENDA MEMORANDUM
July 12, 1989
TO:
Peter L. Cheney, City Manager
FROM:
Carmen S. Annunziato, Planning Director
RE:
Citrus Park (formerly known as citrus Glen II)
Please place the referenced item on the City Commission agenda
for Tuesday, July 18, 1989, under Public Hearings.
DESCRIPTION: Request submitted by Roger Saberson for a Rezoning
from PUD w/LUI=4 to PUD with LUI=4 to allow for substantial
changes to the approved master plan, including the elimination of
a proposed five (5) acre public park, the elimination of a public
street connection to Citrus Glen to allow for a private security
system, an increase in approved units from 106 to 113, and a
change in layout and design of the private street system. This
site is on the east side of Lawrence Road, south of Miner Road
extended.
RECOMMENDATION: The Planning and Zoning Board recommended
approval of this request, subject to staff comments, copies of
which are attached.
.
c2..-&.- - I~
CARMEN S. AWflUNZ'IATO
CSA:frb
Encs
ctpk.711
MOTORIST DESIGN DATA MOVEMENT, INC.
Trafflc/Transportatlon Engineering Consultants
TRAFFIC STATEMENT
FOR
CITRUS GLENS I & II SITE REVISIONS
(CITRUS GLEN II, ALSO KNOWN AS CITRUS PARK)
Prepared By:
~~~~~
Daniel N. Murray. P.E.
President
Motorist Design Data Movement.
MDDM Project. 89-017
0~
Date
I nc.
MARK IV Building' 7491 N, W, 4th Street. Plantation, Florida 33317' (305) 791-6022' (407) 391-6336 . Fax # (305) 791-9533
1 00 Parn~1I Street. Merrill Island, Florida 32953 . (407) 459-2905 . Fax # (407) 459-2012
MOTORIST DESIGN DATA MOVEMENT, INC.
TrafflclTransporta"on Englnaerlng Consultant.
INTRODUCTION
As a result of certain access modifications to the Citrus
Glens I & Citrus Glens II site plan, it was necessary to review
and evaluate the original traffic reports submitted on these two
projects. Specifically. the March 23, 1987 and September 28,
1987 traffic reports were the documents reviewed. The scope of
the analysis included evaluating the new daily traffic
generated by the latest site plan, calculating the AH & PM peak
traffic generated by the new development density, reviewing the
access reconfiguration, examining the turning movement
modifications at each access. and scrutinizing the recommended
improvements.
SUMMARIZATION OF THE PLANNING DATA
The density factors utilized in comparing the original
reports were as follows:
The Harch 23, 1987 report included 132 patio homes and 118
duplex units. The September 28. 1988 report included 106 single
family dwelling units. The revised Citrus Glen I site plan
includes 196 patio homes and the Citrus Glen II site includes
113 single family homes. Based on this data it is obvious that
there is a significant reduction in the total number of units
actually built.
TRIP GENERATION
To determine a realistic traffic impact, it
first of all to recognize the type of dwelling
different dwelling units have a different trip rate.
is important
unit since
The original Citrus Glen I site plan indicated both duplex
and patio homes. The duplex had a trip rate of 7 trips per
dwelling unit and the patio home had a trip rate of 10 trips per
dwelling unit. Based on these trip rates and the aforementioned
dwelling units, a total of 2146 trips per day were generated by
these residential communites. In contrast the Citrus Glen I that
was built included 196 patio homes which results in a total of
1960 trips per day. Based on this computation the final Citrus
Glen I development had a reduction of 180 trips per day.
',...,
.,
MOTORIST DESIGN DATA MOVEMENT, INC.
TrafflclTransportatlon Engineering Consultants
In analyzing the Citrus Glen II development, the original
site plan had a total of 106 single family dwelling units which
resulted in 1060 per day. In comparison, the developed Citrus
Glen I site plan had a total of 113 single family units which
resulted in a total trip number of 1130. Of the resulting
differential is a total of 70 additional trips per day. In
combining Citrus Glens I & II we find a total daily reduction of
110 trips per day.
