Loading...
LEGAL APPROVAL DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT DIvIsion of Planning and Zoning Building Planning & Zoning Engineering Occupational License Community Redevelopment June 1,2000 Mark Montantes 1512 NE 4th Street Boynton Beach, Florida 33425 Re Flle No LocatIOn. Kmgdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses CaDS 00-002 (RevIsed) 1512 NE 4th Street Dear Mr Montantes. Enclosed IS the CIty of Boynton Beach Development Order for conditIOnal use and sIte plan approval granted on May 16, 2000 To contmue tIns project through the development process, please subrrnt to tms office four (4) sets of rectified plans. A rectIfied plan IS a sIte plan revIsed to mcorporate all applIcable condItions of approval, except those clearly specIfied to be met at tIme of permIt review A person managmg your permIt applIcatIOns should be made aware of any such condItIons and submIt required documents With your permIt package AddItIonal engmeenng plans or other pages wmch w1l1 be requITed for your permit package but were not part of the approved sIte plan set should not be submitted with the rectified site plan sets. Please note that a rectIfied plan must be sIgned offby all TRC members prior to submittingfor building permits Our staff IS commItted to speedy and effiCIent completIOn of your SIte plan rectIficatIOn process. However, fmlure to meet all applIcable condItIons m the first rectIfied plan submIssIon w1l1 reqUIre further reVISIons and subsequent reVIews by the TRC members and thus produce unnecessary delays. Feel free to contact any TRC member for addltlOnal clarificatlOn of comment( s) Your copy of the sIgned-off rectIfied plan IS to be submItted as part of your permIt plan package to the BUIldmg DIVIsIon. America's Gateway to the Gulfstream 100 East Boynton Beach Blvd.. P.O. Box 310 Boynton Beach. Florida 33425-0310 Phone: (561) 375-6260 FAX: (561) 375-6259 Imoortant. If you plan to introduce any changes to your approved site plan over and above those required by conditions of approval, please contact our staff before submitting a rectified plan set. All modifications to the site plan must be evaluated by our staff and processed accordingly Should you have any questIOns regardIng thIS matter, please feel free to contact thIS office at (561) 742-6260 SIncerely, ~~~ Michael W Rumpf DIrector of PlannIng & Zomng MWR/nl l:\SHRDA T AIPlanning\SHAREDlWP\PROlECTSIKINGDOM HALL-lEHOV AHS WITNESSESlSlandard Development Order Lctter2.doc DEVELOF JRDER OF THE CITY COMI CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA PROJECT NAME. KINGDOM HALL OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES C!d r::~ ~ OF THE &~~ ~tV <ZJur C Ol1-S ttf) /OfJp" APPLICANT'S AGENT Mark Montantes APPLICANT'S ADDRESS 1512 NE 4th Street DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION May 16 2000 TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT Conditional Use Site Plan LOCATION OF PROPERTY 1512 NE 4th Street .- ~_._-- ~.~ -"i r -:: - : . "' -- t "1 \ L~! :2! 1 ; I ~ , i 1 ~--- ----,--- .~.~~ I : DRAWING(S) SEE EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO !8 _ THIS MATTER came before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida appearing on the Consent Agenda on the date above. The City Commission hereby adopts the findings and recommendation of the Planning and Development Board, which Board found as follows OR X THIS MATTER came on to be heard before the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida on the date of hearing stated above. The City Commission having considered the relief sought by the applicant and heard testimony from the applicant, members of city administrative staff and the public finds as follows 1 Application for the relief sought was made by the Applicant in a manner consistent with the requirements of the City's Land Development Regulations. 2. The Applicant -1L. HAS HAS NOT established by substantial competent evidence a basis for the relief requested. 3 The conditions for development requested by the Applicant, administrative staff, or suggested by the public and supported by substantial competent evidence are as set forth on Exhibit .C" with notation "Included" 4 The Applicant's application for relief is hereby -1L. GRANTED subject to the conditions referenced in paragraph 3 hereof DENIED 5 This Order shall take effect immediately upon issuance by the City Clerk. 6 All further development on the property shall be made in accordance with the terms and conditions of this order 7 Other \\\\\\1 11111/ 11/// ~ '\ III. ~< -.{ I'l TOA, 1'/.... :-.; 0 'v ~ '~ ~) ~.' -.'. ~ ~ ~ l.i. ,'c-.?OR..1,,~~...., ~ 2 0 /,Y '0). ~ ~ = > ~ = =1- = ~ Q ., -4 920 ~ ~ .. \ .. ~ ~ ............. <:) 'r- ~ ~ FLO~\ #' 1'1/ \ \' 1/111/1 /II \1\\\\\\ DATED. f~,k ~.~~ / City Clerk JISHROATAIPlanningISHAREOIWP\PROJECTSIKINGOOM HALL-JEHOVAH'S W1TNESSESlOevalop.Order CC Sol6-00.dOC Exhibit "C" Conditions of Aporoval Project name: KINGDOM HALL File number' COUS 00-002 (Rev) Reference: Revised 3rd Review. New Site Plan. File # COUS 00-002 with a March 21. 