REVIEW COMMENTS
7.E.2
SERRANO BEACH (NWSP 03-010)
NEW SITE PLAN
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 03-171
STAFF REPORT
TO:
Chairman and Members
Planning and Development Board and City Commission
FROM:
Michael Rumpf
Planning and Zoning Director
Eric Lee Johnson, AICP crt"
Planner
July 15, 2003 '
THRU:
DATE:
PROJECT NAME/NO:
Serrano Beach / NWSP 03-010
REQUEST:
New Site Plan
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Property Owner:
Ms. Beth Pesch I
Applicant:
Ms. Beth Pesch I
Agent:
Mr. Chip Bryan - Julian Bryan & Assocaties
Location:
1,300 feet west of Congress Avenue on the north side of the
Lake Worth Drainage District Lateral Canal 28 (L-28)(see
Exhibit "A" - Location Map)
I>
... ,~Existing Land Use/Zoning:
MR-5 (Palm Beach County) (3-5 dwelling units per acre
[du/ac]) / AR-USA, Agricultural-Residential in the Urban
Services Area (Palm Beach County)
Proposed Land Use/Zoning:
Low Density Residential (LDR) (4.84 du/ac) / Planned Unit
Development (PUD)
Proposed Use:
Request site plan approval for 47 single-family dwelling
units
Acreage:
9.728 acres (423,754 square feet)
Adjacent Uses:
North: To the northeast, three single family homes in Silverlake Estates designated Low
Density Residential (LDR) at 4.84 du/ac and zoned Planned Unit Development
(PUD). The actual built density of the PUD is 2.04 du/ac. To the northwest,
unincorporated property developed with one, two (2)-story single-family residence
Staff Report - Serrano Beach (NWSP 03-010)
Memorandum No PZ 03-171
Page 2
designated MR-5 (Medium Density Residential at 5 du/ac) and zoned AR-USA,
Agricultural Residential in the Urban Services Area;
South:
Immediately south are the rights-of-way of the Lake Worth Drainage District L-28
Lateral Canal and Palmland Drive, then developed residential (Chanteclair Villas
Condominiums) designated High Density Residential (HDR) at 10.8 du/ac) and
zoned Multi-family Residential (R-3) (10.8 du/ac). The actual built density of
Chanteclair Villas is 7.42 du/ac. To the west of Chanteclair Villas is the Palmland
Villas development with a built density of 8.57 du/ac;
East:
Developed Elementary (Crosspointe) School designated Public & Private
Governmental/Institutional (PPGI) and zoned Public Use (PU); and
West:
Property within the Village of Golf designated single family residential and built at a
density of 0.3 du/ac. The property immediately adjacent to the subject site
consists of one Single-family home on a 1.6-acre parcel and a portion of a vacant
parcel of 4.5 acres.
Site Characteristic: According to the survey, the subject site is currently vacant but contains a 12-foot
wide dirt road, which traverses along its western edge. Also, a 15-foot wide Lake
Worth Drainage District (LWDD) easement runs along its southern boundary. The
highest elevation is a point 18.19 feet above sea level, located at the southwest
corner of the property. Likewise, a "temporary wood power pole" is located at the
southwest corner of the property.
BACKGROUND
Proposal:
Mr. Chip Bryan, agent for Ms. Beth Pesch I, proposes to develop the subject
property with 47 (Zero Lot Line) single-family dwelling units. Approval of this
project is contingent upon the approval of the corresponding request to annex the
subject property into the City Of Boynton Beach (see Exhibit "c" - Conditions of
Approval). The applicant would also be requesting to designate the subject
property with the Planned Unit Development (PUD) zoning district. Single-family
homes are permitted uses in the PUD zoning district. The maximum density allowed
by the Low Density Residential (LDR) land use classification is 4.84 dulac, which
would provide the developer a maximum of 47 units. The project would be built in
one (1) phase.
ANALYSIS
Concurrency:
Traffic: A traffic statement was sent to the Palm Beach County Traffic Division for
concurrency review in order to ensure an adequate level of service. As of the date
of this report, no response has been received from the County. The Palm Beach
County Traffic Division must approve the traffic impact statement prior to the
issuance of a building permit (see Exhibit "c" - Conditions of Approval).