In addition to analyzing the daily trips it is important
to look at the AM and the PM hourly traffic. By scrutinizing the
Citrus Glen I development, the AM peak hour traffic was 39
vehicles per hour ingressing and 132 vehicles egressing in the
original report. The site plan change resulted in a total of 41
vehicles per hour ingressing and 108 vehicles per hour egressing.
This is a reasonable reduction in AM peak hour traffic. Likewise
the PM peak hour traffic in the original report was 142 vehicles
per hour entering and 77 per hour exiting. With the changes the
ingress traffic was 124 vehicles per hour and the egress traffic
was 73 vehicles per hour. The after condition again has been
reduced moderately from the original traffic figures. Based on
tese peak hour comparisons it is evident that the existing
conditions will produce substantially less peak hour trips.
The assessment of Citrus Glen II peak hour traffic indicated
that the existing AM peak ingressing traffic changed from 22
vehicles per hour to 24 vehicles per hour and the egressing
traffic changed from 58 to 62 vehicles per hour. Likewise the PM
changed from 67 vehicles per hour to 71 vehicles per hour for
entering traffic and 39 vehicles per hour to 42 vehicles per hour
for exiting traffic. It is obvious that the modified peak hour
traffic for the Citrus Glen II development has increased very
slightly. Therefore it can be concluded that the change in
traffic figures generated by the Citrus Glen II project is very
insignificant.
REQUIRED HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENTS
After recalculating the daily traffic and peak hour trips an
assessment of the recommended highway improvements that
in the two original reports was undertaken. The
improvements are still valid and should be implemented.
for any further improvements is not necessary since
were made
suggested
The need
the total
\
\ \
;
,I
MOTORIST DESIGN DATA MOVEMENT, INC.
TrBfflclTrBnsportBtlon Engineering Consultant.
traffic was reduced rather than increased. By maintaining the
aforementioned transportation improvements the traveling public
will not be adverslyaffected by the Citrus Glen Phase I and
Phase II modifications. The slight redistribution of trips due
to the modified access configuration does not introduce any
additional traffic concerns.
MEMORANDUM
June 27, 1989
TO:
Chairman and Members
Planning and Zoning Board
FROM:
Carmen S. Annunziato
Planning Director
RE:
Citrus Park Planned Unit Development (approved as
Citrus Glen Phase II) - Rezoning Request - File No .2.81-
Introduction: Roger Saberson, agent for Boynton Nurseries, A Florida
General Partnership, is requesting that the master plan for the Citrus
Glen II Planned Unit Development be modified as follows:
1) elimination of the proposed five (5) acre public park which
is to be combined with the recreational amenities on the
Elementary School "P" site to create a larger public park
facility.
2) increase the unit count from 106 to 113 with a corresponding
increase in gross density from 3.68 dwelling units per acre
to 3.92 dwelling units per acre; and
3) eliminate the public street connection to Citrus Glen and
substantially alter the internal street layout and design of
the PUD.
Copies of the existing and proposed master plans for the Citrus Park
PUD can be found in Exhibit "A". For a further explanation of the
proposed changes and the applicant's justification, please refer to
Exhibit "B".
It was the decision of the applicant to submit this proposal as a
rezoning, rather than a master plan modification, due to the
substantial nature of the changes proposed and to reduce the time
necessary to process this proposal if the changes were determined to
be substantial by the City Commission (i.e., if submitted as a master
plan modification in accordance with Section 12 of Appendix B of the
Code of Ordinances).
History and Background: Citrus Glen was originally proposed by Alan
Miller and approved in two Phases - I and II, by the City. Phase I
was sold to Granados Enterprises and is currently under construction.
Phase II has been taken back by the Sturrock family after Alan Miller
failed to extend his option to purchase. It was the intent of the
City, at the time these projects were approved, to provide additional
recreation facilities to serve the new developments within the
Lawrence Road corridor, consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies
1
for the provision of open space and public recreation facilities. It
was also recognized, at that time, that a unique opportunity existed
to provide a larger public recreation facility by combining the public
park facilities with the recreation facilities proposed for the new
elementary school to the south (Elementary School "P"). The joint use
of recreation facilities between the City and the School Board is
currently undertaken at various sites in the City, including Congress
Avenue Middle School, Forest Park Elementary School, Rolling Green
Elementary School (recently approved), among others.
