LEGAL APPROVAL
DEVELopr-"'I ORDER OF THE CITY COMM'''''''''II OF THE
vI" OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLOR.....A
PROJECT NAME. LOWES HOME IMPROVEMENT CENTER (SIGN APPROVAL)
APPLICANT'S AGENT Robert E. Basehart, Basehart Consulting Inc.
APPLICANT'S ADDRESS: 333 Southern Boulevard, Ste 200 West Palm Beach
DATE OF HEARING RATIFICATION BEFORE CITY COMMISSION: April 18, 2000
TYPE OF RELIEF SOUGHT Major Site Plan Modification
LOCATION OF PROPERTY Southwest corner of 1-95 and Woolbright Road
DRAWING(S): SEE EXHIBIT "B" ATTACHED HERETO
X 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
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
1... 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
~ 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
DATED'
City Clerk
J:\SHRDATA\Planning\SHARED\VVP\PROJECTS\LOWE'S HOME CENTER\SIGNAGE APPRQVAL\Devalop.Qrder CC 4-18-00.doc
MErnNG MINUTES
PLANNING. DEVELOPMENT BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
NOVEMBER 23, 1999
"Truck traffic shall be separated from vehicular traffic along the (shared drive) west side of
8uilding ':4 H of the PIO. On the site pia,. designate (induding signs and arrows) and label
the proposed trllck route that is to be located along the eastside of 8/J/lding ':4 H
OR
.:o!l'-
"Redesign truck route to place on property, in place of parking spaces and request variance
If necessary for reduction in parking spaces. H
Mr Finkelstein had a problem with the direction noted in this comment. He believes it should read "north
side of Building A" Mr Rumpf adv!St.'(l that Mr Finkelstein was correct and the condition would be corrected.
Mr Finkelstein added that the "eastside" goes to "north",
CHAIRMAN WISCHE ANNOUNCED THt 'PUBUC HEARING. THERE WAS NO ONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO
SPEAK ON THIS APPUCATION.
Mr Myott asked if staff had an opportunity to review the different Lowe's prototypes. Mr. Rumpf responded
affirmatively He said staff was recommending a white building that is similar to another existing store
because they felt it was more comparable to The Home Depot. In addition, Mr Rumpf advised that the
applicant has added some building elements of cQlumns along the garden area that were not originally
proposed.
Motion
Vice Chainman Dure moved to approve the request for conditional use approval for the construction of a 135,
, 197 square foot home improvement store with a 48,472 square foot garden center on 15.27 acres subject
to all conditions with the following changes:
. That in Item #10 of Exhibit "C", the second sentence be removed and the third sentence
be changed to the sign area shall not include...
. Item #29 is to be worked out by staff
. Corrections to Item #30
Mr Finkelstein seconded the motion.
Mr Myott clarified with Vice Chainman Dure that the motion recommended that the applicant include only
the lettering as the basis of the sign calculation.
The motion carried 6-1. (Mr Myott dissented. He does not agree with the amended sign portion of the
motion.)
Zonina Code Variances
3
PROJECT NAME:
AGENT
OWNER:
LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
LOWE'S HOME CENTER (NUMBER OF SIGNS)
Robert E. Basehart, Basehart Consulting Inc.
Woolbright Partners, Inc.
Southwest corner of I -95 and Woolbright Road
Request for relief from Chapter 21 Signs, Article IV, Section
2(B) which limits a single use to one (1) site sign to allow
the erection of two (2) site signs.
9
.
MErnNG MINUTES
PLANNING. DEVELOPMENT BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
NOVEMBER 23, 1999
Bob Basehart, 333 Southern Boulevard, West Palm Beach, said the applicant does not agree with
staff's conclusion that there would be three signs on the site. There is an existing sign on the corner that
identifies the Commerce Park. Lowe's is proposing a monument sign and a freestanding sign. The
Commerce Park sign should not be counted as a site sign because that is a sign on the property that
announces the activity on the property The existing sign would be an off-premise sign. Although the Code
does not penmit that type of sign, it is a valid nonconfonming sign. It is in place by virtue of an easement and
Lowe's cannot remove it. It is unfair to penalize the site by counting it as a site sign.
The applicant has met with staff and worked out a compromise. The applicant is willing to withdraw the
request for the pole sign and the variance that requests that it be 49' high. In Its place, the applicant would
agree that there would be only one monument sign on the site in addition to the existing Commerce Park
sign. The applicant requested that the board grant a~ight exception of 30' instead of 49' This request is
consistent with the variance that was granted for The Home Depot. In addition, the applicant is willing to
use similar materials that were used on The Home Depot sign.