2000 Plannmg and Zonmg Deoartment date stamo marking DE? ARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT PUBLIC WORKS Comments. NONE X UTILITIES Comments 1 Fire flow calculations will be required demonstrating the City Code requirement X of 1500 g.p.m. as stated in LOR chap. 6, Art. IV, Sec. 16, or the requirement imposed by insurance underwriters, whichever is greater (see Sec. 26-16(a)). Please submit these calculations with your Health Department permit submittal. 2. A building permIt for this project shall not be issued until this office has X approved the plans for the water and/or sewer improvements required to serve the project. (Section 26-15) 3 Provide drainage calculations showing the amount of rainfall to be retained on- X site. Use 3 year - 72 hour storm event to determine control elevations. FIRE Comments. 4 Water flow test is required. X POLICE Comments 5 Add "Do Not Enter" sign at southbound intersection of entrance/exit drive. X ENGINEERING DIVISION Comments. NONE X BUILDING DIVISION Comments 6 Compliance with the building Codes will be evaluated at time of permit review X The permit fee, water and sewer facility fees, FIre and Life Safety fees, County fees and State fees will be determined at time of permit review 7 Permits are required to construct the improvements that are shown on the X approved site plan/conditional use documents. Permit application forms are available in the Building Division of the Development Department. A permit submittal checklist IS available in the Building Division. The list identifies the Page 2 Kingdom Hall File No. COUS-00-002(Rev) yt ~\ 7\D DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT basic documents that the Plans Analyst checks for when an applicant submits for pennit review PARKS AND RECREATION Comments NONE X FORESTER/ENVIRONMENT ALIST Comments. NONE X PLANNING AND ZONING Comments. " Building signage was submitted wIth this second review set of plans on sheet A- X 4 One wall sign is pennitted and shall be one and one-half (1-1/2) square feet of area for each one (1) foot of linear building frontage. The maximum sign area for this building is 67 8 square feet. Provide dimensions for the signage shown on sheet A-4 Indicate the size, type, and color of signal!:e lettering. J 9 A church requires a conditional use approval In the R-I-A zoning district. X Applicant has filed a request for conditional use. \! 10 Indicate the zoning of the parcel as R-I-A on the site plan under tabular data. ChA, Sec. 7 V I 1 The maximum height for the R-I-A district is 25 feet for a non-residential X structure. Correct site plan under tabular data.ChA, Sec. 7 \I 12. Provide a mounted color elevation drawing prior to the P&D meeting ChA X Sec. 7 " 13 Indicate the number of trees required and the number of trees provided X on the landscape plan. Ch.7.5 Landscape Code. J 14 Ind.~te the percentage of native landscape material. (Comp Plan Policy X 44. ~vide the required landscape buffer along N.E. 4th Street (5 feet), and along X the north property line (2.5 feet excluding curbing). Provide labels and I'\, dimensions for all required landscape buffers on the site plan and landscape ,t..; plan. Ch. 7.5 Landscape Code. v 16 Change the symbol delineating the property line to differentiate from the X setback lines. \j Provide written confinnation from Palm Beach County's Traffic Division 17 X that the proiect meets the Traffic Perfonnance Standards. Iv 18 The coordinates for the south property line must match the survey Please X correct this on the site plan. ADDITIONAL PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD CONDITIONS Page 3 Kingdom Hall File No. COUS-OO-002(Rev) DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT QjJ Cypress mulch is prohibited. Replace with another type of landscaping mulch. X Indicate the chan e on the landsca elan. ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS 21 Re lace roof material with barrel "S" tile roof. J:ISHRDA T A IPlanninslSHAIUID\ WPlPROIECTS\KINGDOM HALL.JEHOV AIrS WJnlESSESICond of Appr CC S-I6-00.doc X X MEETING MINUT t..d REGULAR CITY COMMISSION BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA May 16, 2000 Sarah Lorenz, 250S N.W. 21st St., #29, requested straight answers regarding the opening of her tattoo parlor Henrietta Solomon, 230 N.E. 26 Avenue, spoke about a newspaper article, which mentioned a potential special taxing district for Village Royale on the Green, stating that they did not pay property taxes. She stated that a large number of the residents of Village Royale on the Green are snowbirds and have not taken out Florida residency and do pay taxes. She said their assessments had gotten to such a low point that they do not pay taxes. She spoke of their pride in the City and the contributions they make to the City such as donations, volunteering, and patronizing the local shops and restaurants. Ms. Solomon stated that perhaps the City's lack of ability to attract revenue- building industries might be part of the problem Her last point was that Village Royale on the Green holds up the integrity of north Boynton. If Village Royale on the Green were to deteriorate, it would be like a cancer and spread right down to the City's center Ms. Solomon thought the City should "put its thinking cap on" and "be more realistic in direction to pursue more money" Bill Schmalz, 1727 S. W lStn Street, referred to careless