CORRESPONDENCE
.
~
STATE OF flORIDA
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY
~~[NG,U~J~rn1
~J ccq I 6. ~
PLANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
AFFAIRS
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT' HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. RESOURCE PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
LAWTON CHILES
LINDA LOOMIS SHElLEY
Governor
Secretary
February 14, 1996
--hle,. I' ;(
,,,,,,~{'1J> ')
, /2 I<'
"aJ
I
Ms. Tambri J. Heyden
Planning and Zoning Director
City of Boynton Beach
Post Office Box 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310
Dear Ms. Heyden:
Thank you for submitting copies of your proposed comprehensive
plan amendment(s) for the city. We have conducted a preliminary
inventory of the plan amendment package pursuant to Chapter 163,
Florida statutes, to verify the inclusion of all required
materials. Our reference number for this amendment package is
Boynton Beach 96-1.
The submission package appears to be complete, and your
proposed plan amendment will be reviewed pursuant to Chapter 163,
Florida statutes. Once the review is underway, you may be asked to
provide additional supporting documentation by the review team to
ensure a thorough review.
The Department will conduct a preliminary review to make a
determination as to whether the proposed plan amendment package
should be formally reviewed. The Department will notify you when
the determination has been made to review or not to review the
proposed plan amendment package in accordance with Chapter 163.3184
and Rule 9J-ll.008, Florida Administrative Code. The Department's
notification shall specifically identify the amendment (s) that
shall be reviewed and the amendments that shall not be reviewed.
2740 CENTERVIEW
FLORIDA KEYS AREA OF CRITICAL STATE CONCERN
FIELD OFFICE
2796 Overseas Highway, Suite 212
Marathon, Florida 33050-2227
DRIVE. TALLAHASSEE,
SOUTH FLORIDA RECOVERY OFFICE
P.O. Box40n
8600 NW. 36th Street
Miami/Florida 33159-4022
FLORIDA 32399-2100
GREEN SWAMP AREA OF CRITICAL STATE CONCERN
FIELD OFFICE
155 EastSummerhn
Bartow/Florida 338304641
Ms. Tambri J. Heyden
February 14, 1996
Page Two
If you have any question please contact Roger Wilburn, the
Community Program Administrator that will be overseeing the review
of the amendment and assigning the amendment to the respective
planner for review, at (904) 487-4545.
Sincerely,
d~ <t.J--
O. Ray Eubanks
Planning Manager
ORE/per
~~
rrfu City of
'Boynton 'Beacfi
'~.--'
100 'E. 'Boynton 'Beadi '1Joulevarcf
P.O. 'Bo'{.31O
'Boynton 'Bead., J10ritfa 33425.0310
City:Jfafl: (407) 375-6000
J"}lX: (407) 375-6090
January 26, 1996
Mr. Robert Pennock. Chief
Bureau of Local Planning
Div. of Resource Planning and Management
State of Florida Department of Community Affairs
2740 Centerview Drive
Tallahassee, FL 32399
RE: Proposed Plan Amendment - #96-1
Newport Place (LUAR 95-006)
Dear Mr. Pennock:
Enclosed you will find six (6) copies (individual copies have
been simultaneously sent to the Treasure Coast Regional Planning
Council, the FDOT-District Four. the South Florida WMD, and the
Department of Environmental Protection) of the required
transmittal documents for the above-referenced map amendment.
This proposed amendment consists of one map amendment for 24.77
acres of property. Based on the projected minimal impact of this
proposed amendment, and since it is considered to be consistent
with all goals, objectives and policies of the City's
Comprehensive Plan, the City is requesting that this amendment
not be reviewed.
The proposed amendments were reviewed, and approved for
transmittal, by the City commission (who became the Local
Planning Agency in 1995) on December 19, 1995. With respect to
adoption, staff anticipates that ordinances will be adopted in
Mayor June of the current year.
In accordance with the requirements of Rule 9J-11.006, please be
informed that the subject amendments are not in an area of
critical state concern or the Wekiva River Protection Area, and
nor are they related to a proposed development of regional impact
or to be adopted under a joint planning agreement.
Furthermore, as indicated by the certifying letters included
within Attachment "A" of the amendment package 94-1 as submitted
on July 6, 1994, the Comprehensive Plan and related support
documentation were previously provided to other reviewers and
they were informed that said documents would be updated by
subsequent amendments.
~merial's (jateway to tm (julfstTW1Tl
To: Mr. Robert Pennock
-2-
January 26, 1995
Should you have any questions on the subject amendments, please
contact Michael Rumpf, Senior Planner at:
City of Boynton Beach, P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, FL 33425-0310
Tel: (407) 375-6260
With respect to the remaining submittal requirements outlined in
the amended Rule 9J-l1.006, the following has also been provided
for your information;
(1) (b) (1) Six copies of one (1) map indicating the existing and
proposed future land use map designation, property
boundaries and their relation to the surrounding street
and thoroughfare network are included in Attachment
IIA";
(1) (b) (2) The present land use designations of the subject site
and adjacent properties are shown on the map in
Attachment "A";
N/A as no amendments to the text of the Plan are
proposed;
(1) (b) (3) Property size is indicated within an excerpt of the
staff report/Memorandum #95-692 (Attachment "B");
(1) (b)
(1) (b) (4) The availability of, and demand on public facilities is
summarized in each staff report and in Attachment "C";
(1) (b) (5) Information regarding compatibility of the proposed Map
amendment with the Comprehensive Plan, and other
information relative to the basis of the recommendation
is provided in the excerpt of the staff report (see
Attachment "B"), and is summarized below;
(1) (c) Staff recommendation is indicated in the staff report
within Attachment "B", and the recommendation of the
local planning agency/local governing body (City
Commission) are indicated in meeting minutes of which
excerpts are provided in Attachment "D"; and
(2) NA
The following information summarizes, or is in addition to that
provided by the staff report which indicates, in part, the basis
on which this Plan amendment is proposed, and further justifies
the proposed amendment with respect to compliance with S.163,
F.8., Rules 9J-5 and 9J-11, F.A.C., and the City's Comprehensive
Plan:
1.
For a brief explanation of the proposed
refer to page 1 of Memorandum #95-692.
relative to consistency of the proposed
the Comprehensive Plan, please refer to
amendment, please
For documentation
map amendment with
pages 4 through 7 of
To: Mr. Robert Pennock
-3-
January 26, 1996
Memorandum #95-692 (see Attachment "B");
2. This proposed amendment does not involve property containing
environmentally sensitive or native features worthy of
consideration in the City's Comprehensive plan or the
County's inventory of native ecosystems. Lastly, the
subject site contains no historic features recognized by the
City or County.
3. With respect to the elimination or reduction of land uses
inconsistent with the City's character and, the need to
increase or decrease the intensity of land uses, the
proposed amendment will have only a minor impact on actual
density of the site as it is predominantly built-out, and
the amendment is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, in
part, based on the type of demanded land uses-nursing
homes/adult care facilities-which are being provided for
which are specifically promoted in the plan (the underlying
Planned Unit Development master plan limits the property to
those nursing homes, ancillary medical offices, and adult
congregate living facilities which currently exist or are
planned for the project);
4. The subject property is located within both the "B" and "C"
flood zones;
5. With respect to Traffic Circulation Element analysis
requirements, the only relevant policies in the plan that
currently apply, which regard maintaining levels of service
standards, will be complied with. As indicated above and in
the staff report, the subject property is predominantly
built-out, and specifically nearly at the maximum density
allowed under the proposed classification. As indicated in
Attachment "C", the impact has been reviewed and it has been
determined that roadway capacity exists to serve the maximum
potential traffic to be generated by the proposed amendment.
6. With respect to Housing Element analysis requirements,
theoretically, the proposed amendment will enhance housing
opportunities by increasing the maximum density, and
therefore the maximum units allowed on the subject property.
However, given the built status of the site, the actual
impact of the proposed amendment on housing opportunities
will be slight. The amendment would allow for an increase
of only 60 units or 138 nursing home or ACLF beds (using the
City's conversion factor of 2.3 beds per unit).
7. With respect to Infrastructure Element analysis
requirements,
see Attachment "C" for a description of the surplus capacity
projected to remain after project completion.
8. The Coastal Management Element is not applicable as the
subject property is not within the coastal management area.
To: Mr. Robert Pennock
-4-
January 26, 1996
9. The Conservation Element is not applicable. see paragraph 2;
10. With respect to Recreation Element analysis requirements,
the subject property is nearly built-out with remaining
capacity under the proposed land use classification of
approximately 60 units.
a) NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS - According to adopted levels of
service standards, there is no deficiency within the subject
area. Furthermore, the subject property currently contains
private recreation resources equivalent to a neighborhood
park.
b) DISTRICT PARKS - The surplus of district park space was
calculated in excess of 13 acres on July 6, 1994. According
to the level of service standard for district parks, 2.5
acres per 1,000 persons, this 13.76 acres will serve an
additional 5,504 residents. It should be noted that BEBR
estimated that the City's permanent population grew by 237
persons between 1994 and 1995. Even if post-1995 growth is
accounted for, the total increase in population is likely
less than 400 persons. The 60 additional maximum units
permitted by the proposed amendment are insignificant given
the current surplus in district park acreage.
c) RECREATION FACILITIES - As of July 6, 1994, four of the
eighteen categories of facilities had the minimum number of
units as required by the corresponding level of service
standards (the remaining had significant surpluses) .
However, these facility categories include single facilities
which serve large population groups such as practice fields
(1 field per 10,000 persons), youth baseball/softball fields
(1 field per 17,500 persons), and regulation baseball fields
(1 field per 35,000 persons). The maximum potential demand
to be generated for recreation facilities by at most 60
dwelling units, will be easily accommodated by the remaining
surpluses of all facilities.
