Loading...
REVIEW COMMENTS PLANNING DEPARTMENT MEMORANDUM 90-209 TO: Jay D. Mussman, Assistant city Attorney FROM: Timothy P. Cannon, Interim Planning Director DATE: June 26, 1990 SUBJECT: Alhambra Scruare- Declaration of Covenants and Restrictions In response to your memorandum dated June 22, 1990 (copy attached), please be advised that the Planning Department has no objections with the conditions in the Declaration that are above and beyond the Agreement or that refine conditions of the Agreement. However, any provisions in the Declaration that contradict the Agreement should be deleted from the Declaration. ~ );? ~/~ . Timo y P. Cannon TPC:ccc Enclosure cc: City Manager Central File JUN-22-'90 15:04 ID:JOSIA5 AHD GOREH TEL fIO:305-771-4923 ~845 P06 To; James J. Golden Senior City Planner F ronu Timothy P. Cannon Interim Planning Dir~otor 3ay D. MUllllMan AlIsistant City Attorney ReI Alhambra Square - Dealar.~ion of Covenant. and Re8~riotiong (hereinafter nDealaration") and Stipulation and Settlement Agreement (hereinafter "Agreement") June 22, 1990 Date. This memorandum is in response relative to the above captioned comments regarding the Declaration to your Memorandum Number 90151 matter. The following are our and Agreement. The Declaration and Agreement contain the following inconsistenciesl 1) The Agreement does not provide tor any type ot building set baCk requirements frOm any property lines. 2) The Agreement provides that all dumpsters shall be located away from adjacent residential aress however the Declaration provides that no dumpster shall be located directly adjacent to sinale family residential areas. As a result, the Declaration shall be amended to read in accordance with the Agreement. 3) The Agreement provides on Page 4 that construction of the six (6) foot zoning boundary wall shall be coordinated with the governing association of th~ adjacent residential property and existing buffer head shall be removed and replaced with the sod and landscaping to the specifications of the governing association and at no cost to the governing association. 4) The Declaration provides that all utilities shall be installed und~r9round howev~r the S~1pulation does not provide for same. 5) The wall made reference to and defined on Page 5 of the Agreement relating to Alhambra Square South and Alhambra Square ACLF dO"'lI not: -- - RECEIVED dUN 25 i~G;" PbANNING tl~f3f: JUI,-22-'90 15:05 ID:JOSIAS AIID GOREH TEL 110:305-77.1-4923 ~845 F"07 provide for the height of the wall. Aocordingly any reference to the he1ght shall be deleted and be in acoordance with the Agreement. 6) The Deolaration provides on Pages 3 and 4. Paragraph (e)(7) that if a plan and I or specification is SUbmitted for approval and if no written objection to same is delivered within thirl:y (30) daya from the date thereof, it shall be deemed, to have been approved. There i. no such reference made in the Agreement and aooordingly eame ahould be deleted. 7) ArHole IV of the Declllration should be amended l:o l:rack the language of Paragraph 11 of l:he Agreement. S) Article VII of the Oeclaration doea not track the language of tbe Agreement and accordingly .hall be deleted in 1l:8 entirety except tor the reference that l:he DeolaraHon ehall run with the land for the benefi~ of the City and all adjacent property owners and shall be 1n perpetuity. g) paq. 1 of the Deolaration .pe~ifi~ally ll1akes reterence to the governing .ssoclations and in this regard it, Is unclear whether Golfview RatbOur Homeowners Association and Golfvlew Barbour Estates, Ino., AS reflected in the Declaration 18 the same as those entities desctibed in the Agreement, which states Golfview Harbour and Golfview Barbour Estates. Accordingly, we need additional clarifioation regarding theee entities and if they are the same and if so, what are their correct namee. The oeclaral:1on must be consistent and In accord with the Aqreement, ae the Agreement Is a binding, legally enforceable Stipulation previously entered into. Upon your review of the above, please contact me 80 that we may discuss this In greater detail. I have been in contact with Robert A. BIsen, Esquire and lie is very anxious to coopeute with the City in order to facilItate the nece8sary modifications of the Declarsl:ion and to complete this matter. Respectfully BubBitted, lp::sMAN Assistant City Attorn.y CCI J. Scott Miller, City Manager JDM!jmw l'IIellos/alhalllbra Pllg8 2 of 2 , JUN-22-'90 15:04 ID:JOSIRS RND GOREN TEL NO:305-771-4923 11845 P06 TOI James J. Golden Senior City Planner Timothy P. Cannon Interim Planning nirQctor F rOllll 3ay D. MUllllman Assi.tant City Attorney Re. Alhambra Square - Declaration of Cov.nants and Relltrictionll (hereinafter "Declaration") and Stipulation and