driving by people talking on cell phones and driving. He quoted statistics from countries and states where it is banned and requested it to be banned in the City of Boynton Beach to make it safer for everyone. Terry Pereira, 161 N.E. 19th Avenue, spoke about the lack of a traffic light on Seacrest in front of Ezell Hester Center between 17th & 19th Avenues and the incidence of accidents and fatalities in the area. Mr Pereira asked that a traffic light be installed at that location Bob Ensler, 26 Woods Lane, referred to the quality of architecture design for the City and mentioned that the City Manager had an approach for design quality standards which he would like to see presented to the City Commission for their consideration Mr Ensler spoke of the need to upgrade the City's aesthetic standards for new construction and demand adherence to them VII. PUBUC HEARING: A. Reconsideration of Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witness Conditional Use Approval Motion Vice Mayor Weiland made a motion to reconsider the conditional use approval for the Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses. Commissioner Rsher seconded the motion The motion carried 5-0 10 MEETING MINUTt::S REGULAR CITY COMMISSION BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA May 16, 2000 Vice Mayor Weiland referred back to the May 2 Commission meeting and the Jehovah's Witnesses Kingdom Hall being approved for an asphalt shingle roof, saying it was his firm belief, after looking at the area, that there were buildings in that area that already had the barrel/Spanish style tile roofs on them Benvenuto's, Manatee Bay and Yachtsman's Plaza, which are all right in the vicinity of this particular building Vice Mayor Weiland thought it would greatly enhance that area if the Commission required the applicant to maintain that standard as far as the tile roof or barrel tile roof was concerned Vice Mayor Weiland urged the Commission to consider his view He believed the Commission would be holding up a higher standard and improving the area Commissioner Rsher stated that he tended to agree with that and said that at this point the Commission had the opportunity to set the standards for that area a little higher than they had been set previously Commissioner Rsher stated that since the entire corridor area was going to be redone, it would be a shame to miss an opportunity to make this the standard by which all others would need to abide. Upgrading it to a barrel tile roof would make a night and day difference to that area Commissioner Fisher believed that in the future, the Commission should make the rest of the new facilities adhere to the same type of standards throughout that corridor and if it did not, the Commission would be looking at "grandfathering" in and having this conversation two or three years from now as more buildings came into the area Commissioner Black was perturbed that the Commission was revisiting this item He stated that the Commission had put the applicant through all the hoops and voted one way and because the applicant did not get a permit before it was reconsidered, he believed it sent out the wrong message, that it is no longer final when the Commission votes on something - that it is a race to the permitting department the next morning to see who gets there first. He did not believe that the Commission needed to do that. They had a publiC discussion and when the applicant left here and possibly said to his congregation that the Commission voted okay and then to find out a couple of days later that the Commission changed its mind was not a good thing and he disagreed with that way of conducting business. Commissioner Black said that because the building was 350 feet off the highway, the applicant reviewed his budget and decided that in lieu of the barrel tile roof that they were going to put those extra dollars in the landscaping. Commissioner Black expressed a liking for barrel tile roofs and that they would be a lot nicer than asphalt shingles but a barrel tile roof with no plants around it would not be good either Commissioner Black referred to the Commission's plans to look at strengthening the landscaping code and thought it would be more pleasing to the eye to have nice landscaping than a barrel tile roof, especially in light of the City's present-day, skimpy, code requirements for landscaping He said he would like to see if the Commission could talk to the applicant and see if he would be willing to step up to the new proposed landscaping codes. Mayor Pro Tem Sherman stated that he wished to hear from the applicant as he had read that the landscaping costs were going to be $50,000 and he wanted this issue 11 MEETING MINU'~ .. REGULAR CITY COMMISSION BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA '-.. May 16, 2000 clarified by the applicant. He wanted to evaluate what a roof difference in cost would be and weigh it against a compromise in the landscaping Vice Mayor Weiland expressed his opinion on Commissioner Black's comment about the applicant leaving thinking he had a conditional use approval Vice Mayor Weiland clearly stated that he was voting in favor of that Tuesday, May 2, only to be on the prevailing side to reconsider at