11. The Intergovernmental Coordination Element analysis
requirements have been satisfied as proper notifications and
requests for availability of facility analyses have been
sent;
12. With respect to Capital Improvements Element analysis
requirements, there are no impacts upon capital facilities
that have not been projected within the analysis of the
Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, levels of service are met
and all other related policies are complied with; and
13. With respect to consistency with the State Comprehensive
Plan and the Regional Comprehensive Policy Plan, the above
statements, along with that information provided within the
staff report address pertinent issues and topics within such
plans. Such issues and topics include housing, natural
To: Mr. Robert Pennock
-5-
January 26, 1996
systems, endangered species, levels of service, intergovernmental
coordination, public facilities, historic resources, and
transportation.
If you have any questions concerning this amendment package,
please do not hesitate to contact this office.
Very Truly You.rsik
~ - . ~
/''i, i h.. fJ, , '# ! .
~~ {/' U
Tambri J. Heyden
Planning and Zoning Director
TJH:mr
Enclosures
cc: Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
Florida Department of Transportation-District Four
South Florida Water Management District
Florida Department of Environmental Protection
MISCXI:NEWPDCA.LET
--4.
LAND USE DESIGNATIONS
\ K.LJ~
\
C-5
R
,
.
.
I
,
,
.
I
I
SUBJECT PR~RTY:
CURRENT LAND USE: LOR
.
.
.
.
.
I
\
.
.
.
,
I
I
I
R-2
LOR
LAND USE CATEGORIES:
CITY
R:RECREATIONAL
LDR:\.OW DENSITY RESlDEN11AL
couNTY
R-2 RESIDENTIAL 2
R-3 RESIDENTIAL 3
R-5 RESloeN11AL 5
C-5 COMMERCIAL 5
CI"1''f
<-,NIT?
\- (i)
\ 1-96 '
. PLANNING DEPT.
_'"0""':- \
:~
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
:
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
:
.
R-5
PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDill1 NO. 95-692
FROM:
Chairman and Members
Planning and Development Board
Tambri J. HeYden,~
Planning and Zoning Director
Michael W. Rumpf ~
Senior Planner
TO:
THRU:
DATE:
December 8, 1995
SUBJECT: NEWPORT PLACE (LUAR 95-006)
Request for Land Use Amendment/Rezoning
(A,K.A. stanford Park Planned Unit Development)
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 land use classification to High Density, the
land use reclassification from Low Density Residential to High Density
Residential of an adjoining tract proposed to be incorporated into the
PUD, and the rezoning of this tract from R-1-AAB (Single Family
Residential) and the existing PUD to PUD with LUI=5, as accompanied by
a new master plan 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 1.59
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
(e) (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 requirement in connection with a land
use element amendment that involves property in excess of 10 acres (or
density in excess of 10 units/acre), is the ultimate review by the
Florida Department of Community Affairs (DCA). The DCA will conduct two
reviews of this proposed amendment, first, following approval by the
City commission (prior to ordinance readings), and second, a compliance
review following approval of the ordinance by the City.
/
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
lilorth City
Northeast City
Farther northeast County
East City
Farther east County
South City
West City
Zonina Land Use
N/A Hypoluxo Rd.
N/A NW 7th Court
RS day care center
N/A NW 7th Court
RS large lot single
family homes
R-l-AA undeveloped
REC High Ridge Country
Club
APPROVED AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
The applicant is proposing a new master plan to 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 )
4)
Zoning District:
PUD w/LUI:5.0 "Stanford Park"
Permitted Uses:
1.
2 .
3 .
A 120-bed nursing home (Ridge Terrace)
A 356-bed/220-unit ACLF (Newport Place)
A medical 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-Iakes!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)
following new components:
the proposed
reflects the
1) A land use amendment that would change the PUD's and the 1.59-acre
tract's (Lots #7 and #8, High Ridge Subdivision) existing Low
Density Residential land use classification (4,84 units/acre
maximum) to High Density Residential (10.8 units/acre maximum) I and
rezone this tract from R-l-AAB to the Stanford Park PUD w!LUl-S as
well as rezone the existing POD (zoning designation does not
change) to approve a new PUD master plan to incorporate this tract.
2) A two- and four-story, 120-bed assisted living facility (ALF) in
the south portion of the site, which will be landscaped similar to
the existing uses and contain associated parking. please note that
the building setbacks as established within the approved master
plan (e.g. 40 foot front (east), 25 foot rear (west), 25 foot side
(south) and 15 foot side (north)), will remain unchanged;
')
C"-
Newport Place (LUAR 95-006)
-3-
December 8, 1995
3) Two (2), two-way driveways off of the west side of N.W. 7th Court
into the portion of the site proposed for the new ALF; and
4) Addition of the 1.59-acre tract that is limited to an existing 60
foot wide public right-of-way. The property is located on the east
side of N.W. 7th Court, directly east of the Newport Place ACLF.
The public right-of-way connects 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:
UTILITIES:
Confirmation has been received that all utilities for the proposed
development are available and will be provided by the appropriate
agencies.
DRAINAGE:
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
closer to the existing ACLF. A stormwater management plan for the
existing 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.
ACCESS AND INTERNAL TRAFFIC FLOW:
Two (2), two-way driveways to be added will impact the access points and
internal traffic flow of the project. 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 portion of the site proposed for the new ALP,
However, pursuant to city code only two (2) driveways are allowed per
parcel. The applicant is requesting the necessary variance (File No.
PKLV 95-006) to allow a total of four driveways to the site in order to
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 POD 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.
~3
Newport Place (LUAR 95-006)
-4-
December 8, 1995
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
Pursuant to Section 9.C.7 of the Land Development Regulations. staff
shall evaluate land use amendment/rezoning applications with respect to
the following criteria:
1) 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, apply to the subject requests and are analyzed below:
Ob-iective 1.17 - "Minimize nuisances, hazards, and other
impacts to the general public, to property values,
residential environments by preventing or minimizing
conflicts."; and
adverse
and to
land use
Policy 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 Support Document. pace 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, except 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 found within the Future Land Use Support Document, page 33.
Although the text emphasizes the requirements of state law to allow
small croup homes within all ~oning 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
reason~ble, since this type of group home comprises the vast majority of
L(
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 alao 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 under Demand for Land for Nursinq Homes. Group Homes. and
Foster Homes: "The 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.
2) WHETHER THE PROPOSED REZONING WOULD BE CONTRARY TO THE ESTABLISHED
LAND USE PATTERN OR WOULD CREATE AN ISOLATED DISTRICT UNRELATED TO
ADJACENT AND NEARBY DISTRICTS, OR WOULD CONSTITUTE A GRANT OF
SPECIAL PRIVILEGE TO AN INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNER AS CONTRASTED
WITH 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. When the PUD was originally approved, the project 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.
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.
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 addition, and on the above-referenced information
from the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use 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.
..:.J
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 amendment is projected to have little impacts on
facilities including roads, utilities, 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
density. Upon reviewing this amendment, staff determined that the
original PUD proposal was not evaluated based on density, but rather
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 compatible with the Low Density Residential land use
classification, the PUD does not meet the maximum density limitation of
this classification.
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 for only
an additional 139 beds (the proposed project contains 120 beds). In
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 uss 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 isolated district
unrelated to adj acent or nearby properties. Therefore, staff recommends
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
LJCAT\ON MF~?
STANFORD PARK
~ ~ =-_-=- _,,,_" --" "llllillL ~ L
... ' ".'C~M' ru' ~'O- - ,.-
, L _JT- i 'ild ~ ' '", ,,. -'- u lif~r rf '-:r-I -~ [: l;:. \ ;~,
~ ~ _I' ,.. :,::'\'\;.; l ' ~ '1/'
; . ;:::::: t) ',::: - T II
,',-: ' ,. '-"'C" :" r
~ J' j SIT~_Wn ~~ T:- ,-- " "
~ / t $k "', ' , U\
~ .~ i! ,W:- Jf ~~~
i~ ' ,." . ,-/' OL.m UL'I1',,_:,',':,
, ,!.. " '. ,.... 1"-'
r' .,' ' ' .
, ",.:. \'.
I; "..' \\ '\: '-= -- -~. Pli :~ QL1:'
,,' . __ . \\1 ,. , '
,,' , " '.' 'j' L-- T .If l~i1\\\
II; \} REC?;;' ~J .. r i-'( ~I :",
~ ':. ::'," ...M IR'S! i \ i . ,','
......' l." ~ ~-l"" ,u:0"!/- . ! ..t~' J ~ JL
, ,,_' ~~' t::: ,TT ('
. !<~ \ ,_ I z.. \'; ~l:: . . " \ I~J;~ ~.,
\, ~ \ I,R' ;.~ ~,~~--- 1>1' u"',:\ \i ,'\',
v;~ ) \,~ \. STATt~1 ::J 1\ 1 \ "
",.,'"\ i '~" 11~~; \,' \ I
.. H!g'.:',,_~'Ll"'< I~;.,:, \,~J' :Iil>','
R'\ A AI""'"'' E L",d'Il.'i:. \ ',', 1 ~_\'."
, ,,)- !-'
,\ 1\ P IUJ n 1\ . '!;\:~,
i:^~"~ ~., ,-u --.t.l;. \1\""'("
\ . __ 'I ,,,,0'" \.:! : \ill.\li\~\iI
! . , " . '" . . I ' ,,- ,//, ,', \mill\\~::
\ )/
\ \ __~' L s 1/; lit ,\!, ,
./ I>:~'( , .____" V I .. It.'