Drainage: Conceptual drainage information was provided for the City's review. The
Staff Report - Serrano Beach (NWSP 03-010)
Memorandum No PZ 03-171
Page 3
Engineering Division has found the conceptual information to be adequate and is
recommending that the review of specific drainage solutions be deferred until time
of permit review. All South Florida Water Management District permits and other
drainage related permits must be submitted at time of building permit (see Exhibit
"c" - Conditions of Approval).
School: The School District of Palm Beach County has reviewed the application and has
determined that adequate capacity exists to accommodate the projected resident
population.
Driveways: The plans show that one (1) point of ingress / egress is proposed at the southwest
corner of the property, connecting with Palmland Drive. This entrance / exit would
be at least 20 feet in width. According to the Typical Road Section shown on the
Preliminary Engineering Details (sheet 2 of 2), the private rights-of-way, internal to
the development would be 40 feet in width. Each side (or half) of this right-of-way
would consist of 10 feet of asphalt, two (2) feet of valley gutter (for drainage
purposes), a swale (grassy area), and a four (4)-foot wide pedestrian sidewalk.
Parking Facility: Two, three, four, and five bedroom dwelling units require two (2) parking spaces
per unit. The project proposes 47 residential units and therefore, would require 94
parking spaces. Each unit would have a two (2)-car garage. According to the floor
plan (sheet A-1), the garages would be dimensioned a minimum 19 feet in width
by 19 feet in depth, large enough to accommodate two (2) vehicles. This provision
equals the required parking. Also, the "Typical Lot Detail" (sheet 1 of 1) indicates
that the driveways in front of each unit would also accommodate two (2) parked
cars. The detail shows the driveways would be dimensioned 18 feet in width by 25
feet in depth.
Landscaping: According to the site plan tabular data (sheet 1 of 1), the proposed pervious area
would total 4.29 acres or 44% of the site. Nearly an acre of the subject property
would be set aside for the lake (retention) area, proposed within the center of the
project. The landscape data indicates that 76% of the shade and palm trees would
be native. The landscape data indicates that 78% of the "medium" shrubs would
also be native (see Exhibit "c" - Conditions of Approval). The plan shows that a
landscape buffer 10-feet in width would surround the entire property. The "Typical
Buffer Detail" (as shown on sheet 2 of 5) indicates that a "canopy" tree would be
placed every 30 linear feet within the limits of this 10-foot wide landscape buffer.
The category of "shade" trees would consist of Gumbo Limbo, Seagrape, Dahoon
Holly, Mahogany, Bald Cypress, and Live Oak. Although undetermined at this time
because the landscape plan's identification of proposed trees is vague, it would be
very likely that the perimeter shade trees would be Dahoon Holly, Mahogany, or
Live Oak trees. However, property owners would have both a Live Oak and Green
Buttonwood tree installed within their yards. Since seven (7) different types of
housing styles are proposed, the assortment of landscape material would vary from
lot to lot. Each lot's proposed landscape material is shown in tabular format under
"Typical Landscape Quantities" on sheet 3 of 5. Regardless of where or which
trees are proposed, they are required to be installed at least 12 feet in height, with
three (3) caliper inches (see Exhibit "c" - Conditions of Approval).
Staff Report - Serrano Beach (NWSP 03-010)
Memorandum No PZ 03-171
Page 4
Building and Site: As previously mentioned, the maximum density allowed by the Low Density
Residential land use classification is 4.84 dulac, which would provide the developer
a maximum of 47 units. The PUD regulations require that perimeter buffers and
setbacks within PUDs must mirror those in abutting development to ensure
adequate separation between buildings. The building setbacks in the Sivlerlake
Estates development to the north were approved for the following: Front - 25 feet;
rear - 25 feet; street side - 25 feet; internal side - six (6) feet.
The "Typical Lot Detail" shown on the site plan (sheet 1 of 1) indicates that the
perimeter lots (1 through 39, 45, and 46) would require houses to be setback 20
feet from the rear property line. This detail illustrates the placement of the house
within each lot. The applicant has informed staff that the "building envelope" as
illustrated on the detail would not represent the walls of each home. Rather, the
"building envelope" only depicts each lot's minimum setback requirements.
Therefore, the proposed houses, which would be smaller than the "building
envelope", would be placed further away from the property lines, such as long as
its placement would meet all other minimum setbacks.