the next meeting, so he should have left that meeting knowing that it was approved but that it was going to be reconsidered at the next meeting Mayor Broening confirmed this as being accurate and asked to hear from Mr Montantes. Mr Mark Montantes took the podium and was sworn in by City Attorney Cherof Mayor Broening asked Mr Montantes if he wished to read a statement or if he wanted the Commission to ask him questions. Mr Montantes had a comment about the landscaping issue. He said that the $50,000 for landscaping was supposed to be $15,000 Commissioner Rsher said to Mr Montantes that when Mr Montantes had spoken to his architect about the barrel tile roof, it was Commissioner Fisher's understanding that they would be willing to put on the barrel tile roof to enhance the building even more. Mr Montantes replied that they said they would consider it, not that they would do it, as they were concerned about the estimated cost of the project. They wanted to use the funds originally slated for the barrel tile roof for other things. He stated that if it came down to not having a choice in the matter, they would have to do it. He expressed a desire to work with the community and to beautify the community with their building Mr Montantes asked to share a few points with the Commission He said that he appreciated the work the Commission and the Planning and Zoning Board were doing to develop the community and make it beautiful Mr Montantes said that it was not their intention to "fight" the City in any way but just to use their funds in the best way possible. As a Project Manager and a Minister he was also trying to develop the community from a building and a "people" perspective. Mr Montantes continued, saying that at the 5/2 meeting the vote was 4-1, so they thought that the project was all right. Commissioner Weiland said that he voted yes only to be on the prevailing side only so he could reconsider it. If he had not been on the prevailing side, he would not be able to bring it up again Mr Montantes said that the message they got and relayed to the congregation was that it was approved. We had no idea that there was really a question on it. We did not know it was something we had to "dig into" to try to find out about but if they had known, the plans would have been in there the next morning! He went on to say that on the past Friday he had gotten a call from a reporter on the Post who mentioned this and it took Mr Montantes off guard He also got a call from one of the representatives at the City who told him to be here at this meeting because they were reconsidering his issue. 12 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA May 16, 2000 One point that was mentioned was that the church had frontage property on Federal Highway They took some snapshots and the existing structure on the north end of the property can be seen from Federal Highway As you move along, the existing building goes out of view due to the landscaping. However, from the new location, which would be on the south end of the property, the building can no longer be seen and if a person is driving along and looking straight across, they will not see the building This is because of the existing landscaping and also the proposed landscaping They are putting up a line of trees that, in five to ten years, will be 15-20 feet high and the building will not be visible at all In considering also the code requirements Mr Montantes read briefly from the City Staff recommendations, saying that one of staff's points was general compatibility with adjacent property and other property in the zoning district. One of their comments was "The proposed facility is compatible visually and by use with the adjacent neighborhood. The scale and architecture of the proposed facilities is compatible with the surrounding one-story structures. The church is minimally in use during the week and the intensity of the use will remain" City staff's recommendation was that: "Based, in part, on the need for this new facility as represented by the efforts of the current petitioners, compliance with development regulations, and the consistency with the Comprehensive Plan which allows such uses within this land use classification contingent upon compatibility with neighborhood character, staff recommends that this request be recommended for approval conditioned upon satisfying all conditions of approval as contained in Exhibit "c"" So/ they recommended it. Mr Montantes went on to say that they were also concerned about other Code considerations, one of them being Chapter 9 of the Code, Community Design Plan Within that Code it mentions this particular point. "The purpose of this chapter is to promote harmony with nature and a pleasant and comprehensible cohesiveness among development within the City of Boynton Beach" That is exactly what the church was trying to do according to Mr Montantes. Because they had frontage property on Fourth Street and the building will not be visible from Federal Highway, they were trying to develop the property in such a way that from Fourth Street it will fit within the community itself The building the applicants had there had been there for 30 years and it fits within the community The applicants believed from discussions with staff that they were in compliance and they wondered what portion of the Code was not being met. Concerning the recommendation to put a tile roof on the building, the applicants did not see the necessity of it because they did not feel it was required Mayor Pro Tem Sherman asked if the applicants had done a cost estimate of a barrel tile roof versus the asphalt shingle one? Mr Montantes said yes and Mayor Pro Tem Sherman asked Mr Montantes to share that information with the Commission Mr Montantes invited the architect, Aldo Paredes, to the podium to answer questions on this point. 