As both Citrus Glen I and II were both under contract to Alan Miller,
it was originally contemplated that both Citrus Glen I and II would
dedicate the quantity of land necessary for the park through the parks
and recreation dedication requirement (Section 8 of Appendix C,
Subdivisions and Platting). After phase I was sold to Granados
Enterprises and Phase II was taken back by the Sturrocks, it became
clear that this plan was no longer feasible. Therefore, it was
decided, at the time of platting of Phase I, that in lieu of
dedicating land, the developer would pay cash. This cash payment
would then be applied toward the purchase of the remaining three acres
or so of the five acre park in Phase II that would be obtained through
land dedication upon plat approval.
Surrounding Land Use and Zoning (see attached location map in Exhibit
"C"): Abutting the subject parcel to the north is the Citrus Glen
Planned unit Development which is currently being developed by
Granados Enterprises. Abutting the subject parcel to the east is the
Sunny South Estates mobile home park zoned RS (Single-Family
Residential) in Palm Beach County. Abutting the subject parcel to the
south is Elementary School "P" zoned R-1AA (Single-Family
Residential). Abutting the subject parcel to the west is the
right-of-way for Lawrence Road. Further to the west, across Lawrence
Road, is a commercial tree nursery (Boynton Nurseries) Zoned AR
(Agricultural-Residential) in Palm Beach County.
Procedure: This request for rezoning is being processed consistent
with Section 9.C of Appendix A-Zoning, entitled "Comprehensive Plan
Amendments; Rezonings" and Section 10 of Appendix B-Planned Unit
Developments, entitled "Procedures for zoning of Land to PUD".
Comprehensive Plan - Future Land Use Map: The applicant is proposing
to rezone the PUD for the purpose of substantially altering the master
plan. The underlying PUD zoning with a Land Use Intensity=4 will not
change. The proposed density (3.92 dwelling units per acre) falls
below the 4.82 dwelling units per acre permitted under the existing
Low Density Residential land use category.
Comprehensive Plan - Text: The following Comprehensive Plan policies
are relevant to this rezoning request:
1979 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
"Provide an adequate range of housing choices." (p.G)
2
"Provide a suitable living environment in all neighborhoods."
(p.6)
"Provide adequate open space and recreation facilities and
programs to meet the needs of present and future residents."
(p.7)
"Coordinate the provision of open space and recreation facilities
within new private development to insure an adequate range of
recreation opportunities." (p.7)
"Provide for efficient and safe movement within the city." (p.7)
1986 EVALUATION & APPRAISAL REPORT
47 3.4.3.3. Neighborhood Parks
"Neighborhood parks are intended to be "walk to" parks so their
service area should not be bisected by arterial streets with
thoroughfare traffic. School playgrounds in some cases can be
effectively used as neighborhood parks. The recommended supply of
neighborhood park areas is 2.5 acres per 1,000 persons. However, in
areas where single family development predominates, the standard
should be increased due to the larger proportion of school age
children. Three to five acres is considered minimum depending on the
type and range of activities accommodated. As with mini parks, the
service radii should not exceed a walking distance of one-quarter to
one-half mile." (p.146)
47 3.4.3.6. Current and Future Park Needs Summary
"The most commonly accepted national standard of ten acres of
park per 1,000 residents indicates that the City of Boynton Beach is
deficient in the provision of recreational areas within the city
limits. Based on an estimated current population of 36,000, the
current need is for 360 acres. By 1990, demand for park area will
increase to 570 acres. Compared with the City's current inventory of
slightly more than 60 acres of parks, it would appear that the City is
greatly deficient. However, by considering several factors relating
to use characteristics and planned park projects, this apparent
demand/supply imbalance is greatly reduced. When consideration is
given to park development potential by park type in the region as well
as in Boynton Beach, it is concluded that the greatest need is for the
provision of properly located and developed neighborhood parks. In
the longer-term future, however, the provision of district parks in
newly developed areas will increase in importance." (p.147)
1989 PROPOSED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
c. Continue to utilize and improve school parks.
