CORRESPONDENCE
~
(0 L~_ ()"-? f '1 " l-.Jj -<<; .d
'& ",ff u () Cj(
4....A A P c:> ~ . (.)Q I
~f, Michael
To:
Subject:
roy, peter
FW: BIPPOA buffer wall
Pete, this is the latest from them.
-----Original Message-----
From: Merle Den Besten [mailto:merledenbesten@VermeerSoutheast.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 14, 2004 11:13 AM
To: Rumpf, Michael
Cc: Blasie,Scott
Subject: RE: BIPPOA buffer wall
Mike: Looking at my calendar reminds me it is time to update you regarding status. We
have now received quotation on survey presumably required for Permit Application. We
continue to research various styles and configurations meeting both City and State code
requirements and viable for placement in confined area under FPL overhead power lines.
Apparently business is very good for those providing this service as we have had
considerable difficulty in getting prompt response to our inquiries. We have now narrowed
the process to three potential suppliers who are in process of updating quotations, which
we need to present to POA membership for approval and assessment of shared costs. We have
also spoken with a Mr. Ed Tedtman of the Laurel Hills Homeowners Assn. to pre-alert them
of our intentions and request their cooperation. He would like to see the buffer wall
extended southward toward Boynton Beach Boulevard for continuity sake, with City of
Boynton Beach participation but that is another issue. I did speak with Dan De Carlo and
Doug Hutchinson regarding their monetary andjof public relations participation but found
no optimism for such. This has been a more lengthy process that we had hoped, however with
POA directors and members being deeply involved in their own business and some separation
geographically, I guess that should be anticipated. In any event we will continue to keep
you informed as this project comes nearer to pre-application. Any input you may have will
be welcomed. Best Wishes to you and your staff.
Merle DenBesten
-----Original Message-----
From: Rumpf, Michael [mailto:RumpfM@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us]
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2004 5:43 PM
To: Merle Den Besten
Subject: RE: BIPPOA buffer wall
Merle, Not long ago I had discussions with the Development Dept Director,
and the city attorney who is researching the significance of setbacks shown
on plats. Quintus and I were speaking about the setback issue, and he
agrees that the plat prevails. Although we were talking about the
significance of setbacks on a plat but I brought up the wall issue and he
agreed with Engineering's position. Jim Cherof indicates that there is case
law that supports setbacks on plats (meaning they prevail over current
regulations). I don't think at this point he would contradict the position
that has been taken by staff.
I think you have a solid answer, or confirmation of the "quick" position
taken by Dave Kelley.
Mike
-----Original Message-----
From: Merle Den Besten [mailto:merledenbesten@VermeerSoutheast.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 21, 2004 4:34 PM
To: Rumpf, Michael
Cc: Lyons, Thelma; Greene, Quintus
1
~~ \
~_,. 'y'\_ 4 /11'--___ "~i y- t (,' -J '
o fiJ' t,!, ~- 4 ~., ? ;;J'''' ?' <t~'" ..........-t:' ~
f\:'<(-' 4/'J
,
Subject: FW: BIPPOA buffer wall
Good afternoon, Mike: Just a follow up to determine whether or not you
received any response from Mr. Kelley regarding the code variances and
buffer wall placement. Additionally, have you had any conversation with Ms.
Lyons or anyone else pertaining to this matter? We have heard nothing from
anyone at City of Boynton Beach updating the process and are quite anxious
to communicate with our POA, in fact our 2004 operating budget was supposed
to be presented to the members prior to the annual board meeting which
should be in February per by-laws. Additionally the longevity of this matter
continues to extend. Thanks for any assistance you may provide. Best
Wishes.
Merle DenBesten
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Merle Den Besten
> Sent: Tuesday, January 06, 2004 10:33 AM
> To: 'lyonst@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us'
> Cc: 'rumpfm@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us'
> Subject: BIPPOA buffer wall
>
> Ms. Lyons: Thank you for your telephone time this morning as we
discussed the deteriorating wall at western extremity of West Industrial
Avenue. After you have had opportunity to review this situation and
possibly do an on site inspection, please advise next step in the process.