13 MEETING MINUlrS ..,; REGULAR CITY COMMISSION BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA '-'WI May 16, 2000 Mr. Aida Paredes, 345 S.W. 13th Avenue, took the podium and stated that they had looked at alternates for the roof and their first choice was not asphalt shingles. They were leaning towards flat concrete tiles, painted in white or grey or even a color that would complement the rest of the building's design They never looked at barrel tiles. The asphalt shingles in terms of the roofing structure was in the neighborhood of $7- 8,000 with only about a 5 or 7 year warranty Obviously that cut our costs dramatically compared with flat concrete tile which was in the neighborhood of about $15,000 to $20,000 There would be a greater warranty with the concrete tiles and the aesthetics would be much better but there is some consideration of the funding. In terms of the exterior aesthetics of the building but also looking at the interior where this building will be used, they figured that asphalt shingles would be a good compromise. They wanted to .stay within the Code and within their budget at the same time. Mayor Pro Tern Sherman asked to see the newspaper article Mr Montantes had referred to and it was brought to him for his perusal Commissioner Fisher asked for a ballpark estimate on the warranty of the concrete tile roof? Mr Paredes said it varied, that one could get up to 20 years. Commissioner Rsher asked if after five to seven years on the asphalt shingle roof it would have to be replaced? Applicant said yes. So, you will spend $8,000 to put on an asphalt shingle roof and then in five years, at an inflated cost, you will have to spend it again You will keep this cycle going every five to seven years as opposed to getting an upgraded one now and spending, theoretically, less. Mr Paredes said that warranty did not necessarily mean replacement. Warranty means that the manufacturer warrants the asphalt shingles so if there were any damage due to the material they would have to replace the material. That does not necessarily mean that the life cycle of the asphalt shingle would have to be dictating that it be replaced within five years. There are a lot of asphalt shingle roofs in this City and some of them are ten and even fifteen years old. For us to analyze in terms of funding whether we can do this project now and being able to compromise in terms of the materials we could use and then perhaps project five, seven or maybe even ten years down the road being able to replace with some other material then yes, we would do that to be able to accomplish this project. I would rather have this compromise than the project not coming to fruition at all Mr Paredes wanted to bring up two issues and he referred to the newspaper article given to Mayor Pro Tem Sherman The first issue was that he wanted to make sure everyone understood that while his group applauded the efforts to beautify the Federal Highway corridor, they believed that their building had very little influence on that corridor The second issue was that as they looked at the neighborhood they observed that 85% of the development had asphalt shingles. He spoke of one piece of property between their building and Federal Highway that was yet to be developed and he believed it would be a Head Start or another church and that this would be the only building they would be able to influence with the concrete tiles versus asphalt shingles. He asked if the Commission wanted to make a precedent over one building? They 14 MEETING MINUTE~ REGULAR CITY COMMISSION BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA May 16, 2000 believed they were doing a greater job in influencing the neighborhood with their landscaping than over the type of roof Vice Mayor Weiland stated that while there was now only one building between the applicant's building and Federal Highway, eventually the whole thing would be tied in together in the next few years and that was why he wanted to see a higher standard at this point so it could be continued in future developments. He said that he concurred with Commissioner Fisher 100% and wanted to state that this is the direction the City is headed He also said that in the very near future there would be a higher landscaping Code which developers would be asked to meet. He did not want to step backwards and concurred with Mr Ensler on architectural design standards. We are going to be taking one step forwards with the new landscaping requirements and we would be taking one step backwards in this situation with aesthetics and that did not make a lot of sense to Vice Mayor