AGENDA DOCUMENTS
NOT ICE
The following proposed ordinance which is published by caption only
was read at the regular meeting of the City Council of the City of
Boynton Beach, Florida, on the 20th day of May 1986 and shall be presented
for proposed enactment by the City Council in the Council Chambers at the
City Hall, 120 East Boynton Beach Boulevard, Boynton Beach, Florida on the
3rd day of June 1986 at 7:30 P.M.
PROPOSED ORDINANCE NO. 86-11
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA,
DETERMINING THAT CHANGES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE
DEVELOPl-1ENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT APPROVED IN
ORDINANCE NO 84-51 DO NOT CONSTITUTE A
SUBSTANTIAL DEVIATION UNDER CHAPTER 380, FLORIDA
STATUTES, 1985, DETERMINING THAT NO FURTHER
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT REVIEW IS
NEC~SSARY REGARDING SUCH CHANGES, APPROVING SUCH
CHANGES, AND AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER
(ORDINANCE NO 84-51) FOR PURPOSES OF
INCORPORATING THE APPROVED CHANGES
Interested parties may appear at said meeting and be heard with
respect to the proposed ordinance(s). Su~ject ordinance(s) may be
inspected by the public at the office of the city Clerk at said city
Hall Pursuant to F S 286.0105, please be advised that if a person
decides to appeal any decision made by the City Council with respect
to any matter considered at this meeting, he will need a record of
these proceedings, and for this purpose he may need to ensure that a
verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes the
testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
BETTY S BORONI
CITY CLERK
PUBLISH NEWS JOURNAL
MAY 22, 1986
cc Mayor & Council
City Hanager
City Attorney
Planning Director
/~,
/
I
~
""
---'
./- ,~
J' ,~ J
I
J
\Y\~ va ~ IJ-,
r"
".
,.,. ..
I
..
ORDINANCE NO 86- /1
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA,
DETERMINING THAT CHANGES TO THE COMPREHENSIVE
DEVELOP~1ENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT APPROVED IN
ORDINANCE NO. 84-51 DO NOT CONSTITUTE A
SUBSTANTIAL DEVIATION UNDER CHAPTER 380, FLORIDA
STATUTES, 1985, DETERMINING THAT NO FURTHER
DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT REVIEW IS
NECESSARY REGARDING SUCH CHANGES, APPROVING SUCH
CHANGES, AND AMENDING THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER
(ORDINANCE NO 84-5l) FOR PURPOSES OF
INCORPORATING THE APPROVED CHANGES
WHEREAS, Riteco Development Corporation, a Florida corporation
("Riteco") filed with the City of Boynton Beach (the "City") an
Application for Development Approval of Comprehensive Development
of Regional Impact (the "ADA") on May 21, 1984, regarding that
certain property (the "property") described in Exhibit "A,"
attached hereto and made a part hereof; and
WHEREAS, the ADA was approved and the Development Order for
the Property was granted December 18, 1984 pursuant to Ordinance
No. 84-51 (the "Development Order"); and
WHEREAS, Riteco subsequently conveyed its right, title and
interest in and to the Property to Boynton Park of Commerce, rnc ,
a Florida corporation ("Boynton Park"), and, Boynton Park, in
turn, subsequently conveyed its right, title, and interest in and
to
the Property
to
Quantum Associ ates,
a Florida general
partnership (the "Developer"), the current record fee simple owner
of the Property; and
WHEREAS, Developer has filed with the City an application to
amend the Development Order; and
HHEREAS, the Ci ty Counci 1 01 Boynton Beach, as the governi ng
body having jurisdiction, is authorized and ernpo\vered to consider
applications for
amendments to development orders
approving
developnents of regional i""pact pursuant to Chapter 380, Florida
Statutes (1985); and
WHEREAS, upon publication and furnishing of ~ue notice, public
hearings on these proceedings were held April 8, 1986, before the
EXH/~/r
N,4 "
/
I
...
"
Planning and Zoning Board, and l\pril 22, 1986, before the city
Council of Boynton Beach and
.t1
WHEREAS, the said City Council has considered the testimony,
repo rt sand ot her oocumen t ary ev i dence subm it ted at sai d publ i c
~~
hearings by Developer,
the Treasure Coast Regional planning
Council, the Boynton Beach staff, the Boynton Beach Planning and
Zoning Board, and the public; and
WHEREAS, said City Council has considered all of the foregoing
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of Boynton
Beach, that said City Council makes the following findings of fact.
Section 1
A notice of public hearing in the proceedings was
duly publ i shed on l,pril
~, 1986, in THE POST
, a newspaper
of general circulation in Boynton Beach, Florida, pursuant to
Ch apt e r 3 8 0 , F lor i d a S tat ute s , and proof 0 f sa i d pub 1 i cat ion has
been duly filed in these proceedings
Section 2.
Developer has requested that the Development Order
be amended as follows.
A That the Amended Master Site Development plan ("Amended
Master Site Development Plan"), attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and
made a part hereof, submitted by Applicant in its application for
Amendment to the Development Order replace and supercede the
Master
Site
Development
Plan
originally
approved
in
the
Develop~ent Order
B That Section 4(1) be amended by adding the following
subparagraph (c)
(c) Boynton Beach Park of Commerce ADA, A~ended
r-la ste r Site Deve 10pmen t plan submi t ted J anu ary
21, 1986
C
That
references throuqhout
the Develop~ent O~der be
revised to conform to the Amended Master site Deve1op~ent Plan
D
That
references throughout
the Developnent O~der be
revised, Hhere applIcable, to conforn to the representa:lons set
forth in that certain letter (t e "Letter") fron George W
Zim~erman to Cari1en AnnunzIato under d.Jte of Febrl1,Jry :::3, 1986,
attached hereto as E,hlbit "en Clnd nade .J part hereof
~
015lD
-2-
/
I
..
\.
Section 3
Upon consideration of all matters described in
".
Section 380, Florida Statutes (1985), it is hereby determined that
A The amendments proposed by Developer do not unreasonably
inter fere wi th the ach i evement of the obj ect i ve s 0 f an adopted
.".
state land development plan applicable to the area
B The amendments proposed by Developer are consi stent wi th
the
local
comprehensive
plan
and
local
land
development
regulations
C The amendment s propo sed by Deve loper are con si stent wi th
the recommendations of the Treasure Coast Regional Planning
Council on file in these proceedings
D The amendments proposed by Developer do not consti tute a
substantial deviation under Chapter 380, Florida Statutes (1985)
E The amendments proposed by Developer do not require
further development of regional impact review
Section 4
The City Council has concluded as a matter of law
that these proceedings have been duly conducted pursuant to the
provisions of Chapter 380, Florida Statutes (1985), that Developer
is entitled to the relief prayed and applied for, and the
Development Or der is he reby amended i nco rpo r at i ng the amendment s
propo sed by Deve lope r as se t fo r th inSect i on 2 above, sub j ect to
the following special conditions with which Applicant accepts and
agree s to comply
(1) Those conditions set forth in the Develop~ent Orcer
( 2 ) T hat a n add end u m be add e d tot h e i.1 a nag e r.1 e n t PIa n for the
Sand Pine Scrub Preserve, containing the following informatIon
(a) Conceptual plans depicting the extent and location
of any boardwal~(s) proposed in the Sand pine Scrub Preserve area,
i n c 1 u din gad e s c rip t ion 0 f h 0 '.... t r e boa r d ,oJ a 1 k ( s ) 110 U 1 d be n a nag e d
for educational purposes and naintained
(b) A speci::ic stater.,ent as to .lho oc._c:Je r<2s;:onsible
for the managenent of the Sund pine Scrub ?r'::~""r n
.::nc for the
costs of such nanaaenent
(c) Identify \-lhere the required fortJ ( 0) acres of sand
pIne scrub canopy, undcrstorf<:rl1t grounccover legetatIon (as set
0151D
-]-
",
/1
. ... \
forth in Condition No 6 of the Development Order) will occur, as
well as a statement as to how these acres will be maintained based
.to
upon the location and distribution thereof
(3) That the Developer comply wi th the representations set
.--
forth in the Letter (described in Section 2 D. above)
Section
5
Except
as
otherwise
amended
herein,
the
Development Order shall remain in full force and effect
Section 6
A copy of this Ordinance shall be transnitted by
first class U S Mail, certified return receipt requested, to the
Bureau of Land and ~iater Management, the Department of Communi ty
Affairs,
Quantum
Associ ates
(the
owner/developer),
and the
Treasure coast Regional planning Council
Section 7.
Thi s Ordi nance shall become effecti ve imnedi ately
upon passage.
FIRST READING this ~ day of May, 1986
SECOND READING and FINAL PASSAGE this 3rd
day of June, 1986
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
J/;..c t (,2<0 tide4--e;.
t-l R
C{{,J~~rYvyvu>'l~J
v~~
COli lC I L !1E!B2R /'
.~~~ eJL.-
OJ/elL E ar:? f
Ij ..
I Y -/'7. / (j
__ L(,t /I J ~' (<-<-{it
COUllCIL HEnB R
(-
~~
CITY .....RK
EXHIBITS
"A" - Legal DeSC:.8Clon
"B" - Anendec aster Site Develop~ent Pl~n
"C" - Letter
0151D
-~-
)
I
. ..
,.
..
EXHIBIT "A"
OVERALL BOUNDARY
...
:
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
~- A Tract of land lying partially in Sections 16, 17, 20 and 21, TOWr:ship
45 South,.Range 43 East, Palm Beach County, Florida, said Tract-beIng
more part~cularly described as follows. Commencing at the Southwest
corner of said Section 17. thence North 1014"39" East, along the West
line of Section 17, a distance of 1318.10 feet to a point in the
intersection with the centerline of N.W. 22nd Avenue, as recorded in
O.R. Book 1738, Page ~686, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County,
Florida; thence with a bearing of North 89004'32" East, along the
centerline of N.W. 22nd Avenue, a distance of 778.37 feet to the Point
of Beginning; thence North 1044'39" East, a distance of 1247.06 feet to
the South right of way line of L.W.D.D. Lateral 21; thence North
89008t49" East, along the South right of way line of L.W.D.D.
Lateral 21, as recorded in O.R. Book 1732, Page 612, of the Public
Records of Palm Beach County, Florida, a distance of 635.93 feet to the
centerline of the L.W.D.D. Equalizing Canal E-4 Canal, as recorded in
O.R. Book 1732, Page 612 of Public Records of Palm Beach County,
Florida; thence along the centerline of the above described E-4 Canal
with a curve to the right having a chord bearing of North 10032'52"
~East, a radius of 750.00 feet, a central angle of 4004'17", and an arc
length of 53.29 feet; thence continue along the centerline of the E-4
.~:. Canal, with a bearing 9f" North 12035100" East, a distance of 320.69 feet -
to a point of c~~e; thence with a curve, to the left having a radius of
- -6500.00, a ce~tral angle of 3028130", and an arc length of 394.23 feet;
;;~. thence North 9006'30" East, a distance of 1979.16 feet to a point on the .:":'::"~":.
..:. North Line of Section 17: thence with a bearing of North 89016139" East, '".-"
~along the North line of Section 17, a distance of 1964.50 feet; thence
South 0002111" East, a distance of 2625.18 feet; thence North 89008149"
East, a distar.ce of 368.96 feet to a point on the North right of way
line of~.w. 22r.d-Avenue$as recorded in O.R. Book 1738, Page 1686 of the
Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida~ thence South 19027'31"
East, a distance of 50.00 feet to the centerline of N.~~. 22nd Avenue:
thence with a ~u=v~ to the right having a chord bearin~r6f North
75029149" East, a radius of 1637.02 feet, a central angle of 9053'58",
and an arc le~gt~ of 282.85 feet to a point, thence North 12002141"
East, a distance of 915.72 feet: thence North 0031'11" East, a distance.
6f:399.-7.0 feet; thence North 89012'37" East, a distance of 413.21 feet; ..if;:':.-;';
., thence South 58'"22'56" East, a distance of 1349.70 feet to a point on
the West right of way line of the Seaboard Coastline Railroad; thence
South 0028'21" East, along the West right of way line of the Railroad, a
distance of 1309.09 feet to a point on the centerline of N.W. 22nd
Avenue; thence ~~orth 88027' 31" ~'lest, along the cen terl ine of N.H. 22nd
Avenue a dista'"1ce of 672.97 feet; thence South 0033'53" East, a distance
of 1306.69 feet; thence South 88045'31" East, a distance of 333 51 feet
to a point on t,e West right of way of the Seaboard Coastline Railroad,
thence with a bearing of South 14008'23" West, along the West right of
way of the railroad, a distance of 1312.49 feet; thence South 0033153"
East, a distance of 26.69 feet; thence South 13015'22" West, a distance
of 920.57 feet; thence North 88050'04" West, a distance of 187 60 feet;
thence with a bearing of North 0049'21" West, a distance of 200.00 feet.
. ,
thence North 88050'04" West, a d1stance of 218.00 feet; thence South
0049'21" East, a distance of 20000 feet; thence North 88050'04" ~';est, a
distance of 40.00 feet, thence South 0049121" Ellst, a distance of 556.84
feet: thence horth 88050'04" \-lest, a distance of 3617 26 feet to a point
on the centerline of the above described ccnter11ne of the E-4 Canal
thence with a bearing of North 5018'14" f,est, a dist~ncc of 153.13 f~et,
thence with a curve to the right having a radius of 450 00 feet, a
central angle of 15036'44", and an arc length of 122 62 feet, thence
North 10018'30" East, a dist;:mce of 98860 fcet to II pOInt of curve,
tnencc with a curve to the lcft haVIng a rZldius of 450 00 feet, a
cen~ral angle of 18020'00", and an arc length of 143 99 feet, thence
with a bea.rl.ng of North 8001'30" ~lest, a distance of 1255.14 feet to a
point on the centerline of N W 22nd Av~nue, thcnce with a bearing of
South 89C>0~'32" Vlest, along the ccnterll.ne of N \1 22nd Avenue a .-:;:",~
distance of 817.85 feet more or less to the POInt of BegInning. '{if:
CO::'.:..a~ ~.~.r g 5 S ~ ~ 5 5 acres more or less Zlnd subj ect to eascmen ts and rig h ts ~!'~.
of ....'a:/ of 're:cor::d. .: ..:'-:":~;1.\::.:
_ - . ,-:-'P.::-
- ;,.:. - -- ,. .\~,"2 ~r..:".
-: ....::-"" _ .. ,''':.Y. ".....=:/!t.
.t= .1-":.
~....;:.:
.fI.o.. ,.
.-..~..::,..
~~~
......"
. ..."t... I
~};. .~,,~
.r
'.1
. .>
)-".~...
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING /J~-::: -:"'"'\ --. ~.,-..,~-- T~~lt \~lt
j .. "1\
:::l ) .~~~
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the city of'~
Boynton Beach will hold a Special Meeting and conduct a Public I
Hearing at 7:30 P. M. on Tuesday, April 22, 1986, in the Council
Chambers, City Hall, 120 East Boynton Beach Boulevar9~B~~nton
Beach, Florida. The purpose of this public hearing is for con-
sideration of a proposed change to the Boynton Beach Park of
Commerce Development Order (Ordinance No. 84-51) and determination
as to whether or not the proposed change constitutes a substantial
deviation to the approved development order with respect to the
following described property located within the corporate limits
of said City, pursuant to the request of the pg~ties in interest
and in co~pliance with Chapter 380, FlorLda Statutes
--
REQUEST: 3oynton Beach Park of Commerce
Comprehen&ive Development of Regional Impact
LEGAL DESC?IPTION
A Tract of land lying partially in Sections IE, 17, LO and 21,
Township ~S South, Range 43 East, Palm Beach County, Florida,
said Tract being more particularly described as follows .--_.
Comro.encing at the Southwest corner of said Section 17, thence
~orth 104~'39" East# along the West l~ne of Section 17, a distance
of 1318.10 feet to a point in the intersection with the centerline
of N.W. 22~ Avenue, as recorded in O.R. Book 1738, Paae 1626, of
~he Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida; thence with a
bearing of ~orth 89004'32" East, along the centerlin~-of N.W. 22nd
Avenue, a distance of 778.37 feet to the Point of Beginning; thence
North 1044'39" East, a distance of 1247.06 feet to the South right-
of-way line of L.W.D.D. Lateral 21; thence North 89008'49" East
along the South right-of-way Li..ue L tV'. D. D. Lateral. 21, as recorded
in O.R Bock 1732, Page 612, of the Public Records of Palm Beach
County, Flcrlda, a distance of 635.93 feet to the centerline of
the L.W.D.D. Equalizing Canal E-4, as recorded in O.R. Book 1732,
Page 612, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida,
thence alo~g the centerline of the above described E-4 Canal with
a curve to ~he right having a chord bearing of North 10032'52"
East, a radius of 750 00 feet, a central angle of 4004'17", and
an arc length of 53 29 feet; thence continue along the centerline
of the E-4 Canal, \vith a bearing of North 12035'00" East, a distance
of 320.69 feet to a point of curve, thence with a curve to the left
having a r2~ius of 6500 00, a central angle of 3028'30", and an
arc length of 394 23 feet; thence North 9006130" East, a distance
of 1979.16 feet to a point on the North Line of Section 17; thence
with a bear~-:g of North 89016'39" East, along the North line of
Section 17, a distance of 1964 50 feet; thence South 0002'11" East,
a distance 8= 2625.18 feet; thence North 89008'49" East, a
dlstance of 368 96 feet to a point on the North right of way line
of N.W 22~c Avenue as recorded in 0 R Book 1738, Page 1686 of
the Public ?ecords of Palm Beach County, Florida, thence South
19027'31" East, a distance of 50 00 feet to the centerllne of
N W. 22nd ~venue; thence with a curve to the right having a chord
bearinq c~ ~orth 75029'49" East, a radius of 1637 02 feet, a central
angle of S=S3'58", and an arc length of 282 85 feet to a point,
thence :',o:--th 12002'41" East, a distance of 915 72 feet, thence
North 0031'11" East, a distance of 399 70 feet, thence North 890
12137" E23~, a distance of 413.21 feet, thence South 88022'56"
East, a c_stance of 1349 70 feet to a point on the West right-
of-way l~~e of the Seaboard Coastline Railroad, thence South
0028'21" ~ast along the West right-of-way line of the Railroad, a
distance cf 1309.09 feet to a point on the centerl~ne of N t\ 22nd
."'-venue, thence North 8 8 0 27' 31" ~.vest, alonq the centerline of N l-l
22nd AVen\.l2 a distance of 672 97 feet; thence South 0033'53" East,
a dlstance 0:: 1306 69 feet, thence South 88045'31" East, a dlstance
of 333 51 feet to a pOlnt on the West right-of-way of the Seaboard
Coastlu'2 ?culroad, thence with a bearing of South 14008'23" \'!est,
along tbe ~est right-af-way of the rallroad, a distance of 1312 49
feet, thence South 0033'53" East, a dlstance of 26 69 feet, thence
South 13015'22" West, a dlstance of 920 57 feet, thence Nort~ 880
50'04" Hest, a distance of 187 60 feet, thence with a bearlna of
r.orth 0049'21' ~l, a distance af 200 00 feet, thence North 88050'04"
tance of 218 00 feet, thence South 0049'21" East,
2 of 200.00 feet, thence North 88050'04" \Vest, a
_e of 40.00 feet, thence South 0049'21" East, a dlstance
.....b 84 feet; thence North 88050'04" \'1est, a distance of
3,617 26 feet to a point on the centerline of the above
described centerline of the E-4 Canal, thence wlth a bearir.a of
North 5018' 14" \'Jest, a distance of 153 13 feet, thence ,.;i th - a
curve to the right having a radius of 450.00 feet, a central
angle of 15036'44", and an arc lenqth of 122 62 feet, thence
North 10018'30" East, a distance of 988 60 feet to a pOlnt_of
curve, thence with a curve to the left having a radius of
450.00 fee~, a central angle of 18020'00.r, and an arc length of
1~3.99 feet; thence with a bearing of-North 8001'30" ~';est, a
distance of 1,255.14 feet to a point on the centerline of K \'1.
22nd Avent.e; thence with a bearing of South 89004' 32" vJest,
along the centerline of N.W 22nd Avenue a distance of 817.~5
feet more or less to the Point of Beginning. Containing 591.55
acres more or less and subject to easements and rights-of-way of
record.
CONTAINING:
591.55 AC
51.70 AC
539.85 fie
GROSS LAND AREA
LESS ROADWAY & CANAL RIGHTS-OF-WAY
OF RECORD
:NET LAI\jD AREA
LOCATION:
South of ~liner Road right-of-way extended,
North of Canai C-16, between Congress Avenue
and I-95, Boy~ton Beach, Florida
PROPOSED
USES:
Planned industrial development to include light
manufacturing and research facilities, offices
and ancillary commercial uses.
APPLICAN~:
Deutsch/Ireland properties
All interested parties are encouraged to appear in person, to
be represented by an attorney or comment in writing. The
applicat_on and all related documents will be available for
review d~ing normal worklng hours in the office of the
Planning Director, Carmen Annunziato, 200 North Seacrest
Boulevard, Boynton Beach. Any person who decides to appeal any
decision of the City Council with respect to the matter con-
sidered at this meeting will need a record of the proceedings
and for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record
of the proceedings is made, which includes the testimony and
evidence upon which the appeal is based.
BETTY S. BORONI, CITY CLERK
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
aa
PUBLISH: THE POST EXTRA
April 6, 1986
DEVELOPMENT ORDER
(ORDINANCE NO 84-51)
EXHIBIT "C"
I
DEUTSCH I IRELAND
PROPERTIES
~ .~---..--- ...---,,~
r~ R~~LY TO FORT L.AUD~:~'CE
J- -_.~ ...-
~"6
.;:::;
February 28, 1986
F.~-J";'.'
~ CL..?T.
Hr. Carmen Annunziato, Planning Director
City of Boynton Beach
120 N.E. 2nd Avenue
P. 0 Box 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33435
RE Response to questions of the TRB reviewed in our meeting on February 18,
1986.
Dear Carmen:
In response to the questions raised in the attached memoranda, I am providing
you herewith our responses for the record Hemorandum #1 dated February
12, 1986, from Carmen Annunziato, Planning Director
ITEM 1: The Proponent still wishes to proceed with consideration of the
commercial sites as shown on their Submitted Haster Development Plan.
Although we recognize your concern, we maintain a great deal of concern
ourselves that the parcels be able to support the highest caliber of
cOlm1ercial uses
ITEM 2 The question, with respect to a central loading and unloading
faci 1 ity for rai t service, the Proponent has reviewed such a proposal with a
number of rail users and have found it to be inappropriate. All potential
users require direct siding access to their facility
ITEM 3 The Master Development Plan is presented in full accordance with
the PID Zoning Ordinance We intend to provide all of the required greenbelt
buffers adjacent to properties having a different zoning classification, in
complete compliance with the Code
ITEM 4 The rights-of-way for all interior roadways will be 100 feet wide
Since we will be proposing some variations on the basic sidewalk/bike path
scheme, we will provide complete detail for review during the platting
process. Again, we expect to provide the City with pavement sections,
landscaping and pedestrian amenitfes in excess of Code requirements. The
typical roadway section will have two twenty-four foot wide roadways with a
sixteen foot wide landscaped median
SUITE 1106-1NTERNATIONAL BUILD1NG-2455 E. SUNRISE BOULEVARD-FORT LAUDERDALE. FLORIDA 33304 . (305) 564-5114
THE BUILDING. 1125 NORTHEAST 125 STREET NORTH MIAMI, FLORIDA 33161. (305) 891-6806
AFFILIATES: BROLEN REALTY & MANAGEMENT CORP MilA CONSTRUCTION CORP
I
ITEM 5 The schedule for the Environmental Impact Analysis phase of the
Interchange construction has been presented at the meeting, and a copy is
attached hereto for your further review We expect to execute the contract
with Kimley-Horn, our consultant, on or about March 4.
Memorandum #2 dated February 12, 1986, from Perry A Cessna, Director of
Utilities
ITEM A is comentary on water distribution
ITEM 1: We hereby agree to loop the water mains as requested at the cul-de-
sacs.