Public schools in Boynton Beach continue to constitute an important
public recreation resource due to the public use of their recreation
3
facilities, and, in the case of the Congress Community School, through
the use of classrooms for adult education. As with the Rolling Green
School improvement project, all schools should continue to be examined
for their potential as sites for recreation facilities.
In addition, the recreation facilities of private schools (and
churches), should be considered as a temporary alternative for meeting
park and facility needs. If located within an area that is
experiencing a deficiency in a facility or park acreage, the owners of
a private institution should be negotiated with to create an
acceptable public use policy, until similar facilities can be supplied
by the City. The potential for such a joint program exists with St.
Joseph's School, which is located within Neighborhood Planning Area
#17. Public use of such private facilities should be secondary,
however, to the school's use.
As indicated previously, schools supply a high proportion of several
recreation facilities; therefore, these facilities should be
maintained to ensure that they function properly. Inspections of
school facilities should be undertaken regularly and funds allocated
for needed repairs and facility replacements. (p.41 support documents,
Vol. 1)
2. Citrus Glen Dedicated Site (2000)
This site was acquired through the subdivision ordinance and
should be developed or designed jointly with Elementary School
IIp'', which abuts this site to the south. (p.42 support documents,
Vol. 1) NOTE: This site has not yet been acquired through the
subdivision ordinance.
Objective 5.2: The City shall provide parks and recreation facilities
in accordance with Summary/Recommendation D (see Item #2 above), the
Proposed Park Development Schedule, and the Facility Needs summary:
Planned and Potential Facility Development (The Citrus Glen II park is
shown on the Proposed Park Development Schedule referenced above).
Issues/Discussion: Section 9.c.7 of Appendix A-Zoning, of the Code of
Ordinances, requires the evaluation of Plan Amendments/Rezoning
requests against criteria related to the impacts which would result
from the approval of such requests. These criteria and an evaluation
of the impacts which would result from the proposed development are as
follows:
a. Whether the proposed rezoning would be consistent with applicable
comprehensive plan policies. The planning Department shall also
recommend limitations or requirements which would have to be
imposed on subsequent development of the property, in order to
comply with policies contained in the comprehensive plan.
The proposed rezoning is consistent with comprehensive plan policies
with respect to land use. However, the proposed rezoning would not be
consistent with comprehensive plan policies concerning the provision
4
of public recreation facilities, as the five acre public park is
proposed to be eliminated (see previous section entitled,
"Comprehensive Plan-Text" for a summary of relevant policies
concerning the provision of public recreation facilities).
b. Whether the proposed rezoning would be contrary to the
established land use pattern, or would create an isolated
district unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts, or would
constitute a grant of special privilege to an individual property
owner as contrasted with protection of the public welfare.
The proposed rezoning is consistent with the established low density
residential land use pattern and would not create an isolated district
unrelated to adjacent and nearby districts.
c. Whether changed or changing conditions make the proposed rezoning
desirable.
Conditions have not changed since the approval of the original master
plan for the Citrus Glen II Planned Unit Development.
d. Whether the proposed rezoning would be compatible with utility
systems, roadways, and other public facilities.
The proposed rezoning would be compatible with public utility systems.
Concerning roadways, Section 10 of Appendix C, Subdivisions and
Platting, requires that:
The proposed subdivision street layout shall be
coordinated with the street system of the surrounding
area and consideration shall be given to existing and
planned streets, relation to topographical conditions,
public convenience, safety and their appropriate
relation to the proposed use of the land to be served
by such streets. The arrangement of streets in new
subdivisions shall provide for the continuation of
existing streets in adjoining areas not subdivided,
(and) the arrangement of streets in new subdivisions
shall provide for the proper projection of streets.
