REVIEW COMMENTS
v
FIRE PREVENTION MEMORANDUM NO, 95-376 WDC
TO: Planning Department
,
FROM: Fire Department
DATE: November 14, 1995 !
RE: LUAR 95-006 - 2nd Submittal
Newport Place
4735 NW 2 Ct
We have no objections to the PUD proposed,
/ ,,/ 'f""" ,;1:. ' I
/ t ( {~ (,. tfL- <. t' t... .
'- _.h____.~_ ~ ~__.
William D, Cava.naugh, FPO I
cc: Chief Jordan
FPO IT Cambpell
File
MEMORANDUM
Utilities # 95-357
If~ ~ @ ~ ~ w ~ Im\
Il~~~OOii
i pl.ANtm'jG ~~ID, I
1,__2Qt!!l\9 DfPI _ ,((,~::
TO:
Tambri 1. Heyden,
Planning & Zoning Director
J~hn A Guid~:, ./'l'At-/ ~ci'
Director ofUtlhtles~;:4
v
FROM:
Date: November l6, 1995
SUBJECT: Newport Place Master Plan, Second Review
Staff has reviewed the above referenced project and offer the following comments:
Utilities has no comment at this time,
It is our recommendation that the plan proceed through the review process,
If you have any questions regarding this subject, please contact Skip Milor at 375-6407 or
Peter Mazzella at 375-6404,
sm
xc: Clyde "Skip" Milor
Peter Mazzella I:Y
File
new2
"
BOYNTON BEACH POUCE DEPARTMENT
TRAFFIC UNIT
v
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
REF:
T AMBRI HEYDEN, PLANNING & ZONING DIRECTOR
SGT, MARLON HARRIS
I3 NOVEMBER 95
NEWPORT PLACE - 2nd REVIEW MEMO #0183
I find no problems at this time.
.,/:;
~.' <,
if
::-.:;: ~
{_.,~'::..
"'",,/
}1 n
~>>4'~,>><<.....i >~
:; , r
"'!r~J
r;.:=<:::
1 :t ) t
~ 1M"',""'.....'
~ 'i'............~"\..
~ 'L. ) 1
,. .~
l, ,-~'/ n
,............""""'..."" -..,.
~~~-::::......9
;~:;~a~~~,'^U~~
,~"
lr~:,::::::.....\
~ .}, *
~ :. ~ f
1'--''-'''-
1 ,---:;;\
l;~i}""
J..".,.""",......"..;- &....::
<"""'.,.,.'''':.~
C:::~..,.'~
h
..."',....."..<.-;.;$
'j:.;.:..~,.,...."",.
i"''':~"
~;"J)
'".,.............".. l;..~""'W,.~,
.~;.; ),\<<",:"",-
" ,~ (. ,.........,."..,,:'.,::.
.(.,-<< Ii ~ ~
"-<J II
.:; (.
K"j
?::s~~)
"./ t:\.
'" ./,.......:.;:;-
...~ '"
~ReSpeCtfuli!\l(",
./
.V
gt Marlon Harri~
~""-.............,..,
~r""...~..
f L.......J.)
:,""J-"^~
. ,'....~
~.,,~
rn
r~::::::::...'~~,
". \.'::>
} ~ '~, "
~ ,~ ~ ~:
\1 n
~lJ"
(,,;::'.-.,:/ D
1'.1D
'tmt
! 'l{ 1
t *#Vll
f"'~'
."".~
,., ~
*,=":.,...,.,....,:::-
f ~~ry
\J' ..".:,-<'
.. "'",,,,,......
"
~ ~ ~ 0
NOV 3.
PLANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
,/
FIRE PREVENTION MEMORANDUM NO, 95-376 WDC
TO: Planning Department
FROM: Fire Department
DATE: November l4, 1995
RE: LUAR 95-006 - 2nd Submittal
Newport Place
4735 NW 2 Ct
We have no objections to the PUD proposed,
/:. ;" /' '
//J // ;'
/(' l /;l (c-cf ~~?{,: (' (x.. , .
William D, Cavanaugh, FPO I
;/
/(
cc: Chief Jordan
FPO IT Cambpell
File
BOYNTON BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT
TRAFFIC UNIT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
REF:
TAMBRI HEYDEN, PLANNING & ZONING DIRECTOR
SGT. MARLON HARRIS
13 NOVEMBER 95
NEWPORT PLACE - 2nd REVIEW MEMO #0183
I find no problems at this time,
~"''''
./ ,'\, ,;
gt M.rloo ~:
{}
>,'....;
~'~ ~ 0
NOV 3 .
w
Pl.ANNING AND
ZONING DEPT
RECREATION & PARK MEMORANDUM 395-535
TO:
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
John Wi1dner, Parks Superintendent jJ
Newport Place - 2nd Review and Parking Lot Variance
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
November 17, 1995
The Recreation and Park Department has reviewed the master plan for Newport Place. We have no
recreation-related comments at this time. The plan may continue through the normal review process.
JW:ad
BOYNTON BEACH POLICE DEPARTMENT
TRAFFIC UNIT
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
REF:
TAMBRI HEYDEN, PLANNING & ZONING DIRECTOR
SGT. MARLON HARRIS
13 NOVEMBER 95
NEWPORT PLACE- Parking Lot VariancelNumber of Driveways
MEMO #0184
I find no problem with this request.
l"\
, "::;':~,
[0)1 ~ ~ ~ ~
l& NO'V '3\~
;;;~:''^
r~~:':S~"Marlqn;Hlll:ri1'
:: ~j :' . ': , "
\.... ../)
./
---....-
d," ';1)
PU',.' '.
lONh'<\J ',)...1 ..
LOi
ii: ...:,:',::'
t ........,."." "
:: l
~ ::'
FIRE PREVENTION MEMORANDUM NO, 95-376 WDC
TO: Planning Department
FROM: Fire Department
DATE: November l4, 1995
RE: LUAR 95-006 - 2nd Submittal
Newport Place
4735 N'W' 2 Cl
We have no objections to the POD proposed,
l' /"
/ / ' '
<,/~ /;{' {d-z'&i,''' eKe /
. W~ D. Ca~~~~gh, FPO I
cc: Chief Jordan
FPO IT Cambpell
File
/
,
\
00 rnmrnowrn rn
l]cr - 4 1995
, ".,J
PLANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
MEMORANDUM
UTILITIES DEPT. NO. 95 - 375
TO:
Tambri Heyden, Planning Director A ~
John A. Guidry, Utilities Director~~
December 1, 1995
~
;Jl2>
FROM:
DATE:
SUBJECT: Newport Place - Determination of water and sewer availability
After reviewing your memo no, 95-674. and based upon a projected increase of 139
beds in a nursing home or ACLF, we project a potential flow increase of
approximately 16,000 gallons per day, Sufficient reserve treatment plant capacity
exists for both water and wastewater treatment.
Water and sewer mains are available, and sufficiently sized within the existing
development to provide this anticipated additional demand. These can be extended
as necessary to serve the proposed new construction. The required fire flow of 1500
gallons per minute with a 20 psi residual is also available within the development,
The sewage pumping station is designed to pump an average daily flow of 103,680
gallons, compared to a projected total flow of 70,725 gallons per day. The station
should be able to accommodate the additional flow without major modification,
I trust this memo provides all of the requested information, Please refer any
questions on this matter to Peter Mazzella of this office.
JAG/PVM
xc: File
C:\WPWIN6O\WPDOCS\NQVDEC95\NEWPLACE.WPD
MEMORANDUM
Utilities # 95-357
iM ~ @ ~ ~ w ~ ~. ,I
I ~'l9J5 kl'
I,. ~_
PLA~NIi';G ,~~O I I
70f!iNG p.m. .1;'\'--:',1
_.,-----
TO: Tambri 1. Heyden,
Planning & Zoning Director
FROM: John A Guidry, /'l'At-/ ~ci
Director of Utilities ~;:4 -
Date: November 16, 1995
SUBJECT: Newport Place Master Plan, Second Review
Staff has reviewed the above referenced project and offer the following comments:
Utilities has no comment at this time.
It is our recommendation that the plan proceed through the review process,
If you have any questions regarding this subject, please contact Skip Milor at 375-6407 or
Peter Mazzella at 375-6404,
sm
xc: Clyde "Skip" Milor
Peter Mazzella I!Y
File
new2
.~.
, ::::',
~ --:r:;
COl1va\eSLcnt center ~"
l "ton
iI'i:i. l' ..... ,~
...."-7'..,,,,,..,' ,;;;;. . ,
_ r.;,- .....!""- ~.
. '
2' O,E. \
.14J~~ #tu
'-' \ .;
\ '-'
,..:;
l ,.
'. -
Tr,)Ct \
-,
.../_~\.../....1
. -~...--"\.
L' '
~-
.----
f-5,
r\
;' LA.E.\\
\ >
i.... \ ~ 15' U.L \
\ "" \
,\ \
, \()\\,~,o.\".,
\
\.
\
- ,I
---'~
- ' . .
~ ' ..,
':''"'r'.'';
," .l
" .\:: '~~l\\t>)\ C~l'\te\'
!~ '\\ \' "",--=\ '
~,"""1 ,)) ," \.;\ \ stor\! ~'
"'-'" I: ' '\1-= ,~..-' \
. \', /-,j" . ,',
, iJi~--~Cj'-,
-")' ~. ~ (JfN
_.....~ V
-_//
_/ t ,\kp
,
\
1ra<. t :2
- --'~ ------~- -
\
\ \\.,ter
\\\"na,-,cnwnt
[.""'111<'11\ \'
..' ..J.
,,/ //p r:,\.-, ,-
'\..;. ~f.-' ~ /
':,,""" >, \ f .
--.--
--_.-----~------.._"~
-'"--_.~----~
---'-'-'--'~--
'l'RACKING LUG - SI'l'E PLAN REVIEW SUBMI'f'l'AL
PROJl:C'l' 'l'J.'1'LE:
IJE::;CRIP'l'ION:
'l'YPE:
DA'I'E REC I D :
NEWPORT PLACE
Rezoning & Land Use
NEW SITE PLAN
9/29/95 AMOUNT:
FILE NO.: WAR 95-006
Development
X MAJOR
3,750.00
SITE PLAN MODIFICATION
kECEIPT NO,: 02879
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
TWELVE (12) SETS SUBMITTED:
COLORED ELEVATIONS REC'O:
(Plans shall be pre-assembled. The planning & Zoning Dept. will number each
sheet of their set. The Plannif\g Dept. set will be used to check the
remaining sets to ensure the number and type of sheets match.)
* . * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
APPLICATION & SUBMITTAL:
DATE:
ACCEPTED
DENIED
DATE:
DATE OF LETTER TO APPLICANT IDENTIFYING SUBMISSION DEFICIENCIES:
2nd SUBMIT'I'AL
ACCEPTED
DENIED
DATE:
DATE:
DATE UF SUBMITTAL ACCEPTANCE LETTER:
REVIEWER'S NAME:
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
,
(Label TRC Departments on each set of plans)
DATE
AND MEMO NUMBER OF MEMO SENT TU
SENT:l.ft ~~~,/OJ/~ETUkN DATE:
TRC TO PERFORM INITIAL REVIEW.
DATE
/tlbg
MEMO NUMBER:
1st REVIEW COMMENTS RECEIVED
PLANS MEMO # / DATE / "C" PLANS MEMO # / OJ>. 'E 1 "c"
util. 'I q,s: jJ'a<7 / ~ -e.- planning f-s-?3' 1 o 'o/X-
P,W, ~ -/"ilfi' 1 ~ 1 c;.. Building o /~
~S-'t'T'" / ,'/ C- Y ~-:385 1
Parks Y Engineer ., -J.{OI.f / 0 /~
Fire 'y' q~-3~ 1 '~\2. 1..5:::::.... Engineer / /-
Police Y i I /0 i-=- Forester V '75-'173 / /011"3 1 /!.---
'rYPE Of' VARIANCE(S) DA'rE OF MEETING:
DA'l'E OF LE'fTI::R SENT TO AP1>LICAN'r IDENTIFYING TRC REVIEW COMMENTS:
(Aesthetic Review App., dates of board mtgs. & checklist sent out w/ commen~sJ
NINETY DAY CALENDAR DATE WHEN APPLICATION BECOMES NULL AND VOID:
DATE 12 COMPLE'I'E SETS OF AMENDED PLANS SUBMITTED FOR 2nd REVIEW:
(Must be assembled. Reviewer shall accept amended plans & support documents)
COLORED ELEVATIONS REe I D:
MEMO SENT TO TRC TO PERFORM 2nd REVIEW.
DATE SENT: MEMO #:
RETURN DATE:
Util.
P.W.
Parks
Fire
police
'I
2nd REVIEW RECOMMENDATION/DENIAL
q'5"31~
@EMO # / ~A,T.E /"R/D" PLANS MEMO #
~5"?s1 /~I &-- Planning
/ / BUilding
~'5'-~/./ C- Engineer
'Yc-3'7(., / II . / f; Engineer
o 1'i"!J 1 ,1Ii'-/ / / D Forster
,
/ DATE
/
1-
/"R/D"
/
~/
PLANS
y
~ -'-=-
. ----r-- .... _I
/ I
/- /
LETTER TO APPLICANT REGARDING TRe APPROVAL/DENIAL AND LAND DEVELOPMENT SIGNS
PLACED AT THE PROPERTY DATE SENT/SIGNS INSTALLED:
SCHEDULE OF BOARD MEETINGS: PAD
CC/CRA
IJAT~ APPROVAL LETTER SENT:
A: 'l'kACIUNG, SP
M
f(.j)J q(, / ooh ~~
V~u,vl'
1.1[0) ~ @ ~ a rfI Ii
Wi NOV/51995 fiUI:
it::)1
PLANNING AND..J I
-- ZONING DEPT. I
~,.,~--
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 95-059
November 15, 1995
To:
From:
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
IJ/~m V. Hukill, P.E.
~~ment of Development Director
Re:
Newport Place - Driveway Variance Request
Applicant for subject project has requested a variance for two
(2) additional driveways, My interpretation of the LDR is that
it can be reasonably assumed that the two northernmost access
drives (nearest Hypoluxo Road) have little relationship to the
current project and, therefore, no variance is required for those
two.
With respect to the other three access driveways, the LOR allows
two. The Development Department does not support a variance for
a third driveway. The drive entering/exiting directly at the
front entrance (commons) of the building is superfluous, is very
nearly on a road curve, and is quite close to the other two drive
(200 :1:),
WVH: mh
cc: Al Newbold, Deputy Director of Development
Ken Hall, Plans Check Inspector/Technician
A:NBMPORT.DV
r\(LIA
.-........ '
:;J~-_:,-,"".fl
~.J_L
November 15, 1995
~-.-,- ..~"-- ,,->.;.'
lo)[~@[~UW[~~
lJl] DEe - 519!1i l!.~ I
PLANNING A~D 6L.."'1 J
ZONING DEPT. ~
DBPAR'l101BNT OF DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 95-059
From:
Tambri Heyden, Planning & zoning Director
IJ'~m v. Hukill, P.E.