ITEM 2: The relocation of the water main routing to the High Ridge Road
right-of-way and the additional routing along the north side of the canal is
agreed to. Final plans will be prepared in accordance therewith
ITEM 3: At this initial phase, we will agree to a 1,000 foot maximum
distance between line valves; however, we expect to review this plan in more
detail with the City during the platting phases. When 1,000 foot spacing will
provide for fewer than four utility connections, we feel it is appropriate
that the spacing be increased
ITEM 4: We hereby agree to add an additional ten inch gate valve where
requested
ITEM 5: With respect to easements required for water and sewer, we hereby
request that ten foot wide easements be approved where installation occurs
outside of dedicated right-of-way In these instances, we will provide for a
ten foot building setback from an easement, thereby providing for a thirty
foot clear path at utility lines. We also ask that the limitation on
landscaping be imposed only within the ten foot wide easement area. With
respect to landscaping at the right-of-way and adjacent to such easement
areas, we will endeavor to utilize the plant materials as recommended by the
City Forester, Kevin J Hallahan, in his memorandum dated February 20, 1986.
ITEM 6 With respect to fire flow, the Proponent hereby agrees that no
building will be certified for occupancy without proper fire flow. Since fire
flow is a question of use, the Proponent agrees to work out an appropriate
formula with the building department to establish required fire flow needs for
projects at the time of permitting Since to the extent feasible, al I publ ic
improvements will be made at the same time, it is felt that the water loops
will be connected prior to occupancy for the vast majority of situations
ITEM B
Sewage collection and transmission
ITEM 1: Again, this item refers to easements being provided and the
proponent agrees to provide such easements at a width of ten feet with a
building setback requirement of an additional ten feet
ITEM 2: Parcels W2-0 through W5-0 will be served by a sewer along the
north side of Northwest 22nd Avenue Parcels WI9-0 and W20-0 respectively
will be served by an extension of the two sewers shown to the north.
ITEM C Proponent will work with the City as required to insure that
inspection of utility installation can be accomplished in a timely manner
The funds necessary to accomplish this task will be exarnined and determined at
a later date.
Memorandum #3 from Charles C. Frederick. Director of Recreation and Park
Department also dated February 12. 1986.
ITEM 1: Land exchange proposal: The Proponent wishes to keep this matter
separate from discussions concerning the Master Plan layout. The negotiations
are continuing between Mr. Peter Cheney. the City Manager and the Proponent to
work out the details of such a land exchange.
ITEM 2 Median and right-of-way maintenance The Proponent has determined
at this time that the rights-of-way. other than Northwest 22nd Avenue and High
Ridge Road, will be privately held. Since dedication is not contemplated,
maintenance of those areas will be taken care of by the Developer and the
succeeding Property Owner's Association. Maintenance of Northwest 22nd Avenue
and High Ridge Road rights-of-way is also of concern to the Proponent. and
the Proponent is eager to establish a means whereby they can assume control
and responsibility for such maintenance
Memorandum from John Wildner. Park Superintendent dated February 12. 1986.
This memorandum provides the backup for cost estimates concerning right-of-way
maintenance I b~l ieve all of the questions raised therein have been
addressed in the previous comentary
The next memorandum is from Lieutenant McGarry of the Police Department dated
February 11, 1986
In order to provide further information to the Police Department in response
to Lieutenant McGarry's questions, a meeting was held with Lieutenant Hammock.
Chief Hillary and other members of the Boynton Beach Police Department and Jim
Zook of Kimley-Horn and I. In that meeting, details of the proposed High
Ridge Road relocation were discussed Peak hour traffic movements were
identified at 1.300 cars per hour The interchange spacing between the
proposed 1-95 Interchange and High Ridge Road would be in excess of 800 feet.
center to center This distance more than adequately meets the DOT 660 foot
separation criteria The Police Department felt adequately assured that an
acceptable roadway and interchange design could be developed within these
distance perimeters Final design and pavement layout wil I be accomplished
during the platting and roadway engineering phases scheduled to fol low
immediately
p
With respect to the ability to obtain vacation of the DOT right-of-way for
High Ridge Roady Jim look of Kimley-Horn met with Frank Gordon, Design
Engineer of the Florida Department of Transportation on Thursday afternoon,
Februqry 27. During that meeting, Hr Gordon indicated that DOT would
approach the vacation of High Ridge Road in accordance with their typical
vacation procedure He indicated that it did not appear as if that portion of
High Ridge Road was a part of the DOT network, and as such, there should not
be any major difficulty in obtaining vacation. He did, however, reserve
final jUdgement on the roadway operations and easement vacation until such
time as the roadway design was complete.
I believe this responds to all areas of concern. If you have any further
questions, please ~ontact me
GZ ak
CC Mr Thomas K Ireland
Hr. Edward B Deutsch
Hr Thomas P. Misuraca
Hr. Rick Rossi
Hr James look
Ms Mimi Howard
David Pressly, Esquire
Hr. Richard Kerber
Attachments
LAW OFFICES OF
ROGER G SABERS ON . P A
DELRA Y EXECUTIVE MALL
110 EAST ATLANTIC A VENUE
DELRA Y BEACH. FLORIDA 33444
(305) 272-8616
June 6, 1985
Council 'VIembers
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
POBox 396
Stuart, FL 33494
Re: Indian River Plantation - Substantial Deviation
Dear Council Members:
At the Council meeting of May 17, 1985, it was requested that I provide
the Council with a memorandum regarding the Substantial Deviation Section of
Chapter 380 of the Florida Statutes.
The purpose of this section of the statute is to r"equire a developer who
proposes a change to a previously approved developm en t of regional impact to
submit the proposed amendment for a determination as to whether or not the
amendment is of sufficient size and impact to require further development of
regional impact review
The developer files his application with the local government The local
government is required to make a determination as to whether or not the proposed
amendment constitutes a substantial deviation
A substantial deviation for the purposes of the sta tute is "any change to
the previously approved development of regional impact which crea tes a reasonable
likelihood of additonal adverse regional impact or any other regional impact
created by the change not previously reviewed by the Regional Planning Agency"
The statute further provides guidelines as to certain types of changes
which are presumed not to be substantial deviations. An example of such a
guideline is the following "An increase in the number of dwelling units of not
more than 5% or 200 dwelling units, whichever is less." Any increase in dwelling
units below this guideline is presumed not to be a substantial deviation (however,
based upon actual impact and clear and convincing evidence otherwise, it may be
proved to be a substantial deviation) As to any increase in dwelling units above
this guideline the statute is neutral as to whether or not there would be a regional
impact and hence a substCintial deviation
After the local government has made its determination and modified the
Development Order accordingly the Regional Planning Council and Department of
Community Affairs are notified of any approved changes to the Development Order
made by the local government. The Regional Planning Council and the Department
of Community Affairs then have the option of appealing the ceterrnination made by
the local govern m en t.
In the even t that it is found that a developer's proposed change is a
substantial deviation then such application is subject to further development of
regional impact review, i.e, the amendment would go back through the same
process as for an original development of regional impact.
A t our meeting on May 17, 1985, one of the problems that came up
towards the end of the meeting on the Indian River Plantation matter was that it
became clear that the Council did not want to appeal the amendment to the
Development Order that was made The Council, however, was having difficulty
with the framework within which to put the motion not to appeal. 'rhe primary
issue being whether to find a substantial deviation yet vote not to appeal or find
that there was factually no substantial deviation and, therefore, no basis to appeal.
The facts as presented in the staff memorandum indicated, in my opinion, a close
question as to whether or not there was a substantial deviation factually or not In
such cases, or when the facts indicate even more clearly that there is a substantial
deviation, it would be preferable for the Council to either (j) find a substantial
deviation but vote not to appeal for budgetary or other reasons, or (ii) vote not
appeal without expressly making a finding on the issue of substantial deviation I
am apprehensive that if the Council in dealing with substantial deviation issues
starts deciding that certain amendments are not substantial deviations when
factually it appears they are, that in the event at a later date Council as to a
similar amendment wants to take the contrary view, i e., appeal a similar
amendment, the Council's litigation position could be impaired by the opposing side
presenting evidence of similar amendments having been found by the Council not to
be substantial deviations.
As you are all aware, the legislature this year passed into law a new and
comprehensive revision of the Growth Management Laws in Florida including
Chapter 380 The substantial deviation section of Chapter 380 was modified
significantly Under prior law, in the event that a proposed change exceeded the
criteria or guidelines established in the substantial deviation section, the statute
was neutral as to whether or not such change was a substantial deviation Under
the new law, if a proposed change meets or exceeds the threshholds then the
change is as a matter of law a substantial deviation with no discretion being
exerciseable by the local government or regional planning council as to whether the
proposed change creates additional regional impacts or not ie, the statute
mandates additional regional impact review for such a change Furthermore, the
guidelines or thresh hold were expanded greatly in number Under prior law the
statute set forth only seven guidelines whereas under the new law the statute sets
forth eighteen such guidelines.
Under the new law, in the event that a proposed change does not meet or
exceed one of the eighteen guidelines then the change is presumed not to be a
substantial deviation This presumption may be rebutted, however, by clear and
convincing evidence to the contrary
I will be happy to answer any questions which any of the council
members may have on this matter at the next council meeting
Sincerely yours,
Roger G Saberson
cc Mr Sam Shannon
4 Industrial development area - 5 percent or 32 acre increase
5 Mining - 5 percent or 10 acre increase
6 Office development - 5 percent or 6 acre increase in land area, or an
increase in floor space of 5 percent or 60,000 square feet
7 Chemical/petroleum storage facilities - an increase in storage capacity
of 5 percent, 20,000 barrels, or 7 million pounds
8 Water port - increase in wet storage for 20 watercraft or dry storage
for 30 watercraft, increase in wet/dry storage for 60 watercraft at
site identified in State marina siting plan, or 5 percent increase in
total watercraft storage
9 Dwelling Units - 5 percent or 60 unit increase
10 Commercial development - increase of 6 acres of land, or increase of
50,000 square feet of floor area, or 300 additional parking spaces
11 Hotel/motel - 5 percent or 75 unit increase
12 Recreational vehicle parking - increase of 5 percent or 100 recrea-
tional vehicle spaces
13 Open space - decrease of 5 percent or 20 acres, whichever is less
14 Net change to two or more types of development which cumulatively meet
or exceed 100 percent of these criteria
15 Traffic - a 15 percent increase in external trips above that which was
originally projected
16 Land Use - a change in acreage of 15 percent or more to a 1 and use not
previously approved in the Development Order
17 Preservation of special areas any change which would result in
development of areas initially set aside for preservation, ie,
archaeological sites, habitat, dunes, etc
18 Simultaneous increases and decreasps in industrial, office, commercial,
and hotel/motel uses if the regional impacts of the change exceed the
impacts initially reviewed
Also, an extension of 5 or more years to the buildout of a project shall be
presumed to be a substantial deviation subject to further DRI review
RULES
OF THE
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
DIVISION OF RESOURCE PLANNING AND ~~.NAGEMENT
BUREAU OF LA1ID AND WATER MANAGEhENT
Part I
9J-2.01
9J-2.02
Part II
Subpart A.
9J-2.07
9J-2.08
9J-2.09
9J-2.10
9J-2.12
9J-2.l3
9J-2.14
9':;-2.15
9J-2.16
9J-2.17
9J-2.l8
9J-2.l9
Subpart E.
9J-2.20
9J-2.21
~2.6
9J-2.22
9J-2.23
9J-2.24
~J - 2 . 2 ~
9J-2.26
9J-2.27
9J-2.28
9J-2.29
9,}-2.30
CHAPTER 9J-2
General.
Definitions.
through 2.06
Reserved.
General.
Purpose.
Applicability.
Public Participation.
through 2.11 Reserved.
Notice, Agenda, Conduct of Proceeoings.
Bi-rieekly List.
Guicelines and Standards.
Reserved.
Einding Letters of Interpretation.
Forms.
Agreenents between the Departament and the
Developer.
Development of Regional Impact Application
Procedures in Varicus Juriscictions.
Development of Regional Irr:pact Procedures ir
Regulatec Jurisdictions.
General Requirements.
Preapplication Conferences and OFtional Ccorcin-
ated Review Process.
Filing the Application for Development Approval
The Public Bearing.
Pegional Peport and Pecorr~endaticns.
Local Development Orders.
Appeals.
Monitoring and Enforcement.
Master Development Approval Alternative Revie~
Procedure.
Downtown Development DRI Applicaticn.
Reserved.
Subpart C.
9J-2.3l
9J-2.32
Subpart D.
9J-2.33
9J-2.34
.....
~
Development of Regional Impact Procedures in
Unregulated Jurisdictions.
Ninety Day Notice Requirement.
Reserved.
Developments of Regional Impact Procedures in
Areas of Critical State Concern.
Areas of Critical State Concern.
through 2.39 Reserved.
'* '* '* '* '* * * '* '* '* *
'* '*
'* Including '*
'* *
'* Amendrr.ent *
'* *
* Effective 7-7-85 *
* '*
'* '* * * * '* '* * '* '* '*
Chapter 9J-2, Florida Adrr.inistrative Code, superseded Chapter
9B-l6, F.A.C., {formerly Chapter 27F-l, F.A.C.}
J
9J-2.09 Public Participation. Public participation is an
integral part of the development of regional impact review
process. Each agency having statutory or contractual
responsibilities relating to Section 380.06, Florida Statutes,
should encourage public communication and input and keep the
public informed about the status and progress of agency actions
including: petitions for binding letters of interpretation;
adoption, revision and repeal of rules; receipt of notice of
intent to undertake a development of regional impact in an
unregulated jurisdiction; receipt of notice of filing an
application for development approval for a development of
regional impact; proceedings with regard to developments of
regional impact; and compliance of the local government or
developer with the terms of the development order.
Specific Authority 20.05(5), 120.53(1), 380.032(2), 380.06(22)
FS.
Law Implemented 380.021, 380.032(2), 380.06, 380.07, 380.085,
380.11 FS.
History--New
Previously 22F-1.12, 9B-16.09.
9J-2.10 to 9J-2.11 is Reserved.
9J-2.12 Notices, Agenda, Conduct of proceedings. With
respect to developments of regional impact, the Division of
Resource Planning and Management shall provide notice and agenda,
and shall conduct any proceedings governed by Chapter 120,
Florida Statutes, in accordance with the Model Rules of
Procedure, Chapter 28, Florida Administrative Code to the extent
that they are not superseded by these rules.
Specific Authority 120.53(1), 380.032(2), 380.06(22) FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1),120.54(9),380.032(2),380.06 FS.
Bistory--New 8-25-81; Amended.
Previously 22F-l.13, 9B-16.12.
9J-2.13 Bi-Weekly List.
(1) The Division of Resource Planning and Management shall
prepare bi-week1y and mail to any person upon payment of reasonable
charge to cover the cost of preparation and mailing, a current
list of all notices of applications for developments of regional
impact that have been filed with the Division.
4
2
.,.
PART I
GENERAL
..",
9J-2.01 Definitions.
(I) All the terms defined in Section 380.031, Florida
Statutes, shall have the meanings enumerated in such statute,
whenever used in this chapter.
(2) "Division" means the Division of Resource Planning and
Management of the Department of Community Affairs, which is
the "state land planning agency" referred to in Chapter 380,
Florida Statutes.
(3) "DRI" means Development of Regional Impact.
Specific Authority 20.05,20.18,380.032(2),380.06(22) FS.
Law Implemented 380 FS.
History--New 8-25-81; Amended.
Previously 22F-l.Ol, 9B-16.0l.
9J-2.02 to 9J-2.06 is Reserved.
PART II
RULES OF PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE PERTAINING
TO DEVELOPMENTS OF REGIONAL IMPACT
Subpart A--General.
9J-2.07 Purpose. The purpose of these rules is to
establish uniform procedures and guidelines of statewide
applicability pertaining to the administration of Chapter
380, Florida Statutes, as it relates to development of
regional impact.
Specific Authority 20.05(5), 120.53(1), 380.032(2), 380.06(22)
FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1), 380.021, 380.032(2), 380.06 FS.
History--New
Previously 22F-I.IO, 9B-l6.07.
9J-2.08 Applicability. These rules shall apply to the
Division of Resource Planning and Management, within the State of
Florida Department of Community Affairs, and all developers or
other persons engaged in applications or proceedings pursuant to
Chapter 380, Florida Statutes. These rules shall be utilizeo by
all regional planning agencies and all governmental entities to
the extent provided by law or agreement with the Department in
their consideration of developments of regional impact.
Specific Authority 20.05(5),120.53(1), 380.032(2), 380.06(22)
FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1), 380.031, 380.032(2), 380.06 FS.
Bistory--New 8-25-81; Amended
Previously 22F-1.l1, 9B-IG.08.
1
9J-2.15 is Reserved.
9J-2.16 Binding Letters of Interpretation.
(1) If any developer is in doubt whether his proposed
development is of regional impact, or whether his development
rights have vested pursuant to Subsection 380.06(18), Florida
Statutes, or whether a proposed substantial change to a
development of regional impact previously vested pursuant to
Subsection 380.06(18) would divest such rights, he may request a
Binding Letter of Interpretation from the Division of Resource
Planning and Management. Prior to submitting a formal request,
the developer is encouraged to consult with the Division staff to
insure that appropriate information is presented. The developer
shall submit his application for a binding letter of
interpretation by completing and filing with the Bureau Form
BLWM-01-83 (development of regional impact status), or Form
BLWM-02-81 (vested rights) or BLWM-03-81 (substantial
modification to a previously vested development), as appropriate.
These forms may be obtained upon request to any regional planning
agency or to the Division of Resource Planning and Management,
Bureau of Land and Water Management, whose address is 2571
Executive Center Circle, East, Tallahassee, Florida 32301-8244.
The completed forn shall be submitted to the Division of Resource
Planning and Management, Bureau of Land and Water Management.
(2) A copy of the entire application for a Binding Letter
of Interpretation and any supplemental information shall be
provided by the applicant to the regional planning agency and
local government with jurisdiction over the develop~ent site at
the time it is submitted to the Division of Resource Planning and
Management. The Division shall give notice of receipt of the
application for a Binding Letter of Interpretation by publication
in the Florida Administrative Weekly. Notice shall also be
given to the local government having jurisdiction over the
proposed development and to the appropriate regional planning
agency. A copy of the notice zhall be given to the aFPlicant.
(3) Withir 15 days frore the receipt of an application for a
Binding Letter of Interpretation, the Division of Resource
Planning and ~anagement shall determine and notify the aFPlicant,
the local governreent and the regional planning agency whether the
application information is sufficient to enable the agency to
issue a binding letter, and the Division shall request any
additional information needed. If the Division determines that
the information in the apFlication is not sufficient, the
applicant shall either provide additional information as
requested, or shall notify the Division in writing that the
information will not be supplied and the reasons therefore. If
the applicant declines to provide the requested information, the
Division will so notify the local government and regional
planning agency and begin the linding letter review. If the
applicant does not respond to the request for additional
information within 120 days, then the binding letter aFplicatic~
shall be deemed to be withdrawn. If the applicant prcvides
4
~
~
(2) The list shall provide information relating to the
Division file number, the date of receipt by the Division of the
notice, name of the developer or his authorized agent, the name,
type, size, and location of the proposed development, and public
hearing information.
Specific Authority 120.53(1), 380.032(2) FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1),380.032(2),380.06(19) FS.
History--New
Previously 9B-16.13.
9J-2.l4 Guidelines and Standards.
(1) The guidelines and standards under Chapter 27F-2,
Florida Administrative Code, shall be used in deternining whether
particular developments shall be presumed to be develoFruentE of
regional impact.
(2) From time to time the Division may review the
guidelines and standards and make specific recommendations for
change to the Administration Commission.
(3) In reviewing and recommending change to the guidelines
and standards, the Division shall consider the statutory criteria
specified in Subsection 380.06(2) (b), Florida Statutes.
(4) The guidelines and standards, relating to developrnentE
of regional impact, are adopted by rule by the Administration
Commission upon recomrrendation fro~ the Division of Resource
Plannins and Management. Any changes to the guidelines and
standards adopted by the Administration Commission are subject tc
approval of the Legislature as provided in Subsection 380.06(2) (a),
Florida Statutes.
(5) If the Department of Community Affairs intends to adcpt
rules interpreting the guidelines and standards pursuant to
Subsection 380.032(2), Florida Statutes, by filing the~ with the
Secretary of State, then, in addition to complying with notice
requirements of Chapter 120, Florida Statutes, the intent to f_Ie
Euch rules shall be noticed in the Florida AdministrativE Wee~l~
at least one week prior to the date of filing. Within 20 days
following adoption, any substantially affected party may initiate
review of such rule by filing a request for review with the
Administration Commission and serving a copy to the Division of
Resource Planning and Management. Filing a request for review
shall stay the effectiveness of the rule pending a decision b~
the Administration Commission. Within 45 days following
receipt of the request for review, the Commission shall either
reject or adopt the rule, with or without modification.
Specific Authority 120.53(1),380.032(2) FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1), 380.C32(2), 380.06(2) FS.
History--New
Previously 22F-l.15, 9B-16.l4
4
3
Florida Administrative Code, if the Division obtains information
that such development may be a development of regional impact
because of its character, magnitude or location. As used above,
the term "monitor" means to notify a developer in writing that a
proposed development may be a development of regional impact ana
to request that the developer advise the Division as to his
development plans and as to his understanding of the
applicability of Chapter 380, Florida Statutes. This notice
shall include a copy of Chapter 380, Florida Statutes; Rules
9J-2.0l-.39, Parts I and II, Rules of Practice and Procedure
Pertaining to Development of Regional Impact; and Chapter 27F-2,
Part II, Development Presumed to be of Regional Impact. Copies
of binding letter application forms shall also be included and
may be used by the developer if he requests a Binding Letter of
Interpretation from the Division.
(7) As specified in Rules 9J-2.l6(6) and (17) and
Rule 9J-2.27, Florida Administrative Code, the Department of
Community Affairs shall promote the monitoring of existing or
potential developments and the enforcement of Chapter 380,
Florida Statutes, or any rules, regulations, or orders issued
thereunder.
(8) In response to a sufficient application for a Binding
Letter of Interpretation determining development of regional
impact status received by the Division, the Divisicn shall
determine whether the proposed development would have a
substantial effect upon the health, safety or welfare of citizens
of more than one county using the information submitted on For~
BLWM-01-83 and other factual information obtained from third
persons including an appropriate regional planning agency and
local government. The Division may specify that all information
submitted by the developer or by third persons relevant to a
binding letter application must be transmitted to the Division by
a certain date. Failure to submit such information by the
specified date may result in that information not being
considered by the Division in its determination. The Division
may determine that proposed development below the applicable
numerical threshold contained in Chapter 27F-2, Florida
Administrative Code, is a development of regional impact if the
Division has determined that such development, because of its
character, magnitude or locatior, would have a substantial effect
on the health, safety or welfare of citizens of more than one
county. Also, the Division may determine that a proposeo
development above the applicable numerical threshold contained ir
Chapter 27F-2, Florida Administrative Code, is not a development
of regional impact, if it would not have such an effect. If tte
information presented during the binding letter process is
sufficient to determine that the proposed development is not a
development of regional impact, the Division shall issue a bindins
letter.
(9) The burden of establishing that a proposed development
which exceeds the applicable numerical threshold cont~~nec ir
Chapter 27F-2, Florida Administrative Code, is not a developrne~t
E
.,.
..,
requested additional information, the Division shall, within 15
days from receipt of the additional information, determine
whether the additional information furnished is sufficient to
comply with its request. If the additional information is not
sufficient, the Division shall notify the applicant, the local
government, and the regional planning agency of the respects in
which the information does not comply with the original request.
When all the requested information is received, the application
will be considered sufficient and the applicant, the local
government and the regional planning agency will be so notified.
(4) The Division shall review the completed application and
any additional information provided. The Division shall consider
all written documents, written statements, and information
submitted by the applicant or gathered and made part of the
record by the Division during its investigation and evaluation of
the application. The Division may initiate an investigation of
the application or of any information subffiitted and may utilize
in its evaluation any relevant facts obtained during its
investigation. The applicant shall be informed of and providee
copies of any relevant facts obtained or received by the Division
that will be utilizec in the binding letter and shall be given an
opportunity to respond to them. The Division shall solicit and
accept submissions of information from an appropriate regional
planning agency and appropriate local government, relevant to any
applications. The Division may solicit and accept submissions
from any third persons who may possess factual information
relevant to the Division's investigation of an application. In
evaluating an application prior to rrcaking a deterrrination, the
Division may convene a conference at the request of the applicart
or its own initiative, if, in its discretion, it consioers that
such conference will advance its evaluation of the application.
At the request of the Division or the applicant, any such
conference shall be recorded and such information may be come a
part of the record on which the determination is reade. A partl1
shall be entitled to a transcript of any conference upon paymert
of costs.