When a new subdivision adjoins unsubdivided land, then
the new street, where necessary, shall be carried to
the boundary of the tract proposed to be subdivided
to promote reasonable development of adjacent lands
and provide continuity of street systems.
The approved public road system in this subdivision and the adjacent
subdivision to the north (Citrus Glen) provides an alternative access
route between Miner Road and Lawrence Road and provides public access
to the proposed city park. Access to Elementary School "P" is from a
continuation of the north/south public street through Citrus Glen and
Citrus Park to Lawrence Road. The alignment and design of this
intersection was negotiated and agreed upon by the School Board, the
5
\!, .
~ ;1
\
sturrock family, and the City. The agreement reached involved
rights-of-way dedications, easement dedications, utility construction,
turn-lane construction and dollar contributions. Approval of this
request would change the basis for approval of this agreement and
review of this proposal by the School Board is recommended. In
addition to the above, the proposed elimination of the public road
system and the installation of a private security system may impede
emergency access to these developments, as outlined in the attached
staff comments in Exhibit "0" from the Fire Department and the Police
Department.
e. Whether the proposed rezoning would be compatible with the
current and future use of adjacent and nearby properties, or
would affect the property values of adjacent and nearby
properties.
From a land use standpoint, the proposed rezoning would be compatible
with the current and future use of adjacent and nearby properties for
low density residential development. However, the proposed
elimination of the public park would deprive property owners in the
vicinity of needed public recreation space, the demand for which is
outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. The affect on property values of
adjacent and nearby properties is difficult to evaluate, but the
impact is not anticipated to be significant.
f. Whether the property is physically and economically developable
under the existing zoning.
The approved master plan for the Citrus Glen II Planned Unit
Development allows for the development of 106 single-family detached
zero lot line units.
g. Whether the proposed rezoning is of a scale which is reasonably
related to the needs of the neighborhood and the city as a whole.
The proposed rezoning is of a scale which is reasonably related to the
needs of the neighborhood and the City as a whole.
h. Whether there are adequate sites elsewhere in the City for the
proposed use, in districts where such use is already allowed.
The approved Citrus Glen II master plan currently allows for the
development of 106 single-family detached zero lot line units. The
underlying issue in this rezoning petition concerns whether or not it
would be acceptable to eliminate the proposed five acre public park
and the public road system which serves the park, links the Citrus
Glen and Citrus Park projects to Elementary School "P", and provides
an alternative means of emergency access to the Citrus Park PUD.
Conclusions/Recommendations: The proposed rezoning is consistent with
Comprehensive Plan policies with respect to land use. However, the
proposed elimination of the five acre public park wou~d be
inconsistent with Comprehensive Plan policies concerning the provision
6
of public recreation facilities. In addition, elimination of the
north/south public road connection would be inconsistent with the
provision of public recreation facilities and the intent of Section
10, "Streets" of Appendix C, Subdivisions and Platting. Elimination
of the public street connection would change the basis for approval
for the Lawrence Road intersection design between the School Board,
the Sturrocks, and the City and may also impede the provision of
alternative emergency access to these developments. Based on the
above, it is recommended that the application for rezoning submitted
by Roger Saberson should be denied.
PROJECT APPROVAL
If it is the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board to recommend
approval or the City Commission to approve this request, the Planning
Department recommends that the rezoning be approved subject to the
attached staff comments in Exhibit "D", with the exception of those
comments that recommend against the approval of this request.
C.~~E;'- S~~
JJG:frb
Encs
cc: Central File
citpkpud
7
MEMORANDUM-
Mr. James Golden
DATIE
23 June 1989
P'IL.
M
Lt. Dale S. Hammack
IIU8JlECT Citrus Park (PI I Citrus Glen)
Per our discussion at the Technical Review Board Meeting of 21 June 1989, I
am recommending the following.
1. From a public safety stand that emergency access be provided
for the Citrus Glen (P-I) to allow more than one point of
entry.
~o!:L? .