~tment of Development Director '
To:
Re:
Newport Place - Driveway variance Request
Applicant for subject project has requested a variance for two
(2) additional driveways. My interpretation of the LDR is that
it can be reasonably assumed that the two northernmost access
drives (nearest Hypoluxo Road) have little relationship to the
current project and, therefore, no variance is required for those
two.
With respect to the other three access driveways, the LDR allows
two. The Development Department does not support a variance for
a third driveway. The drive entering/exiting directly at the
front entrance (commons) of the building is superfluous, is very
nearly on a road curve, and is quite close to the other two drive
(200 ;1:),
WVH: mh
cc: Al Newbold, Deputy Director of Development
Ken Hall, Plans Check Inspector/Technician
A:.S.PORT.DV
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
m @ m a 'if} 1~lli
N ',/'1
OY151995 Iv}
: ~._'
MEMORANDUM NO. 95-059
w
November 15, 1995
PLANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
From:
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
IJJ~~m V. Hukill, P.E.
~tment of Development Director
To:
Re:
Newport Place - Driveway Variance Request
Applicant for subject project has requested a variance for two
(2) additional driveways. My interpretation of the LOR is that
it can be reasonably assumed that the two northernmost access
drives (nearest Hypoluxo Road) have little relationship to the
current project and, therefore, no variance is required for those
two .'/
With respect to the other ~r~ ~c;ss driveways, the LOR allows
two. The Development De~ar~nt does not support a variance for
a third driveway. The drive entering/exiting directly at the
front entrance (commons) of the building is superfluous, is very
nearly on a road curve, and is quite close to the other two drive
(200 t).
WVH: mh
cc: Al Newbold, Deputy Director of Development
Ken Hall, Plans Check Inspector/TeChnician
/~) ~. ~/;~L'
, (ll/f.-
i
-_....../
f1 ('i ~ L--,.
,^l I', /l/{
~r "-,,',, Fl,{" ,
, II {i.'''j,;>/1-
l"~A'
'J
'7;""'1
A:NSKPORT.DV
<;""l.:,)L<' +
(,\
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 95-624
TO:
Sue Kruse
City Clerk
Tambri J. HeYden'7V~
planning and Zoning Director
FROM:
DATE:
November 14, 1995
RE:
Newport Place, File No, PKLV 95-006 Parking Lot Variance
- Number of Dr1veways.
AccompanY1ng this memoi'andum you will find a copy of the
application and related documentation for the above-referenced
request for a variance to Chapter 23 - Park1ng Lots, Article II,
Section H, 7. A check in the amount of $400,00 to cover the review
and processing of this application has been forwarded to the
Finance Department, The public hearing is scheduled for the
December 19, 1995 City Commiss10n meeting,
The legal advertisement for this request will be forwarded to your
oft ice after review by the City Attorney and City Manager.
TJH:bme
Attachments
. :ntl"part l<,Jl
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Commission of the CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH,
FLORIDA, shall meet at 7:00 P.M, on Tuesday, December 19, 1995, at City Hall
Cornmiss10n Chambers, 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard, Boynton Beach, to
consider an application for a PARKING LOT VARIANCE on the following described
property:
Applicant:
Newport Place
Agent:
Donald Hearing
Owner:
Newport Place associates, Ltd,
Location:
4735 Northwest 7th Court; approximately 1400 feet south
of the southwest corner of Hypoluxo Road and Northwest
7th Court
Variances
Requested:
Relief from
Regulations,
Section H. 7,
City of
Chapter
Boynton Beach Land
23 Parking Lots,
Development
Article II,
"Number of driveways, No more than (2) driveways shall
be permitted from any property. Where properties abut,
more than one (1) public or private right-of-way,
additional driveways may be permitted, depend1ng upon
traffic volumes, but in no instance shall the number of
driveways exceed two on each street."
Nature of
Variances
Requested:
Two additional access points, for a total ot tour, are
requested off of Northwest 7th Court into the Newport
Place Planned Unit Development.
Legal
Description:
The plat of Stanford Park as recorded in plat book 46,
pages 67 and 68 of the Public Recol'ds of Palm Beach
County, Florida together with Lots 7 and 8, plat ot High
Ridge Subdivision as recorded in plat book 22, page 6,
Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida.
The above described parcels contain 24.77 acres more or
less,
ALSO
All interested parties are notified to appear at said hearing in person or by
attorney and be heard or file any wr1tten comments prior to the hearing date,
Any person who decides to appeal any decision of the Planning and Development
Board and City Commission with respect to any matter considered at this
meeting will need a record of the proceedings and for such purpose may need
to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record
includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based.
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
SUZANNE M. KRUSE
CITY CLERK
(407) 375-6062
lI:newport.lql
REQUEST FOR PUBLISHING
LEGAL NOTICES AND/OR LEGAL ADVERTISEMENTS
A completed copy of this routing slip must accompany any request to
have a Legal Notice or Legal Advertisement published and must be
submitted to the Office of the City Attorney eight (8) working days
prior to the first publishing date requested below.
ORIGINATING DEPARTMENT: Planninq and Zoninq Department
PREPARED BY: Michael Haaq
DATE PREPARED: November 14. 1995
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF NOTICE OR AD: City Commission meetinq December
19, 1995 - Parkinq Lot Variance - Newport Place (Two additional
access points into Planned Unit Development of Newport Place off
Northwest 7th Court,)
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS AND REQUIREMENTS: (Size of Headline, Type
Size, Section Placement, Black Boarder, etc,)
STANDARD LEGAL AD
SEND COPIES OF AD TO: All property Owners within 400 feet of
property, applicant and Director of Planninq and Zoninq.
NEWSPAPER(S) TO PUBLISH: To be determined bv City Clerk
DATE(S) TO BE PUBLISHED: To be determined bv City Clerk
APPROVED B~
(1) --=--);~'K~' \) ~
(Department H~d) ,
1,0~:; . 9S'
,
(Date)
(2 )
(City Attorney)
(Date)
(3 )
(City Manager)
(Date)
RECEIVED BY CITY CLERK:
COMPLETED:
s:newport.lvl
BOYNTON BEACH POlleE DEPARTMENT
TRAFFIC UNIT
[,/
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
REF:
TAMBRI HEYDEN, PLANNING & ZONING DIRECTOR
SGT. MARLON HARRIS
13 NOVEMBER 95
NEWPORT PLACE- Parking Lot Variance/Number of Driveways
MEMO #0184
I find no problem with this requ~:tl;~;~~:~~~:;~':;>'
/./" t.......".".,
H
,~\:-.,
)
...~,:i
.n n
r~....:..,..",,}~
t,'tr...........""j
'"
r;:~::::....:\
~ ~ ~ ~
~ "....~........:l',/
lf~~\
~ ~ ) ~
~ ~,.,>>:.>>:'Y".j~ ~..,
>>:.~...,->>'"
:~",.w~.'::;j
::.,.,....,w...\\
l~;~::~)
(:;:<:~:)'
..............,.,,;;.
n~~:(
d "
i. 'w.,~~J / .,"
~,.,."........,,,<. ii:,,;i
l?:;2;;r~:~~!
,.......'"::',."""
"".,...~ ~......w...,
~'i ~
r ,~
t ~
, ,
::-J
j/:.:~~~>
</ ,:
',j' /~
",.;. ....'
~RespeCtfuliYi'.~\
=i}
,
lE,J,1arIQM
~ ;~~ ~~ '\
~ jt ~~ ~
~ ::;:.......... ~ ~ s ;2
'if ~~;;t
~ ,~.tf
, r: ~~____/ 0
~~"f>.
;;.<<.}t~
," 'f "
I' "~I, I"~
~l{:' /!
"'~*"/'
.;:':-. "\..".."...,:.
.,.....
",' "
,'" ......,....
;::}.........'<:, '>>
/t $r
\ .~:;;~l
f~1 (r::~;:)
" \. ..,....w....:/'
~ ,,,.,.,.....,..,.,
~
m~ ~ I; ~ ~
~~ NO\! J \~
WI
./
.-.~.
Pl'I'" ;0
p....',.;--.. -:
IONINi.:l Uc.( L
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 95-624
TO:
Sue Kruse
City Clerk
FROM:
Tambri J. Heyden
Planning and Zoning Director
DATE:
October 27, 1995
RE:
Newport Place, File No. PKLV 95-006 Parking Lot Variance
- Number of Driveways.
Accompanying this memorandum you will find a copy of the
application and related documentation for the above-referenced
request for a variance to Chapter 23 - parking Lots, Article II,
Section H. 7. A check in the amount of $400.00 to cover the review
and processing of this application has been forwarded to the
Finance Department. The publiC hearing is scheduled for the
December 19, 1995 City Commission meeting.
The legal advertisement for this request will be forwarded to your
office after review by the City Attorney and City Manager.
TJH:bme
Attachments
lIt~oa"'PQrt.l'ii11
,-'
~'
:;;~_~J'
~.'~r.:...-
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 95-059
~
~@rnu~7~1~1
,II!
'-, 5 ,II
[j,-l, - IOC:: ! I U !
- ""...,u i .'--
November 15, 1995
PLANNING A~O A "-
ZONING DEPT. {YJ7'
From:
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
IJ/~m V. Hukill, P.E.
~~ment of Development Director
Newport Place - Driveway Variance Request
To:
Re:
Applicant for subject project has requested a variance for two
(2) additional driveways. My interpretation of the LOR is that
it can be reasonably assumed that the two northernmost access
drives (nearest Hypoluxo Road) have little relationship to the
current project and, therefore, no variance is required for those
two.
with respect to the other three access driveways, the LOR allows
two. The Development Department does not support a variance for
a third driveway. The drive entering/exiting directly at the
front entrance (cOlllllOns) of the building is superfluous, is very
nearly on a road curve, and is quite close to the other two drive
(200 ;1:) .
WVH: mh
cc: Al Newbold, Deputy Director of Development
Ken Hall, Plans Check Inspector/Technician
A:.,1fPORT.DV
*. ~f7\
f-~Y ~
1:~ (l\
flf~7
>>k.~ d I-Iv'" -fc.r~., R '-"o't p ui) -
(t'~H\"" /CSt..,bl, ?
U5"- <oF ?{ vV\fec S t<,ur. -('<:C- ()....c;-.:......s
\~c:..... ,;v.p<>--<e.+ f<=- r)
tJ~ c:.f ~,-",,-fe..' ~ ~ ""^- e '" ",\-\,,-\1\<::" <:..
Lhc "'t' f-{ ,..N"i=-'- ',:> '\<''-''''- - r c" J"'"c,+
c~ ,-""J Is
f'k-
~~"c:.~ f~(.e
~'\ ~"JJY\ '<.. .
(' ~eE:.\(
t/ ' (7
co' ("'V', t-,'S I~y(...
_.s-k~<&..--P,,~~ (~~t 'P(~e)
~
,Incc<"(lQ\,-"--t\"'^-. J~ &\.tr-.-,,<:.L'<:... 'f'('<:f<<""~i 'l-"~ t\J~
( ,,(' -+-, f!,t'e.c. k..& . J. )
0- 'fA,! Q>f 'fJ>v~'- '('~s \ \ ,<;.. 1\<J"f\'s -k ~<e. jn t S
Sv\\l<"y (<.t:c..~ <?,-,S~'i'^-""""l\,
?
~
?roe.s.- "" r
7.) 7> v vr> r ~,<-s F ~;-c ~ I,~ ~
/ /" r...
25~(A()/ ~'Y('2;o), ?"f'k':'i/
~ec ."._ f-.'<>v. ('
71'~
;!Jew port- ?/cV.;..e,
"P'\P"M
-t
,"?",-~ ~ ''''.J l... + \l<:.>-<\",-"'c.,,,
'D?W - f)", CO?"O"l""""'",T:s- /
p>rl! - f)Gl Cern-. ""'" A.. fs:. J
he.. s; (/"..[),/ oJ-
'?
kfT'
I~/~
.......
'?tL \..."T V<.>--.J,------""<-"'-
(3;'(( -
? (>
_ Af'f' (;c. .,,+~ ~t' d ~ 'n fr.--" -<. Ii"", ;+ r'~:r~ i.- fc' '*' .
~ . (. ~ ~ -t.d2 -+e. f &<"" (:( ''''( -- ...""-s ? ~
<.A-<.\ (~-;(t- ~,:s ~Ii\ e"fl<Tn>,^-c.<:"'-.J>.<,1 ~: w.s<::.
v) ',.:, c.\
(,.J h..-f 4;"'~ t- b;->e- - uJ{ ~ ":J'i1e.t'S" 0...1' {(j" '>-'f....T f ~._~-
I
1
l'I'rll+ 1~I\hk ~.
III
~
.....
tI
lQ
t:l
III
'tl
a
m
r+
III
"l'O"'C::"ltllll'1n.,,'O
0111 0 r+ ......r:: t:I ..... r:: I-'
11111-'.....11 .....lQ r+tJ'g
III :><'....' I-' III 1-'"",,< I-'
III III 0..... jJ.t1 .....
rt 1Ilr+t:l.....llltolo.....
Ill'" .....Illl:lllll:l l:l
11 t:l!!'tllCll1lClClCl
.....l"IO..rt ...,....0
1I'111l'tl . t:lt:lt:lt111'>
por+t:l IDlQlD:><'
<.. ID 'tl IDrnN
..... 'tl r+t:l11 0
11t:l r+'1ll t:lP
OlD 'tl ID.....
t:l'tl r+ 'tl t:l
9 r+ r+lQ
III .
t:l t:l
rt III
III 'tl
I-' rt
..... .
III
rt
I I'" ';L
:>'
c
n
no i
o '1
'd ....' 11'1
'<lQ 2:
...' >i
Otl en
Holll
I-' I
gn
~ '0 . ~
III ~
tI Ill.. (;::l
r+1'
rnr+ 0;, ,
01 ,..
<.
tt3
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~ 'J
~~}>~
~ ~"
. t:- n,
j;, ~
'~
~
~
o
.,
~
"
>
-
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 95-583
TO:
Tambri J. Heyden
Planning and Zonin~irecto_r ~~ ~^
Michael E. Haag 0t7,n..i..Cz c" 7'-. '
Site and Zoning Development~ ini trato
FROM:
DATE:
October 16, 1995
SUBJECT:
Stanford Park PUD (Newport Place) - LUAR 95-006
1st Review Comments for Master Plan Approval for the
addition of a 120 bed ACLF and two new access points and
include 24.77 acres in connection with a request for land
use amendment from Low Density Residential to High
Density Residential and rezoning from PUD (with LUI=5, 00)
and R1AAB to PUD (with LUI=5.00).
Please be advised of the following comments relative to the review
of the Master Plan for the above-referenced project:
MASTER PLAN COMMENTS:
1. The final determination from Palm Beach County Traffic
Division regarding the project meeting the traffic performance
standards shall be on file with the city and reviewed by city
staff prior to forwarding the project to the Planning and
Development Board and City Commission.
2. Add to the survey the property lines located within the PUD.
It is recommended that a copy of the plat be submitted to show
location of property lines, [Land Development Regulations,
Chapter 2 - Zoning, Section 6. F. 8. a. (2) (c) and Chapter 3
- Master Plan, Article IV, Section 3.H.I. and L.]