Further historic information may be obtained from Mr. Michael Rumpf and Mr.
Scott Blasie. Any advice, suggestions or cooperative program the CRA may
offer in this matter will be sincerely appreciated. Thanks again for your
assistance.
>
> Merle DenBesten, BIPPOA Vice President
>
> Vermeer Southeast Sales & Service, Inc.
> P.O. Box 555367
> Orlando, FL 32855-5367 (407) 2295-2020
2
The City of Boynton Beach
~O~;
?-n.., ""
Po. Box 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT
FAX' (561) 742-6285
www,boynton-beach.org
OFFICE OF THE CITY ENGINEER
April 16, 2003
Mr. Kenneth H. Kruger, P.E.
6792 Red Reef Street, Suite 100
Lake Worth, Florida 33467
RE: Vermeer Southeast Warehouse
Revision Approval Request
End Section Modifications and Surfacing Section Modification
Dear Mr. Kruger,
In response to your correspondence of March 21, and March 26, 2003 this letter is to serve as
concurrence of your request to make revisions to the approved construction plans. We offer the
following:
1. The proposed headwalls on the 24 inch culverts under the north and south driveways may be
constructed as sand-cement riprap. Construction shall be in accordance with FOOT Standard
Index 258. A copy of this index shall be attached to the Building Permit Modification request.
2. The rear yard area may be constructed using the proposed surfacing section of 4 inches of
crushed/recycled asphalt (1 Y:z inch crusher run) over 6 inches of stabilized subgrade, as
recommended by the Geotechnical Engineer. The owner shall be solely responsible for warranty
and maintenance of the rear yard area. City of Boynton Beach accepts no liability for this design.
If you have any questions or need additional information regarding this request, please feel free to contact
me at 561-742-6482. You may proceed with a Minor Modification through the Planning and Zoning
Department, with this letter of concurrence.
Sincerely,
LUck
xc: Jeffrey R. Livergood, P.E., Director, Public Works (via e-mail)
Timothy Large, Building Code Administrator, Building Department
Michael W. Rumpf, Director, Department of Development/Planning & Zoning
Frantz LaFontant, Engineering Plans Analyst, Public Works/Engineering (via e-mail)
File
America s Gateway to the Gulfstream
Coale, Sherie
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Rumpf, Michael
Friday, March 14,20035:17 PM
Coale, Sherie
Hallahan, Kevin
RE: Vermeer Application
All approvals must be ratified by the City Commission. And not the next CRA agenda this month (their spillover meeting)
but the first meeting in April. MR.
-----Original Messagenm
From: Coale,Sherie
Sent: Friday, March 14, 20034:08 PM
To: Rumpf, Michael
Subject: RE: Vermeer Application
I guess my only question then would be... Are they going to City Commission? Kevin "suggested" to me that they are
only going to CRA? and on the next agenda. It will wait until Monday, so you don't have to repeat it to Kevin. Happy
Birthday. Sherie
-----Original Messagenm
From: Rumpf, Michael
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 3:54 PM
To: Coale, Sherie
Subject: RE: Vermeer Application
Because the last kevin and I knew that would not be part of it and avoided by changing species and avoiding any
conflict with our code all together. Kevin will have to fill us in on Monday. MR.
-----Original Message---n
From: Coale, Sherie
Sent: Friday, March 14,2003 1:36 PM
To: Rumpf, Michael
Subject: RE: Vermeer Application
I have a check for the appeal, 12 sets of revised plans and a letter for the appeal. Kevins' request has to do
with the caliper of the trees so I don't know why that wasn't included as part of the appeal. Sherie
-m-Original Message-----
From: Rumpf, Michael
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2003 1:04 PM
To: Hallahan, Kevin; Coale, Sherie
Cc: Galav, Lusia
Subject: Vermeer Application
Importance: High
Kevin, we received a request from a landscape architect for Vermeer regarding the planting specs for
trees and shrubs but I'm not sure what is being requested and if the information we discussed with Mr.