Settlement Agreement (hereinafter "Agr.ement") June 22, 1990 Date. Thia memorandum ia in response to your Memorandum Number 90l5l relative to the ,above captioned matter. The fallowing are our commente regarding the Declaration and Agreement. The Declaration and Agreement contain the tollowing inoonsistenciesl 1) The Agreement does not provide for any type Of building set baCk requirements fr~m any property l1nes. 2) The Agreement provides that all dumpsters shall be located away from adjacent residential areas however the Declaration provides that no dumpster shall be located directly adjacent ,to sinGle family residential areas. As a result, the Declaration shall be amended to read in accordance with the Agreement. J) The Agreement provides on Page 4 that oonstruction of the six (6) foot zoning boundary wall shall be coordinated with the governing association of the adjacent residential property and existing buffer head shall be removed and replaced with the sod and landscaping to the specifications of the governing association and at no cost to the governing association. 4) The Declaration provides that all utilities allall be installed underground however the stipulation does not provide for same. 5) Tbe wall mada raference to and defined on Page 5 of the Agreement relating to Alhallbra Square Soutb and Alhambra Square ACLP doeR not .., RECEIVED JUN 25 191) PLANNING OlPf. JUN-22-'90 15:05 ID:JOS1AS AND GOREN TEL NO: 305-77.J -4923 "845 P07 proqide for the height of ~he wall. Aooordin91y any referonae to the beight shall be deleted and be in aocordance with the Agree.ent. 6) The Declaration provides on Pages 3 and 4. Paragraph [C)(?) that if a plan and / or specifioation is SUbmitted for approval and if no written objeotion to same is delivered within thirty (30) daYII from the da~e thereof, it shall be deemed. to have been approved. There ie no Buch reference made in the Agreement and aocordingly eame should be deleted. 7) ArHcle IV of the Decluation .hould b. amended to track the language of Para9raph II of the Agreement:. 8) Article VII of the Deolaration dOes not track the language of the Agreement and acoordingly ehall be deleted in it. entirety except for the reference that the DealaraHon IIhall nil ...H.h the !Dna tor the benefit of the City and all adjaoent property owners and shall be in perpl!t:uity. 91 paqa 1 of the Deolaration specifically lI1/Skes reterenoe to the governing a..ooiatione and in thie regerd it,1s unolear whether Golfvi.", Barbour BOllleowners A815oclation and Golfview BU'bour Estates, Ina., a. refleoted in the Declaration 1s the same as those entities desoribed in the Agreement, which states Goltview Barbour and GOlfview Barbour Estates. Aooordingly, we need additional olarification regarding these entities and if they are the same and if so, what are their oorrect names. The Declaretion must be consistent and in accord with the Agreement, es the Agreement is a binding, legally enforceable Stipulation previously entered into. upon your review of the above, pleaa. oontact 11141 so that we may discuss this in greater detail. I have been In contact with Robert A. Btsen, Bsquire and he is very anxious to cooperllte with the City in order to faoilitate the necessary modifications of the Declaration and to complete this matter. Respectfully submitted, ~f;::SMAN Assistant City Attorney CCI J. Scott Miller, City Manager JDM!jmw lIellol/alhambra Page 2 of 2 , M E M 0 RAN DUM December 30, 1988 TO: CHAIRMAN AND MEMBERS PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD FROM: CARMEN S. ANNUNZIATO, PLANNING DIRECTOR RE: ALHAMBRA SQUARE ACLF-CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION The pUblic hearing for the above-referenced application was continued at the December 15, 1988 special meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board, as the site plan was determined to be incomplete by the Technical Review Board. The applicant did not resubmit the site plan for review by the Technical Review Board at the December 19, 1988 deadline owing to the fact that there were only four days between the special meeting date and the December 19th deadline to revise and resubmit the site plan documents. In addition, the applicant is awaiting the outcome of the public hearing before the City commission on January 4, 1989 for the land use element amendment/rezoning request which, if approved, will enable the applicant to further pursue the Conditional Use application. If the City commission approves the land use element/rezoning application, it is recommended that the public hearing be continued to the February l4, 1989 meeting at 7:30 p.m. Otherwise, this item should be deleted from the agenda. ... c.. ,~ CARMEN S. ANNUNZI~ - -- CSA:ro cc Central File MEMORANDUM TO: Mr. Carmen Annunziato Planning Director DATE: December 28, 1988 FROM: Sue Kruse Deputy City Clerk RE: City Commission Meeting of January 4, 1989 Attached please find a letter received from the Cedarwood Villas Homeowners Association supporting the applications submitted by Norman J. Michael and Milnor Corporation, scheduled to be heard by the City Commission on January 4. ~/.