3. Label on the master plan the perimeter setback for the north
side of the ACLF property.
4. Add a note to the master plan indicating that the project is
subject to site plan review prior to permitting.
5. Provide data showing compliance with Land Development
Regulation, Chapter 3 - Master Plan, Article IV, Section 3. M.
regarding subsurface soil conditions and groundwater depth.
Also, add a note to the master plan regarding subsurface soil
conditions and groundwater depth as described in the
aforementioned code section. Compliance with this comment is
required prior to forwarding the request to the Board and
Commission. The City Engineer shall evaluate compliance with
this comment.
6. Add a statement to the master plan that all utilities are
available and will be provided by the appropriate agencies.
Compliance with this comment is required prior to forwarding
the request to the Board and Commission. The City Engineer
and Utilities Departments shall evaluate compliance with this
comment. [Land Development Regulations, Chapter 3 - Master
Plan, Article IV, Section 3. P.]
7. Show on the master plan the LUI computations.
8. Show on the master plan the density computations.
9. Indicate on the master plan that the design of the new
building will be compatible with the existing structures.
Page 2
Stanford Park PUD (Newport Place)
1st Review Comments for Master Plan
10. specify on the master plan the width of access aisles and
delineate what is existing and what is proposed.
11. Submission of a rectified master plan will be required to be
submitted to the planning and zoning Department in triplicate
prior to platting and site plan review of the project.
12. Comments relative to completeness of the application, with the
respective application item number, are as follows:
N/A
1.11
11.B.6
II.C.5
II.D
II ,E
11.H.3
IV./V.
It should be noted that the applicant has
submitted, in advance of approval for transmittal
to the state, the $500 fee required when the
application is transmitted to DCA;
Although not explicitly required, it would increase
the specificity of the application to also indicate
the size of just those properties (lots number
seven (7) and eight (8)) being added to the planned
unit development;
The application
documentation (i.e.
properties;
lacks property
deeds) for all
ownership
affected
The application lacks verification of Mr. Aylar's
position, and that he has "delegated authority to
represent the corporation";
Survey lacks easements, rights-of-way, and other
typical features. Survey shall be revised to
include features in addition to perimeter boundary
and legal description;
Postage, or stamped envelopes are lacking;
Information relative to timing of development is
lacking;
Since most signatures are not legible, type the
names below the respective signatures.
13. The zoning code limits the maximum number of driveways from a
single road to two (2). If this maximum is to be exceeded, as
indicated on the master plan, then relief from this
requirement must also be requested through the variance
process.
MEH:bme
xc: Central File
_=1ITIPaRe.ColI
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM #95-188
TO:
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
THRU:
Carel Fisher, Deputy Public Works Director
FROM:
Robert Gibson, Roads & Streets Supervisor
SUBJ:
Site Plan - Newport Place
DATE:
October 16, 1995
The Public Works Department has no problems with the above site,
12d,~~rJ
Robert Gibson
Roads & Streets Supervisor
RG/cr
\i\:~~,-ffi ~ -~J \~'-[l.rn~
: rd l ~ ~ U
'!i\i! ntWIliHI. rl i
I .h~\ 1 UltJ'l! ~ I
. l.,....~".. I i
\"1:, ; :",0;:) O......L~
~'T '~
"
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT frQ
ENGINEERING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO, 95-404 un
rn@rnowrnrn1
OCT I 9 1995 : I.~
TO:
~~~~rj_ J. Heyden, Planning
~m Hukill, P.E., City
October 16, 1995
& Zoning Director
Pl.,{\N.~mJf~ ",1 f~D h ~^"
.__.l:!!'!:"'~l~~.': .'dJ ..
FROM:
Engineer
DATE:
RE:
NEWPORT PLACE - MASTER PLAN REVIEW
We have reviewed subject documents and have the following comments:
1. All plans submitted for specific permits shall meet the
City's code requirements at time of application. These
permits include, but are not limited to the following;
site lighting, paving, drainage, curbing, landscaping,
irrigation and traffic control devices. Permits required
for agencies such as the FDOT, PBC, SFWMD and any other
permitting agency shall be included with your permit
request.
2. The master plan is subject to the provisions of Chapter
2 of the LDR Sec.SC, pg.2-S0
3. Specify the name, address, telephone number of the
applicant's agent, Chap.3, Art,Iv, Sec. 3D, pg.3-4
4. Provide a statement that all utilities are available and
will be provided by appropriate agencies. Chap. 3,
Art,IV, Sec,3R, pg.3-5
5. Include a statement that no buildings shall be placed on
any easements. Chap.5, Art.V, Sec.1D10, pg.5-7
6, Provide Certification by Developer's Engineer that
drainage plan complies with all City codes & standards.
Chap,6, Art.lv, Sec,5A, pg.6-7 and Chap.23, Art.IIF,
pg.23-S
7, Locate all drainage easements or setbacks. Chap. 6,
Art.IV, Sec.6B, pg.6-9
S, Provide dumpster location & details, including drainage.
Chap.7.5, Art,II, Sec.5J, pg.7.5-1S & Chap.9, Sec.10C3,
pg.9-4
9. Permits must be obtained for work within R,O.W. Chap.22,
Art,II, Sec.7A, pg.22-3
10. Survey must comply with Chap.23, Art.I, Sec.5B2, pg.23-4.
11. Location of proposed curbs is not clearly defined on the
drawing. Chap.23, Art.I, Sec.5B15, pg,23-5
12. Parking lot dimensions, striping, aisles, stalls, radii,
signs, landscaping, etc. must conform with City codes and
standards, Chap,23, Art,II, pg.23-6
13. Number of driveways may not exceed two on each street.
Chap.23, Art,II, Sec.H7, pg.23-9
14. All parking lots shall meet or exceed State Handicap Code
requirements and comply with the Standard Building Code
and the Countywide amendments thereto. Chap. 23, Art. IlK,
pg.23-9
WVH/ck
C:NEWPORT.MPR
BUILDING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM NO. 95-385
October 16, 1995
\-:::, ~,~ ~ ~ w fW'\'\.
I n ,J.~-~~- 1 \i
I J, r , .,
" ."; '; 1'-'--"'- ! . .J \ j
6 ",) ,', ~>_i \
To:
Tambri Heyden
Planning & Zoning Director
"--,._....-::--.~""".
..' ",' n
" .."._,..,
From:
Milt Duff
Building Code Permit Administrator
Re:
Newport Place
The Building Division has no comments of the above project at
this time,
We support your going forward with processing.
~j)4t
Milt Duff
MD:mh
cc: William V, Hukill, P.E., Director of Development
A:NB"PORT.TItC
FIRE PREVENTION MEMORANDUM NO, 95-359 WDC
TO: Planning Department
FROM: Fire Department
DATE: October l2, 1995
RE: Newport Place PUD
4735 NW 7 Ct
Master Plan Change
We have no objections to the proposal change.
~~
Wi iam D, Cavanaugh, FPO
cc: Chief Jordan
FPO IT Campbell
, " ~ I
,
";
OCT I 3
. :, ~ .'
,
.,:~
^ ._.~'~"" ,.............",""
.,..,..<,,--.....-'
"-i) - r;~ \\
BOYNTON BEACH POLICE DEP ARTMENT
TRAFFIC UNIT
OCT \ 0'
, .
i,.",....,.,',.;:,..,-y.... ,
k.".,.~_..~. , ", ;'.. 1 <
"., ~~.'-'~..',_: :': .'_:("__~<~._..~.n~.'"--:'
,--"--'"
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
REF:
T AMBRI HEYDEN-PLANNING & ZONING DIRECTOR
SGT, MARLON HARRIS, POLICE DEPARTMENT
9 OCTOBER 95
NEWPORT PLACE MEMO#
I have reviewed the above plans and find no problems at this time,
:7;;;~~
Sgt ,Marlon Harris
Police Department
---.,----------.- -_.._~---_..,,-_.- ~ -_...._------~
...."
,
)r; 'j
RECREA nON & PARK MEMORANDUM #95-476
OCT' J "Ii
" ' IJi
I j
,---.,_,..,~_--J
PUl,l]!)!i"S::\;.E)
znN11<G BEiT.
TO:
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
John Wildner, Parks Superintendent M.J
Newport Place 1
FROM:
RE:
DATE:
October 13, 1995
The Recreation & Park Department has reviewed the master plan for Newport Place. We have no
recreation related comments at this time, The plan may continue through the normal review process.
JW:ad
3ubJ:>-ct,
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 95-583
TO: Tambri J. Heyden
Planning and Zoning Director
FROM: Michael E. Haag~" {~-<. "(:J_ .J{t:i#.il,,- ~~
Site and Zoning Development4t~~itrato~-'
DATE: October 16, 1995
SUBJECT: Stanford Park PUD (Newport place) - LUAR 95-006
1st Review comments for Master Plan Approval for the
addition of a 120 bed ACLF and two new access points and
include 24.77 acres in connection with a request for land
use amendment from Low Density Residential to High
Density Residential and rezoning from PUD (with LUI=5.00)
and R1AAB to PUD (with LUI=5.00).
Please be advised of the fOllowing comments relative to the review
of the Master Plan for the above-referenced project:
MASTER PLAN COMMENTS:
1. The final determination from Palm Beach County Traffic
Division regarding the project meeting the traffic performance
standards shall be on file with the city and reviewed by city
staff prior to forwarding the project to the Planning and
Development Board and City Commission.
2. Add to the survey the property lines located within the PUD,
It is recommended that a copy of the plat be submitted to show
location of property lines. [Land Development Regulations,
Chapter 2 - Zoning, Section 6. F. 8. a. (2) (c) and Chapter 3
- Master Plan, Article IV, Section 3.H.I. and L.]
3, Label on the master plan the perimeter setback for the north
side of the ACLF property.
4. Add a note to the master plan indicating that the project is
subject to site plan review prior to permitting,
5. Provide data showing compliance with Land Development
Regulation, Chapter 3 - Master Plan, Article IV, Section 3, M,
regarding subsurface soil conditions and groundwater depth.
Also, add a note to the master plan regarding subsurface soil
conditions and groundwater depth as described in the
aforementioned code section. Compliance with this comment is
required prior to forwarding the request to the Board and
Commission. The City Engineer shall evaluate compliance with
this comment.
6. Add a statement to the master plan that all utilities are
available and will be provided by the appropriate agencies,
Compliance with this comment is required prior to forwarding
the request to the Board and Commission. The City Engineer
and Utilities Departments shall evaluate compliance with this
comment. [Land Development Regulations, Chapter 3 - Master
Plan, Article IV, Section 3. P.]
7. Show on the master plan the LUI computations.
8. show on the master plan the density computations.
9. Indicate on the master plan that the design of the new
building will be compatible with the existing structures.
Page 2
stanford Park PUD (Newport Place)
1st Review comments for Master Plan
10. specify on the master plan the width of access aisles and
delineate what is existing and what is proposed.
11. Submission of a rectified master plan will be required to be
submitted to the planning and zoning Department in triplicate
prior to platting and site plan review of the project.
12. Comments relative to completeness of the application, with the
respective application item number, are as follows:
NIA
1.11
11.B.6
II.C.5
II.D
II ,E
11.H.3
IV./V.
It should be noted that the applicant has
submitted, in advance of approval for transmittal
to the state, the $500 fee required when the
application is transmitted to DCA;
Although not explicitly required, it would increase
the specificity of the application to also indicate
the size of just those properties (lots number
seven (7) and eight (8)) being added to the planned
unit development;
The application
documentation (i.e.
properties;
lacks property
deeds) for all
ownership
affected
The application lacks verification of Mr. Aylar's
position, and that he has "delegated authority to
represent the corporation";
Survey lacks easements, rights-of-way, and other
typical features. survey shall be revised to
include features in addition to perimeter boundary
and legal description;
Postage, or stamped envelopes are lacking;
Information relative to timing of development is
lacking;
Since most signatures are not legible, type the
names below the respective signatures.
13. The zoning code limits the maximum number of driveways from a
single road to two (2). If this maximum is to be exceeded, as
indicated on the master plan, then relief from this
requirement must also be requested through the variance
process.
MEH:bme
xc: central File
.=18T,'lUlK,eo.lll
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 95-674
FROM:
Pete Mazzella, Administrative Assistant to Director of
utilities
Tambri J, Heyden, Planner & Zoning Director yJ
November 27, 1995
TO:
DATE:
SUBJECT: NEWPORT PLACE (Dept. No. LW\R 95-006)
APPLICATION FOR LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT/REZONING
ANALYSIS ON AVAILABILITY OF WATER/WASTEWATER FACILITIES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Florida Department of Community
Affairs for review of plan amendments, I am requesting that you
provide me with specific information on the current availability of
water and wastewater facilities and ability/inability to serve
demands represented by the subject request for High Density
Residential land use, Based on the maximum density allowed within
the High Density Residential land use classification (10,8
units/acre) and existing development (476 nursing home or ACLF
beds), if approved, this request would allow for a maximum of 139
additional beds (or 60 units based on a conversion factor of 2.3
beds per unit). please indicate specifically the capacity within
the systems and the demand proj ected from the above-described
maximum development scenario.
To assist you with your review I have enclosed a portion of the
application and a public notice which includes a location map.
Although I am unable to provide you with specific facility demands
(i,e. traffic generation, change in potable, sanitary sewer, solid
waste demand/generation, etc,) I hope that you are able to conduct
the necessary analysis with the enclosed information,
Please conduct the necessary review of this request and forward
your comments to Michael Rumpf of this office. The State has a
specific time frame within which this information must be
transmi tted to them. Therefore, a response would be greatly
appreciated at your earliest convenience, If you have any
questions, please contact Mr. Rumpf at 375-6260. Thank you.
TJH:mr
Attachments
K!5C~;NEWPW5S L!T
\
r
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD
lAND USE AMENDMENT AND/OR REZONING APPLICATION
This application must be filled out completely and accurately and submitted,
together with the materials listed in Section II below, in two (2) copies to the
Planning Department. Incomplete applications will not be processed.
Please Print legibly or Type All Information.
GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Project Name:
Newport Place
2. Type of Application (check one)
a. Rezoning only
b. land Use Amendment Only
x c. land Use Amendment and Rezoning
3. Date this application is accepted (to be filled out by
Planning Department:
4, ~pplicant's Name (person or business entity in whose
name this application is made) :
Donaldson E. Hearing
Address:
1070 E. Indiantown Road, Ste. 402
Jupiter, FL 33477
Phone: ( 4 07 ) 7 4 7 - 633 6 Fax:
(407)747-1377
5. Agent's Name (person, if any, representing applicant):
Agent is applicant
Address:
Phone: (
)
Fax:
)
6. Property Owner's (or Trustee's) Name:
Ronald L. Aylor (Owner's Rep)
Address:
Newport Place, 4735 N.W. 7th Court
Lantana, FL
33462
PLANNING t~{?MME&10Il~~~ill.4?~91 Fax:
A: \LandUse
,-
(2)
7, Correspondence Address (if difference than app~icant or agent):
N/A
*This is the address to which a~~ agendas, ~etters and other materia~s
wi~~ be mai~ed.