/1\:/'/ v 1Fl'1AA~~ ~,I \ ~ I r
--/(,,\ '~I" - ~ - --------t. >~ --- ]'. I~ [, \ \ ~ ~
, "~ : ,.4;-- ',.._ J I '.. -\ t ~
I" L... ".I .c' . ., 51
, ~-- '" ,,,'
r' :..t - "'f'f~n L L C '11J'[fl 1.'~ '- -\~' - -
. : ...... t,~~"/" /} 1-- ~\, ..,- -0" 11,:,1 .:4 Cj. f..:' =t, -
.' " .' l"'--l I' ,.. 1 '
A" ,". j/,~ Ln /- f. F)~:\. i\:\'1
. '0 ,18 MILESV - ,: --1 I ' ','. - - T"~' ". I"
~~\ \lb\8~~N~~~T ..:" ,~.:. ~ br~ )~t~17C ~
lli@lliUWllin
!I~L
DEe ? 6 19S5 i ~' ;
County Administrator
Robert Weisman
Board of County Commissioners
Ken L. Foster, Chairman
Burt Aaronson, Vice Chairman
Karen T. Marcus
Carol A. Roberts
Warren H. Newell
Mary McCarty
Maude Ford Lee
J~
...J
'geparlment of Engineering
, and Public Works
J
December 1B, 1995
Mr. Michael Rumpf
Planning & Zoning Department
100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, FL 33425-0310
RE: STANFORD PARK PUD
PLANNING ANO
ZONING DEPT.
Dear Mr. Rumpf:
The Palm Beach County Traffic Division has reviewed the traffic information for
the project entitled Stanford Park PUD, pursuant to the Traffic Performance
Standards in Article 7.9 of the Palm Beach County land Development Code. This
information shows the trip generation for an increase of 52 AClF dwelling units.
Because this would generate 112 daily trips, less than 200 daily trips, no
additional traffic analysis is provided. It is my understanding that the
proposed project is an increase of 120 nursing home beds. This would generate
312 daily trips, requiring a traffic study prior to issuing a development order.
I have been requested to provide traffic information'for the maximum developmp.nt
scenario for the purposed land use amendment. That information is provided
below.
Development size:
Project Traffic
Existing traffic volume on Hypoluxo Rd.
Volume with project traffic
LOS D for Hypoluxo Rd.
139 bed nursing home
361 daily tri ps
29,173
29,353
45,000
If you have any questions regarding this determination. please contact me at €84-
4U30.
Sincerely,
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ENGINEER
~J+~
Dan Weisberg, P.E.
Senior Registered Civil Engineer
File: TPS - Mun. - Traffic Study Review
g:\user\dweisber\wp50\tps\boyn57
"An Equal Opportunity' Affirmative Action Employer"
Ru, ::11:lJ W\)~t r~lm BC.1CI1, Florida YH16.1229 1-\07) hS-l-4DOO
00 m@rnowrn ill
" .i :
\ . ,
PL~,NN1tJG AND
ZONING DEPT.
/
l/
MEMORANDUM
UTILITIES DEPT. NO. 95 - 375
TO:
Tambri Heyden, Planning Director
~
~
FROM:
John A. Guidry, Utilities Director
DATE:
December 1, 1995
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 MazzeIla of this office.
JAG/PVM
xc: File
C:\WPWIN6G\WPDOCS\NOVDEC9S\NEWPLACE.WPD
March 21, 1995
~,~
...-: ~
SWA
SOUO WASlE !U1HORIlY
YOUR P\RTNER FOR
SOLID WASTE SOLUTIONS
City of Boynton Beach
100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard
Boynton Beach, FL 33435
Ann:
Planning Director
Subject:
Availability of Solid Waste Disposal Capacity
Dear Planning Director:
The Solid Waste Authority of Palm Beach County hereby provides cenification that
the Authority has disposal capacity available to accommodate the solid waste generation for
the municipalities and unincorporated county for the coming year. This lener constitutes
notification of sufficient capacity for concurrency management and comprehensive planning
purposes. Capacity is available for both the coming year, and the five and ten year
planning periods specified in 9J-5.oo5(4).
As of September 30, 1994, the Authority's Nonh County Landfills had an estimated
38,200,000 cubic yards of landfill capacity remaining. Based upon the existing Palm Beach
County population, the population growth rates published by the University of Florida
Bureau of Economic and Business and Research (BEBR), and projected rates of solid waste
generation, waste reduction and recycling the Solid Waste Authority forecasts that the
existing landfill capacity will be depleted in approximately 2021.
The Authority continues to pursue options to increase the life of its existing
facilities and to provide for all of the County's current and future disposal and recycling
needs. As pan of Us responsibility, the Authority will provide an annual statement of
disposal capacity, using the most current BEBR projections a'nilable.
.
If you have any questions or if I can be of funher assistance, please do not hesitate to call.
V~~o~
Marc C. Bruner, Ph.D.
Director of Pl.nnil1g and Environmental Programs
00
MAR 2 2 'C.:;5
~rn
PLANNING AND
ZONING OEPT.
7501 Nolth Jog Road, West Palm Beach, Florida 33412 (407}640-4000 FAX 683.4067
ReCYCleOpJper
~"88
Board 01 SupoMlora
C. Stanley Weaver
Kermit Dell
John I. WhitwOrth III
SecretarylManagar
William G. Winters
Asslstam Manager
Richard S. Wheelihan
Anomey
Perry & SChone, P_A
LAKE WORTH DRAINAGE DISTRICT
~
13081 MILITARY TRAIL
DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33484
December 5, 1995
Mr. Michael W. Rumpf, Senior Planner
City of Boynton Beach
100 East Boynton Beach Blvd.
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33435
Dear Mr. Rumpf:
Subject:
LWDD Project # 95-2697D.OI, Newport Place, Analysis on Availability of
Drainage Facilities, Canal E-4, BB Dept # LUAR 95-006
The above site is located within our jurisdiction boundaries. Drainage availability is based
upon the applicant meeting the L WDD policies and guidelines.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
LAKE WORTH DRAINAGE DISTRICT
Patrick A. Martin, P .E.
District Engineer
P AMlmfb
c: Tarnbri J, Hayden, Planning and Zoning Director, The City of Boynton Beach .'
;\ \11','UCll,I~WJ-l~I\\
',!Ii '\ '
"I' I ,I
I ' I 1
,
Oe\ray Beach & Boca Raton 498-5363 . BoynlDn Beach & West Palm Beach 737-3835 . FAX (407) 495-9694
.
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
DECEMBER 19, 1995
not be recorded or provided to the applicant until the conditions are met. Approval on that basis will
eliminate the need for the applicant to come back before the Commission.
Motion
Commissioner Jaskiewicz moved to approve the abandonment of Miner Road subject to the conditions
being rectified prior to the Resolution being prepared, Commissioner Rosen seconded the motion.
Mayor Pro Tern Matson asked Commissioners Jaskiewicz and Rosen if they would agree to delete
Condition #2. Both were agreeable. .
The motion carried 4-0.
Mr. Harris confirmed with Mayor Taylor that he must comply with Comments #1, 3, 4, 5 and 6. With
reference to Comment #5, the City is only concerned about Waste Management, Florentine Marble and
Rollyson.
.
Attorney Cherof reminded everyone that all paperwork in the agenda package is part of the public
record. Exhibit "F" is a list of the administrative conditions. This is a new form prepared by Ms.
Heyden and Mr. Hukill which will attempt to simplify the Commission's review. When the
development order is prepared. the document can be used as a check off to show "included" or
"rejected", and it will expedite the preparation of the development order.
D.
PROJECT NAME:
AGENT:
OWNER:
lOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
Newport Place PUD (f.k.a. Stanford Park PUD)
Donald E. Hearing
Newport Place Associates ltd.
Southwest corner of Hypoluxo Road and NW 7th Court
FUTURE lAND USE AMENDMENT/REZONING - Request to
amend the Comprehensive Plan Future land Use Map from
low Density Residential to High Density Residential for a 23
acre, existing planned unit development (PUD) and a 1.59 acre
tract and to rezone the 1.59 acre tract from R-1-AAB (single-
family residential) and the PUD to Planned Unit Development
(PUD w/LUI-5) to add a 120 bed assisted living facility,
Dona/dB;a".,., bnd.r"p" arrhitll!d and land plan....... ~ntil1l Nl!WJ'Ort Plate. introduced Ron
Ehler, Managing and General Partner of Newport Place, and Steve Gillespie, landscape Architect. He
summarized the request by noting that the staff report clearly outlines the request.
The applicant is requesting a reclassification of the land use on the property so that completion of the
campus master plan can be accomplished. To the west is High Point Country Club; to the north is
Hypoluxo Road; to the east are large-lot residential homes which are separated from NW 7th Court by
a platted landscape buffer preserve area which was put In place when the original PUD was approved
for Stanford Place. Newport Place intends to add an additional 12O-bed assisted living facility. This
. will fill the gap in health care services provided at Newport Place. There is already an assisted adult
13
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, flORIDA
DECEMBER 19, 1995
.
congregate living facility existing on site. This will add the assisted living facility which will provide
a greater level of services needed by the elderly. There is an existing nursing home located at the
extreme northwest of the property. In addition to the request for the reclassification of the land, the
applicant will be adding additional parking to the PUD which were not added in the past. Those areas
include Lots 7 and 8 on the east side of NW 7th Court. They will also be rezoned so that they are
consistent with the overall PUD master plan.
Mr. Hearing advised that the Land Development Regulations require that seven criteria be evaluated
for approval of an amendment, or rezoning of the Comprehensive Plan. The seven criteria are outlined
on Pages 4 through 7 of the staff report (Planning & Zoning Department Memorandum No. 95-692).
5taff finds that each of the criteria have been met and the proposal is consistent with the criteria and
land use plan. A variance component involving access drives is included and will be discussed .
following review of this request. Mr. Ehler has been in contact with the neighbors and all surrounding
properties in an effort to be a good neighbor. The applicant is unaware of any opposition.