~ smk Attachment cc: City Attorney City Manager Mayor & City Commission . R"ECn1\Toi.D, ,1=(', 2,8 'l~ , \1'2?~" ~ MEMORANDUM 10 December 1988 TO: Chairman and Members Planning and Zoning Board FROM: Carmen S. Annunziato Planning Director RE: Alhambra square South Land Use Amendment/Rezoning Request Summary: Charles Putman & Associates, Inc., agent for Norman and Elishka Michael, property owners, is requesting that the Future Land Use Element for a 4.368 acre parcel be amended from "Low Density Residential" to "Office Commercial" and that this parcel be rezoned from R-1AA to C-1 (Office/Professional). The parcel is located at the southeast corner of South Congress Avenue and Golf Road (S.W. 23rd Avenue) and has a 335 frontage on Congress Avenue and a 500 foot frontage on Golf Road. On December 16, 1986, the City adopted the Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report (Ordinance No. 86-54) which amended the Future Land Use Element for this parcel from "Moderate Density Residential" to "Low Density Residential." The proposed use of this proeprty, if rezoned, would be to develop it for aJ57,800 square foot professional/medical office complex including a financial institution with a drive-through facility (see attached conceptual site plan). Surrounding Land Use and Zoninq (see attached location map): Abutting the subject parcel to the north is the 80 foot wide right-of-way for Golf Road. Further to the north, across Golf Road, is a 4.0l acre vacant parcel zoned R-1AA (PUD). An application has been submitted for this parcel which proposes that the Future Land Use Element be amended from "Moderate Density Residential" to "Office Commercial" and that this parcel be rezoned from R-1AA (PUD) to C-1 (Office/Professional) for the purpose of constructing a 66,600 square foot professional/medical office complex (Alhambra Square North) similar to that proposed for this parcel (Alhambra Square South). To the northeast, across Golf Road, is the Leisureville Planned Unit Development.Abutting the subject parcel to the east is a five acre parcel zoned R-1AA (Single-Family Residential) which is currently vacant and is under the same property ownership. An application has been submitted for this parcel which proposes that the Future Land Use Element be amended from "Low Density Residential" to "High Density Residential" and that this parcel be rezoned from R-1AA to R-3 (Multi-Family Residential) for the purpose of seeking Conditional Use approval for an Adult Congregate Living Facility (Alhambra Square ACLF). Abutting the subject parcel to the south is a 100 foot wide right-of-way for the L.W.D.D. L-27 Canal (Lazy Lake Waterway). Further to the south, across the canal right-of-way, is the Gulfview Harbor Estates development. These are 1 and 2 story mUltiple-family dwelling units zoned R-3. Abutting the subject parcel to the west is the 120 foot wide right-of-way for Congress Avenue. Further to the west, across Congress Avenue, is the Silverlake Estates development. This project is a planned unit development (PUD) approved under the name "Cranbrook Lake Estates." To the northwest, across Congress Avenue, is an 1l.74 acre vacant parcel which lies within the Quail Lake Planned Unit Development. Site plans for this parcel were previously approved under the names "Savannah Place" and "Sutton Place." The former site plan has since expired and the latter site plan was withdrawn by the property owner shortly after approval. -2- Present Zoning: The present R-IAA zoning would allow for the development of about 20 single-family lots. The R-1AA zoning requires a minimum 8,000 square foot lot with a 75 foot frontage. These lots could be developed so as to face away from Congress Avenue and Golf Road, and in fact, Palm Beach County and City policies would prohibit residential driveways on these two thoroughfares. Access could be provided to the property by a local street connection to Golf Road or to S.W. 13th Street, if the eastern parcel is utilized. Rezoninq: Rezoning to C-l, Office/Professional, would permit professional or office buildings up to two stories height (25 feet) or up to 30 feet if under-building parking is utilized. Uses permitted in the C-1 zoning district include churches, financial institutions, funeral homes, governmental facilities, hospitals, medical/professional offices, nursing and convalescent