At Mr Baseharl's request, Mr Rumpf explained that the variance .for The Home Depot sign almost a variance
granted for the variance because the Code limits variances for signs to a percentage threshold. He feit that
perhaps because of the location and type of use, the City felt it deserved something more than the Code
allowed.
Returning to the first request for two signs, ~1r Rumpf explained that staff recommended denial of their
request because one sign already exists on the site. Staff favor,s this type of entry signage and does not
recommend removing it. Staff does not oppose two signs.
Mr Finkelstein confinmed that the monument sign would be 20' tail and would be located behind the existing
Commerce Park sign. Mr Rumpf explained that the grade behind the sign comes to approximately the
second tier of the wall. The sign would start at the top of the wali and goes up 20'
Mr Basehart said the applicant would eliminate the pole sign and put the monument sign somewhere in the
middle of the site. It would not loom over the Commerce Park sign. The sign would be fully within Lowe's
property
Chairman Wische favored this proposal and agreed with Mr Basehart that the existing sign should not be
counted against the applicant.
Vice Chainman Dube pointed out that the board was being asked to approve something that has not yet been
submitted, He reminded the members that it was important to vote only on the item that was before the
board. Chairman Wische agreed that the board must vote on the agenda item.
Vice Chairman Dube confinmed with Mr Rumpf that the one sign that staff agrees with is the one that is
already existing. If the board follows staff's recommendation, Lowe's would not get a sign. Mr Rumpf
explained that the variance is for two signs. However, that counts the existing sign as one. Therefore, the
applicant is entitled to one sign. There is a nonconfonming sign on the property When a property is modified
in a major way, all non-confonmities must be brought up to Code except for those that are exempt by Code.
A sign is not exempt. If the board approves this request, they would be approving the existing sign plus one
additional sign for Lowe's. Mr Rumpf is in favor of that approval.
In response to Ms. Frazier, Chainman Wische advised that Lowe's name would not be added to the existing
sign because it is not a reader board.
Mr Finkelstein inquired about whether or not the board would be approving the conditions in the conditional
10
~
MErnNG MINUTES
PLANNING. DEVELOPMENT BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
NOVEMBER 23, 1999
use that limits the signage to size and square footage if they approved this request. Mr Rumpf advised that
if the variance application were approved as written for two signs, it would be necessary to recognize the
language in the condition'al use (Item #24) because it contains specific recommendations including area.
Neither of the signs meets the maximum sign area and there isn't a variance addressing that issue.
Mr Finkelstein confirmed that if the board includes Comment #24 from the previous application in the
motion, staff's concerns woulc! be covered."
Motion
Vice Chairman Dube moved to approve the request for relief from Chapter 21 Signs, Article IV, Section 2(B)
which limits a single use to one (1) site sign to allow the erection of two (2) site signs subject to all staff
comments. Mr Friedland seconded the motion.
Ms. Fra~ier was not comfortable with the wording that included "two site signs" Mr Myott also pointed out
that this motion would oppose Mr RumpFs recommendation. Vice Chairman Dube disagreed and explained
that one site sign already exists and the board would be approving one sign.
Modified Motion
Vice Chairman Dube modified the motion to read" ,limits a single use to one site sign to allow the addition
of one more site sign." Mr Friedland seconded the motion.
Attorney Cirullo administered the oath to Commissioner Ron Weiland.
Ro~ Weiland, 2540SW 14th Street, asked if the approval would address the location of the sign and what
material would be used for the construction of the base of the sign. Commissioner Weiland said the sign
would be 6'-4" tall and 20' wide and it would be mounted on a 24' base to reach a peak height of 30'
Chairman Wische advised that the board was addressing only a sign at this point and the applicant would
have to meet Code when he submits the sign.
Mr Basehart explained that the applicant would not put the second sign behind the existing sign. They will
eliminate the sign proposed behind the Boynton Commerce Park sign and eliminate the pole sign. One sign
will be located somewhere in the central part of the site.
Attorney Cirullo explained that the board's responsibility was to address the variance regarding the number
of sign - not the sign contents.
Mr Rumpf advised that it would be in the applicant's best interest to narrow down these issues.
The motion carried 6-1. (Mr Myott dissented.)
4.
PROJECT NAME:
AGENT
OWNER:
LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
LOWE'S HOME CENTER (POLE SIGN HEIGHT)
Robert E. Basehart, Basehart Consulting Inc.
Woolbright Partners, Inc.