In terms of perimeter buffering, the detail shows that this 20-foot rear setback
would partially consist of the 10-foot wide landscape easement (where the buffer
trees are proposed). In order to maximize setback compatibility of the subject
property with Silverlake Estates (to the north), the proposed Lots 17 through 20
would require homes to be setback at least 25 feet from their rear property line
(within the limits of their "building envelope". The proposed development would be
more than adequately buffered from the elementary school building to the east and
the Chanteclair development to the south. According to the Detail, the houses
would be setback 25 feet from the front property line and 10 feet from the side
property line (excluding the zero-lot line).
The applicant is requesting the provision for swimming pools and screened-roof
enclosures in the rear yard. No solid-roof enclosures are proposed. Staff has no
objection to this allowance provided that the landscape buffer would remain intact.
Staff would object to solid-roof screened enclosures that encroach into the
minimum rear setback. Staff recommends that the height ofthe screen enclosures
be limited to the mean height of the house on which the structure is proposed (see
Exhibit "C" - Conditions of Approval). The elevations show that the mean height of
the two (2) story homes would be 25 feet - seven (7) inches tall and the peak of
the roof would be 29 feet - six (6) inches tall. The maximum height in all
residential zoning districts except R-3 Multi-family Residential is 30 feet.
Design:
The City has reviewed and approved many different residential projects over the
past two years (i.e. The Harbors, Villas at Quantum Lakes, Arbolata, Jefferson at
Boynton Beach, Kensington Place). Most of them however, have been townhouse
developments. Associated with the proposed type of single-family residential
development are a wide variety of possible building designs (i.e. contemporary,
traditional, Spanish-Mediterranean, etc.). This project would be considered as
more of a mixture of "contemporary and Mediterranean" architectural style, similar
Staff Report - Serrano Beach (NWSP 03-010)
Memorandum No PZ 03-171
Page 5
to many zero-lot line communities throughout South Florida. The homes would be
either one (1) or two (2) stories tall. The proposed roofing material would be
Spanish S-tile roof. The elevations show that the exterior finish of the walls would
be textured stucco. The applicant is proposing a variety of colors schemes. The
colors are as follows:
. Scheme 1: Mansard Stone #8635, Woodlet #8685, and Tequilla #8672;
. Scheme 2: Manganese #8826, Weaverbird #7760, and Saltbrush #8183;
. Scheme 3: Winestain #8386, Spicenut #8755, and Restorative #025;
. Scheme 4: Gristmill #8665 and Artist's Canvas #8681;
. Scheme 5: Wayfarer Gray #8535, Moose Point #8715, and Desert Tumbleweed
#8723 ;
. Scheme 6: Dark Calossus #8526, Beaver Creek #8765, and Desert Fawn
#8222; and
. Scheme 7: Black Metal #8796, Floral White #033, and Stucco Greige #8693
The project proposes a variety of house style types, ranging from three (3) to five
(5) bedrooms with air-conditioned living areas ranging from 2,110 square feetto
2,931 square feet. Staff has no objections to the proposed building colors,
architectural style, or roof types.
Signage:
No project signage is proposed at this time. The applicant understands that all
signage is subject to review and approval of the Planning & Development Board
and City Commission (see Exhibit "C" - Conditions of Approval).
RECOMMENDATION:
The Technical Review Committee (TRC) has reviewed this request for new site plan approval. Staff
recommends approval of the site plan, contingent upon the successful annexation and rezoning (AN EX 03-
001) and also subject to satisfying all comments indicated in Exhibit "C" - Conditions of Approval. Any
additional conditions recommended by the Board or City Commission shall be documented accordingly in
the Conditions of Approval.
S:\Planning\Shared\Wp\Projects\Serrano Beach\NWSP 03-010\Staff Report.doc
Location Ma
Serrano at 80 p
ynton Beach
~
/
---<
,-- ',J
r--
/---r-
~
\, ,/.~\
-', ,., \
~, '., /\(\
:~ \~ ,<y
t.) 'I~ \
,~~ , ~'lC\
,/J -; .,-
PU
\
\
\ i-::::J
'~I~
1\ :
[',
PU
/
-
800
,
o
800 Feet
N
.-<r.
s
Facsimile
TRANSMITTAL
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
100 E. BOYNTON BEACH BOULEVARD
P.O. BOX 310
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 33425-0310
PHONE: (561) 742-6260
FAX: (561) 742-6259
PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION
to: Chip Bryan
fax #: 561-391-3805
date: June 23, 2003
from: Eric Johnson, AICP
re: 1 :-iT REVIEW COMMENTS FOR Serrano Beach
Attached, you will find the 1 st review comments for the above referenced project.