8, What is the app~icant's interest in the subject parce~: (Owner,
Buyer, Lessee) Bui~der, Deve~oper, Contract Puroha.er, eto.)
Owner's Representative/Agent
9. Street Address or Location of Subject Parce~:
4735 N,W, 7th Court, Lantana, FL 33462
10. Lega~ Description of Subject Parce~:
See attached Legal Description
11. Area of Subject Parce~ (to the nearest hundredth (1/100th)
of an acre) : 24.77 acres
12.
Current Zoning District:
PUD LUI-5, R-1AAB
13.
Proposed Zoning District:
PUD LUI-5
14.
Current Land Use Category:
LOR (Low Density Residential)
15. Proposed Land Use Category: HDR (High Density Residential)
16. Intended Use of Subject Parce~: Assisted Living
Facility, Adult Congregate Living Facility,
Medical Facility, Convalescent Nursing Facility
17.
Deve~oper or Bui~der:
N/A
18.
Architeot:
O'Keefe & Associates, Architects
19.
Landscape Architect:
Cotleur Hearing, Inc.
20. Si te P~anner: Cotleur Hearing, Inc,
21 . Ci vi~ Engineer: Michael B. Schorah & Associates
22.
Traffic Engineer:
Yvonne Ziel
23.
Surveyor:
Landmark Surveying, Inc.
PLANNING DEPARTMENT - APRIL 1991
A; \Landllse
NOTICE OF
NOTICE OF
ZONING CHANGE fD) & & U WI rn. 1'1)
LAND USE CHANGE W Nav:) I 199~
I
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH PUBLIC HEARINGS
I) '~;r;l~r'~-;~ ;:)5'-
. ..-.....lJ.!:Jl!:lliJ1tj1-._..._
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Development Board of the CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH,
FLORIDA, shall meet at 7:00 p, M" or as soon thereafter as the agenda permits, on Tuesday,
December 12, 1995, at City lIall Commission Chambers, 100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard,
Boynton Beach, to consider an application for LAND USE AMENDMENT/REZONING covering the parcel
of land described below, Also, a PUBLIC IIEARING will be held by the City Commission of the
City of Boynton Beach on the request below on Tuellday, Dece,ober 19, .1995, at 7:00 p, M, at
the Commission Chambers, or as soon thereafter as the agenda permits,
I
~"
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
t
II")"
fMoJ...ut; IUr
...~.
.
.
NEWPORT PLACE
REQUEST:
Cotleur Hearing, Inc,
Donaldson E. Hearing
Expansion of existing Stanford Park PUD to include an additional
1,59 acres and a l20-bed assisted living facility to the existing
Newport Place adult l'iving facility campus.
24,77 acres at the southwest corner of Hypoluxo Road and Northwest
7th Ct. (A,K,A. Stanford Park PUD)
The plat of Stanford Park as recorded in plat book 46, pages 67 and
68 of the public records of Palm Beach County, Florida
together with
Lots 7 and 8, plat of High Ridge subdivision all r.cor~.~ tn plat
book 22, pase 6, pUblic records of Pslm Besch County, Florida,
AMEND FUTURE LAND USE PLAN:
From - Low Density Residential
To - High Density Residential
REZONE:
From - PUD Planned Unit Development w/LUI 5
R-1-AAB (Single Family Residential)
To - PUD Planned Unit Development w/LUI 5
PETITIONER:
AGENT:
DESCRIPTION:
LOCATION:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
REQUI!!IT:
ALL INTERESTED PARTIES ARE NOTIFIED TO APPEAR AT SAID HEARINGS IN PERSON OR BY ATTORNEY AND
BE HEARD. ANY PERSON WHO DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION OF TilE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD OR
CITY C(J~IISSION InTII RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THESE MEETINGS WILL NEED TO ENSURE
THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND
EVIDENCE UPON WIIICH THE APPEAL IS BASED.
PLEASE CALL (407) 375-6260 FOR ANY QUESTIONS
mCI:IIEWP,AD .ftl.j...&~
HR:m 1t/3Jlfft- /;/;41f"
REGARDING TIlE ABOVE MATTERS,
SUZANNE M, KRUSE, CMC/AAE
CITY CLERK
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO, 95-694
TO: Tambri J. Heyden
Planning and Zoning Director
FROM: Michael E. Haag
Site and Zoning Development Administrator
DATE: December 8, 1995
SUBJECT: Newport Place PUD (f.k.a. Stanford Park PUD)
LUAR 95-006, 2nd Review Comments for Master Plan Approval
for the addition of a 120 bed ACLF and two new access
points and include 24.77 acres in connection with a
request for land use amendment from Low Density
Residential to High Density Residential and rezoning from
PUD (with LUI=5.00) and R1AAB to PUD (with LUI=5.00),
Please be advised of the following comments relative to the review
of the Master Plan for the above-referenced project:
MASTER PLAN COMMENTS:
1. The master plan shall be modified to show compliance with the
final determination regarding Palm Beach County Traffic
Division and City staff's evaluation of the applicants traffic
statement,
2, Add a note to the master plan indicating that the project is
subject to site plan review prior to permitting.
3. Specify on the rectified master plan maximum density allowed
for the Stanford Park PUD, Also show on the master plan the
conversion computations that verify the proposed total of 596
ACLF and Convalescent Center beds does not exceed the maximum
allowed density for the entire PUD. The following City
adopted conversion factor shall be used:
Total gross acreage within the PUD (times) maximum
allowed density per acre (times) 2.3 = maximum number of
beds
4. The zoning code limits the maximum number of driveways from a
single road to two (2). If this maximum is to be exceeded, as
indicated on the master plan, then relief from this
requirement must also be requested through the variance
process. A parking lot variance (File No. PKLV 95-006) to
increase the number of driveways from two (2) to four (4) is
being processed concurrently with this request. Amend the
master plan to show the results of the variance and reference
on the master plan the City Commission's action regarding the
variance.
5, Submission of a rectified master plan showing compliance with
the conditions of approval for the project will be required to
be submitted to the Planning and Zoning Department in
triplicate prior to site plan review of the project.
MEH:dim
xc: Central File
a: 2NDSPARK. Com
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 95-717
TO:
Carrie Parker
City Manager
Tambri J. HeYden~JL
Planning and Zoni{(~~Director
FROM:
DATE:
December 13, 1995
SUBJECT:
Copies of Development Plans of Current Projects
Scheduled for Review by the City Commission at the
December 19, 1995 City Commission Meeting
Please find attached five (5) sets of plans for the following
current development projects:
Master Plan Modification - Newport Place P,U.D,
LUAR 95-006
Site Plan Modification
- Waste Management
MSPM 95-007
New Site Plan
- Papa John's
NWSP 95-002
Note:
Please return the plans/documents to the Planning and
Zoning Department following the meeting.
If I can be of further assistance, please contact me.
TJH:bme
Attachments
cc: Central File
Subject File
a:transmtl.dec/P&D
~k
Memorandum
. ,:.:'_,..-...~,--.
.111\':-~;~'_'.'
f u) r-,0GLQJU~ ~I
/JUL JUN I 0 1995 / iv
PLANNING AND J
Clean ZONING DEPT.
500 Greynolds Circle
Lantana, FL 33462
Palm Beach County
Intergovernmental Coordination
Program
To:
From:
Date:
Subject:
Tambri Heyden, Planning and Zoning Director
Anna Yeskey, Clearinghouse
June 7, 1996
BOY-9
Please be advised that as of May 21, 1996 the Cleari:1ghouse has not received any formal
objections to BOY-9 from any participants in the lnterlocal Plan Amendment Review
Program,
cc: Terry Hess, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
"
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 96-165
Agenda Memorandum for
April 2, 1996, City Commission Meeting
TO: Carrie Parker
City Manager
FROM: Tambri J. Heyden ~
Planning and Zoning Director
DATE: March 28, 1996
SUBJECT: Newport Place (LUAR 95-006)
Request for Land Use Amendment/Rezoning
(A.K.A. Stanford Park Planned Unit Development)
Please place the above-referenced item on the April 2, 1996 City Commission agenda under
Legal - Ordinance, First Reading
DESCRIPTION: The above request was submitted by Cotleur Hearing, Inc., agent for
Newport Place Associates, owner/operator of the Newport Place Adult Congregate Living
Facility (ACLF) located at the southwest corner of Hypoluxo Road and N.W. 7th Court.
The request is to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map from Low Density
Residential to High Density Residential for both a 23-acre, existing planned unit
development (PUD) and an adjacent 1.59-al:re tract. The request also includes the
rezoning of the 1.59 acre tract from R-I-AAB (single-family residential) to Planned Unit
Development (PUD w/LUI=5) and modifications of the existing PUD master plan to allow
the addition of a 120-bed assisted living facility. This land use amendment was approved
by the City Commission on December 19, 199.5 for transmittal to the Florida Department
of Community Affairs (DCA). You will recall that concurrent with the request for a master
plan modification, the applicant also submitted a parking lot variance application for relief
from the Land Development Regulations, Chapter 23 - Parking Lots, Article II, Section
H.7 "Number of Driveways" to allow for two (2) additional driveways than permitted onto
N.W. 7th Court. This variance request was approved on December 19, 1995 conditioned
upon the southern most driveway being limited to egress only (see Planning and Zoning
Memorandum No. 95-687 for additional information on this variance request).
RECOMMENDATION: The DCA has no comments on this proposed amendment and
directed the City to continue its land use amendment process through the adoption of
ordinances. Therefore, Staff also recommends the adoption of these ordinances.
TJH:dim
Attachments
xc: Central File
a:lstreadg.New
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO, 95-687
TO: Chairman and Members
Planning and Development Board
FROM: Tambri J. Heyden '~~
planning and Zoning Director
DATE: December 8, 1995
SUBJECT: Newport Place - PKLV 95-006
Parking Lot Variance (Increase in Number of Driveways)
NATURE OF REQUEST
Chapter 23 - Parking Lots, Article I, Section 3.B,3,d, of the City
of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, requires that when
a variance to the parking lot regulations is requested, the
Technical Review Committee must forward to the City Commission, a
recommendation that is to be part of the public record, This
change in parking lot variance procedure for Commission action only
on parking lot variances become effective with the recent adoption
of the land development regulations,
Although this function is no longer formally a part of the Planning
and Development Board's duties, the Commission has indicated that
they would like the Board's comments and recommendation on a
parking lot variance that is submitted concurrently and in
connection with a related site plan or conditional use approval,
since parking lot design is a significant part of reviewing a site
plan. The information below has been prepared by staff to be made
part of the record for the public hearing proceedings before the
City Commission on December 19, 1995, and serves to apprise the
Board of the variance that has been submitted in connection with
the master plan for the Planned Unit Development for Newport place
that requires formal review by the Board (See Exhibit "A"
Application) .
BACKGROUND
Mr. Donaldson E. Hearing, agent for Newport place Associates, Ltd.,
is requesting a variance to the City of Boynton Beach Land
Development Regulations, Chapter 23 - Parking Lots, Article II,
Section H,7 for the number of driveways that shall be permitted
onto any public or private right-of-way. The variance is requested
to allow two additional driveways in connection with a new master
plan approval for the Newport Place Planned Unit Development (PUD)
f.k.a. Stanford Park PUD located at 4735 Northwest 7th Court;
approximately 1400 feet south of the southwest corner of Hypoluxo
Road and Northwest 7th Court, (see Exhibit "B" -location map and
Exhibit "C" - master plan) .
The existing Newport Place site contains a large 4 story building
that houses 356 ALF beds includin::r administrative offices, This
building fronts on Northwest. 7th Court, A detached ancillary
recreation building is located to the west of the main ALF
building. Direct access to the site is provided by two existing
driveways located on Northwest 7th Court, One of these driveways
provides egress from the main entrance located in the middle of the
main building. This area of the site also contains visitor
parking. The other access driveway provides ingress/egress to the
south end of the main building, This area of the site contains
parking for the residents and access for delivery vehicles and
sanitation vehicles to serve the recreation building: Another two-
way driveway on Northwest 7th Court is located on' the adjacent
property (medical office building) located directly north of the
Newport Place ALF, This driveway provides access to the medical
office building and cross access into the Newport Place site. The
access into Newport Place is two-way and connects with the
previously identified egress located on Northwest 7th Court. There
is direct access into the PUD from Hypoluxo Road. This
I
Page 2
Memorandum No. 95-687
Newport place - PKLV 95-006
ingress/egress serves the nursing home that fronts on Hypoluxo
Road. This driveway also leads to a cross access into the Newport
place site, This cross access allows traffic flow to the resident
parking located on the north and west sides of the Newport Place
ALF.
The two proposed driveways in question are to be located as
entrances into the south portion of Newport Place, The two new
driveways are in connection with the development of a four (4)
story 120 bed Assisted Living Facility (ALF) also located in the
south portion of the Newport Place site, Both of the proposed
driveways are located on Northwest 7th Court. The first of the two
access points would serve as the primary point of visitor access to
the new assisted living facility, utilizing a drop-off turnaround
area that is very similar to the one located within the existing
Newport place ALF. The applicant feels that this access point is a
crucial element to the design creating a sense of entry and
identity for prospective visitors and residents. The second access
point is proposed as a means of convenience for services (fire,
emergency, solid waste removal, food and maintenance) .
ANALYSIS
Chapter 23, Article II, Section H. 7. of the City of Boynton Beach,
Land Development Regulations, states the following:
"7, Number of driveways, No more than two (2) driveways shall
be permitted from any property. Where properties abut
more than one (1) public or private right-of-way,
additional driveways may be permitted depending on
traffic volumes, but in no instance shall the number of
driveways exceed two (2) on each street."
The applicant's proposal represents an increase in the number of
driveways serving the two (2) Newport place site to a total of four
(4) to accommodate the planned construction of an additional 120
beds with forty new parking spaces.
RECOMMENDATION
On Tuesday, October 24, 1995, the Technical Review Committee (TRC)
reviewed the plans and documents submitted and formulated a
recommendation with regard to the variance requested, After review
and discussion, the TRC recommended approval of the request for one
(1) additional driveway entering the southern end of the parcel to
allow the ingress and egress to function efficiently for public
services such as fire and rescue vehicles and sanitation vehicles.
The second proposed entry way located in the center of the proposed
new ALF building is not recommended because the traffic analysis
submitted by the applicant did not demonstrate traffic volumes that
would require an additional driveway. Therefore, the proposed
center driveway is not needed.