homes, pharmacies, veterinary offices and clinics, nursery schools, instruction or tutoring, academic schools, and copying service. Nursery schools and instruction or tutoring greater than 2,000 square feet in floor area require Conditional Use approval. The rear and side yard setbacks abutting the residential properties to the south and east would be 30 feet. A six foot buffer wall or hedge two feet in height at time of planting and maintained at a height of six feet would also be required along these property lines. The applicant proposes to build a 57,800 square foot professional/medical office complex including a financial institution with a drive-through facility. Under the City's development regulations, a maximum of about 76,000 square feet of office floor space could be built on the parcel if under building parking is utilized. Approval of this rezoning request would also set a precedent for the commercial rezoning of the vacant parcel abutting this parcel on the east side and the two vacant parcels located at the northeast and northwest corners of the intersection. Comprehensive Plan-Future Land Use Map: The property in question is currently shown on the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan as "Low Density Residential," so an amendment to the Future Land Use Element to "Office Commercial," as requested by the applicant would be necessary. Comprehensive Plan-Text: The following Comprehensive Plan policies are relevant to this rezoning request. "Provide a suitable living environment in all neighborhoods." (p.6) "Provide a range of land use types to accommodate a full range of services and activities." (p.7) "Eliminate existing and potential land use conflicts." (p.7) "Encourage the development of complimentary land uses." (p.7) "Encourage the development of commercial land uses where accessibility is greatest and where impacts to residential uses are minimized." (p.7) "Provide for efficient and safe movement within the City." (p.7) "Encourage the development of clustered neighborhood and community commercial centers at arterial and collector intersections." (p.39) In addition to the broad Comprehensive Plan policies outlined above, the parcel is designated in the Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report as an area of potential land use conflict (Area 39). The language for Area 39 reads as follows: The recommendation contained in the original draft of this report that the west half of Area 39 be changed to a High Density Residential land use category and the R-3 zoning district has been deleted. Therefore, the R-IAA zoning on this parcel should -3- continue and the land use should be shown as "Low Density Residential." The Planning Department's recommendation that the land use for the west half of area 39 be changed to "High Density Residential" was modified by the City commission during public hearings which preceded the adoption of the Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report. The Future Land Use Plan designation was instead amended from "Moderate Density Residential" to "Low Density Residential" to reflect the desire of the residents in the vicinity of this intersection to retain the existing low density residential character that currently exists. Issues/Discussion 1. Whether development of this property for commercial uses will have an adverse impact on surrounding residential properties. The property is of sufficient size and depth so that it could be developed without causing significant adverse impacts on the existing mUlti-family residences which lie to the south across the canal. The types of uses that are allowed in the C-l zoning district generally do not create nuisances such as litter, odors, noise, or glare and usually do not operate after 6:00 p.m. However, the use of this property for offices would change the character of the neighborhood, considering that there is no commercial zoning or commercial land uses established in the vicinity. Furthermore, approval of this rezoning request would set a precedent for the rezoning of the abutting parcel to the east (Alhambra Square ACLF), the R-lAA (PUD) zoned parcel at the northeast corner of the intersection (Alhambra Square North) and the vacant 11.74 acre parcel within the Quail Lake Planned Unit Development. As a condition of site plan approval, if this request is approved, it is recommended that the six foot high concrete block wall be provided along the southern property boundary, and that the parking lot lighting along this property line be directed away from the existing residences. Although it is not anticipated that this facility would experience significant use during the evening hours, parking lot lighting is often activated during the evening hours to enhance on-site security and to assist the Police Department in patrolling the property. 