The Technical Review Committee (TRC) meeting is tentatively scheduled for
Tuesday, July 1, 2003. In order to maintain the current project review schedule,
provide the following documents at the TRC meeting:
1. Revise your plans so that they affirmatively address each of the 1 st review comments.
Bring 10 sets of your revised plans to the scheduled TRC meeting. Each of these sets of
plans should be fully completed, stapled, and folded. Do not bring in incomplete,
unstapled plans to the TRC meeting. Please note that these new sets of plans should
contain the same plan type (i.e. survey, site plan, landscape plan, floor plan, drainage
plan, etc.) of that from the original submittal.
2. Address each comment with a written response. Each written response should briefly
summarize how the comment has been addressed on the revised plans. At the TRC
meeting, please provide 10 copies of your written responses. You may also include
supplemental information. The written responses promote efficient review of your plans
during the TRC meeting.
3. Submit any additional information as requested within the attached comments; ( i.e.
traffic impact analysis / statement, drainage certification, concurrency documents, etc.).
4. Submit 2 sets of reduced sized copies of your plans (survey, site plan, elevations,
landscape plans, etc.). One set should be sized 8 %" x 11" and the other sized 11" x 17".
These reduced sized plans will be used for the final report and public presentation.
If you have questions regarding the attached comments, please contact the
TRC representative or designee (listed below) that generated the comment.
DEPARTMENT REPRESENT A TIVE REPRESENTATIVES' PHONE FAX
DESIGNEE
Engineering Dave Kelley Laurinda Logan 742-6482 742-6485
Building Don Johnson Timothy Large 742-6352 742-6352
Fire Department Steve Gale Bob Borden 742-6602 364-7382
Rodger Kemmer 742-6753 742-6357
Police Department Marshall Gage John Huntington 737-6167 737-3136
Utilities Pete Mazzella H. David Kelley Jr. 742-6401 742-6485
Public Works-General Larry Quinn Laurinda Logan 742-6482 742-6485
Public W orks- Traffic Jeffrey Livergood Laurinda Logan 742-6482 742-6485
Parks & Recreation John Wildner N/A 742-6227 742-6233
Forester/Environmentalist Kevin Hallahan Kevin Hallahan 742-6267 742-6259
Planning & Zoning Michael Rumpf, Eric Johnson 742-6262 742-6259
CHAIRMAN
If the plans are reasonably complete and all comments are adequately addressed following the
TRC meeting (2nd review), the project is then forwarded to either the Planning and Development
Board Meeting or Community Redevelopment Agency Board (whichever is applicable) that falls
approximately 2 to 3 weeks following the TRC meeting.
Note: Items recognized by staff as typically outstanding at this point include a traffic
report and/or confirmation of the traffic concurrency approval from the Palm Beach
County, drainage certification by a licensed engineer, signed "Rider to Site Plan
Application" form, and colored elevations ofthe proposed project. This information is
necessary for the project to proceed to the public meetings. If you have submitted this
information, please disregard this note.
The applicant should not attend a TRC meeting (2nd review) until all documents have been
revised and copied for staff review. TRC meetings can be held every Tuesday. If you anticipate
that your plans will not be fully revised or do not adequately address the comments by the time
we meet for TRC, simply contact Sherie Coale at (561) 742-6260 by the Thursday prior to that
TRC meeting and reschedule to a later time when your plans will be adequately revised. It is
better to postpone a TRC meeting to a later time than to attend a TRC meeting only to pay for
additional staff review for another TRC review. Please note however, that the remainder of the
project review schedule (for the Public Hearing and City Commission) may be changed as a
result of postponing this TRC meeting.
Revised OS/29/03
S:IPlanningISHAREDlWPIPROJECTSISerrano BeachlNWSP 03-01011st Review comments FAX COVERdoc
.------
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
Fire and Life Safety Division
100 East Boynton Beach Blvd.
P.O. Box 310
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS
For review of:
NWSP 03-010 1 st review
Project Name and Address:
Serrano at Boynton Beach (47 sinqle family
residences)
% mile W. of Conqress, South of Golf Road
Reviewed by:
.(1-\
Rodqer Kemmer, Fire Protection Enqineer
Department:
Fire and Life Safety
Phone:
(561) 742-6753
Comments to:
Sherie Coale by email on 6/06/03
CODE REQUIREMENTS
Design documents shall demonstrate compliance with LOR Chapter 6,
Section 16, which provides requirements for hydrants. Connections shall
be to mains no less than 6 inches in diameter.
cc: Steve Gale
Bob Borden
,....--.