Weiland. Mr Paredes said that he did not see the building as it was proposed being detrimental to the neighborhood at all Vice Mayor Weiland said that he did not say it was a detriment but that the barrel or Spanish tile roof versus the asphalt shingle was the issue and that it would eventually all tie together Mr Paredes reiterated the applicant's belief that their building had very little influence on the Federal Highway corridor He said the most impact was on the neighborhood to the immediate west. Mayor Pro Tern Sherman read the newspaper article which said, "Mark Montantes, the Congregation's representative, could not be reached Friday but on May 2 he told the Commissioners the more expensive tile roof was rejected in favor of a security system and more than $50,000 in landscaping" Mayor Pro Tern Sherman said there was a quite a difference in $50,000 and $15,000 Mayor Broening commended the Commissioners for their efforts to provide upgrading for this project and for projects in general, however, he did not believe that this was the way to get this accomplished. Mayor Broening said that he lived nearby the proposed building and uses 14th Street and comes across that way several times a week and that the existing facility, while not a model of architectural excellence for a landmark of any kind for our city, is clean, respectable, well-maintained and in a neighborhood that is essentially blighted with the exception of a number of properties that are like the Kingdom Hall. The very next home to the south on the same side of the street is a home which, since I've been in Boynton Beach for the last eight years, has had for a roof a blue tarpaulin I think the tarpaulin has worn out too. I have asked several times but cannot recall the status but it is a house that is in desperate need of something I see this new Kingdom Hall going in there as being a wonderful advantage to that community and to this City You can't see it from Federal Highway unless you are making an effort to see it and I believe that over the next several years you won't see it because of potential buildings in the area Mayor Broening did not see a problem with asphalt shingles, saying that they were extremely prevalent in the area and that they were respectable, decent roofs. He said that every house could not be a Mizner for 15 ~ ... MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 'W'.,I May 16, 2000 budgetary and location reasons. Mayor Broening did not believe that this project deserved this attention He personally thought it was a vast improvement to the existing structure and a vast improvement and example for the neighborhood. Mayor Broening called for a motion to approve this project as presented Motion Commissioner Black made a motion to approve the project as presented, Mayor Broening seconded the motion and asked for a roll call vote. City Clerk Sue Kruse called the roll, after which the motion failed 2-3 (Vice Mayor Weiland, Mayor Pro Tem Sherman and Commissioner Rsher dissenting) Mayor Broening said he could move to table the item Commissioner Rsher then asked Mr Montantes and Mr Paredes if the project were tabled until the June 6 meeting if it would slow them up dramatically? Mr Montantes said they were hoping to get started with permits in June. Mr Bressner said that he was assuming that the roof structure would change in terms of the type of roofing material used. How far into the process is the fail-safe date you would need? He said, "Let's assume that in two weeks the City Commission opts to request that you put in a tile roof or concrete shingle roof When you set your foundation that will not be affected but at what date in the construction do you need a decision as to the roofing material so as not to lose any time? I am trying to buy you time and perhaps give you an interim permit until this matter is resolved so you don't lose any construction time to get it done" Mr Paredes stated his impact would come in when he released the roofing or the pre- engineering truss manufacturing company to design the trusses for the building So they would have to have that information in order to be able to have the connections, uplifts and so on Mr Bressner said, "Assuming you got a building permit for the project next Monday, how soon after that do you estimate that you would need to get that information to the various outside parties to have those drawings prepared?" Mr Paredes said that theoretically, if they were to have a building permit on Monday, that would probably allow him about 15 - 20 days before he had to release the engineer for him to be able to engineer the trusses, prepare drawings and submit those for a permit himself for the City for review and then, once it had been approved, he could commence manufacturing Mr Bressner said that he had been attempting to determine whether an interim permit would be of assistance to the petitioner to move forward and it sounded as if the best that could be achieved would be five days and that does not sound like it would be a significant benefit to the petitioner He said that he was sorry and that he had tried. Mr Paredes said that they had considered the issue from every angle since Vice Mayor Weiland's comments at the last meeting