Kruger has been translated/communicated down to the LA This on your chair for review. Please confirm
that this is not what we'd expected. Sherie, stand by for clarification. I don't believe a check was included
which would have helped to narrow down the application type that was intended. MR.
1
Hallahan, Kevin
From: Rumpf, Michael
Sent: Thursday, March 13, 2003 5:26 PM
To: Hallahan, Kevin
Cc: Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
Subject: RE: Vermeer landscape appeal status A -, P <'{ I /<:" '
\ Kevin, Please be sure to include a brief explanation of the easement Lue along th ~ bOrd!'~n~IU~ng the pr~~: of the /
\stray line that needs another easement which would further push the buffer westw~~, and Engineering's position on trees~
in easements. Also, we'll need digital photos of the subject border, particularly from the different relevant perspectives.
Max could assist if you need support. Thanks, MR. v
-----Original Message-----
From: Hallahan, Kevin
Sent: Thursday, March 13,200311:56 AM
To: Rumpf, Michael
Cc: Coale, Sherie; Tucker, Patricia; Galav, Lusia
Subject: Vermeer landscape appeal status
Mike.
I called Ken Kruger this morning to check on the status of the landscape appeal letter, the 12 sets of plans, and the
$200 application fee for the April 8th CRA aqenda. Ken will be by tomorrow (Friday) to bring each of the items to
Sherie Coale for the file. Sherie has been setting up the file since Pat is in a class with you today and tomorrow. I
have completed 50% of the staff report. I will complete the report on Monday next week.
Ken Kruger is also preparing the required bond information for Don Johnson in reference to requesting a temporary
c.o.in the next two weeks.
If you need any additional information, call me on the cell telephone at 389-5357. Thanks. Kevin.
1
I TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT
TIME 03/12/2003 13:59
NAME
FAX
TEL
SER.# BROE2J409484
DATE, TIME
FAX NO./NAME
DURATION
PAGE(S)
RESULT
MODE
03/12 13:58
91866529975367529
00:00:53
02
OK
STANDARD
ECM
k~~e -
-l ft^.~-ed
-*l5
to
kef)
klC lJS~~(
f1rf<:e -
~ tit c '1:JC (,J.()
TC) d lAY
. I' ,
:J.f.C{..! d
~f()
I'.a( C
J +-.
" (J()<t('
Ii ( ,., {r: (I 1') /,
....
f
~tJl~
t:.. V; /] r ko--s;c.
Ie:... v ; e (.J -.S cr (...)C,.
cc. \. l1. C "" -4 r. "" -# ,
/). 7t1k'r
,~, ICe.- t1'Q..C ~;~.
P'7~ y
From: Ken Kruger To: Director Mike Rumpf
Date: 3/12/2003 Time: 12:26:20 AM
Page 1 0' 2
FACSI~ILE COVER PAGE I
1.11
To: Director Mike Rumpf
Fax #: 7426259
Company: Boynton Beach Planning c~
Subject Verrmeer SE Sales
Sent 3/12/2003 at 12:26:14 AM
From: Ken Kruger
Fax #: 1-866-529-9753
Tel #: 561-434-4061
---.-j
-----
----
I Pages: 2 (including cover)
MESSAGE:
Mike:
I will call you Wednesday to discuss thH attached with you. In my followup tel conversation with Mr.
DenBesten and Jon Schmidt, I was mclde aware that the primary problem and cost impact IJf the
tree specification was with the oak trees (not necessarily the multi trunk trees that I discussl3d with
you and Kevin). I believe that the points made in the second telephone conference are very releilant
and on point - especially the fact that we do not believe that weare seeking any relief from code.
We are seeking to specify and provide oak trees that meet BOTH of the followinQ :
1) The TRC requested 3" dia 12' high trees
and
2) The BB Code requireml3nt that by definition a tree is a minimum dia of 2" at 4.5' n.