DCD:bme
xc: Central File
A: PKLOTVAR. NPP
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. 96-196
Agenda Memorandum for
April 16, 1996, City Commission Meeting
TO: Carrie Parker
City Manager
FROM: Tambri J. Heyden 1?J.,lJ
Planning and Zoning Director
DATE: April 11, 1996
SUBJECT: Newport Place (LUAR 95-006)
Request for Land Use Amendment/Rezoning
(A.K.A. Stanford Park Planned Unit Development)
Please place the above-referenced item on the April 16, 1996 City Commission agenda
under Legal - Ordinance, Second Reading
DESCRIPTION: At the April 2, 19996 Commission meeting, the attached ordinance was
approved on first reading. The above request was submitted by Cotleur Hearing, Inc.,
agent for Newport Place Associates, owner/operator of the Newport Place Adult Congregate
Living Facility (ACLF) located at the southwest corner of Hypoluxo Road and N.W. 7th
Court. The land use amendment was approved by the City Commission on December 19,
1995 for transmittal to the Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA). The DCA
has no comments on this proposed amendment and directed the City to continue its land
use amendment process through the adoption of ordinances. A variance request was
approved on December 19, 1995 conditioned upon the southern most driveway being limited
to egress only.
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the attached ordinance be approved on
second and final reading.
TJH:dim
Attachments
xc: Central File
a:~nd"'l&dll.Nllw
7.A.l
NEWPORT PLACE PUD
(f.k.a. STANFORD PARK PUD)
PUBLIC HEARING
Future Land Use Amendment/Rezoning
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM NO, 95-692
TO:
Chairman and Members
Planning and Development Board
Tambri J. HeYden,~
Planning and Zoning Director
Michael W. Rumpf ~
Senior Planner
THRU:
FROM:
DATE:
December 8, 1995
SUBJECT: NEWPORT PLACE (LUAR 95-006)
Request for Land Use Amendment/Rezoning
(A.K.A. Stanford Park Planned Unit Development)
JJJ--
INTRODUCTION
Cotleur Hearing, Inc., agent for Newport Place Associates,
owner/operator of the Newport Place Adult Congregate Living Facility
(ACLF), proposes to modify the existing Stanford Park PUD (Planned Unit
Development) located at the southwest corner of Hypoluxo Road and
Northwest 7th Court (see Exhibit "A" -Location Map), The proposed
changes include the land use reclassification of the existing PUD from
Low Density Residential ~ use classification to High Density, the
land use reclassification-trOm Low Density Residential to High Density
Residential of an adjoining tract proposed to be incorporated into the
PUD, and the ~Oning of this tract from R-1-AAB...I. (Siugle Family
Residential) an he existing PUD to PUD with LUI=5, ~~tcompanied by
a new master pla . showing the addition of a 120-bed assisted living
facility (ALF) and the addition of the adjoining tract currently used
for an alternative ingress/egress for the PUD. This southern entrance
was created in June, 1993 following the acquisition and annexation of
Lots #7 and #8 of the High Ridge Subdivision, and through the dedication
of a portion of these lots for a public right-of-way between NW 7th
Court and High Ridge Road. Since the lots would not be used for any
purpose but ingress/egress, and to avoid modification to the PUD, when
annexed, these lots were zoned comparable to the former county zoning,
rather than to PUD. The use of this property will remain limited to
accessway as indicated by the applicants and owner when these lots were
annexed and incorporated into the traffic circulation plan of the
Stanford Park PUD, who where also willing to place such limitations
within the form of deed restrictions. These two lots represent 1,5~
acres which would increase the size of the entire PUD from approximately
23 acres to 24.77 acres, It should be noted that the original master
plan indicates total acreage as being 21.29 acres, which is apparently
a discrepancy between the original and current surveys. This smaller
figure is indicated below under the description of the original master;
however, based on near similarity with that recorded in the current
property appraiser's map, staff concurs with this 23-acre figure and
therefore has used it within this report where existing density is
estimated. Despite the 120-bed proposed addition, the master plan's
intensity rating remains at 5 (LUI=5),
PROCEDURE
Pursuant to the Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Section 9-
Administration and Enforcement, when a rezoning request requires an
amendment to the Future Land Use Map, staff analyses shall include an
evaluation of the project using the eight (8) criteria under Section 9
(C) (7). For this analysis please see the section below titled ISSUES/
DISCUSSION. As the applications also involve a planned zoning district,
specific application requirements related to the proposed amendments to
the master plan will also be analyzed. For specific information on the
proposed revisions to the master plan, see the section below titled
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. Also as a reqUire~nt in,99un~st}gp,~with a land
use element amendment that involves pr9P , .~~'19 ~c~e~_~~A-
fA density in excess of 10 units/acre)~' e lU.Lnmal:eu~~t e ~,
Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA), The DCA will conduct two t:'~
reviews of this proposed amendment, first, following approval by the . ~
City Commission (prior to ordinance readings), and second, a compliance rev
review following approval of the ordinance by the City. ~ '~
/ ~. ,f1)..r/o
~~~
Newport place (LUAR 95-006)
-2-
December 8, 1995
ADJACENT LAND USES AND ZONING
The land uses and zoning in the surrounding area vary and are presented
in the table that follows:
Direction Entitv Zoninq Land Use
North City N!A Hypoluxo Rd,
Northeast City N!A NW 7th Court
Farther northeast County RS day care center
East City N!A NW 7th Court
Farther east County RS large lot single
family homes
South City R-l-AA undeveloped
West City REC High Ridge Country
Club
APPROVED AND PROPOf€~~w ~u~~ ~
The applicant is proposing a new master pla~'Ato add a 120-bed assisted
living facility to the Newport Place health care campus formerly known
as Stanford Park, The land use intensity will remain at 5 (LUI=5).
Information regarding site data for the existing Stanford Park PUD (see
also Exhibit "B" - Approved Master Plan) is as follows:
1) Acreage: 21.29 acres (23 acres)
2) Land Use
Classification: Low Density Residential w/4.84 units per acre
3) Zoning District: PUD w/LUI:5,0 "Stanford Park"
1~)#.pern,itt:~e;.~fUr. ~ 120-bed nursing home (Ridge Terrace)
2, A.~~R~~ed/220-unit ACLF (Newport Place)
3. ~m~f6al office building
5) Current Uses: (see Exhibit "C" - Survey)
Tract 1 - 120-bed convalescent center
Tract 2 - open space/buffers-lakes/ponds
Tract 3 - 6,300 square foot medical office building
including open space/buffers-lakes/ponds
Tract 4 - 356-bed ACLF
Tract 5 - right-of-way and buffer
Tract 6 - open space
Tract 7 - open space
With respect to the proposed development and request,
master plan (see Attachment "D" - Proposed Master Plan)
fOllOWi~ n^~p~~iL- hcoi, ~ qu. f'L{ P
1) A land-~se.~eR~~nt that woutd change the PUD's and the 1,59-acre
tract' sJf6;6n !lJY~7 ~d #8, High Ridge Subdivisio~,existing Low
Density Residential land use classification (4,84 units/acre
maximum) to High Density Residential (10,8 units/acre maximum), and
rezone this tract from R-1-AAB to the Stanford Park PUD w/LUI=5 as
well as rezone the existing PUD (zoning designation does not
change) to approve a new PUD master plan to incorporate this tract.
~) " ~d-lcfai2J..ruytx.. b d ' d 1" f 'l't (ALF) ,
2 A two- an our-story, 120" e ass~ste ~v~ng ac~ ~ y ~n
the south portion of the site, which will be landscaped similar to
the existing uses and contain associated parking. "gea~ note that
the building setbacks as established within th~~~pprdved master
plan (e.g. 40 foot front (east), 25 foot rear (west), 25 foot side
(south) and 15 foot side (north)), will remain unchanged;
the proposed
reflects the
.;2
Newport Place (LUAR 95-006)
-3-
December 8, 1995
Two (2), two-way driveways off of the west side of N.W, 7th Court
Cc-~tion of the site proposed for the new, ALF..;..-a:rid aAL. P, b.....
Addition of the 1.59-acre trac~ tp~~,~s limikeQ ~n existing 60
foot wide public right-of-way~~~~~ocated on the east
side of N.W. 7th Court, directly east of the Newport Place ACLF.
The public right-of-way connect~ N.W. 7th Court to High Ridge Road;
The proposed master plan depicts the existing and proposed site
configuration including the location of existing and proposed buildings
for the entire PUD plus the adjacent property proposed to be
reclassified and rezoned. That portion of the PUD where the proposed
ALF and two new driveways are to be located, is circled and delineated
with a symbol on the master plan, The following is an analysis of the
basic impacts generated by the new master plan:
3)
4)
~E:
f2 f:
UTILITIES:
Confirmation has been received that all utilities for the proposed
development are available and will be provided by the appropriate
agencies.
DRAINAGE: ,J ?Ic:~. ! c-r I~ ~ ~1 L":'- -tt: L--1e-&.- tf 'lL
The 1988 site plan for the existing Newport Place ACLF originally /'~
depicted parking in the area where the new ALF is proposed. This site ~
plan was later modified to omit the parking and relocate the spaces ~L
closer to the existing ACLF. A ctoFfAUat.cr fl\aI.l.a~t::LLLcuL 1-'lc:u.I. fOl: tl.Le-.
'exist';',,~ project was previously permitted by the South Florida Water
Management District (SFWMD). The impact of the proposed development
will be subject to review by the South Florida Water Management District
to determine whether the original SFWMD permit is to be modified.
Although drainage concurrency certification is required at time of
master plan approval, there is insufficient information to certify for
drainage concurrency at this time. The City's engineering department
agreed to allow drainage concurrency to be postponed to time of site
plan review for the proposed building, The 1.59-acre tract proposed to
be added to the master plan is as previously stated, an existing 60 foot
wide City right-of-way and no changes are proposed to this use,
f,f:,ACCESS AND INTERNAL TRAFFIC FLOW:
Two (2)~two-way driveways to be added will impact thealccess points and
internal traffic flow of the proj ect, Access to Newport Place is
currently provided by two existing driveways on N.W. 7th Court and two
existing cross access points that allow access to the Newport Place site
from the adjacent properties located in the PUD and north of the site.
Three of the four existing access points, one of which is on N.W. 7th
Court, provide access and traffic flow to the north portion of the
existing Newport Place ACLF, The fourth and southern-most access point,
which is located on N,W. 7th Court, facilitates access to and
circulation around the proposed ALF. The two (2) new driveways are
located on N.W, 7th Court, south of the existing southern-most driveway
and directly east of that portio~l, the site proposed for the new ALF.
Howev~r~~~~suant to city cod~ two (2) drive~ys are af~9w~q pep
parcel1K~w~applicant is requesting the necessary"variance~i~~,~ r
PKLV 95-006) to allow a total of four driveways to the site in order to W~(~
accommodate the two new driveways, The variance request is being ~
processed concurrently with this request. The location of the existing ~
access points and the proposed new driveways and internal traffic flow ~~
are shown in Exhibit "D" - Proposed Master Plan, ~
The 1.59-tract proposed for incorporation into the PUD will remain a 60
foot wide City right-of-way with open space located to the north and
south of the road right-of-way (to be maintained by the Newport Place
Associates), In part to accommodate access to the west-bound lane of
Hypoluxo Road via the lighted intersection at High Ridge Road, which is
not allowed at the project's entrance (at NW 7th Court), this additional
access point was created between High Ridge Road and NW 7th Court.
Lastly, traffic concurrency comments on these requests have not yet been
received by the City from Palm Beach County, ~ V~ 8tJ7rr..- ~~K.e. f,
~~,/
_3
Newport place (LUAR 95-006)
-4 -
December 8, 1995
(U~ RECREATION:
Although current city code does not require recreation for this use,
private recreational opportunities are provided on site.
TOPOGRAPHY, SOILS AND VEGETATION:
The applicant has indicated that the soil tests taken on the proposed
ALF site, determine that existing soils are suitable for construction of
the proposed facilities. The tests indicate that the soils were
generally in the SP or SP-SM soil groups (medium to fine sand) based on
the Unified soil Classification method. The water table was observed
to be approximately four (4) feet (average) below existing ground
elevation. As previously stated, the area to be developed for an ALF
was originally improved as a parking lot. The land is presently graded
and unimproved.
SCHOOLS:
No impact on schools is expected given the elderly age of existing and
future residents of this development, _ ' _ ~;?.~
ISSUES/DISCUSSION ~ tz/U--~.MJtAA./k1": ~~~jy
Pursuant to Section 9.C.7 of the Land De~'lop~n~ Regulations, staf~'~
shall evaluate land use amendment/rezoning applications with respect to ~
~he following criteria: ~
-Vir~lP> WHETHER THE PROPOSED REZONING WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH APPLICABLE ~
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES.
The Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan addresses land use plan amendments
and specifically, the conversion of land to higher densities. The
following Comprehensive Plan objectives, policies, and support document
., text, app~e subject requests and are analyzed below:
,~~ective 1. ;7 - "Minimize nuisances, hazards, and other adverse
impacts to the general public, to property values, and to
residential environments by preventing or minimizing land use
conflicts,"; and
Policv 1. 17.8
single-family
conversions to
- "Maintain and improve the character
and lower-density neighborhoods, by
higher densities,"
of existing
preventing
(The following limitations on commercial development have also been
referenced since nursing homes are construed to be commercial uses for
purposes of projecting demands for commercial land within the
Comprehensive Plan. That shown in "( )" have been inserted by staff to
provide an applicable, alternative interpretation)
Future Land Use Suooort Document. oaqe 40 - "Therefore the City
should not change (intensify) the land use to (on) commercial
categories, beyond that which is shown on the proposed Future Land
Use Plan, exceot for minor boundarY ad'iustments, small infill
parcels, or commercial uses of a highly specialized nature, which
have special locational or site requirements, and therefore cannot
be easily accommodated on already designated commercial areas." and
"Commercial development particularly should not be located where it
would adversely affect residentially-zoned property,.. ,"
Although compatibility of the proposed reclassification with adjacent
properties is addressed more completely below, Objective 1.17 and Policy
1,17.8 are best analyzed, in part, by contrasting them with the
justifications for, and descriptions of ACLFs for the elderly which are
also fouoow.iJ;hin the Future Land Use Support Document, page 33,
Although ~rrext emphasizes the requirements of state law to allow
small qrouo homes within all zoning districts, it also generalizes that
ACLFs/group homes for the elderly should be encouraged which is the
basis on which several areas throughout the City have been labeled as
ACLF density bonus sites (9.68 units per acre allowed despite the
underlying land use classification). In addition, it states that "This
density bonus would be limited to ACLFs for the elderly, which is
reasonable, since this type of group home comprises the vast majority of
"-f
Newport Place (LUAR 95-006)
-5-
December 8, 1995
group homes and Boynton Beach has a very large proportion of elderly
residents. " With respect to compatibility with residential
environments, the plan also indicates that "ACLFs for the elderly are
also one of the more innocuous types of group homes". Lastly, the plan
encourages the appropriate revisions to master plans through the
following text which is also found within the Future Land Use Support
Document ~e mand for Land for Nursin Homes Grou Homes and
Foster Hom . ne City should continue to allow PUD master plans to be
revised to meet market demand, if the impacts of the revised plan do not
substantially exceed those of the original plan, applicable design
guidelines are met, and the revised plan is compatible with the
surrounding properties. ". Please see Exhibit "E" for the aforementioned
text from the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Support Document,
With respect to that text referenced above which places limitations on
additional, or expansions to commercial classifications, this text is
also specifically addressed by the previous justifications for and
descriptions of group homes and ACLFs which specifically recognize state
law with respect to locations for such uses, and description within the
Comprehensive Plan which finds them generally compatible with
conventional residential uses.