2. Whether development of this property for commercial uses will have a significant impact on roads in the vicinity. As a result of the adoption of the new growth management legislation, it is appropriate to review all rezonings and/or Comprehensive Plan amendments on the basis of infrastructure capacity. This is particularly important when attempting to analyze whether or not the adopted Comprehensive Plan Thoroughfare Plan Map provides enough capacity to meet the needs of any request which will intensify the level of land development, thus potentially creating more traffic than the system was designed to carry. The applicant's traffic engineer, K.S. Rogers, Inc., has submitted a traffic impact analysis which analyzes the impact of the proposed developments (Alhambra Square North, South and the ACLF) on roadways and intersections in the surrounding area. In addition, Mr. Roger's impact statement was reviewed by Walter H. Keller, Jr., Inc., the City's traffic consultant, to determine consistency with adopted City and County codes and ordinances. Both reports can be found in Exhibit "A" of this memorandum. As a basis for view of plan amendment and rezoning requests, the City has adopted Level of Service (LOS) C as the base standard, which provides for stable operating roadway conditions even though backups may occur. LOS D is acceptable only during peak season. No approval for development shall be adopted until it -4- can be demonstrated that the roadway system serving the proposed development meets these criteria. In addtion to the above, it is also appropriate to review plan amendment and rezoning requests with the recently adopted Palm Beach County Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance (Ordinance No. 87-18) as Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes, Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act, mandates that the City coordinate its plan policies with those of the state, county, region, and neighboring municipalities. These projects, if approved, would place additional traffic on the state and county road systems. Mr. Keller's analysis of the report prepared by K.S. Rogers, Inc. can be summarized as follows: A. Trip Generation: Both daily and peak hour traffic volumes meet or exceed calculated volumes. B. Trip Distribution: Results were almost identical. C. Proqrammed Improvements: There are three programmed roadway improvements in the study area which all involve Congress Avenue. These improvements should either be completed or under construction at the time of project completion. D. Traffic Assiqnment: The assignment is reasonable based on the calculated trip generation and traffic distribution. E. Background Traffic: The applicant's submittal does not provide documentation on the background traffic analysis. Supporting information should be submitted by the applicant to document existing traffic counts collected, historical traffic growth, and the generation and assignment of approved projects. F. Future Traffic Impacts: The applicant's future traffic impact analysis is reasonable, subject to the submission of the background traffic documentation. No roadway improvements are required except for those proposed for the project driveways. G. Conformance with City and County Standards: The report is consistent with both City and County requirements, subject to the submission of the background traffic documentation. Based on the above, the proposed development, if approved, will not have a significant impact on roads in the vicinity. 3. Whether there is an adequate supply of office space and existing commercially-zoned property in the vicinity. There is currently about 230,000 square feet of office floor space at the intersection of Congress Avenue and Woolbright Road. On South Congress Avenue (west side) in front of the Hunters Run Planned Unit Development, there are approximately 30 acres of vacant C-3 zoned property. The above properties are located within one-half mile of the subject parcel. Within approximately one mile of the subject parcel, at the intersection of 1-95 and Woolbright Road (southwest corner), is the Pylon Interstate Park and the Boynton Commercenter Planned Industrial Development, which include 308,000 square feet of office space which has either been approved or constructed. Furthermore, there are about 8 acres of C-2 zoned property and 9.4 acres of vacant C-3 zoned property at the northwest and southwest corners of Interstate 95 and Woolbright Road. At the northwest corner of Woolbright Road and the LWDD E-4 canal is the Chua Eye Clinic, which has been approved for 14,400 square feet of medical office space. This project was recently