If you can agree with us on the above, then we can keep the appeal letter simply to the req Jest 'for
the east buffer change.
I will call Wednesday to discuss with you
Sincerely,
Ken
~ 'r'- ~~'vJ
~
14- .~~
~ ~ IT /c ~
~
~
~~
~~ C'--lt~
~ "0
~
tt.; .~ Owl<
WinFax PRO Cover Page
t'f1~ 6L
8 ~ /2'{)
1'-1 ~
Ken(
~.~c~
~~~J
~2(
l<d(~~
From: Ken Kruger To: Director Mike Rumpf
Date: 3/12/2003 Time: 12:26:20 AM
Page ~ of 2
(Note View: Note 86 of 86)
Tel Confwith Mike Rumpf & Kevin H.
03/Jl1/2003
M&K suggested that we agree on references to "code"
1) LDR Chapter 7.5, Art. 2, Sect 5.E - Buffer requirements - relieffrom for the east pll
Kevin suggested that we do not include in the A.ppeal Letter the matter of the dbh and tree specs apJlrovuU. Thdr
suggestion was for Jon to suggest a different species that better fits the size/cost that we are confortable with, but
meets the original intent. They want us to write a separate letter to Mike R. or Kevin H (not an appl~al 01'
variance letter requesting change for the code requirements...... but just a vegetation species revisioll thalt Mike
and Kevin can approve administratively.
Mike did confirm that the appeal submittal must be in by the end of this week, in order to be assured to bt: nn thf
agendas in early April.
Mike also confirmed that the submittal would .consist of 1) The appeal letter from Jon 2) 12 sets cfrev~ied
plans corresponding to the letter 3) Check to the City of BB for $ 200 (could not talk him out of if).
Tel Confwith Jon Sclunidt and Merle DenBesten (subsequent to above conversation) 03/11/2003
After discussion, we reached consensus that:
1) The BB code definition of tree is 2" dia mfasured at 4.5' height.
2) The staffTRC comments only stated 3" diil, 12' tree. Did not state caliper or 4.5' dbh method of
measurement. A 3' dia tree, measured at 4.5' height would in fact exceed the BB Code definition of 3. tree.. ;md
would in fact considerable exceed the height rt~quirement requested by TRC.
3) That a 3" dia tree, measured at the base, 'Yvould be a minimum of2" dia at 4.5' dbh. It would also be 12' to 14'
in height. Thus, this size tree would meet "code" requirement.
4) Jon would change his plan to the tree desclibed in 3 above, and would submit a letter to Mike explaining thf
reason for the plan change request.
5) Ken would talk to Mike R to confirm that he would agree, conceptmilly, with the above plan chaJI ge ami that:
we would only include the east buffer change in the Appeal Letter.
Ken will advise Merle and Jon after speaking with Mike R on Wednesday 3/12/03
Rumpf, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Rumpf, Michael
Thursday, March 06, 2003 8:52 AM
'Merle Den Besten'
RE: Landscape Appeal Letter
Mr. DenBesten,
I apologize for the once again lack of complete information conveyed to you. As I
indicated to you, the only benefits of the Landscape Appeal over the variance process
are that you do not have to prove "hardship" as required for the variance approval, and
no public notifications are required. However, this is still a formal request for
relief from the code intended to be granted if the intent of the code is met and found
favorable by the Board and Commission. Again I apologize for the misunderstanding. Have
your local agent contact us for details on the request and review schedule. Also, do not
hesitate to have them contact Kevin regarding the bonding issue.