(5) Within thirty (30) days of acknowleoging recel~t of a
sufficient application, or receiving notification that additional
information requested pursuant to Subsection (3) will not be
supplieo, but not sooner than fourteen (14) days after
publication of the notice in the Florida Administrative Weekly,
the Division shall issue a Binding Letter of Interpretation ~ith
respect to the proposec development. The time for issuance of e.
binding letter of interpretation, or reconsideration thereof,
may be extended upon agreement between the Division and the
applicant.
(6) The Division's policy is to monitor all development
types set forth in Chapter 27F-2, Florida Administrative Code,
which exceed the applicable numerical thresholc contained in
Chapter 27F-2, Florida Administrative Code. The Division will
also monitor developments whose reagnitude is less than the
applicable numerical threshold contained in Chapter 27F-2,
5
final agency action unless, within thirty (30) days of the date
of filing of said determination the applicant requests in writing
a reconsideration of the Binding Letter of Interpretation
including an opportunity to present additional testimony,
evidence or written statements pursuant to Section l20.57(2)(a)2,
Florida Statutes and these rules.
(IS) A request for reconsideration of a binding letter
shall be granted by the Division if the applicant's request
alleges that there are additional material facts not previously
considered or that the Division's findings of fact or conclusions
of law are substantially inaccurate. If a request for
reconsideration is not timely filed with the Division or if such
request does not spec ify disputed issues of nlater ial fact, the
Division shall, within seven days of receipt, denl in writing the
request for reconsideration. Denial of a request for
reconsideration shall constitute final agency action resarding
the application for a binding letter. All additional inforDation
or evidence shall be submitted to the Division by the applicant
within 90 days of tLe date the request for reconsioeration is
received by the Division and shall also be provided to the
entities specified in Subsection 9J-2.16(2}. Within 45 days
after the Division receives written notice from the applicant
that all information or evidence to be considered has been
submitted, the Division shall issue a final binding letter of
interpretation which shall constitute final agency action.
(IE) Einding Letters of Interpretation, and any
reconsiderations thereof shall be issued by the Division within
the periods of time specified by these rules and after an:,
informal proceedings held pursuant to Section 120.57(2), Florica
Statutes. However, at any time before the initial binding letter
is issued, or within 30 days after reconsideration of a bindirg
letter is completed and a final binding letter issued, if the
applicant believes the determination involves a disputed issue of
material fact which requires a full evidentiary hearins, the
applicant ~ay request a formal hearing by filing a petition
specifying the disputed ~aterial facts, in cO~Fliance ~ith
Subsection 120.57(1}, Florida Statutes, and the Model Pules,
Chapter 28-5, Florida Administrative Code.
(17) Copies of the binding letter shall be provided to the
applicant, the local government, the resional planning agency,
and appropriate state agencies. The Department shall request
s~ct governments or agencies to notify the Department of pote~-
tial violations of Section 380.06, Florida Statutes. In addi-
tion, notice of the issuance of a binding letter shall be given
to persons who have requested notice. Binding Letters of
Interpretation issued by the Division shall bind all state,
regional and local agencies as well as the developer.
8
~
-..
of regional impact shall rest with the applicant. The burden of
establishing that a proposed development which does not ey.ceed
the applicable numerical threshold contained in Chapter 27F-2,
Florida Administrative Code, is a development of regional impact
shall be on the Division.
(10) If the Division determines that the proposed
development is a development of regional impact, and if requested
by the submission of Form BLWM-02-8l the Division will make a
determination as to whether rights have vested pursuant to
Subsection 380.06(18), Florida Statutes. If the information
before the Division is sufficient to determine that rights are
vested, the Division shall issue a binding letter.
(11) When requested by the submission of Form BLWM-03-81
and the Division has determined that the proposed development is
a development of regional impact and that rights are vested, the
Division shall make a deterrrination as to whether a proposed
change to the vested pl~n of development is substantial, and, if
substantial, whether the proposed change would result in reduced
regional impacts. In order for the Division of Resource Planning
and Management to make such deter~ination, the developer shall
furnish sufficient information fer the Division to have
determined that the development has acquired vested rights
pursuant to Subsection 380.06(18), Florida Statutes. If the
information presented to the Division is sufficient to determine
that the change to a previously vested development is not
substantial or that the regional i~pact has been recuced, the
Division shall issue a binding letter. In making sucr a
determination, the cr ~ ter ia pursuant to Subsection 380.06 (4) (b)
and (c) and 380.06(17) (b), Florida Statutes, shall be considered.
(12) If the Division concludes that the proposed
development is a development of regional impact, that rights
have not vested, or that a proposed change to a previously
vested development would increase regional impacts so as to
divest rights to complete the development, it shall issue a
binding letter requiring compliance ~7ith Chapter 380, Florica
Statutes.
(13) If the applicant declines to provice information
requested by the Division, and the DiviEion decides tbat ~t coes
not have sufficient information to deterLine whether the ~roposed
development is of regional impact, or whetrer developnent right~
have vested, or wcether a proposed substantial change to a
development of regional impact previously vested would diVEst
suc~ ri~~ts, then the letter issued by the Division pursuant to
Paragraph 380.06(4) (a), Florida Statutes, may state that the
information was insufficient to roake the binding determination
requested by the applicant.
(14) A Einoing Letter of Interpretation shall contair
findings of fact and conclusions of la~ wDich shall specify the
factual, legal, and policy 9roun~s sUfporting the Division's
deterreination. The Ein(~n9 Letter of Interpretation shall be
7
specified in Subsection 380.032(3), Florida Statutes, is limited
to agreements was may be necessary to effectuate the provisions-
of Chapter 380, Florida Statutes. The Department does not
construe this authority to include the power to waive the
applicability of Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, or to allow
developers to avoid the requirements of the law merely for their
economic or competitive benefit. The Department does not view
agreements, and will not enter into them, as an optional
alternative to the DRI process. The Department believes that
agreements are only appropriate in an extremely limited number of
instances where, in the Department's sole discretion, it is
apparent that reasonable factual circumstances exist whereby an
agreement is necessary to effectuate the intent of the law.
(b) It is not the intent of these rules to encourage
requests for agreements nor to specify circumstances under which
an agreement is appropriate or will be entered into by the
Department. These rules establish procedures to be followed
prior to entering an agreement. To the extent that specific
conditions are described in the rule, such conditions are meant
to limit requests for agreements and to limit the Department's
discretion in determining when an agreement may be necessary.
However, such conditions shall not be interpreted as defining the
circumstances under which the Department's discretion must be
exercised or an agreement entered into.
(2) Any agreement entered into by the Department must
state, and establish a factual predicate for, the Department's
conclusions that the agreement, in the Department's discretionary
determination:
(a) Is in the interest of the state, and
(b) Is necessary and beneficial to the Department in its
role as the state agency with the responsibility for the
administration and enforcement of Chapter 380, Florida StatutesJ
and
(c) Reasonably applies and effectuates the provisions and
intent of Chapter 380, Florida Statutes.
(3) As an alternative to seeking an agreement with the
Department pursuant to Section 380.032, Florida Statutes, and
Section 9J-2.18, Florida Administrative Code, the developer may
choose to establish an agreement with the regional planning
agency and local government and to file an application for master
development approval pursuant to Section 380.06(20), Florida
Statutes, and Section 9J-2.28, Florida Administrative Code.
Copies of such agreements shall be sent to the D1 vision of
Resource Planning and Management within 10 days of being entered
into.
(4)(a) If a developer believes his circumstances
necessitate an agreement pursuant to Subsection 380.032(3),
Florida Statutes, he may request such an agreement from the
Department of Community Affairs. Prior to submitting the
10
~
~
Specific Authority 20.05(5),120.53(1),380.032, FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1),380.021,380.031,380.032,380.06(1),
380.06(4),380.06(18), rs.
Bistory--New 8-25-81, Amended.
Previously 22F-1.16, 9B-16.16.
9J-2.17 Forms.
(1) The attached forms are prescribed for use with these
rules and are incorporated by reference:
(a) Form Number DSP-BLWM-11-76, Developments of Regional
Impact Application for Development Approval,
(b) Form Number BLWM-01-83 Application For a Binding Letter
of Development of Regional Impact Status,
(c) Form Number BLWM-02-8l, Application for a
Binding Letter of Vested Rights,
(d) Form Number BLWM-03-81, Application for a Binding Letter
of Modification to a Development of Regional Impact with Vested
Rights,
(e) Form Number BLWM-04-83, relating to regional planning
agencies designated under Chapter 380, Florida Statutes;
(f) Form Number BLWM-05-83, Notice of Intent to Undertake a
Development of Regional Impact in an Unregulated Jurisdiction;
and
(g) Form Number BLWM-06-83, Report of Agency Participation
in Development of Regional Impact Preapplication Conferences.
(2) These forms may be obtained without cost from the
appropriate regional planning agency or by making written request
to:
Division of Resource Planning and Management
Bureau of Land and Water Management
2571 Executive Center Circle, East
Tallahassee, Florida 32301-8244
Specific Authority 120.53, 380.032(2), 380.06(22) FS.
Law Implemented 120.53, 380.031(13),380.06(4)-(9),380.06(22)
FS.
Bistory--New 8-25-81, Amended.
Previously 22F-1.31, 9B-16.l7.
9J-2.l8 Agreements Between the Department and the Developer.
(1) (a) The procedures in Section 380.06, Florida Statutes,
are the procedures which must be followed by developers of
proposed developments of regional impact prior to undertaking
development, as defined in the law, of such a project. The power
granted to the state land planning agency to enter agreements,
9
the applicable thresholds contained in Chapter 27'-2, Florida
Administrative Code, or would eventually have substantial effects
on the citizens of more than one county and the Department
concludes that the developer has no satisfactory eapIanation for
failing to determine that Section 380.06, Florida Statutes was
applicable to his development at an earlier date.
(b) A determination after July 1, 1974, by the local
government or other governmental agency other than the Department
as to the DRI or vested rights status of the development which is
relied on by the developer to begin development, cannot be used
as a justification to enter into an agreement with the
Department. Binding determinations on DRI status, vested rights,
and proposed changes to a vested plan of development can only be
made by the Department of Community Affairs, Division of Resource
Planning and Management. A developer will be held responsible for
his actions in not seeking advice from the Division as to the DR!
status of his development.
(c) The mere convenience or desire to gain a competitive
advantage or economic benefit is the developer's primary
justification for seeking an agreement or the primary result of
the agreement would be an economic benefit, a competitive
advantage or mere convenience for the developer.
(d) An agreement would allow any development prior to
completion of DR! review and such development is reasonably
likely, in the Department's opinion, to result in substantial
adverse regional impacts that should be reviewed in accordance
with Section 380.06, Florida Statutes.
(6) Specific terms in any agreement entered into shall:
(a) Specify how Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, has been
applied to the development in the past and how it shall be
applied subsequent to the agreement;
(b) Specify the location and a maximum amount of any
development authorized to be completed pursuant to the agreement
and the reasons why the Department finds such development is
necessary;
(c) Identify portions of the property which shall not be
disturbed; and
(d) Limit the period of time that the agreement is in
effect.
(7) Specific conditions in an agreement may:
(a> Require submission of a master development plan;
(b) Require DRI review of the entire project including
completed development, vested portions, and types of development
not specified in Chapter 27F-2, Florida Administrative Code;
~
~
proposed agreement, the developer shall schedule a meeting with
the Division staff so that the Department can initially determine
whether, in its opinion, the circumstances indicate it would be
advisable and necessary to pursue an agreement.
(b) The developer must send a letter to the Division
outlining his alleged justification pursuant to the guidelines in
Subsections 9J-2.l8(5), (6) and (7), Florida Administrative
Code. This letter shall be sent at least 10 days prior to the
scheduled meeting. A copy of the letter will be sent to the
appropriate regional planning agency as specified on Form
BLWM-04-83.
(c) After the meeting or after additional information
requested at the meeting is received, the Division shall notify
the developer and advise the regional planning agency whether it
believes there is sufficient cause to pursue an agreement.
(d) 1. If the Division finds and advises the developer
that the facts warrant the consideration of a formal agreement,
the developer shall submit three copies of the proposed agreement
to the Division of Resource Planning and Management. In preparing
the agreement, the developer must incorporate the criteria and
conditions listed in Subsections 9J-2.l8(6) and (7), Florida
Administrative Code.
2. Copies of the proposed agreement shall be given to the
appropriate regional planning agency and the local government
having jurisdiction over the development. Any comments from
the regional planning agency and local government concerning the
proposed agreement must be submitted to the Division within
30 days after transmittal of the proposed agreement.
(e) In evaluating the proposed agreement, the Division may
convene one or more conferences at the request of the applicant
or on its own initiative, if, in its discretion, it considers
that such conferences will advance its evaluation of the proposed
agreement. During the evaluation, the Division may obtain
additional information needed to assist it in determining whether
an agreement is appropriate and may modify the proposed agreement.
(f) The Department shall make a final decision as to
whether or not it chooses to enter the proposed agreement in no
less than 4S days after receipt of the proposed agreement and no
more than 90 days unless extended by mutual consent of the
Department and developer. The Division will send a copy of the
final agreement to the regional planning agency and local
government.
(5) The Department will not consider an agreement
appropriate when it is persuaded that the provisions of
paragraph 9J-2.l8(2) are not met or one or more of the
following conditions exist:
(a) The Department concludes that the developer knew or
should have known that his development would eventually be over
, ,
of the Administration Commission pursuant to Section 380.05,
Plorida Statutes.
Specific Authority 120.53(1), 380.032(2), 380.06(22) PS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1), 380.06(5) PS.
Bistory--New 8-25-81, Amended.
Previously 22P-l.17, 9B-16.l9.
Subpart B--Development of Regional Impact Procedures in
Regulated Jurisdictions.
9J-2.20 General Requirements.
(1) Prior to undertaking development, as defined in Section
380.04, Plorida Statutes, of a DRI in a regulated jurisdiction a
developer must have obtained a development order issued pursuant
to Section 380.06, Plorida Statutes. The development order shall
be issued prior to, or concurrently with, any development permit
or other authorization to commence development issued by the
local government with jurisdiction over the development of
regional impact.
(2) The following summarized procedures and requirements
are applicable to developments of regional impact and are in
addition to applicable local land development regulation
requirements and procedures:
(a) Participation in preapplication conference proceedings
with regional planning agency and affected state and regional
agencies pursuant to Subsection 380.06(7), Florida Statutes1
(b) Filing an application for development approval pursuant
to Subsection 380.06(6), Plorida Statutes1
(c) A determination that the application for development
approval contains sufficient information pursuant to Subsection
380.06(9), Florida Statutes1
(d) A report and recommendations by the regional planning
agency pursuant to Subsection 380.06(11), Florida Statutes1
(e) A development of regional impact public hearing
pursuant to Subsection 380.06(10), Florida Statutes1
(f) Issuance of a development of regional impact
development order pursuant to Subsection 380.06(14), Florida
Statutes1
(g) Appeal of a local development order as provided for in
Section 380.07, Florida Statutes1
(h) Filing of annual reports pursuant to Subsection 380.06
(16), Plorida Statutes1
-
(i) Local government review of any proposed changes to an
approved development of regional impact for a substantial
14
~
~
(c) Require submission of the Application for Development
Approval or binding letter applications for all or portions of
the development within a specified period of time;
(d) Specify other conditions necessary to effectuate the
provisions of Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, or any rules
promulgated thereunder: and
(e) Require the developer to pay the costs and a reasonable
attorney's fee resulting from any suit brought and successfully
prosecuted by the Department to enforce the provision of the
agreement.
(8) The Department may terminate the agreement or may
initiate a proceeding to enforce the agreement or enjoin any
developer pursuant to Section 380.11, Florida Statutes, if the
developer fails to comply with the conditions in any agreement
or if the Department determines that the agreement was based on
materially inaccurate information submitted by the developer.
(9) The time frames established in this section may be
expanded or contracted by the department upon showing of good
cause. In extraordinary circumstances it may necessary for
department staff to consult with the local government and regional
planning agency by telephone rather than to wait for the
submission of comments in writing. In such cases, the substance
of those conversations will be reflected in a follow-up letter to
the local government or regional planning agency.
Specific Authority 120.53(1),380.032(2),380.06(22), PS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1),380.021, 380.032.(3), FS.
History--New 5-4-83; Amended 6-20-84.
Previously Numbered 9B-16.l8
9J-2.19 Development of Regional Impact Application
Procedures in Various Jurisdictions. Prior to undertaking any
development of a development of regional impact a developer shall
comply with:
(1) Subpart B, Sections 9J-2.20-.30, Florida
Administrative Code, if the development is proposed within a
regulated juriSdiction, which as used herein shall mean a local
government that has adopted a zoning ordinance or subdivision
regulations, or both; or
(2) Subpart C, Sections 9J-2.3l-.32, Plorida
Administrative Code, if the development is proposed within an
unregulated juriSdiction, which as used herein shall mean a local
government that has not adopted either a zoning ordinance or
subdivision regulations; or
(3) Subpart 0, Section 9J-2.33, Florida Administrative
Code, if the development is proposed within an area of critical
state concern, which as used herein shall mean a specific
geographical area of the state defined by general law or by rule
13
available to the developer information about the development of
regional impact process and the use of preapplication conferences
to encourage cooperation and mutually beneficial solutions to
problems, identify issues, coordinate appropriate state and local
agency requirements, and otherwise promote a proper and efficient
review of the proposed development. The information shall
include copies of any regional issues list adopted pursuant to
Subsection 380.06(22), Florida Statutes, and other appropriate
material indicating issues of regional significance in the
region, or containing regional policies. It shall include
material describing planning, permitting or review requirements
of state, regional or local agencies that has been obtained by
the regional planning agency. Such information shall be made
available before or during the preapplication conference.
(b) The regional planning agency shall arrange a
preapplication conference pursuant to Subsection 380.06(7),
Florida Statutes. Reviewing agencies shall make reasonable
efforts to attend these conferences and shall participate when
requested to do so pursuant to Subsection 380.06(7), Florida
Statutes. In addition to meetings, preapplication conference
activities may consist of telephone calls, written correspondence
or reports, or other means of communication that can be used
effectively to fulfill the intent of Subsection 380.06(7),
Flor ida Statutes.
(c) Upon the request of the developer or the regional
planning agency, other affected state and regional agencies shall
participate in conference proceedings and shall identify the
types of permits issued by the agencies, the level of information
required, and the permit issuance procedures as applied to the
proposed development. Such information shall be provided for
initial project planning and coordination and shall not
constitute a binding agency commitment to a course of action on
an Application for Development Approval or permit review unless
so established in an agreement between the agency and the
developer, pursuant to Subsection 380.06 (8) (b), Flor ida Statutes.
(d) When a Development of Regional Impact also requires an
environmental impact statement, affected agencies should conduct
one or more meetings for the purpose of considering the
feasibility of integrating the development of regional impact
review process and report with the Environmental Assessment or
Environmental Impact statement review processes and reports.
(e) In order to increase the effectiveness of agency
participation in the preapplication conference, the regional
planning agency may request the developer to submit a minimal
amount of basic data about the type, size and location of the
proposed development. Such information requests shall be for the
purpose of promoting productive project discussions at the
preapplication conference and shall not constitute an extensive
information requirement. This information should be provided to
agencies at least seven days in advance of the conference
activity at which the agencies are to participate.
16
~
,..,
deviation determination pursuant to Subsection 380.06(17),
Florida Statutes,
(j) Monitoring and enforcement of the development for
compliance with terms of the development order as provided for
by Paragraph 380.06(14) (c), Subsections 380.06(15), (16) and
Section 380.11, Florida Statutes.
(3) Under certain circumstances, a developer may be able to
proceed with an alternative DRI review procedure. Alternative
procedures that may be appropriate include the following:
(a) The coordinated review process specified in Section
380.06(8), Florida Statutes and Subsection 9J-2.2l(2)
and .22(1) (d), Florida Administrative Code,
(b) A comprehensive development of regional impact
application pursuant to Subsection 380.06(20), Florida Statutes,
and Paragraph 9J-2.22(1) (a), Florida Administrative Code;
(c) An application for master development approval
pursuant to Subsection 380.06(20), Florida Statutes and Paragraph
9J-2.22(1) (b) and Section 9J-2.28, Florida Administrative Code;
(d) A downtown development of regional impact
application, pursuant to Subsection 380.06(21), Florida Statutes,
and Paragraph 9J-2.22(1)(c), and Section 9J-2.29, Florida
Administrative Code.
(4) Lists of regional issues to be used in reviewing
Development of Regional Impact applications are included in
Chapter 9B-20, Florida Administrative Code, pursuant to Paragraph
380.06(22) (b), Florida Statutes. Regional policy plans adopted
by regional planning councils pursuant to Section 160.07, Florida
Statutes are a long range policy guide for the development of the
region and shall be used in developments of regional impact
review. Lists of regional issues identify regional issues that
may be pertinent to a DRI whereas regional policy plans contain
policy guidelines for decisions on such issues.
Specific Authority 20.05,120.53(1), 380.032(2), 380.06(22) FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1),160.07,380.021,380.06 FS.
History--New 7-7-76; Amended.
Previously 22F-l.20; 27F-l.20, 9B-16.20.
9J-2.2l Preapplication Conferences and Optional
Coordinated Review Process.
..
(1) (a) Before filing an application for development
approval, the developer shall contact the regional planning
agency with jurisdiction over the proposed development to arrange
a preapplication conference. The appropriate regional planning
agency may be determined by reference to Form BLWM-04-83,
relating to regional planning agencies designated under Chapter
380, Florida Statutes. The regional planning agency shall make
which could later constitute grounds for permit denial or major
modifications of the proposed agreement.
(3) The regional planning agency shall keep all affected
agencies informed of the progress of the DRI review process and
otherwise coordinate reviews of developments of regional impact.
(a) To further effectuate these review processes, the
regional planning agency may encourage additional conferences,
the development of permit processing schedules with other agen-
cies, concurrent processing of applications, the use of the
development of regional impact application for development
approval as a substitute for permit data requirements or plans,
and other appropriate techniques.
(b) No later than May 15 of each year beginning in 1984,
each regional planning agency shall forward a report of state,
regional and local agency participation in the development of
regional impact review process within the region for the preced-
ing year to the Division of Resource Planning and Management.
This report shall include Form BLWM-06-83 and shall contain data
about requests for, the incidence and extent of, agency partici-
pation in regular development of regional impact reviews and
optional coordinated reviews.
Specific Authority 20.05,120.53(1),380.032(2),380.06(22) FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1),380.021,380.06(7),(8),(22) FS.
History--New.
Previously 9B-16.21
9J-2.22 Filing the Application for Development Approval.
(1) In accordance with Subsections 380.06(6), (7), and (9),
Florida Statutes, the developer shall file completed copies of an
application for development approval with the local government
having jurisdiction. Copies of the application shall also be
filed with the appropriate regional planning agency and the
Division of Resource Planning and Management. Copies of the
application, Form DSP-BLWM-11-76, may be obtained from either
agency. The application should be filed in accordance with the
local government's applicable procedures and as early as possible
in its planning or permitting approval processes.
(a) If a proposed development project includes two or more
developments of regional impact, a developer may file a compre-
hensive development of regional impact application for develop-
ment approval covering more than one development of regional
impact pursuant to paragraph 380.06(20)(a), Florida Statutes.
(b) If a proposed development is planned for development
over an extended period of time, the developer may file an
application for master development approval of the project pur-
suant to Paragraphs 380.06(20) (b) and (c), Florida Statutes,
and Section 9J-2.28, Florida Administrative Code.
18
~
~
(f) In order to increase the effectiveness of developer and
agency participation in the preapplication conference, in 1983
and every three years thereafter, the Department, as the
state land planning agency, shall request state and regional
agencies which participate in DRI or binding letter application
reviews to prepare brief descriptions of their programs,
responsibilities and policies that may substantially affect
proposed developments of regional impact during planning or
permitting reviews. Such descriptions may include goals and
objectives, review criteria, procedures, information
requirements, jurisdiction, rule or statute numbers, addresses,
contact names, and other information considered useful to
applicants entering the DRI review process. The Department shall
work closely with agencies to ensure that the descriptions are
reasonably uniform. Upon completion of the descriptions, as
determined by the Department, copies shall be provided to
regional planning Agencies for use in preapplication conference
proceedings.
