REVIEW COMMENTS
7.F.l
KRISPY KREME (MSPM 03-012)
MAJOR SITE PLAN MODIFICATION
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 03-300
STAFF REPORT
DATE:
Chairman and Members
Planning & Development Board and City Commission
Michael Rumpt\\.l,)10-'
Planning and Zoning Director
Eric Lee Johnson, AICP r
Planner
December 10, 2003
TO:
THRU:
FROM:
PROJECT NAME/NO:
Krispy Kreme / MSPM 03-012
REQUEST:
Major Site Plan Modification
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
Property Owner:
Dynamic Donuts, Incorporated
Applicant:
Dynamic Donuts, Incorporated
Agent:
Ms. Michelle Hoyland with Weiner & Aronson, P,A,
Location:
Northwest 1st Avenue (between NW 1st Avenue and Boynton
Beach Boulevard (SR804) east of NW ih Street). West
Industrial Avenue intersects with Boynton Beach Boulevard
immediately north of the subject property (see Exhibit "A"-
Location Map)
Existing Land Use/Zoning:
Local Retail Commercial (LRC) / Neighborhood Commercial
(C-2)
Proposed Land Use/Zoning:
No change
Proposed Use:
Request major site plan modification to construct a 20-foot
tall pole sign, which would replace an existing eight (8) foot
tall monument sign on a 1.04-acre parcel in the C-2 zoning
district
Acreage:
1.04 acres (45,470 square feet)
Adjacent Uses:
North:
Right-of-way of West Boynton Beach Boulevard (SR 804), then property classified
Local Retail Commercial (LRC), zoned Neighborhood Commercial (C-2), and
developed with a service station (Texaco) to the northwest; to the northeast the
Staff Report - Krispy Kreme (MSPM 03-012)
Memorandum No PZ 03-300
Page 2
intersection of Boynton Beach Boulevard and West Industrial Avenue and farther
east, right-of-way of Industrial Avenue then developed property classified Industrial
(I) and zoned Light Industrial (M-1) (the locations of L10yds Auto Electric and Foster
Oil);
South:
Right-of-way of NW 1st Avenue, then property classified Low Density Residential,
zoned Single family Residential (R-1-A) and developed with single family homes;
East:
Property classified Medium Density Residential (MeDR), zoned Duplex Residential
(R-2) and developed with duplex (two-family) homes; and
West:
Developed property classified Local Retail Commercial (LRC), zoned Neighborhood
Commercial (C-2) and occupied by a dental/medical office building,
BACKGROUND
Proposal:
Ms, Michelle Hoyland, agent for Dynamic Donunts, Incorporated is requesting a
major site plan modification to replace an existing eight (8) foot tall monument sign
with a 20-foot tall aluminum pole sign for the Krispy Kreme donut shop, located at
640 West Boynton Beach Boulevard,
Site Characteristic: Originally, the Krispy Kreme parcel consisted of three (3) separate lots with
different zoning districts. The eastern portion (0.26-acres) was zoned R-2 and the
western portion (0.78-acres) was zoned C-2, The project included the approval of
a concurrent rezoning application (LUAR 01-008) that changed the underlying land
use from R-2 to C-2. The developer razed the two family dwelling units that were
built on the eastern lot and combined it with the commercially-zoned lot. The drive
through facility for the restaurant required conditional use approval. The City
Commission approved the Krispy Kreme project (COUS 01-005) on January 15,
2002, The site plan (sheet Sl) shows the location of the existing monument sign.
The structure was approved at eight (8) feet in height and sits 10 feet away from
both the west and north property lines. The abutting Boynton Beach Boulevard
right-of-way varies in width, In fact, the abutting right-of-way is much wider along
the eastern portion of the property than it is on the western portion of the
property, However, the entire portion of the right-of-way that abuts the subject
property is a grassy swale area and is to remain free from visible obstruction.
ANALYSIS
Concurrency:
Traffic: The proposed 20-foot tall pole sign would have no impact on traffic and therefore,
the project meets the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County;
Drainage: The proposed 20-foot tall pole sign would replace the existing monument sign.
This would have little or no impact on drainage;
School: School concurrency would not be applicable to this type of project of modification,
Staff Report - Krispy Kreme (MSPM 03-012)
Memorandum No PZ 03-300
Page 3
Driveways: The site plan (sheet 51) shows an existing driveway opening on Boynton Beach
Boulevard. It would not be altered as a result of this request for major site plan
modification,
Parking Facility: Restaurants require one (1) parking space per 100 square feet of gross floor area,
Therefore, a total of 47 parking spaces are required, The site plan (sheet 51)
shows that 53 spaces have been provided. No parking lot changes are proposed as
a result of this request for major site plan modification.