'I ~ ~ER THE PROPOSED REZONING WOULD BE CONTRARY TO THE ESTABLISHED
Di.J 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 THE PROTECTION OF THE PUBLIC WELFARE.
The original approval for the PUD was based, in part, on the finding
that the proposed use is consistent/compatible with the adjacent
properties, Furthermore, as described in detail below, the current PUD
has an actual density more appropriate within the High Density
Residential Classification rather than the Low Density Residential
classification. ~n~C.I... Ll..l; ~tID Wd.1:j uL.i'=t~.L.La.lly 3.pp....,...vjQon, tl=1e plFejc.ct was ~
~approved at an actual density of approximately 9 dwelling units per
acre. Despite the actual numbers describing the density, the City
originally determined that the health care facilities were needed, and
that the PUD was compatible with adjacent properties. The proposed
expansion of a 120-bed ALF is consistent with the nature and type of
uses within the existing PUD, and represents a relatively minor
expansion of the PUD, under the proposed High Density Residential land
use classification, as based on impacts and performance of the proposed
use-,-, _,.~
~,~~u-
Lastly, the only adj acent uses warranting an in depth evaluation of
compatibility are the single family homes to the east, Although
portions of this area within the High Ridge Road corridor may ultimately
be developed/redeveloped at higher densities, the existing dwelling
units are on large lots and located approximately 200 feet from the PUD,
and approximately 350 feet from the ACLF and proposed ALF. Within the
area which separates the buildings in the PUD and the adjacent dwelling
units are NW 7th Court, and a combination of vegetation on private
property and that landscaping within the perimeter buffer of the PUD.
This distance and the buffering is necessary to mitigate the potential
affects of the four story building heights within the PUD, upon the
adjacent low-density residential properties. As further indicated below
under Item #5, with the exception of the height of the buildings within
the PUD, the typically most offensive characteristics of such uses,
parking areas and rear service areas will have minimal to no affect on
adjacent properties given their proximity (due to design of the master
plan) to other properties, the distance between the uses, and the
buffering provided by vegetation,
J~~~
if"
3) WHETHER CHANGED OR CHANGING CONDITIONS MAKE THE PROPOSED REZONING
DESIRABLE.
Based on the assumption that Newport Place Associates has realized a
need for the proposed additio~~9d~P_.~h~_~bove-referenced information
from the Comprehensive Planl'(Wut(ji"'e"'~se Support Document which
states the need for group homes/ACLFs for the elderly, staff recognizes
the possibility that changes have occurred warranting the addition of
the proposed ALF.
5
Newport place (LUAR 95-006)
-6-
December 8, 1995
4) WHETHER THE PROPOSED REZONING WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH UTILITY
SYSTEMS, ROADWAYS, AND OTHER PUBLIC FACILITIES.
To date, staff has not received all the reviews of other agencies on
impacts on facilities; however, given the minor addition to the PUD, and
the performance of nursing homes which typically include few impacts
relative to other residential or commercial uses of equivalent size, the
proposed rezoning and amend~en~~J~~jected to have little impacts on
facilities including roads)''''-utl1iEfeS, and drainage resources, Once
received, such verification will be incorporated into this review
process, which are also necessary elements of the report to be used to
initiate a review by the DCA.
5) 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. / WHETHER THE
PROPOSED REZONING IS OF A SCALE WHICH IS REASONABLY RELATED TO THE
NEEDS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE CITY AS A WHOLE,
What should be recognized in evaluating impact and scale of the proposed
amendment is the actual change that would take place with respect to
d~.:ll-ty. Upon" ,J:.Et~~~ing this am~I]_dment, staff determined that the
Ii ~tagITial PUD pf"'~c5saT was no~'Uat.ed based on density, but rather
vU/ based on impacts or performance compared to a conventional residential
development of equivalent size (units). Criteria used in the comparison
included population, lot coverage, impact on schools, water and sewer
demands, traffic generation, recreation, and demand on police and fire
services. Except for traffic generation, the applicant estimated that
the criteria measured less impact from the proposed PUD than from a
typical and comparable single-family development, As for traffic
generation, more traffic was projected from the PUD, which the applicant
proposed to offset through intersection and road improvements. The city
accepted the analysis; however, not the method to address excess
traffic. As a condition of approval, the City required that the
proposed office use within the PUD be reduced from 10,000 square feet to
6,000 square feet, in order to reduce the projected traffic volume to a
level comparable with that estimated for a comparable conventional
residential project. Although by impacts, the uses within the PUD were
found to be S::OljlEa~le it,2 $ Low Density Residential land use
clas~.i~lc~~n~e ~ n~t meet the maximum density limitation of
t~ass~f~cation ~ ~~jJV>.~r1../1L~'
In estimating existing density of the PUD, the total beds within the
ACLF, 356, are combined with the beds within the nursing home, 120, and
divided by 2.3 (the City's current conversion factor for beds per unit),
and then divided by the size of the PUD, approximately 23 acres, This
methodology produces an existing density of 9 units per acre. The
density of the proposed PUD is estimated by also including the size of
the proposed ALF, 120 beds, and accounting for the additional 1,59 acres
being added to the PUD. The total beds now equal 596, which represents
a total unit count of 259, and a density of 10.5 units per acre. If the
PUD is increased to 24,77 acres and reclassified to High Density
Residential (10,8 units/acre maximum), the property could contain a
maximum of 615 beds. Since there already exists 476 beds, the site is
currently near maximum density, and there would remain capacity fOEl'R~~
an additional 139 beds (the proposed project contains 120 bedsl~~
sum, the most significant approval of this site has already occurred,
which is the original approval of a PUD within the Low Density
Residential land use classification, at a density nearly the maximum
allowed under the Medium Density Residential land use classification (at
the public hearing when this original approval was reviewed, the only
public comment communicated pertained to fire/EMS response times) ,
Staff has not considered to repeat the original analysis based on
performance, as no documentation remains from this analysis that staff
would need to implement a consistent methodology.
With respect to affect on property values, the PUD is not expected to
negatively affect the values of any adjacent properties and this opinion
is based on the following three statements: 1) the relatively minor
magnitude of the proposed expansion; 2) the general compatible nature of
health care facilities and residential uses; 3) the likelihood that the
PUD will always be well maintained (for reasons related to constant
/
~-
Newport Place (LUAR 95-006)
-7-
December 8, 1995
marketing of facilities); 4) and since there will likely always remain
appropriate distance and vegetative buffers between the PUD and the low
density areas to the east. Furthermore, the typically most undesirable
elements of such uses, parking and rear service areas, should have
little impact on nearby residential properties, As for the parking
lots, they are dispersed throughout the PUD and predominantly located
farther from the adjacent residential areas than the fronts of the
structures, thereby reducing total potential impacts from noise and
light. With respect to the rear service areas of the uses, the ACLF and
proposed ALF are oriented to the east and northeast, which leaves the
rears of the buildings oriented away from the residential properties.
The most undesirable aspects of such uses would therefore have no impact
on adjacent residential properties. With respect to needs, please see
the analysis above under CONSISTENCY WITH APPLICABLE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
POLICIES.
6) WHETHER THE PROPERTY IS PHYSICALLY AND ECONOMICALLY DEVELOPABLE
UNDER THE EXISTING ZONING.
The site within the PUD intended for the proposed ALF was originally
used for parking, therefore the site has been determined to be suitable
for development. There are no known unique physical characteristics
which would limit further development or intensification of this site
within the PUD.
7) WHETHER THERE ARE ADEQUATE SITES ELSEWHERE IN THE CITY FOR THE
PROPOSED USE, IN DISTRICTS WHERE SUCH USE IS ALREADY ALLOWED.
In general, nursing homes of this size are limited to the R-3 (Multi-
family Residential), PUD, C-3 (Community Commercial), and PCD zoning
district, which districts may be available throughout the City,
However, the location has been selected based on the complimentary
nature of the proposed ALF and the existing ACLF within the overall
Newport Place health care campus.
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the analysis and discussions contained herein, this request is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development
Regulations, subject to staff comments as summarized within Exhibit "F"
- Administrative Conditions, and compatible with current and future uses
of surrounding properties and would not create an :h~olai:ed ,Q-istl(ict
unrelated to adjacent or nearby properties, Therefore~~f"'r"t€C<Jm~nds
approval of these requests for land use amendment and rezoning of
Newport Place/Stanford Park PUD, and again subject to staff comments
indicated within Exhibit "F",
Attachments
xc: Central File
MISCX: NEWP. REP
7
Exhibit "A"
LOCATION MAP
/'
L"l
: '
HI\llillk., ...J L_,--
~. vr~rf[Jll- ~': .,'
~\ p'"
, ~"
r= -~
", ~ -, ,....... III I - ~.
1 -\ It 'iF.
. Il~~,
~/ ~: I(,~~~~,
~ mr'-'l";'
~.. \.'
~;'
~OIm,,1~
, """hi
__1 1\:
T ' -,
i r '{ Ut~ ~
fR 3' \ ~- :\ ~:("
f I~~L
ll~"~ \ 11 '.1 ,
,- - \ " ,.
II ' i ; ; 1\ \ ~ I \
I ,f-l""/'l \ ' \
\: ; i II I , ,It J ,t ,s' ~
'~E ~ rllho.\iill.' ,,1\':',\
EI, [iJ IJ! ~ " i\, ,\.' "
~"~ _ ' 2 \ \\;\:\1',\ ,-~
\ /'J ;..~ NO": \: '-,::Tr '~\i
, '. "-, e,';'" I ~ M" &9./ II
"'\ \ t( ':~r\Il-)- ~~/'itt~,~I~~-)jl,:'~ll\\\\\ I~
\ \ . '. _ , i:/ / / -11-. '! ~ ff q iI,
r ",,' i:: r:: ' , I 1
/0""'" . .. .' .
I'" ))~'(, ',~\ Ii, \\\1 i rr-::r-
1-10- /1' R"AAi J. }:': , . ,'.:t: .tJ'
~ J' Jit- __/1 J-) -' ,~!lllJll.-1l-, " \ ,I-' st
, . ." . _ 1I\1J "" ~~ - '
, "',,-'r-_. >--... ,,,,.,.-- y---;- ~ 111 ,\-h.... '::''': ~~I
" ." . 1-/ ,,~. p "I. . I-'~ ~ ~
// \.----' ~/~t; /'. ':~ I c ,I' - ~.'~ '.- ,c:.-,
, ,\' .,., " ' .~_.. 0 e -
.~~ " ' / J ~lIf ...;. ,'.' .'
"0'" 1/B' ~;L~/ J- J _ :~--i (-II#III~~ ~.'- ell
\\ \\ \ \ \ \ \ . - f--- - I ....:'\~~
lo 400.800 fEET ''-- 1./' Ra:iC ~\r
.~~" " __~< '''':'_ ....--L,. cj I 'I " T \'
. \1)CAT\ON MtP
STANFORD PARK
IL
,! _ _ ::::' :~':::'.. :, t=1
I .:::..:....::::
.:.:it::~ '
/' II ~~.,., ,,'
=~ . .~. ~l
~ -" / S'T~-':l~~'
_~.1 (. " f1 :~::::::
, I \: i:i:'::':':
-; J(,!~~t"U
, \: l---.
\ " ~ '
I, ~.... ~
.' " :;
,: h:
y, ' "'"
~}\
r;';'~
'~
\.U
['\'
-
--
-
~f
U. :
)~ "
. If.
I
-->------
, .,--
---
,
, ,
", REC
, ,
(~
"
"
,\\
~\
"
, '
, '
_---1
-
-----{
--I
,I,,,,'<"~
(",~
'~~\ . ~
\>,I'W' ~ /
'.,.'\
':J
R*1AA
'.
'1
\
R1AA \
1./" 7N/f'..1/ ~
fl. Ii'
p. n--
r'.~' .}--
), l!: -.. ;:;;J .I~ .'....
AR R'~.Pll=
\ ,STATI$~
I
fC
.-"" -
----~
-".-
..'"
EXHIBIT "B"
APPROVED MASTER PLAN
)0
"'l
! .!B
"." ~. r-- - .:..'~:, '~~
.. -......
,-
_.lor'"
.:.J;~;':(:' .
';~, ..;:ii;'" ..
....'" .~,~:!~ "F
'.
/
/
,
.,
"
"
~
:.
~~i:~J.l 1\\
\:~I"!l.'(~'''J'I~ I
<\=:'Jt'::rth: I ~
"'..-.;..;.....-~-:-..., "
J'~!;~i~'tl
........... c 11111J, ~I..~ Ii
~ :!i!~5i ~,
~. ~
--.l.
7"=>
'", ""-
,~
-
'--
,,>
--2-...-..) ,
)
SITE DATA
LArlD US(tlATA
....
3,0 AC.
1.n -.c.
1.21 At.
A. tCIlVAlHUNT C(hTU
6. AWL! tCNGUliIoH LIVlllC fACILITY ..el,1
C. 1ll0ltALloH1U
~O.D RIM DUltUIOIIS-
~.llLU.ORQ.D
TRACtll'''O''.'
.95 AC.
1.U llC.
Llll'''llNU
OPEN 5'.'lllUHUI
IOTALSITEAAE:A
2,_~ At.....
.JJl...&...
ll,n At.
TQtAlIUlaIN(ttDTUAOI
leal ..U IN SnUUII,M:OvtItl.D'AIlIIH
IOULO'.UUAtl
10TA~1
IlUlPE"T1A1. DAIA
A. to......lUtlIlTUIfJ..
,,0.1>>'111'
110,01'1101'"
'M......lMlJ.u
'NlI'tIllllll
1,61 .c,
1,n AC.
~
21." c.
CURRENT MASTER PLAN
J
,
1
::
_..J :- '-.---- - R.e..a' '..L-
.. _ __.--;::=:;-/..u.--:'4'_
~_..- -;.... .: 5-t- \! \
. 3. :
\~ \
::
I
-j
.
.
;;
.
s
i
.
"
,_lint"...
1I~1..1.Il.H......oI
'""
,
,
,
\
DIBLill
11,11
15.1 S
5,11:
.,S
H,t
11,7 S
...Jll..L
100,0 I
!Z,SSI
11,$ I
.ll!Jl...L
JDtI., .
,
1 to..
''l,"
Q i'tr C...... c,.. \
" ..... .
()
'"
Z_,
110'''4:''
"p-
1. ....., c......." UVUII UClllTY
lID, Of U...I....UIln. %20
110. OfnOlll1l flWl,
"all......,IDIlI 1l0.,uu
t, ICDltAVCll"ltIJ'IIAflMU
.l1l.1.A"..,I..MII....
JoO,DfIYO'Il'
'U_IIltUIlUI.U
'''OVINO
.'0Dj~:
SCarAtu
SOaPAC"
lOl'l'NGlOllI.I
'M....N..CIICDUfJ) .n
'OY.TOlIn.t.-".......
TOTAL
11.2' ..
.JUIL.K.
n,2tA(,
'.0'0IU10111.'
'O'.'OIIII&CII'.