(g) To the extent feasible and as a part of the
preapplication conference, the regional planning agency shall
state the objectives to be achieved in the proceedings, help
distinguish between DRI application and state or regional permit
reviews, provide information about any local government review
procedures that may apply, provide opportunities for the
developer and affected agencies to obtain and comment on
information of significance to the project, provide information
about regional issues pursuant to Section 9B-20, Florida
Administrative Code, and seek to promote expeditious and
well-coordinated processing of development of regional impact
applications.
(h) Pursuant to Subsection 380.06(7)(b), Florida Statutes,
each regional planning agency shall establish by rule a
preapplication procedure by which a developer may enter into
binding written agreements with the regional planning agency to
eliminate questions from the application for development approval
where those questions are found to be unnecessary for development
of regional impact review.
(2) (a) As part of the preapplication conference, the
developer may, in addition to regular development of regional
impact review, elect to proceed in a coordinated review process
with other affected state or regional licensing or permitting
agencies. The developer may select the state or regional
agencies which will participate in this coordinated review
process pursuant to Subsection 380.06(8), Florida Statutes.
(b) In the optional coordinated review process the
developer may request a binding agreement from an agency as
provided for in Paragraph 380.06(8)(b), Florida Statutes. In
addition, the developer may request that an agency, for non-
binding information purposes only, identify issues or problems
17
local government sball set a bearing date at tbe next scbeduled
meeting and give notice and bold a bearing on tbe application for
development approval of a development of regional impact as
required by Subsection 380.06(10), Florida Statutes.
(2) The notice of bearing sball be pUblisbed at least 60
days in advance of the bearing and shall state that the proposed
development would be a development of regional impact. Tbe
notice shall specify wbere tbe information and reports on the
development of regional impact application may be reviewed. In
addition to giving notice to tbe Division of Resource Planning
and Management and the appropriate regional planning agency,
notice shall be given to adjacent counties and municipalities and
to any otber state or regional permitting agency participating in
a coordinated review process under Subsection 380.06(8), Florida
Statutes.
(3) When a development of regional impact is proposed
within tbe jurisdiction of more than one local government, the
local governments, at tbe request of the developer may bold a
joint public hearing.
(4) The public hearing shall be held in the same manner as
for a rezoning and sball be recorded as required by Subsection
380.06(10), Florida Statutes.
(5) The report and recommendations from the regional plan-
ning agency shall be incorporated into the record of the public
hearing.
Specific Authority 20.05,120.53(1),380.032(2),380.06(22) FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1),380.021, 380.06flO) FS.
Bistory--New 7-7-767 Amended.
Previously 22F-l.2l7 27F-l.2l, 9B-16.23.
9J-2.24 Regional Report and Recommendations.
(1) Upon receipt of the notice of public hearing issued
pursuant to Subsection 380.06(10), Florida Statutes, the
appropriate regional planning agency shall prepare a report and
recommendations on the regional impact of the proposed
development in accordance with the criteria identified in Section
380.06(11), Florida Statutes. In preparing the regional report,
the regional planning agency shall identify and make
recommendations on regional issues and may comment on other
local issues.
(2) The regional planning agency may request other agencies
to prepare reports and recommendations on issues that are clearly
within their jurisdiction and shall incorporate reports and
recommendations pursuant to Paragraph 380.06(11) (b), Florida
Statutes. The agency shall afford any substantially affected
party the opportunity to present evidence to the regional
planning agency head related to the proposed regional report and
recommendations provided that the substantially affected party
makes a timely request.
20
~
~
(c) A downtown development authority as defined in Section
380.031, Florida Statutes, may submit a development of regional
impact application for development approval pursuant to
Subsection 380.06(21), Florida Statutes, and Section 9J-2.29,
Florida Administrative Code.
(d) If a developer has elected to proceed in an optional
coordinated review process, then he must submit copies of the
application for development approval to all state or regional
agencies which are to participate in the review process. The
application shall include additional information identified by
state or regional licensing agencies as necessary if the binding
agreement is to be obtained.
(2) Pursuant to Subsection 380.06(9), Florida Statutes, the
regional planning agency shall make a determination as to the
sufficiency of the information contained in the application.
(a) If the agency determines that the application is
sufficient to begin review, the agency shall provide written
notice to the appropriate local government and the applicant
within 30 days of receipt of the application, stating that the
application contains sufficient information for the agency to
begin review pursuant to the criteria of Section 380.06(11),
Florida Statutes, and that a public hearing date may be set.
(b) If the agency determines that the application is
insufficient to begin review, the agency shall provide written
notice to the appropriate local government and the applicant
within 30 days of receipt of the application stating that the
application contains insufficient informatipn for the agency to
discharge its responsibilities under Subsection 380.06(11),
Florida Statutes, and requesting additional information. Within
five working days of the receipt of the statement the applicant
shall provide written notice to the local government and the
agency that the requested information will be supplied, or will
not be supplied, in whole or in part. Upon receipt of the
requested information, or written notice that the requested
information will not be provided, the agency shall provide
written notice to the local government and the applicant pursuant
to Paragraph 380.06(9)(c), Florida Statutes.
(c) The regional planning agency shall provide copies of
agency requests for additional information and the applicant's
response to the Division of Resource Planning and Management.
Specific Authority 20.05,120.53(1),380.032(2), 380.06(22) FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1), 380.021, 380.06(5)-(9),
380.06(20)-(21) FB.
History--New.
Previously 22F-l.20, 27F-l.20, 9B-16.22.
9J-2.23 The Public Bearing.
(1) Upon receipt of notice from the regional planning
agency that a public hearing date may be set, the appropriate
19
(2) Without an effective development order, the developer
shall not have authorization to develop any portion of the
development covered by the Application for Development Approval
unless the developer has obtained an agreement with the
Department of Community Affairs pursuant to Subsection
380.032 (3), Florida Statutes.
(3) As used in this chapter, rendition or rendering means
issuance of a written development order and transmittal of the
order together with all pertinent attachments by first class u.s.
Mail to the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Land and
Water Management, and other recipients specified by statutes or
this rule. A certified return receipt shall be prima facie
evidence of transmittal.
(4) Requirements for a development order:
(a) The copy of any development order rendered to the
Department of Community Affairs, the regional planning agency,
and the owner or developer shall:
1. Consist of a written document, which shall be printed,
typewritten or otherwise duplicated in legible form on white
paper; and
2. Include copies of all exhibits, attachments and written
materials, including portions of ordinances referenced in the
text. The local government and the Department of Community
Affairs may enter into an agreement whereby major ordinances are
transmitted in their entirety to the Department of Community
Affairs, followed by the transmittal of copies of all revisions
in lieu of transmitting the entire ordinance with each individual
development order; and
3. Include copies of the application for development
approval if the developer has not certified that a complete copy
of the application as modified or amended has been delivered to
all of the parties identified in this section; and
4. Include copies of any supplements, development plans or
specifications which are approved with the order, but which are
not in the Application for Development Approval; and
5. Contain the signature of the official head of the
governmental body issuing the order or the signature of an
authorized representative of the governmental body, and shall be
certified as being a complete and accurate copy of the
development order.
(b) The copy of any development order rendered to the
Department of Community Affairs, the regional planning agency,
and the owner or developer shall contain the following:
1. The name of the development;
2. The authorized agent of the developer;
22
~
~
(3) As part of the regional report and recommendations, the
regional planning agency may prepare a short summary of
conclusions and recommendations for the purpose of providing
easy-to-read public information about the development of regional
impact.
(4) Copies of the completed report and recommendations
shall be submitted by the regional planning agency to the local
government, the Division of Resource Planning and Management, and
the developer within SO days after receipt by the regional
planning agency of notice of public hearing.
(5) (a) When the proposed development of regional impact
lies within the review jurisdiction of two or more regional
planning agencies, the Division may designate a lead agency to
assume responsibility for determining the sufficiency of
information contained in the application for development approval
and for preparing the regional report and recommendations.
(b) Upon completion of the staff report and
recommendations, copies should be transmitted to the respective
regional planning agencies for formal action.
(c) The regional report and recommendations adopted by
formal action of the respective regional planning agencies where
possible should be coordinated and consistent. Upon concurrence
by each regional planning agency, the report and recommendations
should be submitted to the appropriate local governments pursuant
to Subsection 380.06(11), Florida Statutes. When the reviewing
agencies are unable to concur in the adoption of a joint report
and recommendations, each agency may prepare and submit to the
local government within its jurisdiction a separate report and
recommendations.
Specific Authority 20.05,120.53(1), 380.032(2), 380.06(22) FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1), 380.021, 380.06(11) FS.
History--New 7-7-76i Amended.
Previously 22F-l.22, 27F-l.22, 9B-16.24.
9J-2.25 Local Development Orders
(1) This rule provides the form, manner of rendition and
contents for development orders issued by local governments in
Florida for Developments of Regional Impact. A development order
shall:
(a) Be rendered in the manner provided in this rulei
(b) Be in the form specified by this rulei
(c) Contain those items required by this rule; and
(d) Otherwise meet the requirements for a development order
provided in this rule.
21
2. Establish expiration dates for the development order,
including a deadline for commencing physical development, for
compliance with conditions of approval or phasing requirements,
and for termination1 and
3. Specify the types of changes to the development, in
addition to those listed under Subsection 380.06(17), P10rida
Statutes, which shall require a substantial deviation
determination under Subsection 380.06(17)(a), Plorida Statutes,
or which shall be deemed to constitute a change that requires
further development of regional impact review.
(5) Within 30 days after the Development of Regional
Impact public hearing, the local government shall render a
decision on the application for development approval in the
form of a development order unless an extension of time is
requested in writing by the developer. However, no developer
may undertake a development of regional impact prior to approval
of the development under the requirements of Section 380.06,
Plorida Statutes, and these rules unless the developer has
obtained an agreement with the Department of Community Affairs,
pursuant to Subsection 380.032 (3), Florida Statutes.
(6) Complete copies of all development orders issued
pursuant to Section 380.06, Florida Statutes, including any
amendments or modifications to previously issued development
orders, shall be transmitted by the local government to the
Bureau of Land and Water Management, to the appropriate regional
planning agency, and to the owner or developer of the property
subject to such order as soon as possible. A development order
shall take effect upon transmittal to the parties specified in
Section 380.07(2), Florida Statutes, unless a later effective
date is specified in the order. The effectiveness of a
development order shall be stayed by the filing of a notice of
appeal pursuant to Section 380.07, Florida Statutes.
(7) The development order shall specify the requirements
for the annual report as required in Subsections 380.06(14)
and (16), Florida Statutes. The annual report shall be submitted
to the Bureau of Land and Water Management, the appropriate
regional planning council and local government on Form
BLWM-07-85, effective June 1, 1985, and incorporated herein by
reference. Every development order shall require the annual
report to include the following:
(a) Any changes in the plan of development, or in the
representations contained in the ADA, or in the phasing for the
reporting year and for the next year1
(b) A summary comparison of development activity proposed
and actually conducted for the year1
(c) Undeveloped tracts of land, other than individual
single family lots, that have been sold to a separate entity or
developer1
24
.,
."
3.
The name of the developer;
A statement that:
4.
a.
The application for development approval is approved; or
The application for development approval is approved
to conditions, specifying the conditions; or
b.
subject
c. The application for development approval is denied,
specifying the reasons for denial and changes in the development
proposal, if any, that would make it eligible to receive a
development approval; and
S. If approved, describe the development which is approved
specifying and describing acreage attributable to each described
land use, open space, areas for preservation, green belts,
structures or improvements to be placed on the property including
locations, acreage, square footage, number of units, and other
major characteristics or components of the development; and
6. Findings of fact and conclusions of law addressing
whether and the extent to which:
a. The development unreasonably interferes with the
achievement of the objectives of an adopted state land
development plan applicable to the area; and
b. The development is consistent with the local land
development regulations and the adopted local comprehensive
plan; and
c. The development will be consistent with the report and
recommendations of the regional planning agency submitted
pursuant to Subsection 380.06(11), Florida Statutes; and
7. A legal description of the property including the
acreage; and
8. The monitoring procedures and the local official
responsible for assuring the development's compliance with the
development order; and
9. Specification of the requirements for the annual report
designated under Subsection s 380.06 (14) (c) (3) and (16), Flor ida
Statutes, including the date of annual submission, parties to
whom the report is to be submi tted, and contents of the report as
specified by Rule 9J-2.2S(6), Florida Administrative Code.
(c) A development order may contain provisions which:
1. Incorporate into the development order by reference the
application for development approval and other relevant written
documents; and
23
(10) If a development order is issued approving or
approving with conditions the application for development
approval, 8ubsequent requests for local development permits need
not require further development of regional impact review by the
regional planning agency unless otherwise stipulated in the
development order. Factors requiring further develop.ent of
regional impact review shall inClUde, but shall not be limited
to:
(a) A substantial deviation from the terms or conditions in
the development order or other changes to the approved
development plans which create a reasonable likelihood of adverse
regional impacts or other regional impacts which have not been
evaluated in the review by the regional planning agencYr or
(b) Expiration of the period of effectiveness of the
development order; or
(c) Conditions in the development order which specify
circumstances in which the development will be required to
undergo additional development of regional impact review.
,~~
(11) A substantial deviation determination:
(a) Finding a change to a previously approved Development
of Regional Impact to be a substantial deviation, shall be
rendered in the form of a development order consistent with the
provisions of Subsection (2) and Paragraphs (4) (a)l, (4) (a) 5,
(4) (b)l, (4) (b)2, and (4) (b)3 of this section and shall contain a
statement of the basis for the determination.
"
(b) Finding a change to a previously approved Development
of Regional Impact not to be a substantial deviation, shall be in
the form of a development order consistent with all of the
provisions of Subsections (1), (2) and (3) of this section and those
provisions of Subsections (4), (6), (7), (8), and (9) of this
section that are applicable and appropriate to address the
approved changes to the previously approved plan of development.
Specific Authority 20.05,120.53(1),380.32(2), 380.06(22) FS.
Law Implemented 120.53 (1) , 380.021, 380.06 (13) and (14), (16)
and (17), and 380.07(2), PS.
Bistory--New 7-7-76; Amended 5-4-83; Amended 7-7-85.
Previously 22F-l.23; 27F-l.23; 9B-16.25
9J-2.26 Appeals.
(1) Any local government development order regarding a
development of regional impact may be appealed pursuant to
Subsection 380.07(2), Plorida Statutes.
(2) When the state land planning agency or an appropriate
regional planning agency identifies a disputed issue that may be
the basis of an appeal of a local development order, the agency
should attempt to resolve the dispute prior to the issuance of
the development order or the filing of the notice of appeal.
26
.."
...,
(d) Identification and intended use of lands purchased,
leased or optioned by the developer adjacent to the original DRI
site since the development order was issued;
(e) An assessment of the developer's and the
local government's compliance with the conditions of approval
contained in the DRI development order and the commitments which
are contained in the Application for Development Approval and
which have been identified by the local government, the Regional
Planning Councilor the Department of Community Affairs as being
significant;
(f) Any known incremental DRI applications for development
approval or requests for a substantial deviation determination
that were filed in the reporting year and to be filed dur ing the
next year;
(g) An indication of a change, if any, in local government
jurisdiction for any portion of the development since the
development order was issued;
(h) A list of significant local, state and federal permits
which have been obtained or which are pending by agency, type of
permit, permit number and purpose of each;
(i) A statement that all persons have been sent copies of
the annual report in conformance with Subsections 380.06(14) and
(16), Florida Statutes; and
(j) A copy of any recorded notice of the adoption of a
development order or the subsequent modification of an adopted
development order that was recorded by the developer pursuant to
Subsection 380.06(14) (d), Florida Statutes.
(k) The annual report for an Areawide or a Downtown DRI
shall only be required to include the information required in
Paragraphs (a), (b), (e), (f), (g), (i), and (j) of this
Subsection.
(8) Where possible, local governments shall issue
development orders concurrently with any other local permits or
development orders that may be applicable to the proposed
development. A local government shall not issue any permits
authorizing development of all or a portion of a DRI prior to the
issuance of a development order for the DRI unless such
development is authorized in an agreement entered into pursuant
to Subsection 380.032 (3), Flor ida Statutes and Rule 9J-2.18,
Florida Administrative Code.
(9) Pursuant to Subsection 380.06(15), Florida Statutes,
the local government issuing the development order shall
establish procedures and assign staff responsibilities for
monitoring the development and enforcing the terms of the
development order.
25
(3) Pursuant to Section 380.11, Florida Statutes, the
Department, all state attorneys, and all counties and
municipalities may bring an action for injunctive relief against
any person or developer found to be in violation of Chapter 380,
Florida Statutes, or any rules, regulations or orders issued
thereunder.
Specific Authority 20.05, 120.53(1), 380.032(2), 380.06(22) FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1), 380.021, 380.06(14)-(17), 380.11 FS.
Bistory--New.
Previously 98-16.27.
9J-2.28 Master Development Approval Alternative Review
Procedure.
(1) If a proposed development is planned for development
over an extended period of time, the developer may seek to follow
an alternative development of regional impact review procedure by
filing an application for master development approval of the
project and agreeing to present subsequent increments of the
development for preconstruct ion review pursuant to Paragraphs
380.06(20) (b)-(c), Florida Statutes. This alternative procedure
shall follow development of regional impact procedures
established by statute and rule but shall not be used for the
optional coordinated review process specified in Subsection
380.06(8), Florida Statutes. Where such a procedure may be
appropriate, the developer shall consult with the local
government and the regional planning agency regarding information
to be providedJ the timing of review of phases, increments, or
issues related to regional impacts of the proposed development;
and any other considerations that must be addressed in the
application for master development approval and the agreement
required by Paragraph 380.06(20)(b), Florida Statutes. The
agreement shall be entered into by the developer, the regional
planning agency, and the local government having jurisdiction
before the application for master development approval is filed.
(2) In determining sufficiency of information contained in
an application for master development approval, the regional
planning agency shall give consideration to: the adequacy and
availability of sufficient, reliable informationJ the necessity
of subsequent review of phases, increments, or issues related to
regional impactsJ additional information which may be required in
subsequent incremental applications; and issues which could
result in the denial of an incremental application.
(3) Prior to adoption of the master plan development order,
the developer, the landowner, an appropriate regional planning
agency and the local government having jurisdiction shall review
the draft development order and, if appropriate, related
agreements to ensure that the requirements of Paragraph
380.06(20)(b), Florida Statutes, are met. In addition, the
development order and any related agreements shall:
(a) Adequately address anticipated regional impacts
considered in the application for master development approval and
28
~
~
Specific Authority 20.05,120.53(1),380.032(2),380.06(22) FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1),380.021,380.07(2) FS.
Bistory--New.
Previously 98-16.26.
9J-2.27 Monitoring and Enforcement.
(1) The Department shall seek assistance from other state
agencies, regional agencies and local governments in identifying
potential developments which appear to be developments of
regional impact because of their character, magnitude or
location.
(a) The Department shall request state and regional
agencies to notify the regional planning agency with jurisdiction
or the Department of such developments.
(b) If a local government is in doubt as to whether or not
it has authority to review a proposed development as a
development of regional impact because of its character,
magnitude or location, it may request that the developer obtain a
binding letter of interpretation from the Department.
(2) The Department shall seek assistance from state
agencies, regional agencies, and local governments in
identifying, monitoring and enforcing the requirements of Chapter
380, Florida Statutes, any DRI development order issued by a
local government, and any order contained in a binding letter of
interpretation issued by the Department.
(a) The local government issuing the DRI development order
is primarily responsible for monitoring and enforcing the
provisions of the development order and making substantial
deviation determinations pursuant to Subsections 380.06(14) and
(17), Florida Statutes. Local governments shall not issue any
permits or approvals or provide any extensions of services if the
developer fails to act in substantial compliance with the
development order.
(b) The regional planning agency shall send copies of local
government DRI development orders, or relevant portions thereof,
to state or regional agencies that either have participated in
the review of the development of regional impact, or are
identified as having planning or permitting responsibilities
related to tbe development of regional impact and have requested
copies of development orders.
(c) The regional planning agency shall review the annual
report required by Subsection 380.06(16), Florida Statutes, and
other information available to the agency and, when appropriate,
notify the Department of potential violations of Section 380.06,
Florida Statutes.
.
27
(b) Questions in the application for development approval
that are not appropriate for a downtown development area may be
eliminated from the application by agreement between the regional
planning agency and the downtown development authority pursuant
to Subsection 380.06(7), Florida Statutes, and adopted rules of
the regional planning agency;
(c) In addition to the requirements for a development order
specified in Subsections 380.06(14) and (21), Florida Statutes,
and Section 9J-2.25, Florida Administrative Code, the
development order shall specify a procedure for monitoring:
1. The amount of land use development occurring in each
land use category pursuant to Paragraph 380.06(21) (b), Florida
Statutes;
2. The remaining capacities in public facilities and
services and the condition of natural resources or archaeological
or historical resources that are impacted by, or are pertinent
to, the approved downtown development application and development
order.
(d) In addition to the requirements for the annual report
pursuant to Paragraph 380.06(14)(c), Florida Statutes, and
Subsection 9J-2.25(5), Florida Administrative Code, the annual
report for an approved downtown development project shall
include:
1. A comparison of the amount of development approved in
each land use category and the amount of land use actually
developed as of the end of the year; and
2. A comparison of the remaining capacities in public
facilities and services and the conditions of natural resources
or archaeological or historical resources with the projected
needs and impacts of the yet undeveloped land uses approved in
the downtown development application and development order.
(e) By written agreement the Division of Resource Planning
and Management, the local government with jurisdiction, the
downtown development authority and the regional planning agency
may agree to eliminate or modify the requirements for the annual
report established in Subsection 9J-2.25(5), Florida
Administrative Code, which are not appropriate for an areawide
downtown development application.
Specific Authority 20.05,120.53(1),380.032(2),380.06(22) FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1), 380.021, 380.06(21) FS.
Bistory--New.
Previously 9B-16.29.
9J-2.30 is Reserved.
subpart C--Development of Regional Impact Procedures in
Unregulated Jurisdictions.
~n
~
~
the report and recommendations of the regional planning agency;
(b) Specify which regional issues have been sufficiently
reviewed,
(c) Deny, approve or approve with conditions the
conceptual or master plan development and any initial increments
or phases of development that may be appropriate and that have
been reviewed by the regional planning agency;
(d) Define presently known information requirements for,
and issues which are subject to, further review upon submission
of subsequent incremental applications for development approval;
and
(e) Identify issues which can result in denial of
subsequent applications.
(4) The review of subsequent incremental applications shall
be as prescribed in Paragraph 380.06(20)(b), Florida Statutes.
Substantial changes in conditions underlying the approval of the
master development order or substantially inaccurate information
upon which the master development order was based are to be
construed to mean changed conditions or inaccurate information
that creates a reasonable likelihood of additional adverse
regional impact or any other regional impact not previously
reviewed by the regional planning agency.
(5) This rule shall not be construed to limit or modify
statutory responsibilities of regional planning agencies, local
governments or the Department in complying with Section 380.06,
Florida Statutes.
Specific Authority 20.05, 120.53(1), 380.032(2), 380.06(22) FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1), 380.021, 380.06(20) FS.
History--New 7-7-76; Amended.
Previously 22F-l.24, 27F-l.24, 9B-16.28.
9J-2.29 Downtown Development DRI Application.
(1) A downtown development authority may submit a
development of regional impact application for development
approval pursuant to Subsection 380.06(21), Florida Statutes and
Paragraph 9J-2.22(1)(c), Florida Administrative Code.
(2) In addition to the requirements specified in Subsection
380.06(21), Florida Statutes, the fOllowing shall apply:
(a> Upon request of the downtown development authority, the
regional planning agency shall request that representatives of
local government with jurisdiction over the land area participate
in the preapplication conference arranged pursuant to Subsection
380.06(7), Florida Statutes, and Section 9J-2.21, Florida
Administrative Code;
29
k subject to the requirements of Section 380.06, Florida Statutes,
relating to development of regional impact review and permitting
procedures, when the rule designating the area of critical state
concern so provides.
Specific Authority 20.05, 120.53(1), 380.032(2), 380.06(22) FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1), 380.021, 380.05-.06 FS.
Bistory--New 7-7-76.
Previously 22F-l.30, 27F-l.30, 98-16.33.
9J-2.34 through 2.37 Reserved.
'2"
~
v
9J-2.3l Ninety Day Notice Requirement.
(1) Prior to undertaking development, a developer proposing
a development of regional impact in an unregulated jurisdiction
shall submit a written notice to the Division of Resource
Planning and Management and to any local government having
jurisdiction to adopt zoning or subdivision regulations for the
area in which the development is proposed. The notice to the
Division of Resource Planning and Management shall be by a
completed copy of Form BLWM-05-83 as listed in Section 9J-2.l7,
Florida Administrative Code. The form shall be transmitted by
certified mail, to establish a date certain of receipt.