Ms. Heyden explained that this request involves two issues - a land use and a rezoning. Lots 7 and
8 will be added. These lots were brought into the use to provide access to the PUD. They will be
added to the PUD and rezoned to PUD. The land use stays the same, but the density increases. With
the addition of Lots 7 and 8. the entire PUD is increasing by only 1.59 acres. This application is
considered a large-scale land use amendment, and as such, must be reviewed and approved by the
Department of Community Affairs. .
Staff recommends approval subject to the staff comments in Exhibit "F". In addition, the Planning and
Development Board also recommends approval.
MAYOR TAYLOR ANNOUNCED THE PUBLIC HEARING, THERE WAS NO ONE PRESENT WHO
WISHED TO SPEAK ON THIS REQUEST.
Mayor Pro Tem Matson said this property was useless for a very long time. About four years ago. Mr.
Ehler worked tong and hard with Scott Miller and herself to turn this property into a burgeoning senior
center. They have done an exceptional job, and they are very visible in the community. They have
been very good neighbors. She was extremely pleased to approve this project.
Motion
Mayor Pro Tern Matson moved to amend the Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map from Low
Density Residential to High Density Residential for a 23 acre existing planned unit development (PUD),
and a 1.59-acre tract at Newport Place, southwest comer of Hypoluxo Road and NW 7th Court, and
to rezone the 1.59-acre tract from R-l-AAB (single-family residential) and the PUD to Planned Unit
Development (PUD w/LUI-5) to add a 12o.bed assisted living facUlty, including comments in Exhibit
"F". Commissioner Jaskiewicz seconded the motion.
Commissioner Jaskiewicz commended Ms. Heyden for the thorough and comprehensive investigation
she provided with regard to this request. Any questions or concerns she might have had were.
addressed before she could think of them. The back-up material was excellent.
14
.
;f-
.
.
MINUTES
REGULAR CITY COMMISSION MEETING
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
DECEMBER 19, 1995
>- The motion carried 4-0.
E.
PROJECT NAME:
AGENT:
OWNER:
LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
Newport Place
Donald E. Hearing
Newport Place Associates Ltd.
Southwest corner of Hypoluxo Road and NW 7th Court
PARKINC LOT VARIANCE - Request for relief from the City of
Boynton Beach LaRd Development Regulations, Chapter 23 -
Parking Lots. Article II, Section H.7 "Number of Driveways" to
allow two (2) additional driveways onto Northwest 7th Court.
Donald Hearing...representing..Ne.wp.odJ>Iau, advised that this is a companion to the previous request.
The City land Development Regulations within PUDs limit the number of access points that can be
provided to two (2). At the present time, two access points exist on the easterly portion of the Newport
Place master pJan. The applicant is proposing that two additional access points be provided from NW
7th Court. Staff is recommending approval of only one additional access and has expressed concern
about the second access which would be located inJront of the facility.
At the Planning and Development Board meeting, discussion took place regarding approval of the two
access points. It is possible to make the project work with only one additional access; however, the
applicant feels circulation would improve with the addition of the two accesses. Staff has
recommended approval of only one additional access which will provide access to the rear of the
facility where most of the services take place. The applicant would like to have the two access points
in order to segregate the vehicular traffic associated with the customers from the traffic associated with
services. Mr, Hearing requested the Commission's consideration of approval of the two access
driveways.
Ms. Heyden advised that staff is recommending approval of the southernmost driveway, not the center
drive which is located in front of the building. The reasons for this decision involve the fact that the
R-l-M property in close proximity to this project is undeveloped at the present time. Staff has no way
of knowing how this property will be developed. If it becomes a subdivision, there will be multiple
access points. Staff feels it is in the City's best interest to limit as many additional access points onto
NW 7th Court as possible at this time.
In respol)s~ to Mayor Taylor'S question, Ms. Heyden advised that NW 7lf1 Court presently dead-ends;
however, the possibility exists that it could extend through to Miner Read and have multiple street
connections to serve the undeveloped property.
Mayor Taylor questioned how the second access drive would affect the property to the south. Ms.
Heyden explained that the reason for the requirement in the Code is to limit access points so as not to
negatively impact the traffic on the road. Attempts are made to channel traffic to the access points so
that backlogs of traffic are on site. not on the road system.
MAYOR TAYLOR ANNOUNCED THE PUBLIC HEARING.
15
Board of County Commissioners
Ken L. Foster, Chairman
Burt Aaronson, Vice Chairman
Karen T. Marcus
Carol A. Roberts
Warren H. Newell
Mary McCarty
Maude Ford Lee
Jrn[&jlliLJ\vj~r1-
, E-.------,' ,
. ,
J DEe ? 6 1995
PWJNING AND".' ..
ZONING DEPT.
County Administrator
Robert Weisman
Department of Engineering
and Public Works
December 18, 1995
Mr. Michael Rumpf
Planning & Zoning Department
100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, FL 33425-0310
RE: STANFORD PARK PUD
~
".'
Dear Mr. Rumpf:
The Palm Beach County Traffic Division has reviewed the traffic information for
the project ent i tl ed Stanford Park PUD, pursuant to the Traffi c Performance
Standards in Article 7.9 of the Palm Beach County Land Development Code. This
information shows the trip generation for an increase of 52 ACLF dwelling units.
Because this would generate 112 daily trips, less than 200 daily trips, no
additional traffic analysis is provided. It is my under~tanding that the
proposed project is an increase of 120 nursing home beds. This would generate
312 daily trips, requiring a traffic study prior to issuing a development order.
I have been requested to provide traffic information for the maximum development
scenari 0 for the purposed 1 and use amendment. That i nformat i on is provided
below.
Development size:
Project Traffic
Existing traffic volume on Hypoluxo Rd.
Volume with project traffic
LOS D for Hypoluxo Rd.
139 bed nursing home
361 daily tri ps
29,173
29,353
45,000
If you have any questions regarding this determination. please contact me at. E84-
4U30.
Sincerely,
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ENGINEER
~ 'J1,~
Dan Weisberg, P.E.
Senior Registered Civil Engineer
File: TPS - Mun. - Traffic Study Review
g:\user\dweisber\wp50\tps\boyn57
"An Equal Opportunity - Affirmative Action Employer"
@ printed on (&Cycled paper
Box 21229 West Palm Beach, Florida 33416-1229 (407) 684-4000
~-----------_..._-~-_.__...._-----.__..._~--"._----~-- -
Board of County Commissioners
Ken L. Foster, Chairman
Burt Aaronson, Vice Chairman
Karen T. Marcus
Carol A. Roberts
Warren H. Newell
Mary McCarty
Maude Ford Lee
County Administrator
Robert Weisman
Department of Engineering
and Public Works
January 22, 1996
Mr. Michael Rumpf
Planning & Zoning Department
100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, FL 33425-0310
RE: STANFORD PARK PUD (NEWPORT PLACE)
rn
... 3 to _
~
PLANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
Dear Mr. Rumpf:
The Palm Beach County Traffic Division has been contacted by Yvonne Ziel, the
traffic engineer for the project, and Steve Galespe, the agent for the project,
regarding the trip generation for the Newport Place project. There had been a
question as to whether this project should be classified as an ACLF or as a
nursing home. They described the project as being designed most like a 52 unit
ACLF, with apartment type uni ts. Based on thi s i nformat ion, the ACLF is
accurate. I assume that the information received by the City shows a plan that
is cons i stent with the descri pt i on. Based on thi s i nformat ion, the Traffi c
Division has determined that the project meets the Traffic Performance Standards
of Palm Beach County.
Mr. Galespe stated that the City was waiting for informatton to send to DCA, I
believe that the information was provided in my letter dated December 18, 1995.
If you have any questions regarding this determination, please contact me at 684-
4030.
Sincerely,
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ENGINEER
3~ J+-~
Dan Weisberg, P.E.
Senior Registered Civil Engineer
File: TPS - Mun. - Traffic Study Review
g:\user\dweisber\wp50\tps\boyn57b
"An Equal Opportunity. Affirmative Action Employer"
@prlnt9donrecycJ9dpaper
Box 21229 West Palm Beach, Florida 33416-1229 (407) 684-4000
treOlure
cOQJ.t
regional
planniQg
council
r;:::;rn R (r) ~[I -;:0"'-;":,,'
O L_ 01 G, i " ' .
r ~A;I-;-I~'j:
. ,
___._---.J !
PLANNING "Nt) I
ZONING OEPT. :
March 8, 1996
J;~
Ms. Tambri 1. Heyden
Planning and Zoning Director
City of Boynton Beach
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310
Subject: Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan
Draft Amendments - DCA Reference #96-1
Dear Ms. Heyden:
Council staff has completed its review of the draft (proposed) amendments to your
Comprehensive Plan in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government
Comprehensive Planning and Land Development Regulation Act, Section 163.3184, Florida
Statutes and has prepared comments for Council consideration. These comments will be
presented to the Council at its meeting on March 15, 1996. You are invited to attend the
meeting and address the Council if you wish. We have enclosed the staff's report and
recommended comments as well as the meeting agenda.
Following the meeting the comments as approved by the Council are forwarded to the
Department of Community Affairs (DCA) for transmittal to your governing body for
consideration before final adoption of the amendments.
If you would like to discuss the staff report or Council procedures for plan amendment
review, please feel free to call.
Sincerely,
~~~0L
Patricia A. Tobin, AICP
Regional Planner
PAT:pt
Enclosure
~dlgcpa
3228 s.w. martin downs blvd.
suite 205 . p.o. box 1529
palm city, lIorlda 34990
phone (407) 221-4060
se 269-4060 fax (407) 221-4061
treOlure
COC\f.t
regional
planniQg
council
o
~_':r,: ~ ~ Wi rn
rn
"rll -~.
-..
May 1, 1996
~/
, ., '" I
\ i)c; .
Ms. Tambri Heyden
Planning and Zoning Director
City of Boynton Beach
P.O.Box310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310
Subject:
Boynton Beach Comprehensive Plan
Adopted Amendments - DCA Reference # 96-1
Dear Ms. Heyden:
This is to notify you that the Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council will be providing a
recommendation to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) on the above referenced
amendments, which were received in our office on April 29, 1996.