'.O"OIlDlUlun..
5,00
~
NOff.:
Q~
.
" "
Q .
~ ,~
'.1."",,,,,,_,
~
i,
.'
"
I
)
I
.III1A.oCIl..
./
~n ~~no
5'on~"rc
S dfO ~:~ph;CS
..... ueO'..M.wfIllill_.I. " ...
~... ..... ..,.~
.
;. 'i't
~~:~
.......!'!
:
(
~ltC3lrml1(Q)Jf~ I~IfIk
EXHIBIT "e"
SURVEY
i 7
" /'-
DMHO... I~'I ','~
- ;
. t- m..
. ., !
" - ~
i'u
>
a:
>-::1
..JU)
z>-
00:
:r:<t
U~
/jj:J
mg
<t
t-
O
Z
']
I, 8'1:."
I~ _ t
I{ II:
" I,;
... -!
Ii:,
j, -r
, .-
,
!:'
"....01...........,......- --... t, .
........~"";~,._,,~"-....: ('
':O~~~:e-:;~~.=.:..=1 :!.. '. t. ,," .
. ,,1- " &,1"-1111' ;i. f
" . I. .
i /'.,,: r...~.-l-\:-)\.l
! .... i . ., ) .,'
~ ,.I.: >- .' I: i \ I,:'.,
i; , \
.. . , ,I
~~~-~~l::..~~:.:-'-~~}_.._...~....-I I.
._ t' . .._.,..,,,-
.,' I I' I
, I .
; f I I
_.1 I ~ ii,
"{~~:'''' . i i :
. I Ji - ".. ~
:, : .. '
'.. lid'! __,Ii __' tj
i, y . I ~I f .I~ ~
'~i . ,. 'I!
\;, ':'.""""1,! ~.O'
'. -:.-~.==O=j ,I c
----- I" !
-..,. , I
: ; I : t
Iii'
k./' i
, ,
./t.j! :
. . /. ,', '
. _.._.._.~I,-..
I .'....
~ .1/'/;;:
i! ", .f i!
.. '~' ,,; ..::.. .
... -.. ~'I "
_,.c...
..:000000'.
OVal!
!l
d
~i
Z'
61
u'
",I
",.
g!
a:
:t
!2
%
C.
tF
.
,
III ,
I m I
I a I!; II
I jllllI
II'hl !I
I III~I h
I ~ ~ . d Ii
~I'ml I I
!J:!; ~ !i
III!in .11
1,11111
Ilh
111'1 ~
m,lI. I
O"mOdAM
" ........""........-... ......
-,"-!lL.~ I c.;u. '._~~I'
. '.
,
I'
tS .r;
I.' !1
:J1 ill
1/"
loll !
<.:l,
0,
0;
~
;
i,
.
tS
in
:2:
O'
Ill'
="
III,
"'I
g,
0;'
%
'"
:E
OJUYld JON
I
/5
i 11;-
lit .
, ..1
l'ti
,~ . . "'II ~ I.! ~
" 'J' .
~ 11 ., 'I
'. J I.
,; . .'.
-.--.' I: I . , II!
, I Ii > if
J. ~: Ii!
I .. E!
. ~
Iii
IJJI i
~i i ~
~ : : ~
:! i i
L ~ r
~ ~ l:
~ ~: I'
.. II I.
..., I'
~ " : i
~ H i [
a I~ ; i
!:! (~ '4
" ~: I
. ~ j .; ~
;'.. t:,.
'1' " i
t~ i !I ,
EXHIBIT "D"
PROPOSED MASTER PLAN
1"'/
.---
~1<:r.
'H il;' .
~ 1 . I
... ;- i t
, 1. _
! !11i'1~!rr
! 01,\ t\\!AV'!\lP1;
~ lr}l\~!!i!\~:~l hl~ \
i i"i'l.u~ H~ ,
.i!~t~~.;Z: ; u _
t; '" "'.1 ~
:lI -< Ii ;..c._
';:;.; ;:
,~lI'.~\:! ,.._
=",-
0"",
:.~
-'
--
-----~_.--
~.~~~
;.~~
-,
\~
.
,
~ -:
i
\
.
.
",
1 " .., .
j .... 'oJ
\: ,1':
, .. ~. .
~ ,..:..:~ ~<l
t' ..'"
~::... .
.. {,1;
~ ;> .,. 0"
1 '....
! ~ r. ~!l
.,01111
- ~ .. J. ..
li~HH
-" .~.
' ~ .
: ....
~~
i
1 ',,;!
. .. ~ ., .
4< - , ~ .
., ~
~ ' l' .
n !t'..<
t~,l,: '.
:'l..!, .
'1Il i .
1
; -;j~H
~ , "P\'H1
, \\ 'h i\!i 't l 1 .., \ :
! , l : \ \i \\\'I\:\\;\h j, , ,
1 t \"1 t' ~ hIt. \ \ 1; _
{\ .,;\\1\ ;\\~~~W\\\1 ~
. , \\ \ t \' ,\\.\",1,,1, .
:. \',. -' i',! 1\1- i \ , I .
. \ ',t' \ \" \1. ' "".
i I t. l \1\:"ll~.'.\ ,:L\'
\ \\\\L. h , l~! ;"\1,,,,\.\ .. .:,
t II \.,.\ \ ,\ 'H-i\i\\.t !'
! \1 t\ \l \\ ) Hl ~- :
c i jl .,.. ~. . .
s '.' ,
'J '
~
.\
""
~l
, ..
.-
, ,
j ~,
~ i
",
.
\
I
ASTER
oPOSED M / 5'
pR / .
PLAN
EXHIBIT "E"
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
SUPPORT DOCUMENT TEXT
/G
*EXCERPT FROM FUTURE LAND USE~' ~ORT DOCUMENT (PAGES 32 AND 33)
The unincorporated area lying between Lawrence Road and the E-3 c!nal
contains 7 mobile homes parks which provide a total of 2,581 mobile home
spaces, currently, there is only one mobile home park in this area (La
palo~a), which has 229 available spaces for lease. There are a total of
1,029 spaces out the total 2,581 spaces which are under fee simple or
cooperative ownership by the residents. No applications for new mob1le
home parks have been submitted to or approved by Palm Beach county since
1980, which indicates that land values have increased to a level where
permanent housinq allows for a hiqher rate of return. Due to risinq lan~
values, no new mobile home parks are expected to be developed ift within
the CitY.S-~~lli!y-se.viee-a.ea, and it is likely that those parks where
the spaces are leased will be redeveloped for permanent housing.
Therefore, no additional mobile home dwellings have been projected for the
city or its utility service area, other than completion and leasing of
previously approved mobile home parks. Since it is possible, however, for
the city to annex eXisting mobile home parks, the City should permit
mobile home parks-ift-!fte-area-wes~-ef-eeft,ress-Aveft~e , if approved as a
Planned Unit Development or mobile home subdivision. Since the city does
not have specifiC regulations governing mobile home parks, the city should
adopt the regulations used by Palm Beach county, until such time as it
becomes apparent that the city needs to draft mobile home park
regUlations. He~i%e-fteMe-~arks-wftieft-are-e~rreftely-ift-efte-etey--~e-the
wese-ef-es-%-er-tftae-are-aftfteKed-ift-!fte-f~e~re-.fte~ld-~e-a!lewed-ee
eeftt~ft~e-a!-their-e~rreft!-ft~M~er-ef-a~~reved-me~ile-heme-s~aees7-~ftei%
s~eh-e~Me-eha!-ehe-~ark-is-redevele~ed-fer-etfter-~ses~ AlthoUGh mobile
home parks would be allowed in anv residential land use cateGorv. subiect
to PUD or subdivision approval. the future demand for mobile home site~ 111
the City (includinG replacement of redeveloped mobile home park sitesl is
expected to be zero. Due to risinG land values. future mobile home siteE
will probablv be located west of Lawrence Road. The Citv will serve
mobile homes in this area (between Lawrence Road and the E-3 canall w1th
utilities, However. it is uncertain as to whether the Citv would be abie
to annex these areas.
~ftose-Mobi%e-ftoMe-~arks-wftieft-%ie-aleft,-e~S~-l-she~!d-~e-a!!owed-ee
eoft!ift~e-as-ftofteeftfermift~-~Ses7-witft-tfte-eKistift~-ft~Mber-ef-s~aees
,raftdfa!hered-~ft!i%-s~eh-eiMe-!fta~-the-me~ile-fteMe-~arks-are-redevelo~ed
for-o!fter-~ses~--B~e-te-the-~roblems-ef-ft~rrieafte-ftaEard-aftd-la"d-~se
ifteom~ati~lity-!ha!-these-Mobile-hoMe-~arks-eas!~ef-eS-1-pose7-tfteir
redeVe%O~Meftt-fer-e!her-~ses-sfte~%d-~e-eftee~ra~ed7-ift-aeeordaftee-with-the
eoaSea%-Hafta~eMefte-B%eMefte~--HOre-s~eeifieallY7-!fte-Me~i%e-fteMeS-parks
whieh-lie-~e!weeft-e~S~-l-aftd-bake-Wertftt!fteraeeas!a%-Waeerway-sho~ld-~e
re~~ired-!e-be-diseefttift~ed-withtft-5-years-ef-efte-adopeioft-ef-this-plaft7
siftee-ehese-Mo~ile-fte.es-v~lftera~~e-te-da.a~e-fre.-seer.-s~r~e~
~/) ~Qnd for Land for NursinG Homes. Group Homes. and Foster Homes:
Nursing and conval~scent homes are a permitted use in commercial zoning
districts and are allowed in Planned Unit Developments and Planned
Commercial Developments. Since nursing homes are considered to be a
commercial land use, the supply and demand of land for nursing homes ha~
been incorpo~ated 1nto the projections for commercial land use.
32
/7
i
Group homes are currently allowed as a permitted use in C-3 zoning
districts and as a ,conditional use in the R-3 zoning district, The
Housing Element Support Documents oriainallv contain~ a detailed analysis
of the need for .maller group and foster homes, and reoommend.~ that
these homes be allowed in all residential zoning districts, subject to
limitations on the size and type of group home, and provided that these
homes are separated by at least 1,800 feet. Sinc~ the oriainal draft of
the Housina Element was prepared. the Florida Leaislature passed a bill
which reauires the Citv the allow aroup homes in all residential zonina
districts. Therefore, the City's poliCies with respect to aroup homes
should be to allow such aroup homes. in accordance with Florida law.
Since group and foster homes could be located in any type of dwelling, if
these policies are implemented, these types of homes have not been
analyzed with respect to residential density or dwelling unit type. There
are a number of parcels in the Low and Moderate Density Land use category
which, due to there location, may be more suitable for group homes than
for Single-family housing. Most of these parcels are vacant or partly
vacant. Therefore, the Future Land Use Hap shows a number of parcels,
wh.re it ia reeommended that a density bonus equivalent to a maximum of
9.68 dwellings per.acre be permitted for adult congregate living
facilities (ACLFs) for the elderly, if approved as a conditional use.
~This density bonus would be limited to ACLFs for the elderly, which is
reasonable, since this type of group home comprises the vast majority of
group homes and Boynton Beach has very large proportion of elderly
~residents.~CLFS for the elderly are also one of the more innocuous types
of group homes.
From the analysis above, it appears that the City's land use and zoning
regulations provide for a range of densities which are sufficient for all
dwelling unit types, with sufficient flexiblity to accommodate shifts in
the market. It is anticipated, however, that the probable mixture for the
remaining dwellings to be built in the City is 30% single family detached,
30% rental apartments, 35% townhouse, condominium, and duplex dwellings,
and 5% mobile home and ACLF units. The City's Planned Unit Development
regulations are largely responSible for the flexibility in meeting market
demands, Under the PUD regulations, the City Commission can ~rmit
~changes in the dwelling unit type without requiring rezoning.~he City
should continue to allow PUD master plans to be revised meet market
demands, if the impacts of the revised plan do not substantially exceed
those of the original plan, applicable d~sign gUidelnes are met, and the
revised plan is compatible with the surrounding properties.
Commercial Land
Demand for Commercial Land:
The demand for cOmmercial land has been analyzed for the Boynton Beach
Market Area, which is defined as the area bounded by Hypoluxo Road, the
Atlantic Ocean, Gulfstream Blvd., Lake Ida-L-30 Canal, and Barwick
Road-Lawrence Road (see figure 3 in Appendix B). This constitutes a more
reasonable market area, for the purpose of analyzing the need for
co~m~rcial land, than the eXisting boundary of Boynton Beach. Existing
and planned commercial development which is under the jurisdiction of
other local governments in this market area has been included 1n the
analysis of the supply of commercial land. Demand for commercial land lS
found by calculating the demand for different types of commercial land
uses, and then adding the resulting figures. For most types of cornrnerc1al
land uses, the demand for land was calculated by mult1plying the existing
33
/1
!
,
i
*EXCERPT FROM FUTURE LAND USE SUPPORT DOCUMENT (PAGES 38, 39, ~O)
TOTAL DEMAND FOR COMMERCIAL LAND,
AT BUILD-OUT, IN BOYNTON BEACH MARKET AREA:
831. 25 acres
EXCESS SUPPLY OF COMMERCIAL LAND,
OVER PROJECTED DEMAND FOR COMMERCIAL LAND:
i66.,.8i1-acres
198.47 acres
EXCESS SUPPLY OF COMMERCIAL LAND AS
PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL DEMAND FOR
COMMERCIAL LAND:
i!hi\
23.9%
/ '0/ DisclIllllion of Sut>t>lv and Damand for Commerciel Land.
A eomparison of the supply versus demand of commercial land shows that
there may be up to i6i1 ~ acres of excess commercial land at build-out,
There are three additional adjustments to this acreage, however, which may
reduce this excess acreage:
Quantum Corporate Park Commercial Acreage
Quantum Corporate Park will contain about 30 acres of property at the
center of the park which will be devoted to retail stores, and business
services, and personal serviees. According to the Application for
Development Approval which was submitted for Quantum Park, these uses will
mostly serve the tenants of the business park, with only limited use by
perllonll outllide of the park. This demand would not be accounted for by
applying multipliers to the current population. Since this eommercial
acreage would be located on a 4-lane collector road which is less than a
mile from an interchange, it is very possible, however, that up to 50% of
the customers for these commercial uses would be persons from outside of
the park. If it assumed that 50% of the retail commercial acreage in
Quantum Corporate Park would be generated within the park, then 15 acres,
could be subtracted from the supply of commercial land. Commercial
property Surrounding Boynton Beach Mall
It is estimated that, at build-out, that 74% of the population of the
Boynton Beach Mall market area will lie outside of the Boynton Beach
Retail Market Area. It is reasonable to assume that a smaller but
significant percentage of the demand for retail floor space will be
generated outside of the Boynton Beach Market Area. There are about 85
acres of existing and potential acres of retail commercial lying adjacent
to the regional mall, and to the immediate north and south. Assuming that
approximately 25% of the customers for the stores would come from outside
the local market area, then 21 acres could be subtracted from the supply
of commercial acreage.