Landscaping: The existing pervious or "green" area is 8,280 square feet or 18% of the total site,
Much of the perimeter of the site is constrained with overhead power lines, Most
tall growing palm and shade trees would conflict with the guidelines of Florida
Power & Light's "Right Tree, Right Place" publication. However, when the project
was originally site planned, an attempt was made to buffer the subject commercial
property from the adjacent residential properties. The developer installed seven (7)
Ironwood shade trees spaced every 20 feet along the east property line and eleven
(11) Cassia shade trees were installed every 25 feet along the southern property
line, Chapter 7.5 of the Land Development Code only required one (1) tree spaced
every 30 feet along these property lines. The aforementioned trees were placed in
such a way as to create a continuous upper level canopy, serving as a formidable
uninterrupted buffer along the east and south property lines, The landscape plan
(sheet Ll) that was approved with the original application showed Cassia trees
installed along the north property line within the front landscape buffer. These
trees, installed at 12 feet in height, will eventually grow up to 25 feet in height.
The location of the existing freestanding sign, if allowed at 20 feet in height, would
conflict with the canopy of the existing shade trees. This conflict is the reason why
staff recommended that the freestanding sign be eight (8) feet in height. Also,
staff acknowledges that property owners want the freestanding signs to as close to
the roadways as possible for higher degree of visibility, 5taff has no objection to
this need. However, the problem arises when a conflict occurs between the
visibility of a sign and the mature canopy of a tree. The intent of the Land
Development Regulations is often circumvented when, after installation and
maturity, a property owner "hatracks" or removes the trees because it obstructs
views to project signage. Installing a 20-foot tall pole sign now is really just a
short-term solution for the property owner that would lead to conflict in the future,
5taff analyzed the status quo and made some recommendations to the Land
Development Regulations that were approved by the Community Redevelopment
Agency, Planning & Development Board and City Commission. This is discussed in
the "5ignage" section below,
Building and Site: The building and overall site design would not be altered as a result of the
proposed major site plan modification.
Design:
The building and overall design of the site would not be altered as a result of the
proposed major site plan modification.
Signage:
The current Land Development Regulations regarding commercial and industrial
signage allows freestanding pole, pylon and monument signs up to 20 feet in
Staff Report - Krispy Kreme (MSPM 03-012)
Memorandum No PZ 03-300
Page 4
height. Staff has been successful in negotiating with developers for lower
monument signs (ground signs) limited to correspond with project scale and city
direction, Increasingly, developers of smaller sites have been more resistant to
staff's overtures, instead looking to increase their visibility and marketability by
proposing pylon signs at the maximum 20-foot limit. This project would represent
such an example of a developer who wants a taller sign. However, with keeping
the sign heights at bay, the more recently approved projects have gone a long way
to improve the visual image of the city, Still, by code, all of the commercial
projects and industrial projects approved within the last few years could have had a
20-foot tall pylon sign in front of their respective businesses which, if approved,
would likely have conflicted with the vision held for the City as well as with the
stated purpose of the City's sign regulations. The purpose of the City's sign
regulations is, in part, to "...promote the ...aesthetics of the City". In October of
2003, staff analyzed the Land Development Regulations with special emphasis on
the maximum allowable sign height and allowable type of freestanding structures.
Staff proposed several amendments to the code (P&Z Memo No. 03-246).
Proposed amendments to the code that would directly impact this project include
the following recommendations:
1. Eliminate pylon sign as an allowable sign type in the sign code, Pylon signs
are defined as signs that are on a freestanding pole(s) or other
freestanding support so that the bottom edge of the sign face is 6-feet or
more above grade. Currently these signs are allowed up to a height of 20-
feet;
2, Amend the definition of freestanding sign to read: a monument or ground-
mounted sign identifying the use of the property upon which it is located.
Ground-mounted signs may be supported by one or more poles, provided
that the bottom of the sign or cabinet is no more than two (2) feet above
grade and that the poles and complete length of the sign or cabinet are
clad in the same or like material, completely to the ground. Alternatives to
the cladding requirement may be considered if the design of the sign
follows the architectural design of the building(s);
3, Add a requirement of all new freestanding signs, that the numerical
address be an integral and prominent part of the sign; and
4, For all single tenant sites and all multiple tenant sites under four (4) acres,
monument signs shall be the only type of freestanding sign allowed, On
roadways of 6 travel lanes or greater, a monument sign may not exceed
12-feet in height. On roadways consisting of 4 travel lanes, a monument
sign may not exceed 8-feet in height. Other criteria such as surrounding
properties, speed limit and scale of the project may be justification for the
further reduction in maximum height to a 6-foot limitation. On roadways
consisting of 2 travel lanes, a monument sign may not exceed 6-feet in
height. Again, special circumstances (such as those noted above) may
justify a further reduction in sign height.