Mike Rumpf
Planning & Zoning Director
561-742-6260
-----Original Message-----
From: Merle Den Besten [mailto:merledenbesten@VermeerSoutheast.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 05, 2003 4:45 PM
To: Rumpf, Michael
Cc: Ken Kruger (E-mail)
Subject: Landscape Appeal Letter
Hey, Mike; Sorry to hear of your accident, hope you are feeling better. I wish not to be
a bother at this time but did wish to get a message back to you. Thanks for asking Kevin
Hallihan to contact me to update me on the appeal. Kevin indicated that deadline for
March 11th CRA meeting notification had expired and we should prepare for April 8th
board meeting. I had interpreted your previous comments to indicate that an appeal
letter could be handled administratively and no presentation to CRA board would be
necessary. Our landscape architect, Mr. Jon Schmidt is preparing a letter of appeal and
a revised site plan which may be ready Thursday, March 6th for your consideration. As
your personal health and work schedule allows I would appreciate your advice on to whom
this needs presented and confirming my understanding of the process. Again, we wish for
you a speedy recovery.
Merle DenBesten
1
FACSIMILE
CITY OF BOYNTON
BEACH
City Hall, West Wing
100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd.
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425
(561) 742-6260
(561) 742-6259 Fax
From the office of
Planning & Zoning
FAX: (407)293-8087
TO: Merle Den Bester
DA TE:
Michael Rumpf, Director of Planning & Zoning
NUMBER OF PAGES: (including
February 27, 2003 cover)
2
FROM:
RE: Example of Request for Landscape Appeal
If you receive this fax in error, or experience trouble with transmission, please notify our office
immediately, at (561) 742-6260. Thank you.
TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT
TIME 02/27/2003 10:20
NAME
FAX
TEL
SER.# BROE2J409484
DATE, TIME
FAX NO./NAME
DURATION
PAGE(S)
RESULT
MODE
02/27 10:19
91407293808781848
00:00:53
02
OK
STANDARD
ECM
I. ..
ICI.... .. ..n""".....
.J..ndlOlPl ArcnlllCIII Plann....
ltitil forum Piece
8",1'" '00'"
Wttt ,.Im eHoh, Florl~. 23401
14071__1&22 . Fe.: 1.4071 _2tIe.t
-
UNI~D PMCEL 6E~~S~~~~~~ION DATA CENTERi;~r~~/f~~~[~irnl
AT REL INDUSTRIAL PARK r . L or"~; "~ '
} I I ,_.,.,"'.."..,........._
\
Pursuant to Chapter 7.5 Environmental Regulation Artlole " Landsoope Code SGCtlon 5.8
which atates "Perimeter 14nd$o~inQ relating to abutting propertIes on me site of a
b~i1dln9 or atruotur8 or open lot use providing an off-street parking area, suoh areas
should be Provided with a landscape barrier, preferable a hedge, to form a continuous
screen between the off-street parking and abutting property. Such landscape barrier
shall be located between the common lot fine and parking area..
The nature of this lemdscape appeal Is to eliminate the r8qulred hedge on the eastern
sldo of the proposed and existing parking areas which are to the east of the existing
structure, Due to the uses that exist to the east. that being a Lake Worth Drainage
District Rlght-ot-Way, FP & l. easement and Interstate 95, and the fact that an existing
hedgerow of v.g~ation already exists along the eastern perimeter of the property. The
8ite can only be vieWed from Interstate 95 And the existing vegetation DU1Ters that view.
e along the north property line adjacent to the
./;" . '. '. "".'
In exchange for the landscape appeal, additional landscape along Congress Avenue will
be provIded where it wI/I 8erve a greater benefit to the public and ~ddltlonaJ Interior
greenspace is provided where it will serve as a greater benefit to the employees.
Speolal conditions that exist for the subject site to support this landsoape appeal is that
the only properties abutting this site to the east are used for tranilportation and utility
purposes. The proposed parkIng area Is a minimum of 600' from Interstate 95 and will
not be visible. I.' ,~.I ........: ]1114;
11I1IMf:::::", :;.. .'. . . . .ii,... x IIterBlt.~~~rcem8n o' "t s requ remerit' wou ,toe
t1n unfair hard. p On the application In that providing the hedge will not further the
codes Intent to buffer adjacent properties. Granting this landscape appeal will further the
United Parcel Service
Landscap. Appeal
OctoberS, 1996
Page 2 of 2
public interest In that additional buffering can be provided along Congress Avenue to
SQreen parking areas visible to the general public.