Southwest corner of I-9S and Woolbright Road
Request relief from Chapter 21, Signs, Article IV, Section
2(B) which limits maximum sign height to 20 feet to allow
for erection of a 49 foot high pole sign.
11
.
MErnNG MINUTES
PLANNING. DEVELOPMENT BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
NOVEMBER 23, 1999
Chairman Wische advised that staff denied this request, but agreed to allow a 25% increase that would take
the height of the sign to 25' The applicant is requesting 30'
Mr Basehart said the applicant would agree to eliminate the pole sign in favor of a monument sign. The
request for 30' is based on the fact that Woolbright Road is an elevated roadway There would be only a 20'
height above the road grade at the center of the site. Mr Basehart said the ,proposed Lowe's sign would
roughly align with The Home Depot sign across the street.
Mr Myott did not understand the need for the base of the sign to be solid when it is so high. He requested
that Mr Basehart exr>!aln the reasoning for that feature. Mr Basehart said it was an attempt to be compliant
with the design of t:,e si;Jn base that was done across the street. He agreed with Mr Myott and pointed out
that the important thing to Lowe's is where the message is. He said they would be open to discussion on
this issue. Mr Finkelsrein agreed with Mr Myott and said he did not believe the base of The Home Depot
was solid.
Mr Friedland questioned whether or not it would be necessary to have a 30' sign in this location since there
is nothing else around this structure. Mr Basehart said the additional height is needed to achieve vision and
view from the motoring public. If the sign were limited to 10', 12' or 14', it would be below the grade of the
road- and it would be worthless.
Mr Rumpf pointed out that the project originally proposed a sign in excess of 100' so that they could achieve
visibility on I-95. Staff opposed that request and it was downsized to 49' to match the Cracker Barrel sign
along I -95. The applicant realized they were still in excess of Code and downsized it again. The I -95 corridor
signage potential would not be achieved by anything greater than- 40' Therefore, nothing more could be
accomplished with this sign than could be accomplished with a 20' high sign. Staff reviews visibility when
reviewing signs. Due to the curve of the road, the sign will not be visible all the way down the corridor of
Woolbright Road. Mr Rumpf agreed that The Home Depot achieved a 30' high sign that is in excess of what
the maximum variances allow in the Code at 25%. The documentation explained only that the approval of
that sign did not recognize that percentage limitation.
Attorney Ciru/lo advised that the board was being asked to review a variance of a pole sign to go from the
20' to a 49' maximum. There is a limitation in the Code that if you are going to consider a variance to a
height or area of limitation, the maximum authority the board has is a 25% variance.
When Vice Chainman Dube pointed out that the applicant withdrew the pole sign, Mr Basehart explained that
the applicant would agree to reduce the request to 30' and make it a monument sign. The applicant would
like to reduce the request to 25'.
Mr Friedland inquired whether it would be poSSible for the applicant to return to the board in two weeks for
consideration of the request.
Mr Rumpf was of the opinion that the lesser request could be approved under the guidelines of the
advertisement.
Mr Basehart indicated that if the request were reduced to 25', it would be acceptable because the
advertisement was a greater request.
Mr Myott questioned when the board would have the opportunity to see the sign that would be designed.
Mr Basehart said the applicant would agree to a condition that prior to the issuance of the sign penmit, the
board must review it. The board members were in agreement.
12
.
MErnNG MINUTES
PLANNING . DEVELOP","I~T BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
NOVEMBER 23, 1999
Motion
Vice Chainman Dube moved to approve the request for relief from Chapter 21, Signs, Article IV, Section 2(B)
which limits maximum sign height to 20 feet to allow for erection of a 25 foot high sign.
Attorney Cirullo said he would like to review the legal notice that went out to ensure that it did not over-
specify the type of relief that was being requested.
Vice Chainman Dube amended his motion to add "subject to the attorney's interpretation of the legal notice"
Attorney Cirullo said he would clarify this issue prior to the City Commission meeting.
Ms. Frazier confirmed that the reduction would be to 25'
Mr Friedland seconded the motion that ..:arried unanimOUSIY/
S.
PROJECT NAME:
AGENT
OWNER:
LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
LOWE'S HOME CENTER
Robert E. Basehart, Basehart Consulting, Inc.
Woolbright Partners, Inc.
Southwest corner of I -95 and Woolbright Road
Request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land
Development Regulations, Chapter 23, Article 11. (A)(7)
which limits the maximum number of driveways along a
single street to two (2), to allow a total of three (3)
driveways.