(2) Within 90 days of receipt of the form specified in
Subsection (1) of this section:
(a) Any local government with jurisdiction may adopt
zoning or subdivision regulations. If a zoning or subdivision
regulation is adopted during the 90-day period, the developer
shall file an application of development approval as required by
Subsection 380.06(6), Florida Statutes, to commence development
of regional impact review and permitting procedures.
(b) The state may designate the area within which the
development is proposed as an area of critical state concern.
If such an area of critical state concern is designated during
the 90-day period, the developer shall comply with the
requirements set forth in Section 380.05, Florida Statutes, and
Section 9J-2.33 of these rules.
(3) If, after 90 days from the receipt of notice specified
in Subsection (1), no zoning or subdivision regulations have been
adopted by the local government, nor an area of critical state
concern designated, the developer may undertake the proposed
development of regional impact.
(4) Any substantial changes from the proposed development
as set forth in the notice to the Division of Resource Planning
and Management specified in Paragraph 9J-2.3l(2)(a) shall
require a new 90-day notice under Paragraph 380.06(5)(c), Florida
Statutes.
Specific Authority 20.05,120.53(1), 380.032(2), 380.06(22) FS.
Law Implemented 120.53(1), 380.021,380.05-.06 FS.
Bistory--New 7-7-76; Amended.
Previously 22F-l.27, 27F-l.27, 98-16.31.
9J-2.32 is Reserved.
Subpart D--Development of Regional Impact Procedures in
Areas of Critical State Concern.
9J-2.33 Areas of Critical State Concern.
If a proposed development of regional impact is located
within an area of critical state concern the developer shall be
;,
~tJAJc-
CITY of
BOYNTON BEACH
~
Q) 120 E. Boynton
,. .
/....:, P. O. Box 310
:',4" Boynton Beach,
Beach Blvd
Florida 33425-0310
(305) 734.-811]
23 August '85
Mr Wade Riley
Riteco Development Corporation
1300 West Lantana Road, Suite 201
Lantana, FL 33462
Dear Wade,
The following is a list of trees which the City of Boynton Beach has received
in donations from the Riteco Development Corporation The trees are presently
kept at the City Nursery and will be planted on public properties throughout
the City.
HEIGHT CONTAINER
SPECIES (FEET) SIZE QUANTITY
Bischofia 3-4' 15 gal 130
Bottlebrush 3-4' 15 gal 96
Golden Rain Tree 4-5' 15 gal 89
lbng Kong Orchid 3-4' 15 gal 39
Live Oak 2-3' 15 gal 55
Mahogany 3-4' 15 gal 24
Poinciana 5-6' 15 gal 79
Queen Crape Mrytle 2-3' 15 gal 88
Rosewood 2-3' 15 gal 129
TOTAL 729
There are an additional two-hundred and twenty-five fifteen gallon size con-
tainers which were donated We will also use these materials in plant/tree
growing practices in the nursery operation
I would like to thank you and your organization on behalf of the City of Boynton
Beach for your donations and interest in the beautification of Boynton Beach
Sincerely,
y-!""OL 1-4.- #~.I/'J~~
Kevin John Hallahan
Forester/Horticulturist
CC Carmen Annunziato, Planning Director
Charles Frederick, Director, Recreation & Park Dept
John Wildner, Parks Superintendent
KH/ad
" -
f>
MEMORANDUM
21 April 1986
TO:
Peter L Cheney, City Manager
FROM:
Carmen S Annunziato, Planning Director
RE:
Boynton Beach Park of Commerce -
Action taken by Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
Accompanying this memo you will find three documents as follows:
1 Memorandum to Council Members -
Agenda Item SA.
2 Memorandum to Council Members -
Agenda Item SA Addendum, and,
3 Memorandum to File dated April 16, 1986
from Michael Busha
As noted in the recommendation in the addendum, the Council's staff
and the developer are in accord with respect to the submission of
additional information by Deutsch-Ireland, and the memo to file
amplifies on the nature of the materials to be submitted and the
position taken by the City's staff The Council, in turn, approved
the recommendation in the addendum offered by staff on April 18,
1986
These materials should be added to Council's backup information for
the April 22, 1986 public hearing
~~E~S SA~NUN~
/bks
MEMORANDUM
21 April 1986
TO
Peter L Cheney, City Manager
FROM:
Carmen S Annunziato, Planning Director
RE
Boynton Beach Park of Commerce -
Action taken by Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council
Accompanying this memo you will find three documents as follows
1 Memorandum to Council Members -
Agenda Item SA
2 Memorandum to Council Members -
Agenda Item SA Addendum, and,
3 Memorandum to File dated April 16, 1986
from Michael Busha
As noted in the recommendation in the addendum, the Council's staff
and the developer are in accord with respect to the submission of
additional information by Deutsch-Ireland, and the memo to file
amplifies on the nature of the materials to be submitted and the
position taken by the City's staff The Council, in turn, approved
the recommendation in the addendum offered by staff on April 18,
1986
These materials should be added to Council's backup information for
the April 22, 1986 public hearing
c~ SC ~
CARMEN S ANNUN~ATO
/bks
~
.~
TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL
M E M 0 RAN DUM
To
Council Members
,llGFlIDA 11E'1 5-A
From Staff
Date April 18, 1986 Council Meeting
Subject Boynton Beach Park of Commerce - Proposed Amended Master
Site Development Plan and Development Order
Overview
Proposed amendments to the Boynton Beach Park of Commerce Master Site Devel-
opment Plan (Attachment A), and Development Order (0 0.) (Attachment B),
have been submitted to Council by the developer for review pursuant to th~
provisions of Section 380 06(19), Florida Statutes. Pursuant to Counci l's
administrative procedure, the City of Boynton Beach has been notified of
Council's intent to participate at the local public hearing pending
Council's formal consideration of the application. Council must now
eva1 uate the proposed changes and determi ne whether the changes constitute
a substantial deviation and whether Council should be present at the local
public hearing.
Background
The Boynton Beach Park of Commerce is a 539.9-acre project containing
commercial, office, and light industrial uses Council completed its
assessment in September 1984, and the City of Boynton Beach issued the 0 0
in December 1984 The D.O. has not been amended to date
The proposed changes to the Master Site Development Plan include adjust-
ments to land uses to incorporate a Sand Pine Scrub preserve area and city
park, refinements to road alignments, refinements to parcel sizes, and
revision of project phasing to a single public improvement construction and
marketing phase The proposed amendment to the D O. incorporates the
revised Master Site Development Plan into the D 0
Analysis
Section 380 06(19), Florida Statutes, sJ:"'cifies that a substantial devia-
tion occurs when any proposed change to a previously approved Development
of Regional Impact creates a reasonable likelihood of additional regional
impact or creates any type of regional impact not previously reviewed by
the Council A substantial deviation also occurs when any of the specified
criteria listed in Section 380 06(19)(b) and (c), Florida Statutes, is met
or exceeded
..
..
'"
The changes proposed in the Master Site Development Plan and D O. relate to
transportation impacts and impacts on Sand Pine Scrub habitat
The adjustments to land use, refinements to road alignments, to parcel
sizes, and revisions of project phasing could potentially create addi-
tional impacts on the regional roadway network Section 380 06(19){bj(15),
Flori da Statutes i nd icates that a proposed change creates a substantial
deviation if there is at least a 15 percent increase in the number of exter-
nal trips generated by the development above that which was originally
projected. However, the proposed changes result in a reduction in external
trip generation as well as a slight reduction in overall trip generation
The proposed change to a single phase for public improvement construction
and marketing does not create any additional impacts on the transportation
network. The D 0 conditions dealing with transportation improvements are
worded so that required improvements are tied to the number of external
trips generated or maintenance of Level of Service C/D regardless of the
development timeframe. The D.O further requires that the developer
monitor traffic conditions and report the findings to the City, the County,
and the Council annually
Based on the above ana lys is, the proposed amendments to the Plan and D 0
do not create a substantial deviation with respect to impacts on the
regional roadway network. The threshold for increase in external trip gene-
ration is not exceeded, and the specific wording of the D 0 conditions
concerning the mitigation of traffic impacts prevents any substantial devia-
tion due to the phasing change
Adjustments to land uses have been made to incorporate a Sand Pine Scrub
preserve area according to the requirements of the D 0 Condition 6 of the
D O. specifies, in part, that
liThe developer shall preserve in viable condition a mlnlmum of
forty (40) acres of Sand Pine Scrub canopy, understory, and
groundcover vegetat ion Pri or to commencement of any c 1 eari ng
activities, the developer shall survey the site to determine the
numbers and distribution of any populations of the Gopher
Tortoise, Florida Burrowing Owl, Florida Gopher Frog, Florida
Mouse, and Florida Scrub Lizard which occur Sand Pine Scrub
preserve area(s) shall be of appropriate size, quality, and
arrangement to maintain all populations of these species II
The original Master Site Development Plan did not specify the location of
the Sand Pine Scrub preservation area The proposed amended Plan
del'1eates a preserve area, but staff does not believe that this Plan
results in preservation of a minimum of 40 acres of Sand Pine Scrub
habitat The Plan appears to preserve less than 40 acres of this partic-
ular plant community type It is also not clear that the Plan results in
preservation of sufficient Sand Pine Scrub habitat to provide for any
endangered and threatened animal species which occur on-site Data to
support the adequacy of the preserve area to accommodate exi st i ng popu 1 a-
tion numbers have not been provided to Council
-2-
~
;10
>>
The amended Development Plan also includes an attachment submitted as the
littoral zone and wetlands management plan required in D 0 Condition 9
This Plan does not address all of the requirements specified in D O---condi-
tion 9, however
Based on the above analysis, the proposed adjustments to the Maste-r Site
Development Plan and amendment to the D 0 are considered to be substantial
deviations Council's concerns over Sand Pine Scrub habitat and wetland/
1 ittora 1 zone management are not adequately addressed, and the proposed
changes create a reasonable likelihood of additional regional impact
Summary
The proposed amendments to the Master Site Development Plan and D 0 are
considered to be substantial deviations. Because the proposed amended
Master Site Development Plan is to be incorporated into the DO, it is
appropriate for Council to participate at the local public hearing on these
proposed changes. Council should inform the local officials of Council's
position in this matter to preserve Council's juriSdiction over any amended
D O.
Recommendation
Council should direct staff to participate at the local public hearing on
the proposed changes to the Boynton Beach P ark of Commerce Development of
Regional Impact in order to present Council's review and analysis of the
proposed changes and to preserve Council's juri sd i ct i on over any amendea
Development Order
Attachments
-3-
) -
,,, 9!Ji~
j "'CJ..}J=
::1'&
., )
-"\
.., ,,)"
:ut --~~ -,~- ;
~- ~,,~"'j
j~,n~::::;~
MASTER SITE DEVELOPl\1ENT PLAN
:r~
n.
..e..... L. aD... ... ....C..,... l..c. ~ :
0::11_,1"" ;.lol....-o~"'O....IO ..,...1::1 .~~
~
') ):> J~ ~
..#0- -.,~,
, .......-~~ -
~- (~ '
. \J
,1
\1
}-
--'---"-
,.
~ ==;I' ~ oJ.......
~~
-
-:::-
-').,~
~
,
,
~
}~~
~~~
~~-
----
,j?.
~
~~
~r:~
d ~
"
jn
-.-. ./
~\
'"
1
1
I)
~ .
_I -
-~-
-=- -~~..----
, '\ -
\(
\
"
\'
r
l
tl=-
.-
.--~
---
." ,
,'" ; '_ : .,,_/ ), '-l.. -'I; :l .
, ~~~.. \ +_,.J-.
==-=-r-ci' =- ,~ "')
,) ~ 1 (1'.......
MSP-l A
~ ,...,... \or
.-, r-
C i..-J
.-
--.,
:
r-
\ --- .._.;
-"... .....
101.9 ac:.
c".. __ u_ -- - 30."
CQ___ct.t..lf..-~
acnc. ~ \ 311 .c.
("",..trtai l4.4.1 oIC.
R....rc..O"'.o_' 1,.....'11"- 53.3 ..c.
00-- S...-,.....-
t..,/r,.. .--- M-JI -.
.......,&...- ......~
- nmJ'l'SCU.ntF.LANll
-'" _ l"ll'I'Jn1Jl.ll
.:-----.
.--- ;
~ ._-
--~.....- .....
.__~Oe"- ......
~i ~ ......-.-. II....
--~
:\
~l
t=j
F=
-
'50.... p.... fI'~
RoM- -'
rOTA'"
'0.0
J3.9
')399 .aC
...--"....... ..--
A
.......-;.,.
.
ATTACHMENT A
J;I
1Il
E
'i
.,
I
,~
~;1
:),;
p
~
.
.
..
..
!
.i
'b
,;"--
~/~
j"~...s:oQ
J1f~~
1'\. ,
~~~
'~I:Il:i~ t;..1
~cbCl_,':.3
",000 ~-..
J'I,..:J
=oJ
.,..
r
----'
-----./
----.--
i
'-
...,
~.
DEUTSCH IREL.AlW
PROPERTIES
IIIE..... T TO ran I.AUDCJtOAL.C O""CC
January 21, 1986
Mr. Peter Cheney, City Manager
City of Boynton Beach
120 N.E. Second Avenue
P O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33435
- _ i
, ,\--;"
-."..~
.. ..........
~,'!' ."..
.a ..1oI<.,b....
RE. Requested Development Order Amendments
Boynton Beach Park of Commerce
Dear Mr. Cheney.
As part of our submittal requesting approval of the Amended
Master Site Development Plan for the Boynton Beach Park of
Commerce, Deutsch/Ireland Properties hereby requests an
amendment to the above captioned Development Order, City
Ordinance #84-51 passed December 18, 1984, as follows
1 Section #3 The Amendment application procedure and the
subsequent proceedings h~ve been duly conducted pursuant
to the provision of Florida Statutes, Chapter 380
2 Section #4 subsection (1) Paragraph (C) shall be added
as follows:
(c) Boynton Beach Park of Commerce ADA, Amended Master
Site Development Plan submitted 21st January, 1986
3 References throughout the Development Order shall be
revised to conform to the Amended Master Site Development
Plan, as approved. Such revis~ons shall be made in the
interest of consistency and clar~tj
For your use in reviewing this request, attached hereto ~s a
copy of the proposed Amended Master Site Development Plan
E9~E W ZI~RMAN
~rRECTOR OF PJANNING
& DESIGN J
GZ
CC
ak
Mr Thomas K Ireland
~r Edward 3 Deutsch
Jon C. Moyle, Esqu~re ./
SUITE 1106-INTERNAT10NAL aUILDING-2455 E. SUNRISE OOULEVARO-FORT LAUDERDALE. FLORIDA 33304 .l3051 564-5114
ATTACHMENT B
THE BUILDING. 1125 NORTHEAST 125 STREET NORTH MIAMI. F\.uAIOA 33161 . (3051891.6006
AFFILIATES. BAOLEt~ REALTY &, MANAGEMENT CORP MITA CON$TRUCTJOtl CORP
-"':-;t _
, 1-..~
,~
~f.-:~.\\-: r ~:,_
~ 1t' -t .-
,~
'."J 1'1 To .l)a.U- C '1 M b
""';:;'-'",'+'~'fj~~:,~, ounc 1 em ers
\~j;?j~~;~i From)"
,~~ -.t.."
(",-, .. ~;
;'~.,r' '.,.?r Date April 18,},9.86 Council Meeting
':-. -ie" .~:t!'t,' ., ~J ...'~ '.7'~-:;'. '
"'Subject~ Boynton' Beactl~ Park of Commerce
.:~~ Deve 1 opment;; ,"Jan and Development
. i;i~~~i/~~t.~ ,.;~i~ '~~f{;'-{l~';
-.~l} The' staff report on 'the proposed Amended Master Site Development Plan and ',~
, . Development Order (0.0 ) for the Boynton Beach Park of Commerce concludes "1;
._J~~,that,..,;the pro~o~ed ~h~nges represent a sUb,stanti a 1. deviation and recomm~nds .~( '.
'."/;',1~j~~OU~C11 ~p.artlclpatlon at the local publlC hearln.~"to preserve Councl1;'~." ...f~f-;~~.i:i
,,' l~;~Jurlsdlctlon over any amended D.O. ~'~;";.". ",,--''''?t.;~' f?~T;.5:i'
'.~ ' ~. ,i. ' :-',.
~~~'i Following the preparation of ~the staff report, ;'representatives of the :N~~~~
deve 1 opment and offi ci a 1 s from the City of Boynton Beach met with staff to
discuss additional data necessary to meet the requirements of 0 0 Condi-
tion 9 (establishment of littoral zone/freshwater hardwood swamp areas and
development of related management plans) and to discuss whether the Sand
Pine Scrub preserve area and management plan fulfill the requirements of
0.0 Condition 6
TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL
M E M 0 RAN 0 U M
.'
.~.
jr-
~~
~
,
~ ,..j
"
~?'_i
.
" ftGENDA IlB1 5-A ADDENDLM t:l~~0t
?,: ~~ y;-
'~K~~L .{it'.
~';'f ~~?~
Staff
't~
r'
Proposed Amended Master Site
Order r;..H;:~;~' ~f~rtfl~y~:~t~~'; '~;~~;"1
t~3
~i-'f~
At the meeting the developer I s representatives ind icated that the
C additional data necessary to meet the requirements of 0 O. Condition 6 for
the establishment and maintenance of littoral zones and freshwater hardwood
swamp habitats will be submitted to Council Additional material has been
submitted to staff with regard to the Sand Pine Scrub preserve area and
management plan. Staff has therefore conceptually approved the preserve
area designated on the amended Development Plan, but has indicated that
final approval is contingent upon receipt of three additional pieces of
information, which the developer has agreed to provide
Recommendation
Counc il staff and the deve 1 oper are in agreement as to what add it i ona 1
information will be required in order to adequately address 0 0 Conditions
6 and 9 However, because this material is still outstanding, it is still
appropriate for Council to participate at the local public hearing.
Council should direct staff to participate at the local public hearing on
the proposed changes to the Boynton Beach P ark of Commerce in order to
preserve Council's jurisdiction over any amended Development Order
.~
\Y
M E M 0 RAN 0 U M
To
File
Michael Busha tlf>
Apri 1 16, 1986
From
Date
Subject
Boynton Beach Park of Commerce DRI
At the request of the owners of Boynton Beach Park of Commerce, I met with
representatives of the development and with officials from the City of
Boynton Beach on April 15th (see attached). Topics of discussion dealt
mainly with 1) what additional data would be necessary to meet the
requirements of DRI Development Order Condition 9 (i.e., establishment of
littoral zone/freshwater hardwood swamp areas and development of related
management plans), and 2) whether or not the Sand pine scrub preserve area
depicted on the recently reviewed master plan (see attached) and the manage-
ment plan prescribed to'enhance and maintain the ecological functions and
values of this area fulfill the requirements of DRI Development Order
Con d it i on 6.
DRI Development Order Condition 9
It was indicated by the developer that what had been submitted to
date (i.e , revised master plan) was not intended to satisfy the
requirements of this condition It was indicated that complete
design and management plans for establishing and maintaining littoral
zones and freshwater hardwood swamp habitat as part of the final
surface water management plan system will be submitted Staff reiter-
ated the requirements of Condition 9 Staff further explained that
submitting a model or typical lake design would be sufficient if a
specified commitment was included in the plan which provided
assurances that all lakes planned to satisfy Condition 9 would be
constructed and vegetated consistent with the model It was
indicated this approach could be taken rather than submitting design
plans for approval on a lake by lake basis However, staff expressed
that it be specified on the master plan where littoral zone and
freshwater hardwood swamp habitat would be located and how the
acreage would be distributed within the proposed surface water
management system
The City of Boynton Beach was in agreement with either approach
DRI Development Order Condition 6
It was indicated by the developer that the Sand pine scrub preserve
area identified on the previously submitted revised master plan was
not intended to satisfy the requirements of this condition. Since
......+
......
that submittal staff has received a management plan which 1)--
describes physical and biological characteristics of scrub on-site,
2) provides discussion regarding the pros and cons of various
approaches to preserving functions and values of scrub on-site consis-
tent with Development Order requirements, 3) provides valid conclu-
sions regarding why the preserve area initially shown on the revised
master plan is the most viable alternative for preserving scrub func-
tions and values on-site, and 4) prescribes management procedures for
enhancement and maintenance of the scrub community within the
preserve area
Staff indicated that the management plan and the scrub preserve area
identified in the revised master plan would be acceptable with the
understanding that the following additional information be included
in the final management plan
1. Conceptual plans depicting the extent and location of any board-
walk(s) proposed in the scrub preserve area and how the board-
wa1k(s) would be managed for educational purposes and maintained
2 Provide a specified commitment defining the developer's fiscal
and management responsibilities (i e., who will be responsible
for management of the preserve and who will pay for its
man agemen t ).
3 The scrub preserve area currently only provides between 30-33
acres of the 40 acres of Sand pine scrub habitat required by
Condition 6 It was requested that the management plan identify
where the remaining 7-9 acres would occur on-site and how this
would be maintained based upon its location and distribution on
the property
The City of Boynton Beach was in agreement with all points discussed
above
With regard to addressing the scrub shortage within the preserve
area, staff offered three approaches that would be considered
acceptable 1) preserve the additional scrub habitat within land-
scaped areas, 2) create scrub "fingers" within dry prairie habitat
within the preserve, and 3) utilize a combination of both approaches
to make up the difference.
The City of Boynton Beach was only in full agreement with approach
No 2
The City preferred that all the scrub preserved on the property be
contained within the identified scrub preserve area The City was
concerned over how scrub scattered through the landscaped areas would
be accounted for and protected from development in the future
~~
.. ....
The meeting closed with a recommendation from the developer to amend --
April's Agenda Item 5-A to inform Council of what transpired at the meeting
and to specifically indicate that 1) the developer has informed staff
that appropriate design and management plans would be submitted for the
establishment and maintenance of required littoral zones and freshwater
hardwood swamp habitat, and 2) staff has conceptually approved the designa-
tion of the scrub preserve area shown on the revised master plan, and the
scrub management plan, with the understanding that final approval will be
contingent upon receiving the additional information requested above.
I was in agreement with the request by the developer as was the City of
Boynton Beach. It is my recommendation that an addendum to Agenda Item 5-A
be drafted to this effect. Because of the information and documents
outstanding that will be required for staff to form a final opinion on the
consistency of the revised master plan with the DRI Development Order, I
would also recommend that this addendum be provided for informational
purposes only and that we still request Council to approve our attendance
at the local public hearing.
MB cb
Attachments
TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL
M E M 0 RAN DUM
To
Counc i 1 Members
AGFJIDA I!P1 5-A
From
Staff
Subject
April 18, 1986 Council Meeting
Boynton Beach Park of Commerce - Proposed Amended Master
Site Development Plan and Development Order
Date
Overview
Proposed amendments to the Boynton Beach Park of Commerce Master Site Devel-
opment Plan (Attachment A), and Development Order (0 0 ) (Attachment B),
have been submitted to Counci 1 by the developer for review pursuant to the
provisions of Section 380 06(19), Florida Statutes Pursuant to Council IS
administrative procedure, the City of Boynton Beach has been notified of
Council's intent to participate at the local public hearing pending
Council's formal consideration of the application Council must now
eva 1 uate the proposed changes and determi ne whether the changes const i tute
a substantial deviation and whether Council should be present at the local
public hearing
Background
The Boynton Beach Park of Commerce is a 5399-acre project containing
commercial, office, and light industrial uses Council completed its
assessment in September 1984, and the City of Boynton Beach issued the D 0
in December 1984 The D O. has not been amended to date
The proposed changes to the Master Site Development Plan include adjust-
ments to 1 and uses to incorporate a Sand Pi ne Scrub preserve area and city
park, refinements to road alignments, refinements to parcel sizes, and
revision of project phasing to a single public improvement construction and
marketing phase The proposed amendment to the 0 0 incorporates the
revised Master Site Development Plan into the D 0
Analysis
Section 380 Q6(19"), Florida Statutes, s~"'cifies that a substantial devia-
tion occurs when any proposed change to a previously approved Development
of Regional Impact creates a reasonable likelihood of additional regional
impact or creates any type of regional impact not previously reviewed by
the Council A substantial deviation also occurs when any of the specified
criteria listed in Section 380 06(19)(b) and (c), Florida Statutes, is met
or exceeded
--
'Wi>'
.