and had looked at alternative pricing They were willing to go ahead and make adjustments and even incur the added financial burden to be able to put on flat concrete tiles. They would like the assistance of the 16 MEETING MINUTES REGULAR CITY COMMISSION BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA May 16,2000 City in terms of inspections. They would like to commence and culminate the project very quickly A lot of times inspections take a little bit of getting going They proposed they would incur the added cost burden for the concrete tiles, go ahead with construction, approve it as such and have the backing of the Commissioners and the City and be able to get inspections within about a 24-hour turnaround including weekends. He stated that if the City could help them in that direction all of them were in agreement that they could go ahead and move forward. City Attorney Cherof said that the Commission could not do that. He said that the petitioners could express an interest and some direction to the City Manager and the administration on handling inspections but you cannot do anything officially to direct the Building Department to conduct its inspections. Vice Mayor Weiland wished to state that the Commission needed to decide what type of roof at this point will be put up there because while I personally think concrete tile would be a definite upgrade from the asphalt shingles, it does not concur with what is in the area now, which is a barrel tile. He preferred to see red barrel tile roof Mr Paredes stated that there was no red barrel tile in the neighborhood at this time. He believed that everyone had concurred that their building would have very little influence on the Federal Highway corridor and that they were willing to upgrade to the concrete tiles. Motion Commissioner Rsher moved that the Commission approve this with the understanding there will be a barrel tile roof on this facility Vice Mayor Weiland seconded the motion City Attorney Cherof said that it was a public hearing since it was reconsidered and Mayor Broening noted that there was still one person who wished to speak. Dee Zibelli, 440 Ocean Parkway, took the podium and stated that she was concerned about the barrel or concrete tile roofs and remembered that when the Casablanca Apartments were being built and the issue of the roof material came up, they were made to put on a barrel tile roof This was not in the corridor but that made one great big difference in Boynton Beach Boulevard and so I would say that, please, upgrade it. I hate to keep going downwards. She said she had a cement tile roof which is kept well-painted and that it was better in hurricanes as well Lee Wische, 1302 S.W. 18th Street, took the podium and said these were two distinct, different cases. When Casablanca came in their Site Plans showed barrel tile roofs. When they came before the Commission, they claimed a hardship As you should know you can't claim a hardship because of monetary value. They wanted to put in asphalt tile and the Commission did not go for it. They threatened to sue the City for making them put on the barrel tile roof and in the end, they put up the barrel tile roof and did not sue the City Mr Wische stated he believed the Commission was going way overboard and that the applicants were willing to cooperate by putting cement block. 17 MEETING MINU~S'" REGULAR CITY COMMISSION BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA ..., May 16. 2000 He said Leisureville had barrel tile and cement block all along Boynton Beach Boulevard They have asphalt shingles, barrel tile and cement block. The applicant is being asked for too much and Mr Wische believed the Commission was way out of line. Mayor Pro Tem Sherman said that he wanted to leave on a positive thought, saying that the asphalt shingle roof had a life of 7 years and a tile roof be it the flat or the barrel, has around a 20-25 year life so that it would not be money wasted He knew that they had to come up with the funds to put it on but the useful life should in some way pay you back in full no matter what was decided at this meeting Commissioner Black stated that Mayor Pro Tem Sherman was wrong He stated that it was a warranty on manufacturer's defects and had nothing to do with the life expectancy of the roof Commissioner Black said that he had paid $18,000 for an asphalt shingle roof and had a 25-year warranty That is just on the product. It does not mean that if it leaks in five or ten years I get a new roof The life expectancy is very long We would be wrong to think that it is only going to last seven or eight years. Mayor Pro Tem Sherman stated that he had been going by what the applicants had stated, not being well versed in the area. Mayor Broening requested a roll call vote. The motion carried 3-2 (Mayor Broening and Commissioner Black dissenting) VIII. FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS: A. Resolution ranking and approving consultant(s) for Industrial Avenue Corridor and Costa Bella Storm water Improvement Projects (tentatively June 6, 2000 - Preview copy to Commission on 5/11/00) B. Ordinance - Continued discussion on billboard regulation changes (tentatively June 6, 2000) C. Resolution - Proposed policy for cemetery late arrival fee D Ratification of Labor Contract for Rrefighters (tentatively June 6, 2000) E. Marina Project Update (June 6, 2000) F Update of Enforcement of Non-conforming Signs (June 6, 2000) G Proposed Repairs of Tennis Center (June 6, 2000) Mayor Broening read the list of future agenda items. There were no questions. IX. DEVELOPMENT PLANS: None 18 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA April 25. 