Council staff will review the documents for consistency with the Regional Comprehensive
Policy Plan (RCPP), pursuant to the Council's contract with the DCA. A written report
containing a determination of consistency with the RCPP is to be provided to the DCA within
30 calendar days of receipt of the amendment. It is anticipated that the report and
recommended comments will be presented at the Council meeting on May 17, 1996.
Prior to the Council meeting, the meeting agenda, report and recommendations from staffwill
be sent to you. You are invited to attend the meeting and will be afforded an opportunity to
address the Council. Following the Council meeting, the recommendations as approved by
the Council will be sent to DCA.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call.
.~~~
Patricia A. Tobin, AICP
Regional Planner
PAT:pt
2a1gcpa
3228 s.w. martin downs blvd.
suite 205 . p.o. box 1529
palm eltv, Ilorlda 34990
phone (407) 221.4060
sc 269-4060 fax (407) 221-4067
treOlure
COOl.t
regional
planniQ9
council
.: r,\ ~ @ ~ ~ w ~ ~
i~ FEe Iz_l~
PLANNING AND
ZONING DEPI
February 9, 1996
~~
Ms. Tambri J Heyden
Planning and Zoning Director
City of Boynton Beach
P. O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310
Sabje;:t: Boyntcn Beach Comprehensive Plan
Draft Amendment - DCA Reference #96-1
Dear Ms. Heyden:
This is to acknowledge receipt of the materials pertaining to the City of Boynton Beach's
proposed comprehensive plan amendments. Council staff will review the materials in
accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Comprehensive Planning and
Land Development Regulation Act, Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. It is anticipated that a
report and recommended comments will be presented to the Council at their March 15, 1996
meeting.
Prior to the Council meeting, the meeting agenda and staff's report and recommendations will
be sent to you. You are invited to attend the meeting and will be afforded an opportunity to
address the Council. Following the Council meeting the report as approved by the Council
will be sent to the Department of Community Affairs.
If you have any questions, please feel free to call.
Sincerely,
~~~0L
Patricia A Tobin, AICP
Regional Planner
PAT:pt
2d1gcpa
3228 s.w. martin downs blvd.
suite 205 . p.o. box 1529
palm city, florlda 34990
phone (407) 221-4060
se 269-4060 fax (407) 221.4067
.
Cotleur
Hearing
landscape Architecture
Planning
Environmental Consulting
Graphic Design
r~n J @ ~ ~ w trilll
\ V I f; n it
I I ':,1' ,.
: ~ rl .' ; !, 1 ]1
i, 'JL MAY 21 !C1QT "l
L_~~,-,.::,:;;-"""" '.;', j
hA,',"',"", I
~~~~',:,.~::.I_: ;,;~:,:,~__-=^",",,~---1
May 23, 1997
Ms, Tambri J. Heyden
Planning and Zoning Director
City of Boynton Beach
100 East Boynton beach Boulevard
Boynton Beach, FL 33425-0310
Re: Newport Place
Our Project #95-0805
Dear Tambri:
On April 16, 1996 the City of Boynton Beach Commission approved a Land Use
Amendment and Master Plan Modification for the Newport Place Planned Unit
Development alkla Stanford Park (File Number LUAR 95-006). (Ordinances 096-26 and
096-27)
Exhibit F of the Planning and Zoning Department Memorandum No. 95-692 (pages 23
and 24) stipulates five (5) conditions ot?pproval which must be satisfied prior to Site
Plan Review for the amended portion of the project. Please find enclosed three (3)
revised copies of Master Plan modified in accordance with The Conditions of Approval
and as described below.
1. Palm Beach County Traffic Division's January 22, 1996 letter to Mr. Mike Rumpf
confirmed that the subject property meets the Traffic Performance Standards of
Palm Beach County. (See attached letter.) This condition is satisfied and
requires no modification to the Master Plan.
2. A note has been added to the Master Plan dated May 21,1997 indicating that the
project is subject to Site Plan Review prior to permitting.
3a. The maximum density of 10.8 du/ac for the High Density Residential Land Use
has been noted on the Master Plan dated May 21, 1997.
Suite 402
1070 E. Indiantown Rood
Jupiter, Florida 33477
407-747-6336 ~gd~-z\nwpt-heyden,doc
~---~
.~'
Ms. Tambri J. Heyden
City of Boynton Beach
Newport Place
May 23, 1997
3b. Conversion computations documenting that the proposed total of 596 ACLF and
Convalescent Center Beds does not exceed the maximum density of 10.8 du/ac
have been added to the Master Plan dated May 21, 1997.
4. The Revised Master Plan dated May 21, 1997 has been modified to reflect three
(3) full and one (1) exit only driveway connection onto NW 7th Court consistent
with the City Commission's approval of Variance PKLV, 95-006.
5. No action required.
To the best of our knowledge the above revisions to the Master Plan satisfies all
conditions of the above referenced project. The applicant anticipates filing an application
for Site Plan approval in the near future. Should the Planning and Zoning Staff have any
questions, please don't hesitate to contact me.
cc with enclosures:
Tom Little (2 copies)
Richard Mann
Chuck Melear
Brian Idle
Michael Schorah
fJJU City of
'Boynton 'Beac/i
'1'-' ,()'i05-
Mr. Ronald L. Aylor
Managing Partner
Newport Place
4735 No W. S\!vl!nth Court
Lantana, Florida 33462
July 1, 1996
Dear Mr. Aylor:
We recently received a notice dated June 7, 1996, from the State of Florida Department of
Community Affairs finding the Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Ordinance 096-26) in
compliance. Ordiriances 096-26 and 096-27 were adopted by the City of Boynton Beach on
April 16, 1996 and became effective on July 1, 1996.
Ordinance 096-26 changes the land designation for the Plat of Stanford Park and Lots 7
and 8 of the Plat of High Ridge Subdivision (together a.k.a. Newport Place PUD) from Low
Density Residential to High Density Residential. Ordinance 096-27 changes the zoning of
lots 7 and 8 of the Plat of High Ridge Subdivision from R-1AAB to PUD LUI-5 to be part
of the Newport Place PUD (f.k.a. Stanford Park PUD).
Through the above approvals, the zoning and land use designations now allow the minimum
density required to add to the Newport Place PUD a 120 bed Assisted Living facility . You
may now proceed with the site plan approval process. (I should note that prior to submittal
of a site plan application, a master plan, revised to simply incorporate fmal staff comments,
rnu.t first bl> subm;tted ;~ t-l'pll^"te to the 1>lannl'ng ~".. '70"'-- n~__-+-~_'\ v~_ "^ur
. __ _ ___.. ..... w ....,~"""... ...v...... 0UaA.... L.J 1...i"'6 .LI'''::~a.t t.J.U,-,.l..il..,.. .lL'UI.)U
information this requirement is stated on page 24 of the staff report, which is in Planning
and Zoning Department Memorandum No. 95-692.
Sincerely,
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
J /A '~.4' #" /
-.. _' t.L-1~iA- /. ~
I
Tambri J. Heyden
Planning and Zoning Director
TJH:dar
cc: Steve Gillespie
Central File
a:Newport.72(1\.ffi.)
~merica's gateway to tfu gulfstream
qM City of
13oynton 13eacli
100 'E. 'Boynton 'Boo 'BCJUfevara
P.O. 'B11;(310
'Boynton 'Beadi, :FforUfa 33425-0310
City 9laff: (561) 375-6000
:F.9lX: (561) 375-6090
August 21, 1997
Donaldson E. Hearing
1070 E. lndiantown Road, Suite 402
Jupiter, Florida 33477
Re: Newport Place - File No. LUAR 95-006
(Land Use Plan Amendment/Rezoning)
Dear Donaldson E. Hearing:
As the applicant for the above-referenced project, enclosed is your rectified copy of the master
plan approved by the City Commission on December 19, 1995. This is being sent to you for
your files as it has been rectified and staff comments have been addressed and accurately
represents the approved master plan for Newport Place.
Sincerely,
/,- I
! ' ! ~ '7 I /..
-6'tLnL.&/2'f .,'j' )(,li:.<.,</Ct-L,,-
0' / \.1
Tambri J. Heyden, AICP
Planning and Zoning Director
Attachment
TJH:bme
s:\share\projects\Newport Place\trnsapp1.wpd
Jlmuua's gateway to tlU gulf stream.
.
COtleur
Hearing
Landscape Archil8cture
Planning
Environmental Consulting
Graphic Design
September 29, 1995
The City of Boynton Beach
Planning and Zoning Department
100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd.
Boynton Beach, FL 33425-0310
Attn: Mr. Michael Rumpf, Planner
RE: Newport Place - Planned Unit Development
Our Ref. No. 95~805
Dear Mike,
We are pleased to submit on behalf of Newport Place Associates, Inc. an application
for Land Use Amendment and Rezoning for the above referenced property. This
application requests consideration from Zoning and City Commission for an
amendment to the previously approved Stanford Park PUD. Specifically, to develop an
Assisted Living Facility on Tract #4 that would create an additional 120 beds within the
existing community.
We believe the Land Use Amendment from Low Density Residential to High Density
Residential to be consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan, as well as the
spirit and intent of the Land Development Regulations of the City. The proposed plan
provides a strong emphasis on community interaction and the increased quality of living
through enhancement of the surrounding environment.