SUBJECT:
Project - Serrano
File No. - NWSP 03-010 - 1 st review
10i )f Acronvms/Abbreviations:
A~ c - American Society of Civil
Engineers
CBB - City of Boynton Beach
CBBCO - City of Boynton Beach
Code of Ordinances
CBBCPP - City of Boynton Beach
Comprehensive Plan Policy
CFR - Code of Federal Regula-
tions
FBC - Florida Building Code
FIRM - Flood Insurance Rate Map
F.S. - Florida Statutes
LDR - Land Development Regula-
tions
NGVD - National Geodetic Verti-
cal Datum of 1929
SFWMD - South Florida Water
Management District
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
BUILDING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM NO. 03-115
TO:
FROM:
Michael W. Rumpf
Director of Planning and ZOni@g
Timothy K. Large
TRC Member/Building Divisio
DATE:
June 9,2003
We have reviewed the subject plans and recommend that the request be forwarded for Board
review with the understanding that all remaining comments will be shown in compliance on the
working drawings submitted for permits.
Buildina Division (Site Specific and Permit Comments) - Timothv K. Larae (561) 742-6352
1 Indicate within the site data the type of construction of each building as defined in Chapter
6 of the 2001 FBC.
2 Indicate within the site data the occupancy type of each building as defined in Chapter 3
of the 2001 FBC.
3 The height and area for buildings or structures of the different types of construction shall
be governed by the intended use or occupancy of the building, and shall not exceed the
limits set forth in Table 500 of the 2001 FBC.
4 Buildings, structures and parts thereof shall be designed to withstand the minimum wind
loads of 140 mph. Wind forces on every building or structure shall be determined by the
provisions of Chapter 6 of ASCE 7, and the provisions of Section 1606 (Wind Loads) of
the 2001 FBC. Calculations that are signed and sealed by a design professional
registered in the state of Florida shall be submitted for review at the time of permit
application.
5 Every building and structure shall be of sufficient strength to support the loads and forces
encountered per the 2001 FBC, Section 1601.2.1 and Table 1604.1. Indicate the live load
(psf) on the plans for the building design.
6 On the drawing titled site plan, identify and label the symbol that represents the property
line.
7 As required by Chapter 4, Section 7 of the LDR, submit a floor plan drawing. The building
plans are not being reviewed for compliance with the applicable building codes.
Therefore, add the words "Floor plan layout is conceptual" below the drawing titled Floor
Plan. No floor plan submitted.
S:\DevelapmentIBuildingl TRC\ TRC 2003\Serrana
Page 1 af 2
8 Place a note on the elevation view drawings indicating that the wall openings and wall
construction comply with Table 600 of the 2001 FBC. Clearly show distance between
structures.
9 At time of permit review, submit signed and sealed working drawings of the proposed
construction.
10 Add to the submittal a partial elevation view drawing of the proposed perimeter wall.
Identify the type of the wall material and the type of material that supports the wall,
including the typical distance between supports. Also, provide a typical section view
drawing of the wall that includes the depth that the wall supports are below finish grade
and the height that the wall is above finish grade. The location and height of the wall shall
comply with the wall regulations specified in the Zoning Code.
11 Add to all plan view drawings of the site a labeled symbol that represents the location and
perimeter of the limits of construction proposed with the subject request.
12 A water-use permit for the irrigation system is required from the SFWMD. A copy of the
permit shall be submitted at the time of permit application, F.S. 373.216.
bf
S:\Development\Building\ TRG\ TRG 2003\Serrano
Page 2 of 2
To:
From:
Subject:
Date:
/
Plannine Memorandum: Forester / Environmentalist
Eric Johnson, Planner
Kevin J. Hallahan, Forester / Environmentalist
Serrano
New Site Plan - 1st Review
NWSP 03-010
June 16,2003
kjh
File
Lake Plantines
The applicant must design / install native species of upland trees, under story and
littoral plantings along 50% of the lake perimeter within the entire 20' wide lake
easement. The upland and littoral plantings must be contiguous to each other and
cover 50% of the lake perimeter. A cross-section of the design should be
included on the landscape plan.
A Lake Maintenance Plan document must be provided for the proper maintenance
of the lake plantings. A time zero and quarterly monitoring report for two years is
required of the developer.