FACSIMILE
CITY OF BOYNTON
BEACH
City Hall, West Wing
100 E. Boynton Beach Blvd.
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425
(561) 742-6260
(561) 742-6259 Fax
From the office of
Planning & Zoning
TO: Ken Kruger
FAX: (866) 529-9753
DATE:
Michael Rumpf, Director of Planning & Zoning
NUMBER OF PAGES: (including
cover)
2
FROM:
February 27, 2003
RE: Example of Request for Landscape Appeal
If you receive this fax in error, or experience trouble with transmission, please notify our office
immediately, at (561) 742-6260. Thank you.
TRANSMISSION VERIFICATION REPORT
TIME 02/27/2003 10:23
NAME
FAX
TEL
SER.# BROE2J409484
DATE,TIME
FAX NO./NAME
DURATION
PAGE(S)
RESULT
MODE
02/27 10:21
91866529975381848
00:01:03
02
OK
STANDARD
ECM
._~ "'~.,~, ~~- -~~-
-
IX
LANDSCAPE APPEAL .;D1r~]JD JBi~
UNITeD PARCEL SERVIOE COMMUNI~TION DATA CENTER: ~Ji OCT 6\ J ~.L..,:
AT REL INDUSTRIAL PARK I" . L "r' ..p
t
Pursuant to Chapter 7.5 Environmental Regulation Artlole II Landscope Code Section 5.8
whloh atatea "Perimeter landsoC'q)inQ relating to abutting properties on me site of a
bLlildlng or structure or open lot use providing an off-street parking area, such areas
should be provided with a landscape barrier, preferable a hedge, to form a continuous
screen between the off-street parking and abutting property. Such landscape barrier
shall be located between the common lot line and parking area..
The nature of this landscape appeal Is to eliminate the required hedge on the eastern
sldo of the proposed and existing parking areas which are to the east of the existing
structure. Due to the uses that exIst to the east. that being a Lake Worth Drainage
District RIght-of-Way, FP & L easement and Interstate 951 and the fact that an existing
hedgerow of v.gMation already $xists slong the eastern perimeter of the property. The
site oan only be viewed from Interstate 95 ftnd the existing vegetation CU1Ters that view.
In exchange for the landscape appeal, addltlonallandseape .'ons Congress Avenue will
be provIded where it will serve a greater benefit to the public and <<ddltlonal Interior
greenspace is provided where it will serve as a greater benefit to the employees.
Landscape Appeal
October 6. 1995
Pagtt 2 of 2
public interest In that additional buffering can be provided along Congress Avenue to
SQreen parking areas visible to the general public.
~f, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Rumpf, Michael
Tuesday, February 25,20032:18 PM
'merledenbesten@VermeerSoutheast.com'
Hallahan, Kevin
Vermeer project - variance request
Mr. Den Besten,
I realized after we spoke that the minimum needed would be a variance application which includes the advertisement
requirement. You should proceed with collecting the property owner and address information as indicated in the
application. This usually takes about a week but no sense waiting since the variance will be necessary and the property
owners listing is a certainty and not tied to any of the open issues were are dealing with. The Department Director is also
in agreement that you may request that all landscaping be bonded to allow the continued completion of the remainder of
the project and starting its operation while the landscaping issues be resolved. I will relay the answers to your other
questions as they are obtained.
Michael Rumpf
Planning & Zoning Director
561-742-6260
1
~f, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Rumpf, Michael
Monday, January 27, 2003 9:43 AM
'merledenbesten@VermeerSoutheast.com'
Galav, Lusia; Byrne, Nancy
FW: Confirming Letter re: landscape code
Mr. Den Bensten,
I am writing to offer my assistance with the application that Mr. Bressner has described
to you as the option for revising the approved plans as you currently desire. Staff
cannot initiate or propose changes to a private site plan. The formal request must come
from the applicant, and in this case, is a landscape code appeal, and a modification to
the approved site plan (the plans revised to show the proposed changes), including of
course your justification for the change. As confirmed below in a note from Ms Byrne to
others, to accommodate your continued progress and relocation, that portion of the
project could be bonded allowing you to move forward with a temporary certificate of
occupancy while the application is being processed. Given that the February meeting of
the CRA Board is only 12 working days away, there would not be sufficient time to make
this agenda. However, the temporary C.of o. can be used to allow you to continue moving
toward completion and relocation while the application is being processed according to
the schedule that corresponds with your ultimate submittal. Please contact me or Lusia
Galav at 742-6260 for further assistance with this process.