DSH: tm
Tc9 [3 r:
t- t: V-+'5 e C>
"plSP
~~r~c.c:;
MEMORANDUM
To:
Carmen Annunziato, Planning
Director r
Ut111tles~.
From:
John A. Guidry, Director of
Date:
June 23, 1989
Subject: TRB Review - Rezoning for Citrus Park - PUD with Master
Plan
The subject rezoning includes a master plan for which we offer the
following comments.
1. The water main routing shall be revised to promote an even
circulation of water through the subdivision. Configurations
resulting in a dead-end or a looped line with a single feed
point shall be eliminated as these are detrimental to water
qua 1 it Y .
2. Correct the sewer plan to indicate a proposed 15" diameter
sewer main on the west side of Lawrence Road, with only the
road crossing stub being 1011 in diameter.
3. Identify the easement width between lots 14 and 15 for the
sanitary sewer. We recommend a width of twice the depth, plus
eight feet. This results in a 30 feet wide easement, which
will allow our personnel to make a point repair safely, should
the need arise in the future. If you desire a narrower
easement, please submit an engineering evaluation, with
calculations, in support of your proposal.
cmd
xc: Peter Mazzella
( c; It J1l::: }/'rS
r-Jv/c 0 R po K ;t{--[5j)
-..
,
{
I'
MEMORANDUM
,I
i,'
"",- .
f
"
TO:
Mr. Carmen Annunziato
Planning Director
DATE: June 12, 1989
FROM: Betty S. Boroni
City Clerk
Planning & Zoning Board
Meeting of July 11, 1989
RE:
'"
Attached please find a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing for the
rezoning of Citrus Park. This is scheduled to be advertised in The
Post on June 25 and July 2 and notices were mailed on June 9.
The three parking lot variance notices will be forthcoming which are
scheduled for the same meeting and will be advertised on June 22 and
29 in the Boynton Beach News.
B1!:f:B!~
BSB/smk
Attachment
cc: City Manager
'r"'!" ~,-..
-"':".~"._..""--'-'"
~\ ...~' r. ;'~:
.' :. '-'I.
, ~""._..,--..
MEMORANDUM
May 26, 1989
FROM:
Betty BOFoni, City Clerk
James J. Golden, Senior City planner
TO:
RE:
.....
Citrus Park (f/k/a Citrus Glen II) - Rezoning From
PUD w/LUI=4 to PUD w/LUI=4
Accompanying this memorandum you will find a copy of the
application and relat~d documents for the above-referenced
request. Also enclosed is a check in the amount of $1,200 to
cover the review and processing of this application.
Please advertise this request for a public hearing before the
planning and Zoning Board at the July 11, 19890meeting and before
the ICity Commission at the July 18, 1989 meeting. A map
advertisement is not required, as there is no land use change
proposed.
J;:;;:j;: ~
JJG:frb
Encs
BB.526
u , __...._____...___,_..._______________--1___,___
.'1 1'f'-' " -'!'~-'_~ f,,-,
t I
,/
MEMORANDUM
)
'. ..J"
7 June 1988
TO:
Peter L. Cheney, City Manager
FROM:
Carmen S. Annunziato, Planning Director
RE:
Continuation of Public Hearings, Properties on West
Side of US-1, Citrus Park, Elementary School P and
Lawrence Lakes
Please be advised that the economic analysis of the uses of land
along the US-1 corridor has not been received from Walter H.
Keller and Associates within the time frame previously
anticipated. This has resulted in the need to continue the
public hearing before the Planning and Zoning Board for the
change in future land use and zoning for the properties along the
west side of US-1 to July 12, 1988. Changing this schedule will
require that the City Commission continue its public hearings on
the above-mentioned topics to the Commission meeting of July 19,
1988 in order to allow for a complete submission to the State
Department of Community Affairs.
Therefore, when these items come up on the Commission's June 21st
agenda, please have the Mayor announce that th~ hearings on all
four projects have been continued to July 19, 1988 at 8:00 PM or
-as soon thereafter as the agenda permits at the City Commission
Chambers, 211 South Federal Highway, Boynton Beach, Florida.