Landscape Plan
All newly installed trees noted on the Landscape Quantities list must be a
minimum of 12' in height, 3" DBH (4.5 feet above ground), Florida #1 quality.
[Environnemental Regulations, Chapter. 7.5, Article II Sec. 5.C.2.]
The landscape design should identify the City signature trees at the project
ingress/egress locations. [Environnemental. Regulations, Chapter. 7.5, Article II
Sec. 5.C.3, N.]
Irrieation System
There is no irrigation system design included with the site plans.
[Environnemental. Regulations, Chapter. 7.5, Article II Sec. 5,A.]
r
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM NO. 03-127
TO:
Michael W. Rumpf, Director, Planning and Zoning
DATE:
June 19, 2003
\
FROM:
Laurinda Logan, P.E., Senior Engineer
RE: Review Comments
New Site Plan - 1 st Review
Serrano at Boynton Beach
File No. NWSP 03-010
The above referenced Site Plans, forwarded on June 9, 2003, were reviewed by representatives from
Public Works, Engineering and Utilities against the requirements outlined in the City of Boynton Beach
Code of Ordinances. Following are our comments with the appropriate Code and Land Development
Regulations (LDR) referenced.
PUBLIC WORKS - GENERAL
1. Prior to permit application contact the Public Works Department (561-742-6200) regarding the
storage and handling of refuse.
2. Indicate by note that trash will be removed by curbside pickup.
PUBLIC WORKS - TRAFFIC
3. Provide a traffic analysis and notice of concurrency (Traffic Performance Standards Review) from
Palm Beach County Traffic Engineering.
4. Minimum pavement width for local streets is 22 feet (City Standard Drawing P-1). Accordingly revise
the "Typical Road Section", Sheet 1 of 1, Preliminary Engineering Plan, to reflect this width.
5. Provide a secondary access per the LDR, Chapter 6, Article IV, Section 1.A.4.
6. Provide off-site improvements to provide an access for the homeowner (Derle Bailey) to the north.
Meet with the homeowner to determine his needs and provide access accordingly. Inform the City of
Boynton Beach Engineering Department in advance of the meeting of the time, date and location so
that a representative can attend.
7. Add signage and end of road object markers for the two dead-end road sections using FDOT
Standard Index 17349.
8. Revise General Note #4 (Sheet 1 of 1) to reflect use of the City Standard Drawings "K" Series for
striping.
Public Works Department/Engineering Division Memo No. 03-127
Re: Serrano at Boynton Beach, New Site Plan _1st Review
June 19, 2003
Page 2
ENGINEERING
9. Add a general note to the Site Plan that all plans submitted for specific permits shall meet the City's
Code requirements at time of application. These permits include, but are not limited to, the following:
paving, drainage, curbing, site lighting, landscaping and irrigation. Permits required from other
permitting agencies such as Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT), South Florida Water
Management District (SFWMD), Lake Worth Drainage District (LWDD), Florida Department of
Environmental Protection (FDEP), Palm Beach County Health Department (PBCHD), Palm Beach
County Engineering Department (PBCED), Palm Beach County Department of Environmental
Resource Management (PBCDERM) and any others, shall be included with the permit request.
10. All comments requiring changes and/or corrections to the plans shall be reflected on all appropriate
sheets.
11. Please note that changes or revisions to these plans may generate additional comments.
Acceptance of these plans during the TRC process does not ensure that additional comments may
not be generated by the Commission and at permit review.
12. Provide written and graphic scales on the site survey.
13. Show zoning and land use on Site Characteristics Map (Survey) (LDR, Chapter 4, Section 7.A).
14. Show existing and proposed elevations on the Survey and Site Plans (LDR, Chapter 4, Section 7.A
and B).
15. Show sight triangles on the Landscape plans (LDR, Chapter 7.5, Article II, Section 5.H.). Each sight
triangle shall be 35 ft. per the LDR, Chapter 7.5, Article II, Section 5.H.2.
16. Consider specifying a taller (fourteen foot vs. four-six feet) Cocus Nucifera "Green Malayan" (Green
Malayan Coconut Palm) to minimize line of sight issues caused by fronds at intersection locations.
17. Trees placed along the west property line may interfere with overhead power lines at maturity.
18. Correct the Landscape plan (Sheet 2 of 5) to show the road going to the property line adjacent to the
lift station.
19. Specify storm sewer diameters, inlet types, etc. on the Preliminary Engineering plan. Indicate
proposed inlet and invert elevations for all structures, and proposed lake elevations on the
Preliminary Engineering plan.