The changes proposed in the Master Site Development Plan and 0 0 relate to
transportation impacts and impacts on Sand Pine Scrub habitat
The adjustments to land use, refinements to road alignments, to parcel
sizes, and revisions of project phasing could potentially create addi-
tional impacts on the regional roadway network Section 380 06(l9)(b)(15),
Flori da Statutes i nd icates that a proposed change creates a substanti a 1
deviation if there is at least a 15 percent increase in the number of exter-
nal trips generated by the development above that which was originally
projected However, the proposed changes result in a reduction in external
trip generation as well as a slight reduction in overall trip generation
The proposed change to a single phase for public improvement construction
and marketing does not create any additional impacts on the transportation
network. The 0 O. conditions dealing with transportation improvements are
worded so that required improvements are tied to the number of external
tri ps generated or maintenance of Level of Serv i ce C/O regard less of the
development timeframe The 0 0 further requires that the developer
monitor traffic conditions and report the findings to the City, the County,
and the Council annually
Based on the above analysis, the proposed amendments to the Plan and D 0
do not create a substantial deviation with respect to impacts on the
regional roadway network The threshold for increase in external trip gene-
ration is not exceeded, and the specific wording of the 0 0 conditions
concerning the mitigation of traffic impacts prevents any substantial devia-
tion due to the phasing change
Adjustments to land uses have been made to incorporate a Sand Pine Scrub
preserve area according to the requirements of the 0 0 Condition 6 of the
o 0 specifies, in part, that
"The developer shall preserve in viable condition a mlnlmum of
forty (40) acres of Sand Pine Scrub canopy, understory, and
groundcover vegetation Prior to commencement of any clearing
activities, the developer shall survey the site to determine the
numbers and distribution of any populations of the Gopher
Tortoise, Florida Burrowing Owl, Florida Gopher Frog, F-lorida
Mouse, and Florida Scrub Lizard which occur Sand Pine Scrub
preserve area(s) shall be of appropriate size, quality, and
arrangement to maintain all populations of these species "
The original Master Site Development Plan did not specify the location of
the Sand Pine Scrub preservation area The proposed amended Plan
del '1eates a preserve area, but staff does not believe that this Plan
results in preservation of a minimum of 40 acres of Sand Pine Scrub
habitat. The Plan appears to preserve less than 40 acres of this partic-
ular plant community type It is also not clear that the Plan results in
preservation of sufficient Sand Pine Scrub habitat to provide for any
endangered and threatened animal species which occur on-site Data to
support the adequacy of the preserve area to accommodate existing popula-
tion numbers have not been provided to Council
- 2-
>>
The amended Development Plan also includes an attachment submitted as the
littoral zone and wetlands management plan required in D 0 Condition 9
This Plan does not address all of the requirements specified in D 0 Condi-
tion 9, however
Based on the above analysis, the proposed adjustments to the Master Site
Development Plan and amendment to the D 0 are considered to be substantial
deviations Council IS concerns over Sand Pine Scrub habitat and wetland/
1 i ttora 1 zone management are not adequately addressed, and the proposed
changes create a reasonable likelihood of additional regional impact
Summary
The proposed amendments to the Master Site Development Plan and D 0 are
considered to be substantial deviations Because the proposed amended
Master Site Development Plan is to be incorporated into the DO., it is
appropriate for Council to participate at the local public hearing on these
proposed changes Council should inform the local officials of Council's
position in this matter to preserve Council IS jurisdiction over any amended
D 0
Recommendation
Council should direct staff to participate at the local public hearing on
the proposed changes to the Boynton Be!1ch P ark of Commerce Deve 1 opment of
Regional Impact in order to present Council's review and analysis of the
proposed changes and to preserve Counc i l' s juri sd i ct i on over any amendea
Development Order
Attachments
-3-
~ :::;?'}. J~ :y
:f~
=-
.)., -=
~
=
}~~
~~.,
~j
,-
,i!.
y.
~~
~ :J..~~~
, I ~.~-..,
. ~
"
~,>
- -:}:l ,.....
/
.....
I
I
!
,.
-~~
~ :-'"~~-~
" -
)(
(\
"
.-=
~
l'
c
1
l
\~
-
-'
~ U::;:: ::......
.=-:~ ,--
.- - . ; -.- .....
._.._~O<I"_"'"
'I I
~ 9 .....-.-. ...-
__ ..1L-.l.-
:1
~!
___1'-- ....-
..:::..
........ i on ..........
........1))) _~..,
, ~r~-'-
. ~tJ'
\1
1~
! 1.,
i
,
)
..
...
..
,j
,;;.
~
j
~.
,~
~~
:),;
~
'b
".. ----
..
...
..
i
.i
jl~
j'"'~
jJ!f~-.;o~
'\ ,
~.J;~
::>CI';~I..:J
~ci:l..,,..:l
;~OCl ;~
"',..]
,.]
~
] -
'<39!O<C")
:]gQJJ=
"' >
~:) '.:-"
:H~-,~~ -,-.- -; -
rB. ~~"'-;
j cp:n-~~;.,~
~.., ..
, ~ " :"J" ? '-I..]:J,
~~~~o"J__J;f
'OS ":] ~ , l!)'.-....
MSP-IA "~ ":"'
d i-.J
.-
:1
1
~'"
~=":::;:I;::: 10.4 aC.
Ottlc. 133.1 _c.
lI....,... \ 44.3 _c.
R....re...o.-I...... tftd..."..- 53.3 _c.
Opea Scree...........-,
t.....-~~ '
w.ct.... - ......-
- DEU'TSC1NRELAND
......-.~Q
..c..._ \... ..... Ill_ ....,.,... l..c. .. ;
OOG S_I' .~.o ;.(.......0 ;...0...'10 "",,''',C::I .~ri
104.9 ...
t::::::I 5.1... PI- P,......
~ RoecI.-~
TOTAL
-$0.0 olC.
33.9 .c.
S39.9
ATTACHMENT A
..
."",
DEUTSCH mELA1'\TD
PROPERTIES
..I:.... y TO I"O..-T I.AUOE,"DA&.C O""C:I:
January 21, 1986
Mr Peter Cheney, City Manager
City of Boynton Beach
120 N.E. Second Avenue
POBox 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33435
- _I
._;. ...,~
," ~"::'1:"
........,; ..I .,i.,j."'b....
RE. Requested Development Order Amendments
Boynton Beach Park of Commerce
Dear Mr. Cheney
As part of our submittal requesting approval of the Amended
Master Site Development Plan for the Boynton Beach Park of
Commerce, Deutsch/Ireland Properties hereby requests an
amendment to the above captioned Development Order, City
Ordinance i84-5l passed December 18, 1984, as follows
1. Section i3 The Amendment application procedure and the
subsequent proceedings h~ve been duly conducted pursuant
to the provision of Florida Statutes, Chapter 380
2. Section #4 subsection (1) Paragraph (C) shall be added
as follows.
(c) Boynton Beach Park of Commerce ADA, Amended Master
Site Development Plan submitted 21st January, 1986
3 References throughout the Development Order shall be
revised to conform to the Amended Master S~te Development
Plan, as approved Such revisions shall be made in the
interest of consistency and clarity
For your use in reviewing this request, attached hereto is a
copy of the proposed Amended Master Site Development Plan
GZ
CC
ak
~r Thomas K. Ireland
.:1r Edward B Deutsch ATTACHMENT B
Jon c. "1oyJ.e, Esqu~re /
SUITE 1106-INTERNATIONAL aUILDING-2455 E. SUNRISE DOULEVAAO-FOATLAUOEAOALE. FLORIOA 33304. (305) 564.5114 ,/
THE BUILOING . 1125 NORTHEAST 125 STREET NORTH MIAMI. FLURIDA 33161 . (305) 891-61106
AFFILIATES: BAOLEt~ REALTY & MANAGEMENT CORP MITA CONgTRUCTION CORP
MEMORANDUM
To
From
File
Michael Busha tft>
Date
April 16, 1986
Subject
Boynton Beach Park of Commerce DRI
At the request of the owners of Boynton Beacn Park of Commerce, I met with
representatives of the development and with officials from the City of
Boynton Beach on April 15th (see attached) Topics of discussion dealt
mainly with 1) what additional data would be necessary to meet the
requirements of DRI Development Order Condition 9 (i e , establishment of
littoral zone/freshwater hardwood swamp areas and development of related
management plans), and 2) whether or not the Sand pine scrUD preserve area
depicted on the recently reviewed master plan (see attached) and the manage-
ment plan prescribed to enhance and maintain the ecological functions and
values of this area fulfill the requirements of DRI Development Order
C on d it i on 6
DRI Development Order Condition 9
It was indicated by the developer that what had been suDmitted to
date (i e , revised master plan) was not intended to satisfy the
requirements of this condition It was indicated that complete
design and management plans for establishing and maintaining littoral
zones and freshwater hardwood swamp habitat as part of the final
surface water management plan system will be submitted Staff reiter-
ated the requirements of Condition 9 Staff further explained that
submitting a model or typical lake design would be sufficient if a
specified commitment was included in the plan which provided
assurances that all lakes plannea to satisfy Condition 9 ','/ould be
constructed and vegetated consistent with the model It was
indicated this approach could be taken rather than submitting design
plans for approval on a lake by lake basis However, staff expressed
that it De specified on the master plan where littoral zone and
freshwater hardwood swamp habitat would be located and how the
acreage would be distributed within the proposea surface water
management system
The City of Boynton Beach was in agreement wlth either apDroach
DRI Development Order Condition 6
It was indicated by the developer that the Sand pine scruo preserve
area identifiea on the prevlously suomitted revisea ~aster plan nas
not lntendea to satisfy the requirements of ~his condition Since
that submittal staff has received a management plan which 1)
describes physical and biological characteristics of scrub on-site,
2) provides discussion regarding the pros and cons of various
approaches to preserving functions and values of scrub on-site consis-
tent with Development Order requirements, 3) provides valia conclu-
sions regarding why the preserve area initially shown on the revised
master plan is the most viable alternative for preserving scrub func-
tions and values on-site, and 4) prescribes management procedures for
enhancement and maintenance of the scrub community within the
preserve area
Staff indicated that the management plan and the scrub preserve area
identified in the revised master plan would be acceptable with the
understanding that the following additional information be included
in the final management plan
1 Conceptual plans depicting the extent and location of any board-
walk(s) proposed in the scrub preserve area and how the board-
walk(s) would be managed for educational purposes and maintained
2 Provide a specified commitment defining the developer's fiscal
and management responsibilities (i e , who will be responsible
for management of the preserve and who will pay for its
man agemen t)
3 The scrub preserve area currently only provides between 30-33
acres of the 40 acres of Sand pine scrub habitat required by
Condition 6 It was requested that the management plan identify
where the remaining 7-9 acres would occur on-site and how this
would be maintained based upon its location and distribution on
the property
The City of Boynton Beach was in agreement with all points discussed
above
With regard to addressing the scrub shortage within the preserve
area, staff offered three approacnes that would be considered
acceptable 1) preserve the additional scrub habitat within land-
scaped areas, 2) create scrub "fingers" within dry orairie habitat
within the preserve, and 3) utilize a combination of both approaches
to make up the difference
The City of Boynton Beacn was only in full agreement Nith approach
No 2
The City preferred that all the scrub preserved on the prooerty be
contained Nithin the identifiea scrub preserve area The City was
concerned over now scrub scattered through the landscaped areas woula
be accountea for and protectea from development in ~he future
TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL
M E M 0 RAN 0 U M
To
Council Members
AGHIDA rlB1 5-A ADDENDLM
From
Staff
Date
April 18, 1986 Council Meeting
Subject
Boynton Beach Park of Commerce - Proposed Amended Master Site
Development Plan and Development Order
The staff report on the proposed Amended Master Site Development Plan and
Development Order (0 0 ) for the Boynton Beach Park of Commerce concludes
that the proposed changes represent a substanti a 1 devi at i on and recommends
Council participation at the local public hearing to preserve Council's
jurisdiction over any amended 0 0
Following the preparation of the staff report, representatives of the
development and officials from the City of Boynton Beach met with staff to
discuss additional data necessary to meet the requirements of 0 0 Condi-
ti on 9 (estab 1 i shment of 1 ittora 1 zone/freshwater hardwood swamp areas and
development of related management plans) and to discuss whether the Sand
Pine Scrub preserve area and management plan fulfill the requirements of
o 0 Condition 6
At the meeting the developer's representatives indicated that the
additional data necessary to meet the requirements of 0 0 Condition 6 for
the establishment and maintenance of littoral zones and freshwater hardwood
swamp habitats wi 11 be submitted to Council Additional material has been
submitted to staff with regard to the Sand Pine Scrub preserve area and
management pl an Staff has therefore conceptually approved the preserve
area designated on the amended Development Plan, but has indicated that
final approval is contingent upon receipt of three additional pieces of
information, which the developer has agreed to provide
Recommendation
Council staff and the developer are in agreement as to what additional
information wi 11 be required in order to adequately address 0 0 Conditions
6 and 9 However, because this material is still outstanding, it is still
appropriate for Council to participate at the local public hearing
Council should direct staff to participate at the local public hearing on
the proposed changes to the Boynton Beach Park of Commerce in order to
preserve Council's jurisdiction over any amended Development Order
The meeting closed with a recommendation from tne developer to amend
Apri 11 s Agenaa Item 5-A to inform Counci 1 of what transpired at the meeting
and to specifically indicate that 1) the developer has informed staff
that appropriate design and management plans would be submitted for the
establishment and maintenance of requirea littoral zones ana freshwater
hardwood swamp nabitat, and 2) starf nas conceptually approved the designa-
tion of the scrub preserve area shown on the revised master plan, and the
scrub management pl an, with the understanding that final approval wi 11 be
contingent upon receiving the additional information requested above
I was in agreement with the request by the developer as was the City of
Boynton Beach It is my recommendation that an addendum to Agenda Item 5-A
be drafted to this effect Because of the information and documents
outstanding that will be required for staff to form a final opinion on the
consistency of the revised master plan with the DRI Development Order, I
would also recommend that this addendum be provided for informational
purposes only and that we still request Council to approve our attendance
at the local public hearing
MB cb
Attachments
~
"'Y.~
:;s
--., --' :
-.,..-:~ .~~ --~-:-
'-,..\,
\ ~ -
\1~ ~
!
~
~
) -'\.
.,
, ..,
...
""
~
'i
='
:.;..----:;
:1~<)
-~~
_J-
--
~
~- -
:; 'It-:J -,
~~
~~---~
_ . \ ::r- ~~
. . J ~
-~ .,/
.-'~
G-
\
\
1
.--
v
~-_.
- ~--.....
---
"(,
/-...,.-
~
)" ~=--~
:r~~
J"""~"O
1 .,
~~ .;,}
",oCl. .;)
~doO ~
;g~:'~
,.:,1
_./
-:'"
~~ ;...-'
\(
i,
...
"
1
\
1
;.
~
~--
)
'''' ';jC,
1~~
..., >.--- -
----., ~
~8~ :.::
~ J<0fY.3.35
'J~~ ~;:::
~~
..---
~
MASf1:.R srrE. DE\l~l:s?~~l ?L~
~ . _ _ ------.;:;;:. CEGE.P r A ~ =--
____________ ~:::-. _ ~ a~ ~ .--:...--- ~. ". ~
~"._. ~;~":;l
._ ~ .__ ;:::::~~'__"'" ," ". ~"ll','"''''
_.~--_..- ,,---. -- ", ,.-~
---...... ..... ~ .., - .. -.-- .
.- --- ~ "....-.-
_.... ..... .----:l ~.ftd ~\... ~1<..rv. ------:::: ;~.~
.--' --- ~ ......
_____ ;3....
~-====
.~:~:~.'.,~-?......:.!.'o ~":!~,....~..'~
____ ~.._.... ."c-
..()"tAL
~
---.----.----------------
Board of County Commissionels
Karen T Marcus, Chair
Jerry L Owens, Vice Chairman
Ken Spillias
Dorothv Wilken
Kenneth \1 "-dams
County Admmistrator
John C Sansbury
RECEIVED
A.PR'l1986
errv a, !\ J\J '-"'r-'~..
< t f n f"\j'. '" ,.. h" Q n.- -, r ."
~ '-ALl...J ....;r-1-.'.
April 10, 1986
Mr. Peter L Cheney
City Manager
City of Boynton Beach
120 East Boynton Beach Boulevard
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310
Dear Mr Cheney:
This letter acknowledges receipt of the Notice of Public Hearing at 7 30 P M.
on Tuesday, April 22, 1986 in the Boynton Beach Council Chambers for the
purpose of considering a proposed change to the Boynton Beach Park of
Commerce Development Order (Ordinance No. 84-51).
Please be advised that the Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners
officially received and filed the above mentioned resolution at their meeting of
April 8, 1986. A copy has been sent to the Director of the Planning, Zoning &
Building Department for review
Very truly yours, .,
'd1/i j/) 1"' /1 /0
~ "~~7;e<-.
hn -C. sansbu:~ / , <<
County Administrator
JCS/ad
cc: John Lehner
Director, PZ&B
Sam Shannon
Assistant County Administrator
An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer
BOX 1989 WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33402-1989
.-.~
*
AGENDA MEMORANDUM
April 9, 1986
TO Peter L Cheney, City Manager
FROM
Carmen S. Annunziato, Planning Director
RE
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA FOR APRIL 22, 1986
Please place the following item on the City Council Agenda for
the special meeting on the above-referenced date Please note
that the item will require a public hearing
DESCRIPTION: Request for approval of amendments to Development
Order for the Boynton Beach Park of Commerce, request for a
finding that the proposed changes do not constitute a substantial
deviation under Chapter 380, Florida Statutes, and that no
further D R.I approval is necessary; request that the City
Council issue an amendment to the Development Order,
incorporating the approved changes; request that the City Council
find that the revised master plan does not constitute a
substantial change to the master plan and approve the revised
master plan, under the City's PID regulations. See attached
memorandum, dated March 23, 1986 for a description of the revised
master plan
RECOMMENDATION. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended that
the City Council approve the proposed amendments to the
Development Order and make a finding that the proposed amendments
do not constitute a substantial deviation under Chapter 380,
Florida Statutes, and that no further DRI approval is necessary;
Furthermore, the Board recommended that the City Council find
that the revised master plan does not constitute a substantial
change under the City's PID regulations, and recommended that the
revised master plan be approved The Planning and Zoning Board's
recommendation is subject to the agreements reached with the
applicant as stated in his letter of February 28, 1986 (see
attached) and subject to staff comments (see attached), deleting,
however, the Planning Department's recommendation that the
applicant revise the master plan to place commercial uses along
the central collector road, south of 22nd Avenue, rather than
along 22nd Avenue.
EXPLANATION The motion to recommend approval of the revised
master plan and development order was made by Mr Winter and was
seconded by Mr DeLong The vote was 6-1 in favor of the motion,
with Mr. Ryder dissenting.
I
Carmen sl Annunziato
flat
Attachments
..........:-
MEMORANDUM
23 March 1986
TO
Chairman and Members
Planning and Zoning Board
FROM
Carmen S. Annunziato
Planning Director
RE
Boynton Beach Park of Commerce - Master Plan
Amendment
INTRODUCTION
On January 21, 1986 the Planning Department transmitted a
packet of materials which taken together constituted a
request for an amendment to the Development Order which
approved the Boynton Beach Park of Commerce (BBPOC),
Development of Regional Impact. Copies of these amendment
packages were also forwarded to the Mayor and Council, the
City Manager, the Technical Review Board, the City Attorney,
the Library, the Chamber of Commerce, the Treasure Coast
Regional Planning Council and the State Department of
Community Affairs, Bureau of Resource Management.
The amendments requested to the Development Order which
approved the BBPOC (Ordinance No. 84-51 copy attached) are
as follows:
1. Section #3- The Amendment application procedure
and the subsequent proceedings have been duly conducted
pursuant to the provisions of Florida Statutes, Chapter 380.
2. Section #4 subsection (1)
added as follows
Paragraph (C) shall be
(C) Boynton Beach Park of Commerce ADA, Amended
Master Site Development Plan submitted 21 January
1986
1
..-- ....
3 References throughout the Development Order s~l
be revised to conform to the Amended Master Site Development
Plan, as approved. Such revisions shall be made in the
interest of consistency and clarity
As a part of the Master Plan review process,
additional sections of the Development Order may be
recommended for amendment by the City's Technical Staff
PROCEDURE
Procedurally, the amendment request to the approved
development order is governed by Section 7 of Appendix A -
Zoning, of the Code of Ordinances which establishes Planned
Industrial Development Districts and by Chapter 380.06(19),
Florida Statutes for a determination of a substantial
deviation.
As previously reported, the City Council must conduct a
public hearing at which a determination of whether or not
the proposed change requires further development of regional
impact review. If no further review is required, the City
Council shall issue an amended development order which in
this instance requires the passage of an ordinance which
amends the original development order If a determination is
made that the proposed change requires further development
of regional impact review, the review shall be conducted
only on those aspects of the development order required to
be changed The above-mentioned public hearing shall
receive a fifteen (15) days public notice following the
passage of thirty (30) days but not more than forty-five
(45) days after receipt of the amendment materials. It is
anticipated that the City Council will conduct its hearing
on April 22, 1986.
This amendment procedure will require a one-time change to
our development regulations. For non-development of
regional impact planned industrial developments, the City
Council must make a finding related to the degree of change;
that is, whether or not it is substantial, and then, the
Planning and Zoning Board approves, approves with
modifications, or denies the request In this instance, the
City Council must approve any change Therefore, the
Planning and Zoning Board must act in an advisory capacity
to the Council, as the State Statutes prevail over City
ordinances
2
...... .:.....J
LAND USE
The master plan submitted by Deutsch Ireland as a part of
the amendment package substantially implements the
requirements of the approved Development Order, thus
supporting a recommendation that the changes requested are
not substantial The mix in acres of land use as currently
approved and as proposed is as follows
APPROVED PROPOSED INCREASE/(DECREASE)
Commercial 27.6 27 0 (2 2) %
Office 128.9 133 1 3.3
Club 0 3 4 NA
Industrial 254.7 197 6 (22 4)
Lakes, wetlands,
open space 82.2 104 9 27 6
Roads 46 5 33.9 (27 1)
Sand Pine Preserve 0 40.0 NA
TOTAL 539.9 539 9
The decrease in acres devoted to Industrial land uses is
replaced primarily by the Development Order requirement to
set aside 40 acres for a sand pine preserve, and for
increased lakes, wetlands and open space. Also, the
reconfiguration of the site resulted in the need for fewer
acres devoted to roads as noted in the table above
TECHNICAL REVIEW BOARD COMMENTS
Concerning Technical Review Board comments, the TRB met on
February 18, 1986 to review the plans and documents
submitted Also present at this meeting was the applicant,
Mr George Zimmerman, Director of Planning for Deutsch
Ireland Properties. At this meeting and at subsequent
meetings, almost all areas of concern were conclusively
addressed either through explanation, amendments to the
proposed plan or agreements in concept; however, two areas
of concern still remain
3
......-- .:.....J
~ One area of concern involves the applicants desire to locate
five commercial sites (21 acres) plus a Club (3 4) acres
along the south side of N W 22nd Avenue. The proposed
arrangement of commercial land uses seems to change the
character of the Planned Industrial Development and N W--
22nd Avenue Instead of projecting to the public an image
of an industrial/office park, the public will be exposed to
a commercial strip This is clearly in opposition to the
intent stated in the Planned Industrial Development District
Regulations which reads as follows.
"The purpose of this district is to provide a zoning
classification for light industrial development that
will better satisfy current demands for light
industrial zoned lands by encouraging development which
will reflect changes in the technology of land
development and relate the development of land to the
specific site and to conserve natural amenities "
The desired location for commercial activities may also be
in conflict with Comprehensive Plan policies which reject
strip commercial development. Therefore, the
commercial/retail sites should be considered to be an
adjunct to the light industrial, office, and research and
development land uses, and should be relocated to a less
prominent site within the Park
The second area of concern involves the proposed treatment
of water distribution in the Planned Industrial Development
Specifically, more detailed information on the proposed
water uses will be required before final designs are
accepted, as noted in the attached Memorandum from Pete
Mazzella, Utility Engineer.
REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL
As previously noted, the Treasure Coast Regional Planning
Council is a party to the amendment process If concerns
are raised by the requested amendments, the Council must
notify the City that it will be represented at the City
Council public hearing. In this regard, the Council has
raised a question concerning the proposed 40 acre scrub pine
forest preserve as noted in the attached letter from the
Council to George Zimmerman, and as noted, the Council will
be represented at the City Council's public hearing to
present its concerns
4
..- ...!II
RECOMMENDATION
The Technical Review Board recommends to the Planning and
Zoning Board and the City Council that a finding of no
substantial cha~ge be found ~ith respect to the requested
changes to the BBPOC Development Order This recommendation
is based on the agreements reached with the applicant as
stated in his letter of February 28, 1986 (see at"tached).
Furthermore, it is recommended that the applicant redesign
his master plan and place his commercial land uses in a
cluster along the central NE/SW collector road south of NW
22nd Avenue.
-
C~ ()('" ~-Z
CARMEN S .- ANNUNZ 0
jbks
5
......- ....
DEUTSCH IRELAND
PROPERTIES
."..., -~--~--.~
r REPLY ToroiTLAUDER~,~~JICE
J...... .-
-~"
J':)
February 28. 1986
r- ....
..d .__'-J....~.
-.,
Mr Carmen Annunziato. Planning Director
City of Boynton Beach
120 N.E 2nd Avenue
POBox 310
Boynton Beach. Florida 33435
RE Response to questions of the TRB reviewed in our meeting on February 18.
1986
Dear Carmen:
In response to the questions raised in the attached memoranda. I am providing
you herewith our responses for the record Memorandum #1 dated February
12. 1986. from Carmen Annunziato, Planning Director
ITEM 1: The Proponent still wishes to proceed with consideration of the
commercial sites as shown on their submitted Master Development Plan.
Although we recognize your concern. we maintain a great deal of concern
ourselves that the parcels be able to support the highest cal iber of
corrrnercial uses
ITEM 2: The question. with respect to a central loading and unloading
facility for rail service, the Proponent has reviewed such a proposal with a
number of rail users and have found it to be inappropriate All potential
users reqUire direct siding access to their facility
ITEM 3: The Master Development Plan is presented in ful I accordance with
the PID Zoning Ordinance We intend to provide all of the required greenbelt
buffers adjacent to properties having a different zoning classification. in
complete compliance with the Code
ITEM 4: The rights-of-way for all interior roadways wil I be 100 feet wide
Since we will be proposing some variations on the basic sidewalk/bike path
scheme. we will provide complete detail for review during the platting
process Again, we expect to provide the City with pavement sections.
landscaping and pedestrian amenities in excess of Code requirements The
typical roadway section will have two twenty-four foot wide roadways with a
sixteen foot wide landscaped median
SUITE 1106-INTERNATIONAL BUILDING-2455 E. SUNRISE BOULEVARD-FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA 33304. (305) 564-5114
THE BUILDING. 1125 NORTHEAST 125 STREET NORTH MIAMI, FLORIDA 33161. (305) 891-6806
AFFILIATES: BROLEN REALTY & MANAGEMENT CORP MITA CONSTRUCTION CORP
..- ---!II
ITEM 5 The schedule for the Environmental Impact Analysis phase of the
Interchange construction has been presented at the meeting, and a copy is
attached hereto for your further review We expect to execute the contract
with Kimley-Horn, our consultant, on or about March 4
Memorandum #2 dated February 12, 1986, from Perry A. Cessna, Director of
Ut i 1 it i es
ITEM A is comentary on water distribution
ITEM 1: We hereby agree to loop the water mains as requested at the cul-de-
sacs.
ITEM 2: The relocation of the water main routing to the High Ridge Road
right-of-way and the additional routing along the north side of the canal is
agreed to Final plans will be prepared in accordance therewith
ITEM 3: At this initial phase, we will agree to a 1,000 foot maximum
distance between line valves; however, we expect to review this plan in more
detail with the City during the platting phases When 1,000 foot spacing will
provide for fewer than four utility connections, we feel it is appropriate
that the spacing be increased
ITEM 4: We hereby agree to add an additional ten inch gate valve where
requested
ITEM 5: With respect to easements required for water and sewer, we hereby
request that ten foot wide easements be approved where installation occurs
outside of dedicated right-of-way In these instances, we will provide for a
ten foot building setback from an easement, thereby providing for a thirty
foot clear path at utility lines We also ask that the 1 imitation on
landscaping be imposed only within the ten foot wide easement area. With
respect to landscaping at the right-of-way and adjacent to such easement
areas, we will endeavor to utilize the plant materials as recommended by the
City Forester, Kevin J Hallahan, in his memorandum dated February 20, 1986
ITEM 6 With respect to fire flow, the Proponent hereby agrees that no
building will be certified for occupancy without proper fire flow. Since fire
flow is a question of use, the Proponent agrees to work out an appropriate
formula with the building department to establish required fire flow needs for
projects at the time of permitting Since to the extent feasible, all pub'l ic
improvements will be made at the same time, it is felt that the water loops
will be connected prior to occupancy for the vast majority of situations
ITEM B
Sewage collection and transmission
ITEM 1 Again, this item refers to easements being provided and the
proponent agrees to provide such easements at a width of ten feet with a
building setback requirement of an additional ten feet
....-- --!II
ITEM 2: Parcels W2-0 through W5-0 will be served by a sewer along the
north side of Northwest 22nd Avenue Parcels W19-0 and W20-0 respectively
will be served by an extension of the two sewers shown to the north
ITEM C Proponent will work with the City as required to insure that
inspection of utility Installation can be accomplished in a timely manner
The funds necessary to accomplish this task will be exalnlned and determined at
a later date
Memorandum #3 from Charles C Frederick, Director of Recreation and Park
Department also dated February 12, 1986.
ITEM 1: Land exchange proposal: The Proponent wishes to keep this matter
separate from discussions concerning the Master Plan layout. The negotiations
are continuing between Mr Peter Cheney, the City Manager and the Proponent to
work out the details of such a land exchange
ITEM 2 Median and right-of-way maintenance The Proponent has determined
at this time that the rights-of-way, other than Northwest 22nd Avenue and High
Ridge Road, will be privately held Since dedication Is not contemplated,
maintenance of those areas will be taken care of by the Developer and the
succeeding Property Owner's Association. Maintenance of Northwest 22nd Avenue
and High Ridge Road rights-of-way is also of concern to the Proponent, and
the Proponent is eager to establish a means whereby they can assume control
and responsibility for such maintenance
Memorandum from John WIldner, Park Superintendent dated February 12, 1986
This memorandum provides the backup for cost estimates concerning right-of-way
maintenance I be I I eve a 11 of the quest ions ra I sed there i n have been
addressed in the previous comentary
The next memorandum is from Lieutenant McGarry of the Police Department dated
February 11, 1986
In order to provide further information to the Police Department In response
to Lieutenant McGarry's questions, a meeting was held with Lieutenant Hammock,
Chief Hillary and other members of the Boynton Beach Police Department and Jim
Zook of Klmley-Horn and I In that meeting, details of the proposed High
Ridge Road relocation were discussed Peak hour traffic movements were
Identified at 1,300 cars per hour The interchange spacing between the
proposed 1-95 Interchange and High Ridge Road would be in excess of 800 feet,
center to center This distance more than adequately meets the DOT 660 foot
separation criteria The Police Department felt adequately assured that an
acceptable roadway and interchange design could be developed within these
distance perimeters Final design and pavement layout will be accompl ished
during the platting and roadway engineering phases scheduled to fol low
invnedlately
...... -:.....!I
..
With respect to the ability to obtain vacation of the DOT right-of-way for
High Ridge Road. Jim Zook of Kimley-Horn met with Frank Gordon. Design
Engineer of the Florida Department of Transportation on Thursday afternoon.
February 21 During that meeting, Mr Gordon indicated that DOT would
approach the vacation of High Ridge Road in accordance with their typical
vacation procedure He indicated that it did not appear as if that portion of
High Ridge Road was a part of the DOT network, and as such, there should not
be any major difficulty in obtaining vacation He did. however, reserve
final judgement on the roadway operations and easement vacation until such
time as the roadway design was complete.
I believe this responds to all areas of concern. If you have any further
questions, please contact me
GZ ak
CC Mr Thomas K Ireland
Mr Edward B Deutsch
Hr Thomas P Misuraca
Hr Rick Rossi
Hr James Zook
Hs Mimi Howard
David Pressly, Esquire
Mr Richard Kerber
Attachments
~ :...J
!f~ Ij IkM Cer"'n1d1
tI~b
u/ f3,uJett ~
~TFIvt ~
P tFe~s!:J
&f5.D
A-M
MEMORANDUM
12 February 1986
TO:
File
FROM.
Carmen S Annunziato, Planning Director
RE
Boynton Beach Park of Commerce Master Plan Modification
;:
The list which follows constitutes the Planning Department's
comments on the Boynton Beach Park of Commerce Modified Master
Plan.
1. The location of five commercial sites (21 acres) or
78% of all Park commercial acreage, plus the proposed
club along N.W. 22nd Avenue seems to change the
character of the Planned Industrial Development and
N.W 22nd Avenue. Instead of projecting to the public
an image of an industrial park, the public will be
exposed to a commercial strip
The intent of the Planned Industrial Development (PID)
zoning regulations is to provide
"a zoning classification for light industrial
development that will better satisfy current
demands for light industrial zoned lands "
In this regard, the commercial/retail site should be
considered to be an adjunct to the light industrial
office and research and development industrial land
uses
It is recommended that the commercial land uses and the
club located on N W. 22nd Avenue be relocated in a
cluster along the central N.E., S.W collector road,
south of N.W 22nd Avenue.
2. The applicant should explore the need for a central
loading/unloading facility for access to rail service
3. The master plan should delineate all required greenbelt
areas
~....:.:...
Page Two
4. The right-of-way width for all interior roads should
be shown as well as a roadway cross-section depicting
sidewalks, bikepaths, traffic lanes, median and turn
lanes.
5. An Environmental Impact Analysis schedule should be
submitted for public review and analysis
('~ JC-~/Y.~,
Carmen S Ann iato
/bks
...- ---!J
MEMORANDUM
TO Carmen Annunziato - Planning Director
DATE February 12, 1986
SUBJECT
Amendment to Boynton Beach Park of Commerce DRI
Please note the following comments regarding the amended plans for this project
Water Distribution
1.) Water mains within cul-de-sac:~ust be looped, with two additional gate
valves installed on each line to regulate flow.
2 ) Delete the 10" diameter water main section between parcels G 18 - I, and
G 20 - I, and reroute the line along the canal so as to loop the 8" line
to the east of parcel G 21 - I Change said 8" line to 10"
3 ) Plan for 1000' maximum distance between main line valves
4 ) Add a 10" gate valve at the southeast branch of the 10" X 16" cross on
N W 22 Ave
5 ) 30-foot wide water and sewer easements will be required for all water
lines along canals, between parcels, or otherwise not in Rights-of-Way
All construction, and the planting of trees and shrubs must be prohibited
(by deed restriction) within these easements
6 ) To insure adequate fire-flow, we request that certificates of occupancy
(C 0 IS) be withheld until the major loops (16" and lO") are completed
For those units north of N W 22 Ave , the loop from High Ridge Rd to
N W. 22 Ave., and thence to Congress Ave must be completed For those
units south of N W 22 Ave to receive CO'S. the loop across the C-16
canal. along High Ridge Rd to N W. 22 Ave . and thence westward to Con-
gress Ave must be completed
.
Sewage Collection and Transmission
1 ) 30' wide water and sewer easements will be needed for the force main
between the E-4 canal and the drainage lakes. the force main between
parcels G 18 - I and G 20 - I, and the gravity sewer between parcels
G 11 - RD and G 13 - RD All construction. and the planting of trees
and shrubs must be prohibited (by deed restriction) within these ease-
ments
2 ) Indicate how the following parcels will be served by gravity sewer.
W2-0, W3-0. W4-0, WS-O. W19-0, and W20-0
......-
General for both water and sewer
The compressed timetable for utility development of this property will neces-
sitate the hiring of a special inspector by this Department Provision must be
made for the developer to provide sufficient funds to cover the added expense of
the inspector's position The funds are to be provided prior to construction
(?4fl~
Perry A Cessna
lw Director of Utilities
xc file
.......-~
MEMORANDUM
February 12, 1986
TO Mr. Peter L Cheney, City Manager
RE Boynton Beach Park of Commerce
I Land Exchange Proposal
II Median and Right-of-way Maintenance
I LAND EXCHANGE PROPOSAL
The following is recommended in regard to the proposed land exchange
1 The City shall receive twentf (20) acres of land exclusive of the
wetland and Sand Pine preserve areas
The additional land to comprise the 20 acre site is recommended
to be the W20-0 tract, lying south of the designated park site
and bordering the E-4 Canal.
2 The land shall be of such quality, configuration and topography,
to allow for proper design and use of the total 20 acre site for
active and passive recreational purposes
3 The Boynton Beach Park of Commerce developer shall provide the
necessary fill and grade work to insure that elevations are
adequate to allow for total site use, including adequate drainage
and/or water retention where necessary
II. MEDIAN AND RIGHT OF-WAY MAINTENANCE
The revised master plan modification increases the maintenance
responsibilities for the site as center medians have been added to
internal roadways
Attached is a report from John Wildner, Park Superintendent, detailing
the anticipated impact upon Park Division maintenance operations.
It should be noted that our total costs would exceed the $36,000
estimate for this site as assumption of maintenance will require the
hiring b~ a full time three-man crew and acquisition of vehicles and
equipment resulting in a cost to exceed $50,000
I would recommend that strong consideration be given to requiring the
developer to provide for maintenance of all internal roadway medians
and .rights-of-way with the City assuming maintenance responsibilities
of N W 22nd Avenue only
c~~
Charles C Frederick, Director
Recreation & Park Department
,.y
CCF pb
Attachment
CC:
': ,~,~Wft2tUaCOo
.
John Wildner
Mark Thompson
......---
MEMORANDUM
~
Charles Frederick, Director
Recreation and Park Department
OAY'
12 FebrulIry '86
PILI
John Wildner
Parks Superintendent
.u.....C'1'
Maintenance Impact
Boynton Beach Park Of Commerce
As you requested, I have reviewed the Masterplan for Boynton Beach
Park Of Commerce as it pertains to additional maintenance respon-
sibility for the Parks Division. The following information is
provided
1. There are approximately four m~les of landscaped median
shown on the Masterplan. This'would compare to the 31
miles of median on u.s. #1 currently maintained in a day
and a half by a three man crew with the assistance of an
equipment operator for half a day.
2. Agreements already made with previous owners of this develop-
ment indicate the city would also be responsible for R.O.W
maintenance on both sides of the roadway. This would be
very unusual for a P.I.D. or subdivision. Normally, owners
are responsible for R.O.W maintenance in front of their prop-
erty. The Masterplan shows these R.O.W areas to be heavily
landscaped. I estimate that it would normally take another
2; days to maintain these side sections with the assistance
of an equipment operator for half a day.
3. The Masterplan indicates several hundred trees to be planted
in the R.O.W. areas which would have to be trimmed at least
once a year (two weeks for a two man crew).
4. The large amount of irrigated areas will require an increase
in our Sprinkler Supply Account and in a heavy commitment
in time by our irrigation maintenance crew.
.
5. In summary, I would estimate that it will take a three man
crew four days each week (during the growing season) to
maintain these median and other R.O.W. areas and require the
assistance of other crews for specialized work. Total
personnel costs for landscape maintenance is estimated at
$36,000 per year.
An alternative may be for the developer to form a Property Owners
Association and charge a landscape maintenance fee for private
as well as public property. A single landscape maintenance con-
tractor ~or-the whole development should provide a common park-
like atmosphere to the whole area and do it on an economical
basis that might not be too much more than each owner would pay
for their own individual property.
14 f/v~
p:!John wildner
JW/ad
~~
MEMORANDUM
Mr Carmen Annunziato
Planning Director
DATr
February 11,1986
"ILI
0..
Lt. McGarry
Police Dept.
.u.~rCT
Boynton Beach Park of
Corrmerce Master Plan t1odification
1 would like more infonmation supplied in reference to the location of
High Ridge Road intersection and N.HM 22 Ave
How close will this be in relation to the proposed interchan~e of 1-95 and
N.~/. 22 Ave?
How much area is available for stacking in the west bound lane of N W 22 Ave?
What is the proposed traffic flow from High Ridge Road both North and South
of N.~J 22 Ave?
-U~~
Lt. McGarry
Police Department
Wt~ as
.
....-- -
MEMO /'tom tfu dr.~ of
RICHARD S. WALKE
DIRECTOR OF PUBUC WORKS, Boynton Beach
February 12, 1986
PLANNING DIRECTOR:
Re: Boynton Beach Park
of Commerce
I would like to suggest "Compactors" be used to the utmost in this
long term project. Time and money saving would be substantial.
~w~
..
CITY of
BOYNTON BEACH
~
Ql
120 H.E. 2nd AVENUE
P.O. BOX 310
BOYNTON 6EACH. FLORIDA 334J5..()310
(305) 7~111
OFFICE OF THE PLANNING DIRECTOR
r " ~"'-:~;:;"''''H''~i:t:; '~ --;)o~~
.,~ .. --. .. .. ~ III ;W
· .~. - . ,,~h ! .
"-,1~~
.: -=: ;---;.
,
-.I' ..' ~ .:::'" _.
~~-
-:
8 April 1986
Mr George Zimmerman
Deutsch-Ireland Properties
Suite 1106
2455 East Sunrise Boulevard
Ft Lauderdale, FL 33304
Dear George
Please be advised that on Tuesday, April 22, 1986 at 7 30 pm,
in the City Council Chambers, the City Council will conduct a
public hearing regarding the proposed requests to amend the
Development Order for the Boynton Beach Park of Commerce.
Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please
contact me at your convenience
Yours very truly,
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
a-I n~ S ~~--v---J-
Carmen S Annunziato j7 ~
Planning Director
/bks
cc:
City Manager
David Pressly, Esq.
~
r
#
MEMORANDUM
28 March 1986
TO
Peter L Cheney, City Manager
FROM
Carmen S Annunziato, Planning Director
RE
BBPOC - Amendments to Development Order
and Master Site Development Plan
Accompanying this memo you will find a copy of a letter from the
Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council in which the Council
advises that they will appear at the public hearing to be conducted
by the City Council in this regard
This is being forwarded for your information and files
to the City Council is suggested
Distribution
a~~~
/CARMEN S ANNUNZIATO /
/bks
cc Central File
t.o
I
:' L
~.I-
~.~ f
r:
r
b.
!.
r.
~
st. lucie
~'~mQ~tin'~'
treOJure
1 COClf.t
,--~ regional
planniog
council
~-.
'~-----
.,......,~~~
.;; . -j !.. 7-r,11:;' D'
- ......J .' . I .
....-- ......1 ---'.-i f ~;
"J,:."';~.t"~''';~'':-'-'''':'
...-,.;
d4R
i.......'....
",j
~ -
(9Bg
PI "-
'-h,\. \.
1\ ____
.1 1..1 "_ PT.
March 25, 1986
Federal Express
Mr George W Zimmerman
Director of Planning and Design
Deutsch/Ireland Properties
Suite 1116, International Building
2455 East Sunrise Boulpvard
Fort Lauderdale, FL 33304
Subject Boynton Beach Park of Commerce - Amendments to Development Order
and Master Site Development Plan
Dear Mr Zimmerman
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 380 06, Florida Statutes, we have
reviewed the proposed amendments to the Development Order (DO) and amended
Master Site Development Plan for the Boynton Beach Park of Commerce submit-
ted to the Council by you
The proposed changes to the Master Site Development Plan include adjust-
ments to land uses to incorporate a sand Dine scrub preserve area and city
park, refinements to road alignments, refinements to parcel sizes, and
revision of projAct phasing to a singl€ construction and marketing phase
The proposed 00 amendment incorporates the amended Master Site Development
Plan into the Development Order
The proposed changes do not meet or exceed any of the criteria in Sections
3830 06(19(b) and (c), F S , and do not increase external vehicle trips as
specified in Section 380 06(19)(b)(15), F S
However, Council does not believe that delineation of the proposed preserve
area in the Master Site Development Plan adequately addresses all of the
issues raised in Council's report and recommpn.dations to the City of
Boynton Beach or those addressed in the existing DO Based on the informa-
tion submitted to Council for review, it is not clear that the proposed
amended Master Site Development Plan
1 Results in preservation of a mlnlmum of 40 acres of sand pine
scrub habitat The plan aooears to preserve less than 40 acres of
this plant community type
....;.~:..:...~~.(...:...)~
620 So dixie highway
p.o. drawer 396
stuart, Rorido, 33495-0396
phone (305) 286-3313
Q. o. hendl1,l, III
chairman
koren t. marCU5
vice chairman
margoret c. bowman
secretarvitreasurer
daniel m. co",
executive dj,ector
..,
"
Mr George W Zimmerman
Director of Planning and Design
Deutsch/Ireland Prooerties
March 25, 1986
P age Two
2 Results in oreservation of sufficient sand pine scrub habitat to
provide for any endangered and threatened animal species which
occur on-site Data to support the adequacy of the preserve area
to accommodate existing population numbers has not been provided
to Council
3 Adequately addresses conditions 9 and 10 of the DO with regard to
wetland preservation, littoral zones, and native upland
vegetation
If information exists to clarify these concerns, Council staff would be
happy to review these with you However, because Council does not believe
that the proposed amended Master Site Development Plan adequately addresses
issues originally raised by Council, and because the proposed amendment
incorporates the plan into the DO, Council intends to participate at the
local government public hearing on the amendments
Council staff will meet with you to discuss these issues and concerns if
you wish If you have any questions, please call
Sincerely,
~~
~Daniel M Cary
;r- Executive Director
DMC/LCB cb
cc Carmen Annunziato
Roger G Saberson, Esq
James F arr
MEMORANDUM
5 March 1986
TO
Peter L Cheney, City Manager
FROM:
Carmen S Annunziato, Planning Director
Boynton Beach Park of Commerce DRI Amendment
Request - Public Hearing
In late January, the Planning Deparment transmitted to all interested
persons, a packet of materials which constitutes a request for an amend-
ment to the Boynton Beach Park of Commerce Development Order
RE
Procedurally, the review of DRI amendment requests involves the Regional
Planning Council, the Department of Community Affairs, Bureau of Resource
Management and the City's staff, boards and Council This process cul-
minates in a public hearing conducted by the City Council, at which time
the Council determines whether the proposed changes require further
development of regional impact review
Statutorily, the above-mentioned public hearing can be set no sooner than
30 days, but no later than 45 days following the receipt of an amendment
request by the City, the Regional Planning Council, and the State
Department of Community Affairs. Therefore, it is recommended that when
the Council meets at its regular meeting of April 1, 1986 that it
appoints April 22, 1986 at 7 30 p.m , City Council Chambers as the date,
time and place for the required hearing Because the City Council must
give 15 days notice prior to the hearing, this would require that a
notice for the hearing must be posted no later than April 7, 1986
I will coordinate the required advertisement with the City Clerk, if
the proposed public hearing date meets with Council's approval
<'
t:.-- -y- elf ~r~
CARMEN S. ANN ZIATO
/bks
...- ......3
I ,
MEMORANDUM
5 March 1986
TO Technical Review Board
FROM
Carmen S AnnunziabJi-PTannTrry DiLe~LoL
RE Boynton Beach Park of Commerce - Response to
Questions Raised at TRB Meeting of February 18, 1986
Accompanying this memo you will find a copy of a letter from
George Zimmerman, Director of Planning for Deutsch Ireland
Properties which constitutes a response to the matters raised by
the Technical Review Board meeting of February 18, 1986
Please advise in writing if you have any additional comments or
concerns
e~-
CAK1\1t.N S
d't ~
ANNUN Z E/{TO
/bks
Attachments
cc City Manager
Central File
--.,
MEMORANDUM
4 March 1986
TO
Betty S Boroni, City Clerk
FROM
Carmen S Annunziato, Planning Director
RE
Boynton Beach Park of Commerce DRI Amendment
Please be advised that the proposed advertisement forwarded
to this office for the referenced public hearing, meets with
my approval
~~~
/bks
cc
City Manager
City Attorney
\~ ;
..A 1.,...