Please find enclosed the following documents pertaining to the Land Use Amendment
and subsequent Rezoning Application:
1. Application form 2 copies
2. Warrantee Deed 2 copies
3. Owner's Certification 2 copies
4. Agent Consent Letter 2 copies
5. Sealed Boundary Survey 12 copies
6. Legal Description 2 copies
7. Certified List of all Property Owners
of at least 400 . from subject
property with mailing labels 1 copy
8. Copy of Palm Beach County's
Property Appraiser's Map 1 copy
9. Justification Statement 12 copies
Suile 402
1070 E. Indianlown Road
Jupiler, Florida 33477
407-747-6336 FAX747-1377
10. Traffic Trip Generation Analysis 12 copies
11. Comparative Analysis for Water
and Wastewater 12 copies
12. Land Use, Zoning, Aerial Maps
of Subject Property (reduced
t081/2'x11') 12 copies
13. Comprehensive Plan
Comparative Project Analysis 12 copies
14. Master Plan 12 copies
15. Application fees:
Land Use Amendment $1,750.00
DCA Transmittal $ 500.00
Rezoning $1.500.00
Total $3,750.00
Should you require any further information or have any questions pertaining to the
attached documents, please contact either Don Hearing or myself.
Steve Gillespie
Associate
Ene.
cc: Ron Aylor (NelNport Plaee Assoc.)
SG:cc
G:\Projects\GeneraJ\Nwpt-c1
.
Cotleur
Hearing
landscape Archileclure
Planning
Environmental Consulting
Graphic Design
~ f?5stf!,.
I~r~};;?l~
1 I I
PUIl'!H:~'S !\r.:IJ
, 7C,,::O:; '?T. ~.... J'
~'''''- - . ...
October 25, 1995
The City of Boynton Beach
Planning and Zoning Department
100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd.
Boynton Beach, FL 33425-0310
Attn: Mr. Michael G. Haag
RE: Newport Place - PUD Master Plan
Our Ref. No. 95-0805
Dear Mike,
Pursuant to the action taken by the City's Technical Review Committee on October 18.
1995 in connection with the above referenced project, we are hereby transmitting a
revised set of all applicable submittal documents, in addition to responding to your
comments.
A) Recreation and Park Memorandum No. 95-476 - No further action at this time.
B) Fire Prevention Memorandum No. 95-359 WOC - No further action at this time.
C) Police Department Traffic Unit - No further action at this time.
D) Building Division Memorandum No. 95-385 - No further action at this time.
E) Public Work Department Memorandum No. 95-188 - No further action at this
time.
F) Planning and Zoning Department Memorandum No. 95-580 - All comments
have been addressed, as the Master Plan has been revised to reflect.
G) Development Department Engineering Division Memorandum No. 95-0404 - All
comments have been addressed, as the Master Plan has been revised to
reflect.
We believe the revised amendments to be consistent with the City's comments.
Enclosed are twelve sets of amended documents for your reference. Additionally, two
sets of documents are enclosed with the application for requesting a variance.
Suile 402
1070 E.lndianfown Road
Jupiler. Florida 33477
407.747-6336 FAX 747-J 377
Should you require any further information or have any questions pertaining to the
attached documents, please contact either Don Hearing or myself. We look forward to
appearing before the Planning and Development Board hearing on November 17,
1995. Your time and consideration on this project is greatly appreciated.
rs,
Enc.
cc: Ron Aylor (Newport Place Assoc.)
SG:cc
G:\ProjectsIGenerel\Nwpl-c2
.
COtleur
Hearing
land=pe Archileclure
Planning
Environmental Consulting
Gmphic Design
September 5, 1995
City of Boynton Beach
Planning and Zoning Department
100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd.
Boynton Beach, FL 33425-0310
Attn: Michael Rumpf, Planner
Re: Stanford Park PUD
Dear Mike,
I appreciated the opportunity to meet with you informally to discuss possible solutions
to amending the current Land Use Designation and zoning district of the above
referenced project. Access to your files was extremely helpful in gaining a sense of
what the previous development approvals entailed. I believe the option we most
recently discussed is possiby the most beneficial in all cases. As you are aware, the
City previously informed Mr. Ronald Aylor, President of Newport Place Associates, Ltd.,
of an option of amending the current Low Density Residential Land Use Designation to
Local Retail Commercial Use with subsequent rezoning of the existing Planned Unit
Development (PUD) to Planned Commercial Development. Although the PCD zoning
would substitute the limitation on density with an evaluation of intensity, it is felt that this
process would create unnecessary opposition from the surrounding residential
communities, in addition to raising flags with the Department of Community Affairs
(DCA). This process could, however, work with the support of staff and strong efforts
to inform the public of the intentions well in advance of any public hearings.
On the other hand, an alternative approach we had discussed was to amend the
current Land Use to High Density Residential (HDR) with subsequent amendment of
the existing PUD to allow for the expansion of the Newport Place facility through the
addition of a free standing, 120 bed Assisted Living Facility (ACLF). This ACLF, as
previously stated, would be located on the southern portion of Tract #4 in the Stanford
Park PUD.
We believe this option to be the most beneficial to all involved. It would be much easier
to justify amending to a higher density residential land use rather than commercial, not
only to Development of Community Affairs. but the surrounding residential
communities.
Suite 402
1070 E. Indion-. Road
Jupiter, Florida 33477
407-747.6336 FAX747.1377
[fDJ rn @ rn 0 \VI rn ~
IUDI SEP 7/gg) ~
1
WINNING ,\ND
...._SQNING DEPT. ,e,..",.
At the conclusion of our discussions, you requested that I put some figures together for
your department to review. Although the following acreages are approximate and yet
to be confirmed by Landmark Surveying, Inc., they do prove to be a justifiable solution
to this alternative Land Use Amendment.
Tract & Use Area IAc.l
#1 Convalescent Center 3.0
#2 & #3 Medical Center 2.84
#4 Assisted Living Facility 10.36
#5 Open Space 1.49
Roads & R-O-W's 3.70
Beds: Existina/Proposed
120
N/A
356/120
N/A
N/A
#6 & #7 Preserve Open Space 1.53
N/A
"Lots 7 & 8 of Highridge
1.59
N/A
Subdivision (to be utilized as Open Space)
Total
24.51 Ac.
596 Beds
.Note: Lots 7 and 8 of the Highridge Subdivision are proposed to be incorporated into
the existing PUD for Open Space area calculations.
Land Use Amendment: From LDR (4.84 DUlAC maximum) to HDR (10.8 DUlAC
maximum), including City designated DU/bed conversion of 2.3 (24.51 AC/10.8
DU/AC/2.3)= 608 beds maximum.
Taking the above data into consideration, we believe the Land Use Amendment to be
consistent with the Comprehensive Land Use Plan. The proposed addition of beds
falls below the maximum allowed within the HDR Land Use by using allowable
conversion factors. Subsequent amendments to the PUD Master Plan would include
the addition of 120 proposed beds and incorporation of Lots 7 and 8 of the Highridge
Subdivision. I will try to confirm the existing acreage by September 7th.
Please review this alternative proposal and call me with any questions or comments
that might arise. I look forward to hearing from your shortly.
I would also like to confirm our review meeting with Tambri, yourself and Carrie Parker
for September 7, 1995. Your consideration on this matter is greatly appreciated.
urs,
L .
cc: Mr. Ron Aylor, Newport Place
SG:cc
G:\Projects\Stnfd-c1
fJ'he City of
tJ3oynton tJ3eacfi
100 'E. 'Boynton 'Btadt 'Boulevard
P.O. 'Bo'{.310
'Boynton 'Beculi., 1[QriIia 33425.0310
City:JfJJU: (407) 375-6000
15fX: (407) 375-6090
November 28, 1995
Mr. Dan Weisburg, P.E., Traffic Division
Department of Engineering and Public Works
P.O. Box 21229
West Palm Beach, FL 33416-1229
RE: NEWPORT PLACE (Dept. No. LUAR 95-006)
APPLICATION FOR LAND USE ELEMENT AMENDMENT/REZONING
ANALYSIS ON AVAILABILITY OF TRAFFIC FACILITIES
Dear Mr. Weisburg:
This office has previously requested of you a review of the traffic
study for the above-referenced project. However, this office
inadvertently did not request that your review also be formulated
to satisfy requirements of the Florida Department of community
Affairs for review of plan amendments. Therefore, I respectively
request that you conduct the necessary review of the maximum
potential impacts represented by the land use classification
requested, High Density Residential. Based on the total area of
the site and existing development (beds), staff has estimated that
the proposed classification could allow a maximum of 139 additional
ACLF or nursing home beds (or 60 units based on a conversion factor
of 2.3 beds per unit). Please format this response similar to past
responses by indicating current traffic counts, capacity remaining
under the adopted standards, and impact of project traffic. To
also assist your review, I have included a location map and a copy
of a previous response from you to serve as a guide.
I thank you in advance for your response to this request.
Sincerely,
,/" - -:il J
~~Vu 9-,e~tl.~.-v
TambrJ. J. Heyden
Planning & Zoning Director
Attachments
TJH:mr
II!SCX;gE~PTRr.:!~
5tmerica's (jateway to tfU (julfstream
NOTICE OF
NOTICE OF
ZONING CHANGE /OJ, rn & rn 0 WI Kill,
LAND USE CHANGE t~l Nav:. I<J<J~ I,
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH PUBLIC HEARINGS
i ! ; :. ! . ~ \;: i!}
._.~.,~:.!L~il___
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Plannins and Development Board of the CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH.
FLORIDA. shall meet at 7:00 P. M., or as soon thereafter as the asenda permits. on Tuesday,
Deeenlber 12, 1995, at City naIl 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 HEARING will be held by the City Commission of the
City of Boynton Beach on the request below on Tuesday, December 19, '1995, at 7:00 P. M. at
the Commt..ion Chamber., or aa soon theresfter as the agenda permits,
J
I
t
II")"
fLAoJo.;,ur. lEi'r
.,.."'t'\...
,
.
NEWPORT PLACE
REQUEST:
Cotleur Hearing, Inc.
Donaldson E. Hearing
Expansion of existing Stanford Park PUD to include an addition,,]
1.59 acres and a l20-bed assisted living facility to the existing
Newport Place adult livins facility ca.npus.