20. Full drainage plans in accordance with the LDR, Chapter 6, Article IV, Section 5 will be required at
the time of permitting.
21. Provide copy of the LWDD permit for the outfall into the L-28 canal.
22. Provide an explanation for the purpose of the 10 foot utility easement around the lake area.
Trees/plantings are generally not allowed within a utility easement. The Landscape plan will have to
be revised accordingly.
Public Works Department/Engineering Division Memo No. 03-127
Re: Serrano at Boynton Beach, New Site Plan - 151 Review
June 19, 2003
Page 3
23. Show ingress/egress easement along west property line on the Site plan and indicate what its
disposition will be.
24. Provide an easement to access the lake maintenance easement.
25. Show driveways on the site plan.
26. Indicate how mail delivery will be handled. A mail kiosk could be set up in the Open Space Tract on
the east side of the entrance road.
27. A Clearing and Grubbing permit and an Excavation/Fill Permit will be required and may be applied for
prior to site plan approval.
28. Upon Commission approval of the site plan, the applicant shall meet with the Engineering Division to
initiate the plat process.
29. Provide a naming plan for the proposed streets within the subdivision.
UTILITIES
30. Palm Beach County Health Department permits will be required for the water and sewer systems
serving this project (CODE, Section 26-12).
31. The CODE, Section 26-34(E) requires that a capacity reservation fee be paid for this project either
upon the request for the Department's signature on the Health Department application forms or within
30 days of site plan approval, whichever occurs first. This fee will be determined based upon final
meter size, or expected demand.
32. Water and sewer lines to be owned and operated by the City shall be included within utility
easements. Please show all proposed easements on the engineering drawings, using a minimum
width of 12 (twelve) feet, with the exception of the easement along the roadways which may be 10
(ten) feet in accordance with the LDR, Chapter 6, Article IV, Section 6.A. The easements shall be
dedicated via separate instrument to the City as stated in the CODE, Section 26-33(a).
33. This office will not require surety for installation of the water and sewer utilities, on condition that the
systems be fully completed, and given to the City Utilities Department before the first permanent
meter is set. Note that setting of a permanent water meter is a prerequisite to obtaining the
Certificate of Occupancy.
34. The LDR, Chapter 6, Article IV, Section 16 requires that all points on each building lot will be within
200 feet of an existing or proposed fire hydrant. Please demonstrate that the plan meets this
condition, by showing all hydrants. It is recommended that a fire hydrant be installed somewhere
around the lot line of Lots 7 and 8 (on the lake side is acceptable), and somewhere around the open
space tract adjacent to the lift station site. The proposed fire hydrant adjacent to line between Lots
26 and 27 can be shifted southerly to around Lots 30 and 31 (on the lake side is acceptable) to better
balance the proposed subdivision.
Public Works Department/Engineering Division Memo No. 03-127
Re: Serrano at Boynton Beach, New Site Plan - 1 sl Review
June 19, 2003
Page 4
35. A building permit for this project shall not be issued until this Department has approved the plans for
the water and/or sewer improvements required to service this project, in accordance with the CODE,
Section 26-15.
36. Provide the location within the adjacent elementary school site that this proposed subdivision will be
connecting to. If the elementary school site is also located on a lift station, justify that it has capacity
to intake this development's flow, or reflect the changes that will be required to the school's system(s)
to accommodate this development.
37. The LDR, Chapter 3, Article IV, Section 3(0) requires Master Plans to show all utilities on or adjacent
to the tract. The plan must therefore show the point of service for off-site utilities construction needed
to service this project. [The comment above will address the water and sewer utilities, this comment
will need to address the electric, telephone and cable systems off-site systems.]
38. Provide a second water main tie-in south of the property (Le. in the vicinity of Palmland Dr.). If
unable to acquire an easement from the School Board, two tie-ins for water will be required in the
subdivision south of Palmland Drive.
39. Provide a feasibility study that clearly demonstrates and support the need for a sewer lift station. If
supported, the lift station shall be public and shall be constructed in accordance with City of Boynton
Beach Standards.
40. Provide sanitary sewer main sizes (diameter) and material, as well as rime and invert elevations.
41. Provide water main sizes and material.
GENERAL
42.