Michael Rumpf
Planning & Zoning Director
742-6260
-----Original Message-----
From: Byrne, Nancy
Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 3:40 PM
To: Rumpf, Michael; Greene, Quintus; Johnson, Don
Subject: FW: Confirming Letter re: landscape code
I also informed Kurt that the Landscape would need to be bonded for issuance of a TCO.
Nancy
-----Original Message-----
From: Bressner, Kurt
Sent: Thursday, January 16, 2003 3:39 PM
To: 'Merle Den Besten'
Cc: Ken Kruger (E-mail); Byrne, Nancy
Subject: RE: Confirming Letter re: landscape code
Merle,
The letter covers the issues we need to address. I found out this afternoon from Nancy
Byrne in development that relief from the City's landscape code must be reviewed by the
Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) then the City Commission. Procedurally, we will
work on getting the report from staff to the CRA/Commission for their February meeting
cycle. The CRA meets on February 11th and the City Commission on the 18th of February.
In deference to your need to vacate the Pompano facility, the staff is prepared to work
with you on a temporary occupancy permit as needed. I need to verify with Development
if a legal notice has to be published for the CRA meeting or not. Therefore, the City
Commission won't see this item until next month.
Kurt Bressner
-----Original Message-----
From: Merle Den Besten [mailto:merledenbesten@VermeerSoutheast.com]
1
.
Sent: Wednesday, January 15, 2003 2:27 PM
To: Bressner, Kurt
Cc: Ken Kruger (E-mail)
Subject: Confirming Letter re: landscape code
<<City of Boynton Beach.doc>>
Mr. Bressner: I am attaching copy of sample letter drawn up in response to our meeting
yesterday. Please look this over and advise by phone (800) 432-0810, after your perusal
of this correspondence. I hope it is in keeping our discussion and reasonably represents
our position with clarity. If you do have any suggestions of further explanation or
modification for enhancement in your presentation to others, I am certainly open for
constructive comment. I am checking with our insurance carrier as to possibility of
supplying a performance or security bond if needed for obtaining a temporary Certificate
of Occupancy, but preferred to leave this subject undressed in the sample letter
pending more information from Federated Insurance and your response regarding any such
necessity. I have also held off sending copy to Mr. Greene prior to receipt of your
comments and from Mr. Kruger. Again, my sincere thanks for your cooperation and any
further advice you may offer.
2
Duncan, Arlette
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Rumpf, Michael
Thursday, January 16, 2003 8:57 AM
Duncan, Arlette
Tucker, Patricia
Vermeer
Arlette, please pull from files the Vermeer site plan and the file. Please check to see if the executed development order
and conditions, are present. Thanks, MR.
/
?
o:tC~ VJ~ Z,
~ ! P'
+0
1
J' \ \
>#
January 15, 2003
Mr. Kurt Bressner, City Manager
City of Boynton Beach
Post Office Box 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310
Dear Mr. Bressner:
Subject: 1060 West Industrial Ave.
Thank you for meeting with us yesterday to discuss concerns which have surfaced
regarding perimeter landscaping code requirements impact on reference property.
We sincerely appreciate your bringing your staff members and Commissioner,
Ron Weiland together at job site on such short notice.
Per inspection and resulting dialogue, we have collectively determined practical
incompatibility of planting buffer trees and landscaping within 10' PUBLIC
UTILITY EASEMENT (O.R.B. 1739, Page 656) due to placement of 16" sewer
force main approximately 5-6' west o[1ot line and a 6" water line approximately
!2" west of sewer main, therefore some 6-8' westerly outside granted easement.