completed. At the southwest corner of Woolbright Road and the LWDD E-4 canal is the Woolbright Professional Center, which has been approved for 26,400 square feet of professional and medical floor space. Based on the above, it can be concluded that there is already an adequate supply of office floor space and commercially-zoned property in the vicinity. -5- 4. Whether the property in question is physically and economically developable for single-family residences. Under the existing R-1AA (PUD) zoning, the property could be developed for about 20 single-family residences. If the rear of the lots are designed to back up to Congress Avenue and Golf Road and a berm and/or wall is provided along these thoroughfares, then the property could conceivably be developed for single-family detached housing. The recent construction of new Leisureville homes near the subject parcel would tend to support this conclusion. In addition, there is an existing subdivision of high priced single-family homes at the southwest corner of Congress Avenue and Golf Road (Silverlake Estates). Although the lots along Golf Road in this subdivision are separated from the intersection by an 80 foot wide canal right-of-way, the lots are along Congress Avenue are separated from Congress Avenue with only a wall. Given that this is sufficient buffering for homes in the $150,000 plus price range, it is arguable that similar buffering measures would be sufficient for R-1AA zoned lots which, when developed, would probably be in the $80,000 price range. 5.. Whether office/professional zoning would be consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies for the location of and access to commercial uses. Commercial development of properties at this intersection would be consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies for the location of commercial uses. The Comprehensive Plan encourages commercial development at arterial and collector intersections and discourages strip commercial development. Development of the SUbject property would not create strip commercial development. Commercial zoning of the property would also be consistent, in part, with the policy of encouraging "development of commercial land uses where accessibility is greatest and where impacts to residential uses are minimized. The question in this case is whether it would be appropriate to change the character of the properties in the vicinity from residential to commercial. Land Use Conflict Area 38 of the Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report recommends that commercial development should not be permitted at this intersection, as it would change the residential character of the neighborhood and could create unacceptable levels of traffic. Conclusions/Recommendations: Rezoning the subject property to Office/Professional would not have a significant impact on roads in the vicinity and would be consistent with Comprehensive Plan policies with respect to location. However, rezoning would cause a significant change in the character of the neighborhoodand may have a negative impact on abutting residential uses. This concern is reflected in the language for Land Use Conflict Area 38 of the Comprehensive Plan Evaluation and Appraisal Report. Rezoning this corner would also set a precedent for commercial zoning of the undeveloped parcels to the east, north and northwest, which would further change the character of the neighborhood. Whether the change in character is desirable is the underlying issue in this rezoning request. It is the Planning Department's conclusion that changing the character of the neighborhood from residential to commercial is not desirable and that the property is developable under the current residential zoning. Therefore, it is the Planning Department's recommendation that commercialization of this parcel not be allowed, and that the application for amending the Future Land Use Element to "Office commercial" and rezoning to C-l, Office/Professional should be denied. If it is the decision of the Planning and Zoning Board to recommend approval or the City Commission to approve this request, it is recommended that the following conditions be incorporated: -6- CONDITIONS OF ZONING APPROVAL 1. It is recommended that a six (6) foot high concrete block wall be provided along the southern property boundary. 2. Lighting shall be directed away from the abutting residential neighborhood. 3. Proper screening and noise mitigation is recommended for all mechanical equipment. 4. The applicant's traffic engineer should submit information on the background traffic as outlined in the traffic analysis prepared by Walter H. Keller, Inc. This information should be evaluated prior to second reading of ordinances to determine if any levels of service have been adversely affected. 