LUck
Cc: Jeffrey R. Livergood, P.E., Director, Public Works (via e-mail)
Peter V. Mazzella, Deputy Utility Director, Utilities
H. David Kelley, Jr., P.E.I P.S.M., City Engineer, Public Works/Engineering (via e-mail)
Glenda Hall, Maintenance Supervisor, Public Works/Forestry & Grounds Division
Larry Quinn, Solid Waste Manager, Public Works/Solid Waste
Ken Hall, Engineering Plans Analyst, Public Works/Engineering (via e-mail)
File
PARKS DIVISION MEMORANDUM #03-24
TO:
FROM:
Michael W. Rumpf, Planning and Zoning Director
John Wildner, Deputy Recreation and Parks Directo~
Serrano - New Site Plan
SUBJECT:
cc:
Wally Majors, Recreation and Parks Director
File
DATE:
June 23, 2003
The Recreation and Parks Department has reviewed the new site plan for Serrano.
The following comments are submitted:
The Parks and Recreation Facilities impact fee is figured based on 47 single-
family units.
47 single- family units @ $940 ea = $44, 180
- Fee is due at the time of the first applicable building permit.
JW
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 03-138
TO:
TRC MEMBERS
f10eJgel I(Cllllller, Fir~ PrntF!ction EnqineF!r_
Kevin HallBhBrI, rOI\%tedEflvlronm~rllalist-
John Huntingtnn, PnlicF! nF!partmF!nt
H I)avid Kelley Jr., Utilitieg DepartFl,ent
Tir r IUtllY 1<. Largo, BuildiFlg Diviaion
~rl Hall, (engineering) f-Jubllc W'ud'3 CcncfBI
John Wildner, Parks Division
j,..aIJrind::a Logdll, Engirlt:t:dl,g Departm8nt
Eric Johnson, Planning Department
FROM:
Michael W. Rumpf
Director of Planning and Zoning
DATE:
June 6, 2003
RE:
SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCEDURES
1 ST Review - New Site Plan
Project
Serrano
Location
% mile west of Congress, South of Golf Road
Agent
Chip Bryan - Julian Bryan & Associates
File No.
NWSP 03-010
Find attached for your review the plans and exhibits for the above-referenced project. Please review the
plans and exhibits and transmit formal written comments. Comments should be made available
via e-mail to Sherie Coale and I no later than 5:00 P.M. on Fridav. June 20. 2003. When preparing
your comments, please separate them into two categories; code deficiencies with code sections
referenced and recommendations that you believe will enhance the project.
Adhering to the following review guidelines will promote a comprehensive review and enable the
applicant to efficiently obtain Technical Review Committee approval:
1. Use the review standards specified in Part IV, Land Development Regulations, Site Plan Review
and the applicable code sections of the Code of Ordinances to review and formulate comments.
2. The documents submitted for the project were determined to be substantially complete with the
exception of traffic data, however, if the data provided to meet the submittal requirements is
insufficient to properly evaluate and process the project based on the review standards or the
documents show code deficiencies, additional data and/or corrections should be requested by the
reviewer by contacting Eric Johnson, or myself.
3. Each comment shall reference the section of the code that is incorrectly depicted on the
documents.
4. Technical Review Committee member(s) shall identify in their comments when the plans depict or
when the location and installation of their departmental required improvements may conflict with
other departmental improvements.
Page 2
5. When a TRC Member finds a code deficiency that is outside of his/her review responsibility, the
comment and the specific code section may be included in their review comments with the name of
the appropriate TRC Member that is responsible for the review specified.
6. If a TRC member finds the plans acceptable, he/she shall forward a memorandum, within the time
frame stated above, to me. The memorandum shall state that the plans are approved and that they
do not have any comments on the plans submitted for review and that they recommend the project
be forwarded through the approval process.
All comments shall be typed, addressed and transmitted or e-mailed to Sherie Coale and I for distribution
to the applicant. Please include the name and phone number of the reviewer on this memorandum or e-
mail. Eric Johnson will be the Planning and Zoning staff member coordinating the review of the project.
First review comments will be transmitted to the applicant along with a list of Technical Review Committee
(TRC) members.
MWR:sc
Attachment
XC: Steve Gale, Fire Marshal
Bob Borden, Deputy Fire Marshal
Marshall Gage, Police Department
Pete Mazzella, Assistant Dir. Of Utilities
Jeffrey Livergood, Public Works Director
Don Johnson, Building Division
S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Serrano@ BB\NWSP 03-01 O\TRC Memo for 1 st Plans Review .doc
Revised 1/14/02