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 as recorded in plat
book 22, page 6, public records of Pslm Beach 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-l-AAB (Single Family Residential)
To - PUD Planned Unit Development w/LUI 5
PETITIONER:
AGENT:
DESCRIPTION:
LOGATION:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
REQUEST:
ALL INTERESTED PARTIES ARE NOTIFIED TO APPEAR AT SAID HEARINGS IN PERSON OR BY ATTORNEY ANI>
BE HEARD. ANY PERSON WIlO DE'dDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD OR
CITY COMmSSION InTII RESPECT TO ANY HATTER CONSIDERED AT THESE MEETINGS WILL NEED TO ENS liRE
TIIAT A VERBATH! RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS HADE, WIlICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND
EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS BASED.
PLEASE CALL (407) 375-6260 FOR ANY QUESTIONS
HISCX:IlEWP.AD f;cl..t.:;lv
HR:m 1t/3Jlfff- /;//,;/ fr
REGARDING THE ABOVE HATTERS.
SllZANNE H. KRUSE, CMC/ME
CITY CLERK
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
Board of County Commissioners
Kl'n L. Foster, Chairman
[lurt Aaronson, Vice Chairman
J(aren T. Marcus
Carol A. Roberts
Warren H. Newell
Mary McCarty
Maude Ford Lee
County AdministrattH
Robert Weisman
Department of Engineering
and Public Works
January 23, 1995
Mr. Michael Rumpf
Planning & Zoning Department
100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, FL 33425-0310
RE: WOOLBRIGHT COMMERCIAL
Dear Mr. Rumpf:
The Palm Beach County Traffic Division has reviewed the revised traffic impact
study for the project entitled WoolbriQht Commercial, pursuant to the Traffic
Performance Standards in Article 7.9 of the Palm Beach County Land Development
Code. This response has been delayed because there were errors in the original
study, and the revised study was just recently received. The proposed project
consists of 22,500 square feet of retail. The build-out is 1996. The proposed
project will generate 1,541 net daily trips. The Traffic Division has determined
that the project meets the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County.
In your transmittal letter, you requested traffic information for the maximum
development scenario. That information is provided below.
Development size:
Project Traffic
Existing traffic volume on Woolbright
Volume with project traffic
LOS D for Woolbright
45,308 square feet of retail
2,409 net daily trips
27,616
28,868
29,400
If you have any questions regarding this determination, please contact me at 684-
4030.
Sincerely,
00 ~ u n In i~
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ENGINEER
Q 1./ 'c- /~
.'~....<"./~ -,,",v y' ,~ 7
Dan Weisberg, P.E.
Senior Registered Civil Engineer
File: TPS - Hun. - Traffic Study Review
p~
i
h:\traffic\diw\boyn34
"'\n Equ.J1l1ppl1rtllJlII\ - -\1111Jl1.l11\l' .\LII(llll'mplll\VI
, ,.., ", ..Ih'
nox 212~9 \Vl'~t P.111ll Be.ldl, Flnrid,1.:n-llh41229 (.H)7) t>."\.I..IlI(I()
""nl~ORT ~L("lC.
1 o1ca7'5...~I3"'~'"
1::.@1
*
Newport Place
A Full Service Retirement Community
..
fn)~@~owrnrnl
iL~l\ JUN ') 81996 I~
L_._Cd...._-==:J
h ;,t~:~iNG hND
_u...~.._ fO\~\.~G DE-PT.
If A X
MESSAG.!
TO:j-1' C(.,JAcL RvHPP.
COMPANY, C-I"N t>F- gl>'1~Tr>;.j .g~
FAX NUMBER' >'7>" ~ ~t>'1()
f).eaA.. /1. ~ .
~
MESSAGE: of -I-~ -;k.A.f.A.~~"" ':CJ ~ ..,qL 1'11>:'85'<1""
~ ~ ~ ~ r ~"/O<...... :t....:u 'J!. -<;- v,,~-!!J
_ ,4.~ 7/', rl? ...... ~ ~"'~.7"':-t'-f
~ d!",t-r-{,..<4 .J yt-~ r ~. ~.icJTf~./-. A.
~ fp 1~<tN"~. t<.A- w~;/o- ~ &-<H<~ ..-~
~ ~ ,u.. ~ui'-~' ,12 --"" "*'7 ~ ....p.. ~. .-..
t;::R.-~~;:;:;~~~-
JZp ~.;.t..L I~" l.tJ *,1I""~id L..~ tt=..~:'1/~ ....~,;'J,-;I,.~ .
~ ~~~~~~)...k<-d...jP4~....
~ ~--r---"'" iI><""~..A, -r-~....J
r:? ~~ ---~~. JjY"'......t<l!..-n.;w:..
~. r. afi~' ':;Z:- r'/~ ,...... ~, -"- ~
~, ~ 4, ' ..;;d ~ ~ ,4 ....s....
. ,...A-ft< ~~e~1
1"1~ ~ r ~ ;Ltuz. ~ ... ...,f) dt__Avlc.e. /
DATE: fe>1'Z~f{p
TOTAL PAGES: 2-
p7 /J /1.
FROM, ~ ~
4735 N W Scv' tl C
. ., en \ our!. Lantana, Florida 33"'62 ("'071 586-6455 Pax \407) 586-0828
NEWPORT PLACE
14137586121828
P.02
July 1, 1996
Mr. Ronald L. Aylor
Managing Fartne~
Newport Place
4735 N.W. Seventh Court
Lantana, Fl. 33462
Dear Mr. Aylor:
We recently received a letter dated JUne 7, 1996, from the
State of Florida Department ot community Affairs finding the
Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Ordinance 096-26) in
compliance, Ordinances 096-26 and 096-27 were adopted by
the City of Boynton Beach on April 16, 1996.
Ordinance 096-26 changes the land designation for the Plat
of Stanford Park and Lots 7 and 8 of the Plat of High Rid~e
Subdivision (together a.k.a. Newport Place) from Low DenSlty
Residential to High Density Residential. Ordinance 096-27
changes the zoning of lots 7 and 8 of the Plat of High Ridge
Subdivision from R-lAAS to POD LUI-5 to be part of the
Stanford Park PUD (a.k.a., Newport Place).
Through the above approvals, the zoning and land use
designations now permit the development of a 120 bed
Assisted Living Facility within the Stanford Park PUD
(a.k.a., Newport Place). You may now proceed with the
filing of a building permit application for your project.
Sincerely,
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
Michael W. Rumpf
Senior Planner
~~
YVONNE ZIEL TRAFFIC CONSULTANTS, INC.
918 U.S. Highway One, Lake Park, Florida 33403
Telephone (407) 842-0907. Facsimile (407) 842-9284
September 20, 1995
Mr. Michael Haag
Planning & zoning Department
City of Boynton Beach
100 East Boynton Beach Boulevard
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425
RE: Stamford ACLF
Dear Mr. Haag:
Yvonne Ziel Traffic Consultants, Inc. has been retained to prepare
a trip generation analysis for the above referenced project,
located at Hypoluxo Road and 7th Court. The project has been
approved for an ACLF with 272 dwelling units, the applicant is
proposing to increase the dwelling units by 52 to a total of 324
units.
Attached are the trip generation calculations for both the approved
and proposed uses. Trip generation indicates that the change
results in an increase of 112 daily trips. Since the increase is
less than 200 daily trips, according to section 7.9. (I) G,
Subsection 1. (C) (1), a complete traffic study is not required.
Please contact me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
T
INC.
Ziel, P.E.
nt
Enclosure
C Mr. Dan Weisberg, Palm Beach County
Traffic Engineering and Planning
TABLE 1
STAMFORD ACLF
TRIP GENERATION RATES
24-Sep-95
02:41 :26 PM
AM PEAK TRIP
RATES
PM PEAK TRIP
RATES
LAND USE
IACLF/DU
SOURCE: INSTITUTE OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERS, TRIP GENERATION, 5TH EDITION
SOURCE: PALM BEACH COUNTY IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE- ADT
ITE
CODE
ADT
TRIP RATES
TOTAL
PERCENT
ENTER EXIT
TOTAL
PERCENT
ENT:: EXI:1
252
2.145
0.06
61 39
0.17
TABLE 2
STAMFORD ACLF
TRIP GENERATION - APPROVED UNITS
LAND USE
IACLF/DU
SIZE
ADT
TRIPS
AM PEAK TRIPS
TOTAL ENTER EXIT
272
583
16
10
6
PM PEAK TRIPS
TOT:L ENT:6R EX~: I
TABLE 3
STAMFORD ACLF
TRIP GENERATION - PROPOSED UNITS
LAND USE
SIZE
ADT
TRIPS
AM PEAK TRIPS
TOTAL ENTER EXIT
PM PEAK TRIPS
TOTAL ENTER EXIT
ACLF/DU
324
695
19
12
8
55
31
24
APPROVED TRIPS:
TRIP INCREASE/(DECREASE):
583
112
16
3
10
2
6
1
46
9
26
5
20
4
*
Newport Place
fj -1 /J
1-'
i
~,11:ii:..
I
^ Pull Service Retirement Community
October 5, 1994
Mr. William Hukill
City Engineer
The City of Boynton Beach
100 East Boynton Beach Blvd.
P. O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, Fl. 33425-0310
Re: Hold Harmless Agreement
Dear Mr. Hukill:
Newport Place abrees to save and hold harmless the City of Boyhton Beach for
any claims for injury or damages to persons or property arising frOm a parking
space narrower than nine feet in the two covered parking areas constructed at
Newport Place in October, 1994.
Very truly yours,
Newport Place Associates, Ltd.
by Newport Place, Inc., General Partner
/~~&t/0L~
Ronald l. Aylor
President
Swam to and subscribed before me this 5th day of October, 1994.