5. Final recommendations with respect to turn lane improvements for the project driveway to be made by the Technical Review Board at the time of site plan approval. "" -~ ,-'0--.-.- ~ CARMEN S. NZIATO /bks M E M 0 RAN DUM TO: Mr. Carmen Annunziato Planning Director DATE: December 8, 1988 FROM: Betty S. Boroni City Clerk RE: Planning & Zoning Board Meeting of l2/l5/88 Attached please find a letter received from Carmen L. Ford in opposition to the applications submitted by Norman J. Michael and Milnor Corporation, scheduled to be heard by the Planning & Zoning Board on December l5. B:::'7:~A; BSB/smk Attachment cc: City Attorney City Manager Mayor & Commission P&Z Board Members: H. Blanchette M. Huckle M. Jackier D. Richter R. Walshak J. Aguila G. Lehnertz RECEIVEJ -:(' 9' 'l988 , 'J Pl.l:"".".G DEPT. - - ~ ,~ CARMEN L. FORD 1425 S. IV. 25TH AVENUE, liB BOYNTON BEACH, FL 33426 City of Boynton Beach City Commission P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach, FL 33435 RE: Notice of Zoning Change Notice of Land Use Change This is to advise you that I object to the changing of: Application No.1, from Moderate Density Residential to Office Commercial Applicant: Milnor Corporation Location: S. Congress Avenue at Golf Road, Northeast Corner Project Name: Alhambra Square North I further object to the changing of: Application Applicant: Owner: Location: Project Name: No.2, from low density Residential to C-1 (Office/Professional) Norman J. Nichael Norman & Elishka Michael South Congress Avenue at Golf Road, Southeast Corner. Alhambra Square South I further object to the changing of: Application Applicant: Owner: Location: Project Name: No.3, from Low Density Residential to Pigh Density Residential Norman J. Nichael Norman and Elishka Michael Golf Road at S.H. 13th Street, Southwest Corner Alhambra Square ACLF I am requesting all three (3) applications be denied. Any form of business in this area will decrease the residential property value and the home type atmosphere we have now. Sincerely; " If: ,..;.} .., - , (, ~l.<..i.1-~;..,J '-~ . ..)'r5/i'..{ Carmen L. Ford Date iJi' ! /-.-/ C7 '~ . ~-t-!it0?< 4-Itf ..., ~ i....-.;Ck'.' I / ' 7/:7 -:'I7.'Uv ,:2f. /'7 n , Notary / \)j \ Il.cOsj)"-. /(<Y -----V,,,,,,\ . /T.C:''').t.~, ">' "'(...".1:_ \-~.... " ';.'" \-' DEr "'~U '-11\ Ci", '.?, 10 ,- 'r~~ , ",' tc", . v88"',- ') "'''' 't~ ... I (~, , ,',..::,,.. /......'" -, ( ,.'1/ ,'- " '.. __ "\7' 1'1 1,,\ - , ;'", - Ny commission expires: Notary Public. StJtc of FlorIda at Laroe My Commi~,sion ExC';res December 18, 1988 BOl1dC'd Thru Brown & Orown. Inc. , ---' M E M 0 RAN DUM October 20, 1988 TO: BETTY BORONI, CITY CLERK FROM: JAMES J. GOLDEN, SENIOR CITY PLANNER RE: ALHAMBRA SQUARE SOUTH /ACLF Attached is a copy of the warranty deed for the above referenced rezoning applications. J:;- j~ JJG:ro Attachment MEMORANDUM --------- October 20, 1988 TO: Carmen Annunziato, City Planner FROM: Raymond A. Rea, City Attorney RE: Norman Michael Property In regard to the above entitled matter herewith I enclose copy of correspondence I received from Michael M. Listick, together with a copy of a Warranty Deed, dated November l7, 1975 from First Federal Savings and Loan Association of Broward County into Norman J. Michael and Elishka E. Michael. ~~QI- City Attorney RAR/r M E M 0 RAN DUM October 11, 1988 TO: BETTY BORONI, CITY CLERK FROM: JAMES J. GOLDEN, SENIOR CITY PLANNER RE: TRANSMITTAL OF LAND USE AMENDMENT APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ON OCTOBER 1, 1988 Accompanying this memorandum you will find a copy of the application and related documents for the following Land Use Element Amendment/Rezoning applications: 1. Boynton Beach Mall Land Use Element Amendment/Rezoning ($1,800 fee includes postage) 2. Alhambra Square North Land Use Element Amendment/Rezoning ($700 fee) 3. Alhambra Square South Land Use Element Amendment/Rezoning ($700 fee) 4. Alhambra Square ACLF Land Use Element Amendment/Rezoning ($800 fee) 5. Winchester Tract #1 Annexation and Land Use Element Amendment/Rezoning ($1,400 fee) 6. Winchester Tract #2 Annexation and Land Use Element Amendment/Rezoning ($1,400 fee) 7. Winchester Tract #3 Annexation and Land Use Element Amendment/Rezoning ($1,300 fee) 8. Jonathan's Grove Annexation and Land Use Element Amendment/Rezoning ($900 fee) The public hearing dates for the above requests have been tentatively scheduled for December lS, 1988 and January 4, 1989 pending approval by the Planning and Zoning Board and City Commission respectively. Legal advertisements (one-quarter page map ads) will be prepared by the Planning Department and forwarded to your office upon completion. ~t-~ JbMES J I GOLDEN JJG:ro cc Central File