~ E M 0 RAN DUM
---~-------
-----
TO
Mr Carmen Annunziato
Planning Director
DATE
February 26, 1986
FROM
Betty S Boroni
City Clerk
Attached please find a copy of the proposed advertisement
for the Boynton Beach Park of Commerce D R I amendment
scheduled for publishing in The Post Extra on March 9, 1986
Please review and advise if it meets with your approval
This will be forwarded to The Post on March 5, 1986
tfe I~-
Bett~ Boroni
BSB/smk
cc City Manager
City Attorney
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the city Council of the city of Boynton
Beach will hold a Soecial Meeting and conduct a public Hearing at 7:30
P. M. on Wednesday,~March 26, 1986, in the Council Chambers~ city
Hall, 120 East Boynton Beach Boulevard, Boynton Beach, Flor1da
The purpose of this public hearing is for consideration of a proposed
change to the Boynton Beach Park of Commerce Development order
(ordinance No. 84-51) and determination as to whether or not the pro-
posed change constitutes a substantial deviation to the approved deve-
looment order with resoect to the following described property located
within the corporate limits of said city, pursuant to the reques~ of
the parties in interest and in compliance with Chapter 380, Flor1da
Statutes.
REQUEST: Boynton Beach Park of Commerce
comprehensive Development of Regional Impact
LEGAL DESCRIPTION:
A Tract of land lying partially in Sections IE, 17, 20 and 21,
Township 45 South, Range 43 East, Palm Beach County, Florida,
said Tract being more particularly described as follows
Commencing at the Southwest corner of said Section 17; thence
North 1044'39" East, along the West line of Section 17, a distance
of 1318.10 feet to a point in the intersection with the centerline
of N.W 22nd Avenue, as recorded in 0 R. Book 1738, Paae 1686, of
the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida; thence with a
bearing of North 89004'32" East, along the centerline of N W 22nd
Avenue, a distance of 778 37 feet to the Point of BecrinninG; thence
North 1044'39" East, a distance of 1247 06 feet to t6e soufh right-
of-way line of L W D.D. Lateral 21; thence North 89008'49" East
along the South right-of-way line L W.D D Lateral 21, as recorded
in O.R Book 1732, Page 612, of the Public Records of Palm Beach
County, Florida, a distance of 635 93 feet to the centerline of
the L.W.D D Equalizing Canal E-4, as recorded in 0 R Book 1732,
Page 612, of the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida;
thence along the centerline of the above described E-4 Canal with
a curve to the right having a chord bearing of North 10032'52"
East, a radius of 750 00 feet, a central angle of 4004'17", and
an arc length of 53 29 feet; thence continue along the centerline
of the E-4 Canal, with a bearing of North 12035'00" East, a distance
of 320.69 feet to a point of curve; thence with a curve to the left
having a radius of 6500 00, a central angle of 3028'30", and an
arc length of 394.23 feet; thence North 9006'30" East, a distance
of 1979.16 feet to a point on the North Line of Section 17; thence
with a bearing of North 89016'39" East, along the North line of
Section 17, a distance of 1964 50 feet; thence South 0002'11" East,
a distance of 2625 18 feet; thence North 89008'49" East, a
distance of 368 96 feet to a point on the North right of way line
of N.W 22nd Avenue as recorded in 0 R Book 1738, Page 1686 of
the Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida; thence South
19027'31" East, a distance of 50 00 feet to the centerline of
N.W. 22nd Avenue; thence with a curve to the right having a chord
bearing of North 75029'49" East, a radius of 1637.02 feet, a central
angle of 9053'58", and an arc length of 282 85 feet to a point;
thence North 12002'41" East, a distance of 915 72 feet; thence
North 0031'11" East, a distance of 399 70 feet; thence North 890
12'37" East, a distance of 413 21 feet; thence South 88022'56"
East, a distance of 1349 70 feet to a point on the West right-
of-way line of the Seaboard Coastline Railroad; thence South
0028'21" East along the West right-of-way line of the Railroad, a
distance of 1309 09 feet to a point on the centerline of N W 22nd
Avenue; thence North 88027'31" West, along the centerline of N W
22nd Avenue a distance of 672 97 feet; thence South 0033'53" East,
a distance of 1306 69 feet; thence South 88045'31" East, a distance
of 333.51 feet to a point on the West right-of-way of the Seaboard
Coastline Railroad; thence with a bearing of South 14008'23" West,
along the West right-of-way of the railroad, a distance of 1312 49
feet; thence South 0033'53" East, a distance of 26 69 feet, thence
South 13015'22" West, a distance of 920 57 feet; thence North 880
50'04" West, a distance of 187 60 feet; thence with a bearing of
North 0049'21' W, a distance of 200 00 feet, thence North 88050'04"
West, a distance of 218 00 feet; thence South 0049'21" East,
a dlstance of 200.00 feet; thence North 88050'04" west, a
dlstance of 40 00 feet; thence South 0049'21" East, a distance
of 556 84 feet; thence North 88050'04" West, a distance of
3,617 26 feet to a point on the centerline of the above
described centerline of the E-4 Canal; thence with a bearing of
North 5018'14" West, a distance of 153 13 feet, thence with a
curve to the right having a radius of 450 00 feet, a central
angle of 15036'44", and an arc length of 122 62 feet; thence
North 10018'30" East, a distance of 988 60 feet to a point of
curve; thence with a curve to the left having a radius of
450 00 feet, a central angle of 18020'00", and an arc length of
143 99 feet; thence with a bearing of North 8001'30" West, a
distance of 1,255 14 feet to a point on the centerline of N W.
22nd Avenue; thence with a bearing of South 89004'32" West,
along the centerline of N W 22nd Avenue a distance of 817 85
feet more or less to the Point of Beginning Containing 591.55
acres more or less and subject to easements and rights-of-way of
record
CONTAINING
591 55 AC
51 70 AC
GROSS LAND AREA
LESS ROADWAY & CANAL RIGHTS-OF-WAY
OF RECORD
NET LAND AREA
539.85 AC
LOCATION:
South of Miner Road right-of-way extended,
North of Canal C-16, between Congress Avenue
and 1-95, Boynton Beach, Florida
PROPOSED
USES
Planned industrial development to include light
manufacturing and research facilities, offices
and ancillary commercial uses
APPLICANT
Deutsch/Ireland properties
All interested parties are encouraged to appear in person, to be repre-
sented by an attorney or comment in writing. The application and all
related documents will be available for review during normal working
hours in the office of the Planning Director, Carmen Annunziato, 200
North Seacrest Boulevard, Boynton Beach. Any person who decides to
appeal any decision of the city Council with respect to the matter
considered at this meeting will need a record of the proceedings and
for such purpose may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the pro-
ceedings is made, which includes the testimony and evidence upon which
the appeal is based
BETTY S BORONI, CITY CLERK
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
sk
PUBLISH
THE POST EXTRA
March 9, 1986
"
MEMORANDUM
20 February 1986
TO
File
RE
BBPOC/Meeting between staff and applicant
The TRB met with the applicant on 2/18/86 to discuss the
memoranda which accompanies this memo
Based upon discussion, there was agreement to comply with
some requests, or desire to respond with an alternate proposal
on some requests and an unwillingness to amend the plan in one
instance
These responses were as follows
Utility Department Memo
Water Distribution
1 Agree to comply
2 Agree to comply
3 will have an engineer meet with Utility Department to meet
compliance in principle
4 Will comply
5 will submit an alternate proposal
6 Will submit an alternate proposal
Sewage Collection and Transmission
1 Will submit an alternate proposal
2 will comply
General Comments
1 will discuss at a later date
Page Two
Recreation and Parks Memo
1 Land Exchange Proposal - will be the subject of continuing
negotiations
2 Median and Rights-of-Way Maintenance - will submit a
proposal
Police Department
1 Potential problems related to the proximity of High Ridge
Road/NW 22nd Avenue Intersection with proposed 1-95
Interchange - applicant will supply information
Public Works
Compactors - suggestion under consideration
Planning
1 No agreement
2 Previously decided against
3 Will comply
4 Information provided or in process of being determined
5 Information provided
Other
1 Forester Forester to submit to applicant a list of tree
and plant species acceptable for street tree and landscaping
purposes
Final decision on sane pine scrub set aside -
not made
MEMORANDUM
TO Carmen Annunziato - Planning Director
DATE February 12, 1986
SUBJECT
Amendment to Boynton Beach Park of Commerce DRI
Please note the following comments regarding the amended plans for this project
Water Distribution
1 ) Water mains within cul-de-sac ~ust be looped, with two additional gate
valves installed on each line to regulate flow
2 ) Delete the 10" diameter water main section between parcels G 18 - I, and
G 20 - I, and reroute the line along the canal so as to loop the 8" line
\. to the east of parcel G 21 - I Change said 8" line to 10"
vr ~ ) Plan for 1000' maximum disrance between main line valves
4 ) Add a 10" gate valve at the southeast branch of the lO" X 16" cross on
N W 22 Ave
\
5 )
30-foot wide water and sewer easements will be required for all water
lines along canals, between parcels, or otherwise not in Rights-of-Way
All construction. and the planting of trees and shrubs must be prohibited
(by deed restriction) within these easements
, ,
,
~
6 )
To insure adequate fire-flow, we request that certificates of occupancy
(C 0 'S) be withheld until the major loops (16" and lO") are completed
For those units north of N W 22 Ave , the loop from High Ridge Rd to
N W 22 Ave . and thence to Congress Ave must be completed For those
units south of N W 22 Ave to receive CO'S. the loop across the C-16
canal, along High Ridge Rd to N W 22 Ave , and thence westward to Con-
gress Ave must be completed
}'
Sewage Collection and Transmission
\
\ I tt )
/ 1.
30' wide water and sewer easements will be needed for the force main
between the E-4 canal and the drainage lakes, the force main between
parcels G 18 - I and G 20 - I, and the gravity sewer between parcels
G 11 - RD and G 13 - RD All construction. and the planting of trees
and shrubs must be prohibited (by deed restriction) within these ease-
ments
I'
r' 2) Indicate how the following parcels will be served by gravity sewer,
W2-0, W3-0, W4-0, WS-O. WI9-0. and W20-0
General for both water and sewer
The compressed timetable for utility development of this property will neces-
sitate the hiring of a special inspector by this Department Provision must be
made for the developer to provide sufficient funds to cover the added expense of
the inspector's position The funds are to be provided prior to construction
Cl4a~
Perry A Cessna
lw Director of Utilities
xc file
MEMORANDUM
February 12, 1986
TO Mr Peter L Cheney, City Manager
RE Boynton Beach Park of Commerce
I Land Exchange Proposal
II. Median and Right-of-way Maintenance
I LAND EXCHANGE PROPOSAL
The following is recommended in regard to the proposed land exchange
1 The City shall receive twent~ (20) acres of land exclusive of the
wetland and Sand Pine preserve areas
,
\.-t
The additional land to comprise the 20 acre site is recommended
to be the W20-0 tract, lying south of the designated park site
and bordering the E-4 Canal
The land shall be of such quality, configuration and topography,
to allow for proper design and use of the total 20 acre site for
active and passive recreational purposes
The Boynton Beach Park of Commerce developer shall provide the
necessary fill and grade work to insure that elevations are
adequate to allow for total site use, including adequate drainage
and/or water retention where necessary
l l'
'\.,
I"
I 2
3
II MEDIAN AND RIGHT-OF-WAY MAINTENANCE
yc(
r
,/
I'
\
\- \
,
..
,f'
The revised master plan modification increases the maintenance
responsibilities for the site as center medians have been added to
internal roadways
Attached is a report from John Wildner, Park Superintendent, detailing
the anticipated impact upon Park Division maintenance operations
It should be noted that our total costs would exceed the $36,000
estimate for this site as assumption of maintenance will require the
hiring of a full time three-man crew and acquisition of vehicles and
equipment resulting in a cost to exceed $50,000
I would recommend that strong consideration be given to requiring the
developer to provide for maintenance of all internal roadway medians
and rights-of-way with the City assuming maintenance responsibilities
of N W 22nd Avenue only
e~~~
Charles C Frederick, Director
Recreation & Park Department
CCF pb
Attachment
CC
D r'../un--"-'~
John Wildner
Mark Thompson
.
AEMORANDUM
~
Charles Frederick, Director
Recreation and Park Department
DATI
12 February '86
,.,L.
John Wildner
Parks Superintendent
.u.n~
Maintenance Impact
Boynton Beach Park Of Commerce
As you requested, I have reviewed the Masterplan for Boynton Beach
Park Of Commerce as it pertains to additional maintenance respon-
sibility for the Parks Division The fOllowing information is
provided
1 There are approximately four m!les of landscaped median
shown on the Masterplan. This would compare to the 31
miles of median on U.S #1 currently maintained in a day
and a half by a three man crew with the assistance of an
equipment operator for half a day.
2. Agreements already made with previous owners of this develop-
ment indicate the city would also be responsible for R O.W
maintenance on both sides of the roadway This would be
very unusual for a P I.D or subdivision Normally, owners
are responsible for R O.W maintenance in front of their prop-
erty The Masterplan shows these R O.W areas to be heavily
landscaped. I estimate that it would normally take another
2; days to maintain these side sections with the assistance
of an equipment operator for half a day.
3. The Masterplan indicates several hundred trees to be planted
in the R.O.W. areas which would have to be trimmed at least
once a year (two weeks for a two man crew).
4. The large amount of irrigated areas will require an increase
in our Sprinkler Supply Account and in a heavy commitment
in time by our irrigation maintenance crew.
5. In summary, I would estimate that it will take a three man
crew four days each week (during the growing season) to
maintain these median and other R O.W areas and require the
assistance of other crews for specialized work. Total
personnel costs for landscape maintenance is estimated at
$36,000 per year.
An alternative may be for the developer to form a Property Owners
Association and charge a landscape maintenance fee for private
as well as public property. A single landscape maintenance con-
tractor ~or-the whole development should provide a common park-
like atmosphere to the whole area and do it on an economical
basis that might not be too much more than each owner would pay
for their own individual property.
./
~~ / /
~
~ .~
t.-. ~
................
:.
I
I
i
~
-
,\AEMORANDUM
'0
Mr Carmen Annunziato
Planning Director
DATE
February 11, 1986
FIl.l:
",0"
Lt McGarry
Police Dept
5U.J~CT
Boynton Beach Park of
Corrmerce Master Plan r1odification
I would like more information supplied in reference to the location of
High Ridge Road intersection and N W 22 Ave
.~
j
How close will this be in relation to the proposed interchanqe of 1-95 and
N ~I 22 Ave?
How much area is available for stacking in the west bound lane of N W 22 Ave?
What is the proposed traffic flow from High Ridge Road both North and South
of N ~J 22 Ave?
#UJ:htc~
Lt. McGarry
Police Department
WM as
MEMO fwm t~ J~J: of
RICHARD S. WALKE
DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS, Boynton Beach
February 12, 1986
Re Boynton Beach Park
of Commerce
PLANNING DIRECTOR:
I would like to suggest "Compactors" be used to the u.tmost in this
long term project
Time and money saving would be substantial
~ wv-e4
..
MEMORANDUM
12 February 1986
TO
File
FROM
Carmen S Annunziato, Planning Director
RE
Boynton Beach Park of Commerce Master Plan Modification
The list which follows constitutes the Planning Department's
comments on the Boynton Beach Park of Commerce Modified Master
Plan.
1 The location of five commercial sites (21 acres) or
78% of all Park commercial acreage, plus the proposed
club along N W 22nd Avenue seems to change the
character of the Planned Industrial Development and
N W 22nd Avenue Instead of projecting to the public
an image of an industrial park, the public will be
exposed to a commercial strip
The intent of the Planned Industrial Development (PID)
zoning regulations is to provide
"a zoning classification for light industrial
development that will better satisfy current
demands for light industrial zoned lands "
In this regard, the commercial/retail site should be
considered to be an adjunct to the light industrial
office and research and development industrial land
uses
It is recommended that the commercial land uses and the
club located on N W 22nd Avenue be relocated in a
cluster along the central N.E , S W collector road,
south of N W 22nd Avenue
2 The applicant should explore the need for a central
loading/unloading facility for access to rail service.
3 The master plan should delineate all required greenbelt
areas
Page Two
4. The right-of-way width for all interior roads should
be shown as well as a roadway cross-section depicting
sidewalks, bikepaths, traffic lanes, median and turn
lanes
5 An Environmental Impact Analysis schedule should be
submitted for public review and analysis
(~JC-~~
Carmen S Ann iato
/bks
TREASURE COAST REGIONAL PLANNING COUNCIL
M E M 0 RAN 0 U M
To
Council Members
AGEI'lDA IID1 6-D
From
Staff
Subject
June 21, 1985 Council Meeting
Substantial Deviation - Legal and Procedural Review
Date
Overview
The regional planning council's role in the substantial deviation review
process outlined in Chapter 380, Florida Statutes (F S), will change
considerably on October 1, 1985 This is due to the fact that the 1985
Legislature enacted modifications to the substantial deviation section of
Chapter 380, F S , that will require Council to assume a proactive role in
reviewing proposed changes to approved Developments of Regional Impact
This role change will necessitate that Council adjust the procedure
presently followed in handling substantial deviation issues
Current Regional Planning Council Responsibilities
Subsection 380 06(17), F S , defines substantial deviation as any change to
a previously approved DRI which creates a reasonable likelihood of addi-
tional adverse regional impact, or any other regional impact created by the
change not previously reviewed by the regional planning council
Thi sport i on of the 1 aw has been a source of confus i on for both deve 1 opers
and public officials since its adoption The specific provision which
causes the greatest difficulty states, in part
The local government shall review (the proposed changes to an
approved DRI) and make a substant i a 1 dev i at ion determi n at ion
The local government shall modify the (DRI) Development Order to
reflect the approved changes and shall notify the regional plan-
ning counci 1 and State land planning agency of the changes to the
Development Order, with the (local gover ment) findings subject
to appea 1
An interpretation of this provision is that any change to an approved DRI
requires that the Development Order be modified Carried to the extreme
this means that if a developer proposes to make relatively insignificant
changes to his project, such as changing the width of bicycle paths, the
local government must make a substantial deviation determination and modify
----~_._--- ---~--------
the Development Order if the proposed change is approved I n turn, the
amended Development Order must then be transmitted to the regional planning
council and State land planning agency The regional planning council can
then review the local government order and if it disagrees with the local
action may appeal the amended Development Order
The administrative efforts that can potentially result from the strict
application of this provision of the law are considerable To illustrate
the extent of this problem, consider that 39 projects have recei ved DRI
Development Orders within the four county Treasure Coast region Of these
projects, nearly everyone has been modified to some degree, with one
development having received 26 amendments to its PUD Zoning Agreement since
it was granted DRI approval in 1980
In order to comply with existing law, each time local government approves a
change to a DRI it must submit a copy of their approval in the form of an
amended Development Order to this Council for review To meet its legal
responsibil ity, Counci 1 must review each and everyone of these amendments
to determi ne whether it concurs with or objects to the local government
decision If necessary, Council can appeal the local order provided it is
done within the allotted 45 day period
1985 Revisions to the Substantial Deviation Process
CS/HB 287, adopted by the 1985 Legislature and
Growth Management Bill, contains provisions
existing substantial deviation procedures
effective October 1, 1985
generally referred to as the
which significantly modify
These new provisions are
Standards
The most significant modification to the substantial deviation section of
Chapter 380, F S , is that the new 1 aw spec if i es that if a proposed change
meets or exceeds the revised and expanded criteri a then the change is, as a
matter of law, a substantial deviation This provision removes the discre-
tion currently exercised by local government as to whether the proposed
change creates additional adver.se regional impacts Consequently, any such
change must receive additional regional impact review
Another important change to th is section of 1 aw amends and expands the
review guidelines from seven to eighteen criteria Following is an abbre-
viated list of the new minimum substantial deviation criteria
1 Attraction/recreational facility - 5 percent or 300 space increase in
parking, or 5 percent or 1,000 spectator capacity increase
2 Airport - New runway, new termi na 1, 10 percent expans i on of runway or
20 percent increase in terminal floorspace
3 Hospital - 5 percent or 60 bed increase
Process
Eff ect i ve October 1, 1985, the way in wh i ch proposed changes to approved
DRI are processed wi 11 also change In the future, the developer who
proposes changes to an approved DRI will be requ i red to subm; t an app 1 i ca-
tion simultaneously to the local government, the regional planning council
and the State land planning agency The regional planning council must
review the proposed change and within 30 days advise the local government
of its intention to participate in the public hearing before the local
government Participation at the local public hearing is necessary in
order for the regional planning council to maintain its appeal prerogative,
otherwise, local government could issue an amended Development Order that
authorized regionally significant changes to the DRI and the regional
planning council would be precluded from taking legal action to require the
appropriate regional review
Formal Council Involvement -
A Procedure for Determining Regional Significance
With the mod if i cat i on to the substant i a 1 dev i at i on sect i on of Chapter 380,
Florida Statutes, it is appropriate for the Council to develop an adminis-
trat i ve procedure for process i ng amended Deve 1 opment Orders Thi s proce-
dure should economize Council time while at the same time prepare Council
to implement the new substantial deviation provisions To this end, it is
proposed that a "Test of Regional Significance" be applied by staff to each
amended Development Order received by Council This test would serve to
identify, in a uniform and consistent manner, those changes to approved
ORIs that are considered not to be regional in nature and, therefore,
inappropriate and unnecessary-for Council review
In order fDr staff to accurately determine which amended Development Orders
meet the Test of Regional Significance, Council should adopt criteria to
guide staff review Theses criteria should be developed and applied based
upon past experience wi th amended Development Orders and the new substan-
tial deviation criteria As additional experience is developed using the
test, the list of criteria could be modified by Council to include
additional criteria as appropriate
It is suggested that the Regional Significance Test consist of the
following
Amended Deve 1 opment Orders authori zi ng the fo 11 owi ng changes to
previously approved Developments of Regional Impact shall not be
considered to be regionally significant and, therefore, shall not b(
brought to Council for substantial deviation determination
1 Final approval of development phases which previously received
preliminary local government approval and which have been reviewed
and found by the regional planning council not to be substantial
deviations
2 Correction of typographical and other similar scrivener errors
contained in a previously issued Development Order
3 Modification of provlslons contained in protective covenants
and/or restrictions which deal with matters of concern to the
residents of the development only
4 Additional conditions placed on the developer by the local govern-
ment which are clearly of local interest only
5 Approval of changes to architectural and landscape designs
6 Approval of requests to relocate minor anci llary structures and
facilities, such as swimming pools, golf carports, gazebos, trash
collection stations, etc
Amended Development Orders which authorize any of the above changes will
not require review by Council with the following exception
The Executive Director determines that there is a circumstance unique
to a particular local government amended Development Order that
warrants consideration by Council
Amended Deve 1 opment Orders wh i ch au thor i ze changes to approved DR! s beyond
the scope of the changes specified above, or at the .direction of the
Executive Director consistent with the exception abovet shall be reviewed
by staff according to
1
The substantial deviation criteria currently specified
Subsection 380 06(17), Florida Statutes
in
2 The new substantial deviation criteria contained within CS/HB 287
The report to Council which evaluates the changes to a DR! to determine
whether a substantial deviation has occurred shall thoroughly and clearly
explain the analysis conducted by staff The report shall contain two
conclusions The first conclusion is to be based on the substantial
deviation criteria effective through September 30 The initial analysis
and conc 1 us i on sha 11 serve as the bas i s for staff recommend at ions submi tted
on any amended Development Order issued prior to the October 1 effecti ve
date of the new law
The second analysis and conclusi n is to be based upon the new substantial
deviation criteria This information will be provided to Council for
informational purposes only During this period of transition, Council
will have the opportunity to consider the effects of these new standards
and guide staff in the implementation of the new criteria after the October
1 effective date
The advantages that could be realized by Council through implementation of
the Regional Significance Test concept include the following
Council wi 11 have i niti ated a process that assures that Counci 11 s
substantial deviation responsibilities are met regularly in a
consistent and comprehensive manner
Increased staff efficiency wi 11 result from the fact that staff
time would be spent reviewing only those amended Development Orders
that Council had previously determined to be regionally
significant
Council will develop expertise in the application of the new
statutory substantial deviation criteria prior to the October 1
effective date and therefore, facilitate the transition from using
existing criteria
Provided as an attachment is a letter prepared by Council's attorney which
explores both the legal requirements of the substantial deviation clause
and the implications of Council's actions with regard to future substantial
deviation decisions
Recommendation
Council should direct staff to implement the Test of Regional Significance
with reg ard to all amended Deve 1 opment Orders rece i ved from 1 oc a 1 govern-
ment authorizing changes to an approved DRI Further, staff should be
directed to prepare reports on amended Deve 1 opment Orders cons is tent with
the above guidelines
Attachment