Bob Basehart. 333 Southern Boulevard. West Palm Beach, advised that the third driveway would serve
as a shared access with the project to the south, Therefore, there is no increase in driveways on Corporate
Way Because of the size of the project, two driveways would not be sufficient. To keep the traffic flowing
properly, the additional driveway is justified. There are a number of standards in the Code that the applicant
has met to justify the granting of the variance.
Mr Rumpf had no additional comments.
CHAIRMAN WISCHE ANNOUNCED THE PUBUC HEARING. THERE WAS NO ONE PRESENT WHO WISHED TO
SPEAK ON THIS APPUCATION.
Ms. Frazier questioned whether this project would be as large as The Home Depot. Mr Basehart responded
that this project would be larger than The Home Depot.
Motion
Vice Chainman Dube moved to approve the request for relief from the City of Boynton Beach Land
Development Regulations, Chapter 23, Article 11. (A)(7) which limits the maximum number of driveways
along a single street to two (2), to allow a total of three (3) driveways subject to the following conditions:
. The delivery truck traffic shall be prohibited from using the southern driveway; provide note and
signage indicating same; and
. Provide evidence of shared access that provides for both vehicular truck traffic along the
southernmost driveway and truck traffic along a route leading through Buildings "A" and "B" of
the Boynton Commerce Center PID.
j
13
.
MErnNG MINUTES
PLANNING. DEVELOPMeNT BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
NOVEMBER 23, 1999
Mr Finkelstein seconded the motion that carried unanimously
6.
PROJECT NAME:
AGENT
OWNER.
LOCATION:
DESCRIPTION:
LOWE'S HOME CENTER
Robert E. Basehart, Consulting, Inc.
Woolbright Partners, Inc.
Southwest corner of I -95: ~nd Woolbright Road
Request for a height exception in accordance with the City
of Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter
2, Zoning, Section 4.F.1 to allow a five (5) foot increase
from the maximum forty-five (45) foot height limit, or J 59
foot high roof feature at project entrance.
Bob Basehart. 333 Southern Boulevard. West Palm Beach, reported that this is at the front entrance
and only approximately 1S lineal feet is over the 45' limit. That amounts to 4% of the length of the building,
The entry feature is a minimum of 350' from any property line. Therefore~ there would be no impact on
anything else. There are nine criteria in the Code that must be evaluated to approve a height exception.
The applicant has met all of the criteria.
Chairman Wische announced that staff recommended approval of this request.
Mr Friedland said the board voted a number of weeks ago to change the height of Single-family dwellings
from 2S'to 30', With that in mind, Mr. Friedland felt this variation was not a problem and feels we should
continue to do this throughout the City
Mr Myott disagreed with Mr Friedland. He felt this was not a S' addition to the building, but rather a 5'
addition to the sign. He could consider this request if it was for an important function. However, he feels
this request is for all the wrong reasons.
Mr Finkelstein is in favor of the entry feature because without it, it would be a long, boring building.
Chainman Wische is in favor of this request. This entry feature beautifies the project. He pointed out that the
current height limit throughout the City is 45'
Mr Myott felt that if 5' were eliminated, no one would know the difference.
Motion
Vice Chairman Dube moved to approve the request for a height exception in accordance with the City of
Boynton Beach Land Development Regulations, Chapter 2, Zoning, Section 4.F.1 to allow a five (5) foot
increase from the maximum forty-fIVe (45) foot height limit, or a 50 foot high roof feature at project entrance.
Mr Friedland seconded the motion that carried 5-2. (Ms. Frazier and Mr Myott dissented.)
Chainman Wische thanked the applicant and welcomed him to the City of Boynton Beach.
Mr Basehart announced that construction should begin in March 2000.
8. Other
None
14
.
MErnNG MINUTES
PLANNING. DEVELOPMENT BOARD
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
NOVEMBER 23, 1999
.
,
9. Comments by members
Vice Chairman Dulle ad\llsed Mr Rumpf that his copy of the Land Development Regulations is missing
Chapters 11 through 19 because they were never received.
Mr Rumpf said he would forward Vice Chairman Dulle. a new copy of the Land Developm:nt Regulations.
10. Adjournment
There being no further business to come before the board, Vice Chairman Dube moved to adjourn the
meeting at 8:4S p.m. Mr. Finkelstein seconded the motion that carried unanimously
'a~ '(,l / '\.:~.~
./ Janet M. Prainito
Deputy City Clerk
(Two Tapes)
15
.
- -~~.~_.-.._._.- ~~-~,-~-~ -