C~ARMEN S~TO
/bks
I I
MEMORANDUM
October 19, 1989
FROM:
File
James J. Golden, Senior City Planner ~ ~ (~
citrus Park - Sidewalk Variance - ~ a?tr
TO:
RE:
On this date, the Technical Review Board approved the attached
request sUbject to the following stipulations:
1) That the sidewalk on the south side of the entrance
road not be required east of the driveway connection to
Elementary School "P" to the recreation center parking
lot. The sidewalk along the remaining portions of the
entrance road must be constructed, however.
2) A sidewalk or bikepath be provided through the
recreation area to connect that portion of the
development east of the recreation area to the
pedestrian access system and the school entrance which
lies to the west of the recreation area.
~i.~
(JAMES f. GOLDEN
JJG:cp
cc : TRB
Roger Saberson
Rick Rossi
David H. Williams
LAW OFFICES OF
ROGER G. SABERSON, P.A.
DELRA Y EXECUTIVE MALL
110 EAST ATLANTIC AVENUE
DELRA Y BEACH, FLORIDA 33444
(407) 272-8616
October 17, 1989
Mr. Jim Golden, Planner
City of Boynton Beach
100 East Boynton Beach
Boynton Beach, Florida
Blvd.
33425
Re: Citrus Park - Waiver of Sidewalk Requirement for Small Area on the South-
side of Entrance Road
Dear Jim:
Pursuant to our phone conversation of October 17, 1989 I hereby reconfirm my
request made to Mr. Annunziato, September 27, 1989 that the City of Boynton Beach
waive any sidewalk requirement for the south side of the entrance road east of
the north/south entry to the elementary school site.
As I indicated to you, the Palm Beach County School system has requested that
we delete the sidewalk in this area as they would prefer a hedge and/or other
landscape buffering. I enclose for your reference a duplicate copy of the letter
from David H. Williams to Carmen Annunziato dated September 27, 1989 indicating
the School Board's request for the deletion of the sidewalk. We are attempting
to wrap up all of the remaining issues with the School Board so that we can
implement the various exchanges of easements that need to occur and the
conveyance to the City of Boynton Beach of the area for the entrance road.
It is my understanding that you will present this request to the Technical Review
Board on Thursday October 19, 1989, at approximately 11:00 to 11:30 a.m.
I enclose my check made payable to the City of Boynton Beach in the amount of
$100.00 for the City's consideration of this request.
Thank you for your cooperation.
With regards,
1Jr/4 ~
RECEIVED'
Roger G. Saberson
Attorney at Law
OCT 18 1989
PLANNLNG DEPTI
enclosure
c:
Mr. James Sturrock
Mr. Drennan Whitmire
...-.11
.. L__
,.
"'-"-
(@OQ~
~..~
~ IJI t'
8EACH ~
_:~~!i-'3!~~:::-:~'I.."':"'(~""
THE SCHOOL BOARD
OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA
3323 BELVEDERE ROAD
P,O. BOX 24690
WEST PALM BEACH, FL 33416-4690
407.684-5CXXl
THOMAS J. MI LLS
SUPERINTENDENT
DF SCHOOLS
September 27, 1989
MEMORANDUM
Mr. Carmen Annunziato, Director of Planning
City of Boynton Beach
200 No. Seacrest Boulevard
Boynton Beach, FL 33425-0310
Re: Citrus Park PUD
Elementary "P"
Please be advised that the School Board staff has reviewed
the site plan submitted for Citrus Park PUD. Because of the
layout of this project, the School Board recommends that no
sidewalk be provided on the south side of the entry road to
the project east of the entry to the elementary school.
This will encourage all pedestrians to the school to cross at
an identified crossing.
Very truly yours,
f)~~
David H. Williams, Assistant Director
Growth Management Center
DHW:dg
cc: Agustin A. Hernandez
WPC3\ES\SITE.PE
-~~.'.I-__,>:~ :~::'~_~!.-.:~_!"t~~r:~:.'.:~ .:'~~~':-:~--
_._---_:.~--""--,.._,.-