2000 was working with the Neighborhood Group to set up the meetings and that they were being planned to coordinate with the issuance of the first concept draft of the design plan Motion Mr Rosenstock moved that item 6.A.1, Martin Luther King Boulevard Overlay District, as presented by Michael Rumpf of the City Planning Department, be approved to amend the Land Development Regulations Chapter 2 Zoning to establish a new section for overlay zoning districts. the Martin Luther King Boulevard Overlay District, and setbacks. The motion was seconded by Vice Chair Dube. Mr Myott asked if there were any new projects along the corridor? Mr Rumpf said he had heard ideas but no concrete proposals had been submitted to his Department. Motion passed 7-0 7 New Business Assistant City Attorney Igwe administered the oath to all persons who would be testifying at the meeting. A. Public Hearing Conditional Use and Site Plan Location: Description: KINGDOM HALL OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES Mark Montantes Boynton Beach Florida Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses, Inc. 1512 N.E. 4th Street Request for conditional use and site plan approval to construct a 5,917 square foot church on 1.001 Acres. 1 Project Name: Agent: Owner. Mr Mark Montantes. agent for Kingdom Hall of Jehovah's Witnesses took the podium. Chairman Wische commented that there were 18 staff comments and asked the applicant to address only the items he did not agree with or that required clarification. The applicant said that they were in agreement with all 18 comments and were modifying their plans accordingly They had no questions. Mr Finkelstein commented that this property was currently zoned R1A, single family residential, but it had a 3.325 S.F building with parking on it. Had there been any 4 MEETING MINUTES PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT BOARD BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA April 25, 2000 existing variance or conditional use agreement? Mr Rumpfs response was that this was the assumption Mr Ensler said that on Page A3 the drawing showed the platform as 15" high with a ramp on it. He assumed the ramp was to allow handicapped access. His understanding of the Federal law was that the length of a ramp needed to be one foot for each inch of height. With a 15 inch height the length of the ramp would have to be 15 feet and the ramp shown is only 12 feet 10 inches. He stated that the length of the ramp would need to be modified to meet Federal Code. Chairman Wische stated to Mr Rumpf that a few members of the Board with experience in that field had confirmed this. Mr Rumpf noted the reference to the Federal Code and said that he relied on the Building Representatives to ensure that the Code was enforced Chairman Wische asked the applicant if there were any problem with this change and he replied that there was none. He further stated that the plans the Board was reviewing were not the final plans but the proposed one. Mr Myott brought up the cypress mulch comment and wanted assurance that there would be no cypress mulch used in the project and the applicant agreed. The applicant showed the Board the renderings for the project. Applicant stated that the 3,225 S.F building would increase to 4,680 SF and that would be an increase in square foota~e of 1,355 feet. Mr Montantes introduced the architect, Aldo Paredes, of 345 S.W 13 Avenue, Boynton Beach, who took the podium to respond to questions Mr Myott questioned the use of asphalt shingle roof material, something more commonly used in residential buildings. He also wondered about any additional signage that might be near the street. He said that the signage appeared to be under-designed and rather plain. Mr Myott commended the applicants for the quality of the improvements, which were substantial in scope. Mr Paredes agreed that the sign was modest but said that because of the location the need for signage was not as great as it might be in another location. The ingress and egress leave no doubt as to the church's location. Also, he said, there will be some lighting that will accent the signage in the evening. There is a marquee in the front that indicates the time of the different meetings for the different congregations so applicants believed the signage was appropriate. Also, there was a constraint in terms of the location for the signage and they chose to go the modest route and make it as visible as possible. Mr Hay asked Mr Rumpf the status of the written confirmation from the Palm Beach County Traffic Division as to the applicant's compliance with the traffic standards. Mr Rumpf replied that those comments had not been satisfied to date, as the County has not responded Mr Rumpf assured Mr Hay that this would be included in the City's requirements. 5