After allowing for the minimum 6" for fence inside property line, excavation for
planting and future growth of root ball would encroach within inches of 16" DI
force main and the canopy would extend well over the main, which according to
Mr. Milor's statement is unacceptable. Moving the fence and tree line to distance
desirable beyond 6" DI water line would result in loss of 20+' of property. In
view of the natural tree barrier on easterly adjoining property, the incline toward
existing and planned rail elevations and the bireme between rail tracks and 1-95,
no real purpose is achieved by perimeter tree planting and it is detrimental to City
of Boynton Beach Utilities.
We respectfully request that City of Boynton Beach waive requirement of a tree
and shrubbery barrier, as required in code, as mutually beneficial to all parties. In
exchange DenBesten & Bokhoven, Ltd, will grant additional easement covering
the 6" waterline inappropriately on their property. We propose to place fence at
minimum 6" inside property line, slope elevation westerly and place nominal
bir~me at top apex in order to control storm water flow toward front detention
area, and sod present and proposed easement with Bahai. Additionally, although
we note no code requirement for improvement of right of way for West Industrial
Avenue, we propose to shape and provide sod and irrigation for area between east
side of street and sidewalk.
"
I believe this addresses matters discussed and trust you will feel free to contact me
for any additional information you may require. We do sincerely thank you and
additional City of Boynton Beach personnel for their assistance in this and other
matters. We look forward to a long and mutually beneficial relationship as our
business settles into your community.
Sincerely,
DenBesten & Bokhoven, Ltd.
Vermeer Southeast Sales & Service, Inc.
Merle DenBesten, Partner
President
cc: Mr. Quintus L. Greene, AlA, and AICP
Mr. Kenneth H. Kruger, PE
Hallahan, Kevin
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Bressner, Kurt
Tuesday, January 14, 2003 1 :55 PM
Greene, Quintus
Hallahan, Kevin; Sugerman, Dale; Milor, Skip
Vermeer Site Plan Revision
Quintus,
As a follow-up to our site meeting this afternoon at 1060 W. Industrial Drive, this e-mail serves as a request that the CRA
consider a site plan amendment to delete the eastern landscaping for the subject property. This request is being
forwarded in the event you determine that the CRA must review the site plan revision before the Commission. I plan on
presenting the issue to the Commission at the pre-agenda meeting on Thursday, if possible.
i The reason for the amendment is as follows:
J 1. The City has two utility lines along the east property line of the Vermeer property. One line is a sanitary sewer force
main which is located near the east property line and which is located within a utility easement. The second utility is a 6"
water main that serves the subject property and others north and south of the Veneer parcel. The water main is located
about 19 feet west of the sewer force main and is outside an easement on private property owned by Vermeer. It is
advisable to have the water line in a properly dedicated easement.
,J 2. The east side of the Vermeer property abuts railroad right of way and then 1-95. There are therefore no less intense
land uses to the east of the subject property. In addition, there is a stand of trees on the railroad property.
J 3. Kevin Hallahan has reviewed the site plan and has concluded that the balance of the landscaping (north, south and
west) sides of the parcel will meet or exceed the code requirements. The "presentation" of the property from Industrial
Drive (west side of parcel) with the approved landscaping will be attractive and meet code.
4. This parcel and the parcels on either side of the Vermeer parcel are "recycled" parcels with fill that has been processed
and relocated to allow the property to be developed with limitations. The Vermeer building will add tax base to the CRA.
The owner of the property is requesting that they be allowed to amend the site plan to delete the landscaping along the
east side of the property for the above reasons and has indicated that Vermeer will agree to grant the City an easement for
the water main that currently is located on their property.
I support this proposal and request that the CRA consider this change as appropriate at the meeting tonight, if possible.
Kurt Bressner
('
~.
\ :)1 '7
'7 I /"
:/ ~ /
/:,
l') /
\ ,,'
1