Future Increase in Real Household Income
The demand for land for retail uses is approximately proportionate to the
amount of disposable income in the market area. Real per capita
disposable income in Palm Beach County will have risen almost 60% in the
19805, while per capita retail sales will have risen almost 40% (adjust:,
38
Ii
\/
for inflation), The increases in per capita retail sales have been taken
into account in making the projections for retail commercial acreage.
The University of Florida Bureau of Economic and Business Research has
made the following estimates and projections for populations growth and
changes in real personal income for Palm Beach county:
POPULATION AND INCOME PROJECTIONS FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY
1985 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
Population 760,900 799,700 840,300 873,800 903,200
932,400
Real Personal 13,209.3 14,025.2 14,912.6 15,912.8 16,603.3
17,651.1 Income
(millions,
in 1982 dollars)
Real Per
18,931 capita
(dollar.)
17 ,360
Income
17,538
17,747
18,211
18,383
Change in
2,98%
Per capita
Income over
Previous Year
1.03%
1. 19%
2.61\
0.94%
Source: The Florida Outlook: Fourth Quarter, 1988 (BEBR).
The total Change in real per capita income over this five-year period is
$1,571 or 9.05%. It is assumed that, since the annual rate of growth is
neither increasing or decreasing, that the overall growth of real per
capita income will remain the same from 1990 through the Year 2000 as it
was in the 1986-1991 period. Therefore, overall real per capita income is
projected to increase by approximately 18.1% in the 1990s. Since
projecXing income past the Year 2000 is less certain, an increase of 9% i~
assumed for Year 2000-2010 period. Thus the overall increase in real per
capita income from 1990 through 2010 would be 1.181 x 1.09, or 1.296 (a
29.S% increase).
Since retail sales are approximately proportionate to income, it can be
anticipated that, if retail sales per square foot are held constant, the
amount of acreage needed for retail uses would also increase by
approximately 30%. Therefore, the amount of land for $etail uses would
increase by 132 acres by the Year 2010, due to increases in real per
capita income.
When added together, the three adjustments which are discussed above would
have the effect of reducing the supply of commercial land by 36 acres and
increasing the demand by 132 acres. As a result, the !6i ~ acres of
39
'0
, -:x'
i
i
surplus commercial land which has been projected would be reduced to a
surplus of only % ~ acres by the Year 2010.
From the analysis above, it appears that the supply of commercial land il
the Boynton Beach Market Area will match the demand for this type of land
use. The supply for commercial land compared to the demand ranges from a
surplus ranging from \ 1Q acres to %6~ ~ acres. In terms of percentage
of the total demand for commercial land, at build-out, these acreages
represent to a surplus of e\ ~ to ie\ 23.9%. Although the ie\ 23.9%
figure would be considered excessive, it is likely that future increases
in real per capita income will eliminate virtually all of this surplus.
The Future Land Use Plan which is proposed for the city and areas to be
annexed by the City will accomodat~ll of anticipated demand for
~commercial land through build-out.~herefore, the City should not change
the land use to commercial categories, beyond that which is shown on the
proposed Future Land U.. Plan, except for minor boundary adjustments,
.mall infill parcels, or commercial uses of a highly specialized nature,
which have special locational or site requirements, and therefore cannot
be easily accomodated on already designated commercial areas. conversely,
the City should refrain from changing substantial areas of property from
commercial to non-commercial land use categories, beyond those changes
which are recommended elsewhere in the proposed Comprehensive Plan, unless
there are significant problems with land use compatibility or if roads
cannot be built to accomodate the commercial development.
Location of Commercial Land:
The existing pattern of commercial development was discussed under sectio..
II of this element. To summarize that section, and also, section I of the
Coastal Management Element, the demand for commercial land is still
somewhat excessive along U.S. Highway 1, as evidenced by the amount of
vacant commercial property, the low quality of many of the current uses,
and the low rental rates. Therefore, the Coastal Management Element
includes a number of land use recommendations which would reduce the
amount of commercially-zoned land. The City's general policy with regard
to commercial development east of Interstate 9S should be to concentrate
office, retail, and hotel deve~ment in the central business district and
ctt-long Boynton Beach Boulevard.~ommercial development particularly should
n2t be located where it would adversely affect reSidentially-zoned
property, or where it would create spot zones or strip development.
Commercial land uses west of Interstate 9S are dominated by the regional
mall, and its satellite stores and offices. Neighborhood shopping centers
and office buildings are located in the vicinity of most major
intersections. The City should continue its poliCY of encouraging
commercial uses to be located at intersections, and discouraging strip
commercial development, due to the aesthetic and traffic safety problems
that strip development creates. Furthermore, allowing additional
commercial land use in the vicinity of the Boynton Beach Mall would be
likely to cause traffic levels on roads in the vicinity to fall below
established levels of service. Commercial development beyond that which
is shown on the proposed land use plan should be permitted only if the
40
~I
EXHIBIT "F"
ADMINISTRATIVE CONDITIONS
.;:) ;1
EXHIBIT "F"
Administrative Conditions
Project name: Newport Place PUD (f.k.a. Stanford Park PUD)
File number: LUAR 95-006
Reference: 2 sheets submitted bv Cotleur Hearino identified as
2nd submittal with Plannino and Zonino Department October 26,
1995 date stamp markino
I DEPARTMENTS I INCLUDE I REJECT I
I PUBLIC WORKS NONE I I I
Comments:
UTILITIES
Comments: NONE
FIRE
Comments: NONE
POLICE
Comments: NONE
ENGINEERING DIVISION
Comments: NONE
BUILDING DIVISION
Comments: NONE
PARKS AND RECREATION
Comments: NONE
FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST
Comments: NONE
PLANNING AND ZONING
Comments:
1- The master plan shall be modified to
show compliance with the final
determination regarding Palm Beach 1/
County Traffic Division and City
staff's evaluation of the applicants
traffic statement,
2 , Add a note to the master plan
indicating that the project is subject v
to site plan review prior to
permitting.
3 . Specify on the rectified master plan
maximum density allowed for the
Stanford Park PUD. Also show on the
master plan the conversion
computations that verify the proposed c/
total of 596 ACLF and Convalescent
Center beds does not exceed the
maximum allowed density for the entire
PUD. The following City adopted
conversion factor shall be used:
Total gross acreage within the
PUD (times) maximum allowed
density per acre (times) 2.3 =
maximum number of beds
,:? 3
DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT
4. The zoning code limits the maximum
number of driveways from a single road
to two (2) . If this maximum is to be
exceeded, as indicated on the master
plan, then relief from this
requirement must also be requested
through the variance process, A
parking lot variance (File No, PKLV
95-006) to increase the number of
driveways from two (2) to four (4) is
being processed concurrently with this
request. Amend the master plan to V
show the results of the variance and
reference on the master plan the City
Commission's action regarding the
variance,
5 . Submission of a rectified master plan
showing compliance with the conditions V
of approval for the project will be
required to be submitted to the
Planning and Zoning Department in
triplicate prior to site plan review
of the project,
MEH:dim
xc: Central File
a: 2NDSPARK. Com
,;2~(
~ :~~
i :;1
.' ~I 'I
;: .! I
-........., .,.~
.....-----:- -- ~~..:....... ... - ~
~ i ,/"'. J~ - - ---;r. _ _ _,__ _
't : I 1\ ~,~~:';0'~~~' :;: Iii;';
i i :. 'I' :1:~~~!i~1 ; Id! H ~ f~ ~.JI
' I R~~i i,': I 1111,; 11 ) i
'f' lt3~o; I I.~ .:~n~ H1 i L
( ~J II H -"~:~;.!: i!i' t a~ (j)
j : I Ii '-:9 j;;l~! i~i - '.:~ lfl!
; , 1 ",f;, "'i, "'" 0
: I , 'I..i~ Z '!1fi=~ :~!' I~l 0'
., 0;' 0 hI" "'1, ..'
' I " ~.! - "I"" .1'1",'
s I I ,. I J. is !~~ In: H, ~ of i r g
, ~. zl'J."'t 'It' I;, 'i: \
:r I 0 !"i!;~;!;; ! 'I ! IU
' () . t ,I., I "I " 0
'I 'I "I,,'. ,;.; 11' P.i
' , I l IU "w,l!! :11 . ., I ~
! 'I !il ~ I:ili:;;' iz; I !I a IU ,
I r II @~ Iljj!J~I! iil ! i! ~ @ ::1
I l:i'Jcnl-.'~JH..pl;I"" U 'l'iil
i 'I ih (D,;iWil'! J;lll'l rrl ~
! I, ill all,i!;!ii, 111 z :!J ~ 1
. 1H I~I ~I':~~l
J ~ ~ .;1 fJ
~~ AI f lHh~J~1
\Yl I !!!I~e1
,
""'.~ '''-
~ . .'- .. ~
~'.: ......"
. .,.~".. . -.-
! t.;':'<~:':,;';',':'-''''i
:'m' I ("i
I II'
Ie::: '_:
LULlJ .
. '1" ,. '\:1 ; ~~ " .
"-J ,. .l'l".. .,,.:Jij ,'T.~ :~ :
i ! 1 I r".
o
-0
..
ai,; ~~
~lli ~.
'!j"jf
i J~
..
I, "
,; 11\'-"-"-+
'} '"
.. ,
!~ ;
i-Ii
,;
, .
;,~ I
;: I
!
,
,
j
I
i
I
! , I-
I ~. ,
i . o,~ OS
, 'a n",
I I il~!J~ I
, I , .
!
I
i
I 1 I 1
- ~~.;': \.;-,,~: ::~v.::,.:,:.
, I
.,"~'.... Il>CN 001.0.0:...0
i
I!
F~..3 " .
!n~ " H~
[111 "
s' ;~~
~~ ...
I"
ii .1
,. . ,
.; i~'
j! !"Jl
,
.J
.~
:;.
,0
,"
i: , ~ r!1-
~U\
" ~ii~
j
.~ ~~ !-
:~~ ~~:
;1i! . "
!:l~ ';I~
IE! I,!!
,
a .dl;
~':' ,It f
i!~i;,
, ~:"
, -i'
:~ ~
'~.'.._--_..-------...--'--_.'':':':-._-
iii,-i'iilil
"-
r____ 1"""''''.WI
- lV1W':::I -crcrM,
- .. .. .. .',.
.... ,,",un; ~I< .._._ &
i
,
,
!
:i..:
!~l
"..
~il
n. " ~" ,.., ,'.. ~lj'o
" . :,' ,_" ,-co' ". ~
'."'4"~~~~~:-_. _
..;: I
.'f" !
/" :i'
~._~-- .
-
i
,
,
;~I ~!
,h ,;
! ,: I,j
~II ~~!~ ~;~ .,
~ ~ i :t 'i 'i !! i'i i "!i ~ ~
~ id!;;! ~t_'r b2~J~
:t .a l~l ItS'"j t:ii
~ ~ II '" I ::1111 ;:i - ej ..~C
i ~~~~..;tS i8:!!ne_';f:t:t'i li2 ~~~ ~...... ~f'
I ~!~'~:!';"' "'~;!;;, i~~Hlj! 0 'i; l'!
! , ! n ill I ~ '!Ui;,'j l~l Ii,
I' ~ I ; I'il M~" II. ':
~I I I, i . I I" h' iiil~ n~ iii"
;1 .1 Ii I --.. ! ~'h ,h.. oj "~ ~
~.. ii" '" . ~h. i,li"ll'" il~gh.I'! :1
13; :. ~!l~l H Ii !!ll~. !!;,j-i li!.aiLSlld ,f, N
". .81";""1 -""111""''"'1 ,,,Ii. o. ',' .~/
~~! '. .j!! .l~, !I/'!"""; ,!,'l',! II' ,.! ...... I;, 'u
"If; feet ~'! :, ~An!~ .';Ij'! ~I :~Lr~ !i~~!..~
HLr~ j SJ . II' 3 It It L = ...:=
--...__"",,,:;O..~-
i ..
;",i~;
~ ~i~~;;
11"'!#~1! L.
..........<1 IE
Ii
!J "I
f: . 'il! I!' ,
I,! : f"'l I" I'
- B' i 111 ".
! ;:! I :!ll i!i I
fj ij:! 'i',: !H. .
I, 1.1 i !i / Jl.j;
j; :~ II j:~! Hit,' .
U .;i!! f!n ~ff;1 .J
ri \r It ;ili Ill'll ~
! )'0' '/1" . 'II ~
! , n,ll' !/; IIIL' b
. I 1:!" , ':11 I; . zl ..J
.f It,., fl I'!' ai.' ..l
~~ i ~~h h! ; i clH l~ <{
~. i ~l~~; f- ( j-"-. Q
d f :Hi 1 ~ : ~
0,
,':"'1 i'
~ . ;Ii
~ ! rl'J
~ ! t z ., Iii"
Iii !II U, !'
ci ., I' .. I 1'1
:i J: ~;!j ; I,
Ii ill !P.! ;"
(/) . - i:: I"
'L !!' !j" "
<l .1.., I'
O 'IH ~1H .,~ s.f
I ~; ~ ~I'
<l ....i'.hI~!~
"2" jU ~Hf. ;- i~
CV 'ih .:ili iJ! ~
..:l ...: ~ 1lI".~: .,' ",:~,
I- e f e. . ,
, - . _... ..r._
.{.~'. .!. ..,.~~~~: ~..n.-
'-4,......,....~........_, .~
~
~'''-=,
.... ,-;~..:-~.. ....:-tr
._~ 1-.......____.
'.; 0 ~
"
N
~:_~~
00
z'"
iillJ~
," I Iii ;
'f ·
_11
1lJ
-'
<l
o
([)
c
c
o
.0:
-'
- .
Ou
- ..
U _ 0
0.- 0
.~-
. ~a.. ,
..c: <( E ~
.;er x.~~J
000 I
>- u...-c
o .
'Q "0_"_
- CII1=l
~ 3~a3
-. ~\
ca
p
~
C"I.2 ,
~ ~
.s: ,
~
0 J:
~
.s: .
.
'"
t::IC: 0
.s: -
c
>
E-t c
0::
!
!
i
H
~o
..
I'll
.! &;. ,==
JIl_II" C...41
~~at:a:~
i----
i
. .
I .i Iii :.
Ci: Oli i' f'
<;t j I h: ::I~: ~~
~ I,,, I. In flU,
;:!riU ';:~.ir;r!;.;
· I . "I i;h'f~; ~ I:
o i ". /'I,.I,,-!,/ "
~,'" . :i' '. It I ,.
i ~ sn I! lti: ;f~:"M",,:..t~
. UJ! i -1'1 -,_l--< '::: "I,!i ~.-::1' ~;;\
- tfj - :0_ ""l. 1_ 2' ',c!:_.'.
&..... I Ul ':-:i j ~~~~i-~~"_~
t ? ~.~ <.91 ..:./ I
J If......[\ ~, EiI>~ 01
. ..<;'Ie a I i~2 -.J:! ~..i,
t, ~:,..t ~:,~"_<o i~[~: .0'
;i!~: i
m;~1 ~! '.ii ~ in~; ,!
i~;:i, ~,u!i ill; r,;il; :f :i