, Notary Pu~~ <-I' I / My Commission Expires:
qQa.J 1 rr!&tf}o..-.P ..$)\1/1:\ L1HDAF.tfOUANtj
loW' ;, MY COMIIISSIOH , cc 228<<l8
~. . < EXPIRES: Seplombo, 3. 11198
".' _1Jw~_,-,
4735 N. W. Seventh Court, I "I)t~n~, Fh'rid~ 33462 (407) 58(> 'is Fax (407) 586-0828
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM NO. 94-309
TO:
,~~~~~i J. Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
~am Hukill, P.E., City Engineer
September 30, 1994
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
NEWPORT PLACE, AKA STANFORD PARK
We have measured subject parking/carport installation and discussed
the code variations until we are nearly blue in the face. The
actual measured variations from the 9' wide parking stalls
specified in the Parking Lot (Chapter 5, Section x, Page 446)
portion of the code vary from about 7/8" to 27/8". In our opinion,
that constitutes a minor change.
The bad news is that we can find nothing in the code permitting
administrative relief short of entering the formal variance process
outlined on pages 450.7 & 450.8 of the code. It would seem
reasonable for a procedure to be established authorizing
administrative review of this type of situation in the future.
Our only apparent choice is to require the applicant to submit an
application and fee through the formal process. One alternative I
see is to take this case to the P & D Board informally and ask if
they support giving the City Engineer latitude in this and similar
situations, and if they do, proceeding to the City commission.
Another possible alternative, now that the City Engineer and
Building Official are one and the same, is to declare this a
decision to be made by the Building Official, subject to appeal
through the Building Board of Adjustment and Appeals. After
October 1st the latter method would speed up the process.
By copy of this memo I am asking City Manager Parker for input on
possible procedural changes.
WVH/ck
C:NEWPORT.LOT
xc: Carrie Parker, City Manager
Al Newbold, Dep. Bldg. Official
Jim Du Vall, Engineering Insp.
ENGINEERING DIVISION MEMORANDUM NO. 94-314
TO:
Tambri J. Heyden
Planning & Zoning Director
~~/iLam ~ukill, P.E.
(:JJfJf5l. En g ~ nee r
October 4, 1994
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
NEWPORT PLACE AKA STANFORD PARK
I have discussed the 2" dimensional discrepancy on the covered
parking stalls at subject location with City Manager Parker and we
both agree that the applicant should be allowed to proceed with
construction, A satisfactory document holding the City harmless
against future claims should be provided by the applicant.
WVH/ck
C:NEWPORT.STL
xc: Carrie Parker, City Manager
~
Or.T 4 1994
PlANNING AND
ZONING DEPT.
tJ1ie City of
'Boynton 'Beacli
100 'E. 'Boynton 'Beadi '1loulevartl
P.O. 'Bo't310
'Boynton 'Beadi, J'fmUfa 33425.0310
City %Jfl: (407) 375-6000
J'.9IX: (407) 375..(j()9()
OF THE CITY ENGINEER
October 6, 1994
Mr. Ronald L. Aylor, President
Newport Place Associates, Ltd.
4735 N.W. Seventh Court
Lantana, FL 33462
Re: Newport Place
Dear Mr. Aylor:
As you know the City Manager and I recently allowed you to continue
construction of the two covered parking canopies at Newport in
spite of the slight dimensional discrepancy between supports.
Please do not interpret this to include future canopies which do
not provide 9' clear for each parking space, as our variance
applies only to the two canopies already partially completed.
Very truly yours,
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
?{://f&rc;1" ~ 6d/
William Hukill, P.E.
City Engineer
WVH/ck
C:NEWPORT.PL
xc: Carrie Parker, City Manager
Tambri Heyden, Planning & Zoning Director
JImerica's (jateway to tfie (julfstream
VA~/fWcE ~.
A/PtliAflOllJ .
.
Cotleur
Hearing
landscape Architecture
Planning
Environmental Consulting
Graphic Design
ii , i;
I', Ii f'. ,[
OCT 28
L- -".....
October 25. 1995
..
The City of Boynton Beach
Planning and Zoning Department
100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd.
Boynton Beach, FL 33425-0310
Attn: Mr. Michael G. Haag
RE: Newport Place - PUD Master Plan
Our Ref. No. 95~805
Dear Mike,
Pursuant to the action taken by the City's Technical Review Committee on October 18.
1995 in connection with the above referenced project. we are hereby transmitting a
revised set of all applicable submittal documents. in addition to responding to your
comments.
A) Recreation and Park Memorandum No. 95-476 - No further action at this time.
B) Fire Prevention Memorandum No. 95-359 woe - No further action at this time.
C) Police Department Traffic Unit - No further action at this time.
D) Building Division Memorandum No. 95-385 - No further action at this time.
E) Public Work Department Memorandum No. 95-188 - No further action at this
time.
F) Planning and Zoning Department Memorandum No. 95-580 - All comments
have been addressed. as the Master Plan has been revised to reflect.
G) Development Department Engineering Division Memorandum No. 95-0404 - All
comments have been addressed. as the Master Plan has been revised to
reflect.
We believe the revised amendments to be consistent with the City's comments.
Enclosed are twelve sets of amended documents for your reference. Additionally, two
sets of documents are enclosed with the application for requesting a variance.
Suite 402
1070 E. Indionlown Road
Jupiter, Florida 33477
407.747-6336 FAX 747.1 377
Should you require any further information or have any questions pertaining to the
attached documents, please contact either Don Hearing or myself. We look fOlWard to
appearing before the Planning and Development Board hearing on November 17.
1995. Your time and consideration on this project is greatly appreciated.
rs,
Steve Gillespie
Associate
Ene,
ee: Ron Aylor (Newport Plaee Assoc,)
SG:cc
G:\ProjectsIGenerallNwpl-c2
FORMICA & ASSOCIATES
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
1600 NW. 2nd Avenue, Suite 15180ca Raton, FL 33432/(407) 368.3611
City of Boynton Beach Building Department
POBox 310
120 NE 2nd AVE
Boynton Beach. FI 33435
November 8, 1995
Attn: Chief Electrical Inspector
Ref: Portofino Fountain Electrical Wiring
Dear Sir,
I have reviewed the electrical wiring for the fountain located in the Portofino project courtyard,
Although routing high and low voltage wires in the same conduit is frowned upon by the National
Electrical Code, I feel that in this particular case there is not a hazard to public safety for the following
reasons stated below:
I. The insulation jacket for both high and low voltage conductors is 600 volts.
2, The conduit is non<onductive PVC.
3. Each circuit is protected by GF! circuit breakers.
4. The lighting and the pump will not be operating simultaneously on a continuous basis.
If you have any questions regarding my professional opinion on this matter, please call me.
Sincerely,
Robert F. Formica P.E.
\',<
!,,:
h~
,)~
~~I
.~
"I
: ~.
.'<:
~\,
.'
"
"
:\:
f
~':
.'
r
~~
1~
~;
.
t:
t:i
}',"
i~
:.i-
I,,'
\~
'to
~~:
~,
~
p:
,;
"
-'..
..,.'
, U ' Hl::::.H~ If'JG lr'-J.L
....l1.d'/.(.4.,~b..;;Jb eLl I LI:::=. .....
~I.:::.lW
t-'l.:::l.d.-
...." .....11
ULI
1 ,,^"'T
,.;..:1.' ':::d.'=:J 1.:.t ~ l.::.~b
407'/418331
. . ...
. . . ... ..... .(":i r- .
.,. II
'l'h1J "...~..__J U"." 'aQle'lUl3t' iHltJ.t.l.Q&1R *"1\8 >>1....... ...11 .on;a.ftg 8CHU':d t:o
QTant 1::0 olalwo ~t:l1:iQ;per a vas-1l1Jl.a. to Art1al. X "l'cu;-k.t.Dg Lot.",
of Cb.pl:.~ S, "8\lild1ng, Housing and CD!Ult:J:\IOt1on Rogula.t:1ons".
of the Code of o:t'd1l1auoea of t:he City of Bo"ut= a.lUJh, J'~odcla,
as 1t: p.zot:a1n. to .the property descrlbed U th18 appUcat:.1on. IUI.d
for t:ba zoealllOIUJ stAtAd below;
Section, Sub.cation, a.nd iaragr~ number of Ilpoo.1f.1a l'acnurfllMnt:
to whlch YArilUloe 2.1 :r:sqnaat:e4, aM ~ot: l~9'e contained in
t:he Code.
Section 23-9 H,'
Number of driveways.
from any proper~y.
No mors ehan (2) driveways shall hQ p~~m~+'~~d
Where properties abue, mo~e than one (1) pu~11c
or privato right-ot-way, additional driveways =ay be permitted,
depending upon erattic volumes, but in no instance shall the'number
Of driveways exceed two on ~ach street.
Nature o~ Vcu:ilWce llOqueatedl Two additional jl~""""
points into Planned Unit Dev~~ODment ox Newport Place off
N.W. 7th Court.
Btate%llBnt of Special eomUt1ons, HardshiPs. or othe:: realJons
.:Justifyil\g' ~he 'I Reqa8Utad varLance I attached add.t.doul Meset.,
neceqaa.r:y) I ,
See attached Ju6tificat1on Statement
.
if
u) \W.) undelC tBllld that tbis Qpl1aat1on an4 all ~pe:r. 01' plll1l.
.\JJlm.i.l;te4 hel:' itlll btlccxaa u. put of the pe=anant reCoz4ll of the
Pl.anning and :rWnlf HQud.
(!) (We) her 1!rU't:1fr thAt: the llllove statements and. the
statemenb or 1nlll!l JIl4de 111 any 8 0 laDa subaLitl:4ul
herewi tb are ue t.o i:he beat Qf our) w1sd~e. '!J)hill
application w 11 not be ac:cept 8 low.
D&te;
A:pkLotVar
If
~l\