Staff Report - Krispy Kreme (MSPM 03-012)
Memorandum No PZ 03-300
Page 5
It is obvious that the proposed 20-foot pole sign would be in violation of all
proposed amendments to the Land Development Regulations, The proposed
structure is a "pole" style sign. The changes to the Land Development Regulations
would only allow a "monument" style sign, which is defined above, Also, the
Wesco Sign elevation shows no site address. This would be in violation of #3.
Finally, under the new code, this property would be eligible for only a 12 foot tall
monument sign, not a 20-foot tall sign, as proposed. Therefore, the proposed
project would be in direct violation of a majority of the proposed text amendments.
The Planning & Development Board on October 29, 2003, the Community
Redevelopment Agency on October 30, 2003, and the City Commission on
December 2, 2003 approved the above-referenced text amendments. The second
reading of the ordinance adopting the amendments is scheduled for December 16,
2003.
The proposed project resembles the type of sign products that represent
inconsistent sign patterns throughout major arterials such as Okeechobee
Boulevard in West Palm Beach or International Drive in Orlando. It is the opinion
of staff that this is not the desired image of Boynton Beach Boulevard or the City of
Boynton Beach, The subject request for major site plan modification was filed prior
to the second reading of the above-referenced ordinance, and therefore, is eligible
for processing. The applicant maintains that there is little visibility from the west to
the east for the sign where it is currently placed, in part, because of the presence
of another tall project sign, which is located on the abutting property directly to the
west. The original/existing sign location was apparently selected as a factor of
adjacent right-of-way width. At its current location, the width of the right-of-way is
the narrowest. Although it is typically preferable to locate a project sign at the
project entrance, that location would maximize its distance from the improved
right-of-way, and has limited space due to the location of the hydrant, parking
spaces, and adjacent landscape buffer. Alternatively, due to the limited space and
setback requirements, staff would support the elimination of a parking space (the
project was approved with a surplus of 7 spaces), adjustments to the landscaping
to maximize visibility while maintaining compliance with code, and a setback
variance which may be justified by the unique, unimproved right-of-way adjacent
to the project. This all may be necessary to accommodate the sign at the preferred
location, the project entrance, which would also separate the sign from the larger,
adjacent sign that is currently impacting views to the subject sign (see Exhibit"C"-
Conditions of Approval).
RECOMMENDATION:
The Technical Review Committee (TRC) has reviewed this request for major site plan modification and is
recommending that the request be denied, based on the pending sign code changes, and as further
justified above. If the application is supported by the Commission, staff recommends that the approval be
subject to the conditions indicated in Exhibit "C", This list includes the condition that the sign be located
near the project entrance Any additional conditions recommended by the Board or City Commission shall
be documented accordingly in the Conditions of Approval.
EJ
S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\krispy kreme\MSPM 03-012\Staff Report.doc
.
1 in. = 130.0 feet
-
2
EXHIBIT "A"
~
-.;;;
- ----
I
I
A
KRISPY KREME
EXHIBIT "B"
I
II:
II
;1
~a
~~
SLiS'::
Ili~
n
If~
"I
i'Co!
Sdo
.&1 .
'!Ii
1ft -
i' i. ~
i~ i i
I'll
II~i Ulfl!l " ~lr~~1l UHI f'~ np i
'I' il 1 h! f1~i
r!~ I .1 f'ii' J! ,'1 21
Hi!'! I . 00 j I,IIII~ I! ! Iii,
~ It. ; ;&'~
_i'1eI l Iii i ill'll- nil Ii ~! ! liit'
I .
n' I i~ I tlil ~~ ,ler. =f
J i I Ii !. .~ 1,- i (ill ~ It Iln i I
i ir r llil:~ i
i I : !.t' I ,II II 'id I { iill !
I ~. .11 Ii !
J J t r 11,1 · .11 .1 If r
I
i;
(I
J
i
i~
[i'!
I
J
i
li1l:1
I~
I
J
i
I
...
-
"!
t:
I
i
&I!! JSiS IV III ll' I - P ~ 11f Idl.
.. ~ III ' t .JP. . 1 Ii ' j 11115 @ illlU
Gl ~ 111'-1- 'i 3
a 111'"1, ~ l f [ !j!~ !! 11111)1 ill I illI! i-~
~ ~ IJI 011 .. i
!II r I~ I ~C)V)
.. ~ ~ ~ /1 Ii I ~ ~ i= ~ Ezn
8
f "I .. ~ -. ~ ~ ;;v>O
,
I
I
if::ti7"rijfl~'frJ~i7Irtmmoor I
mi'!~I!i;iil~IJii!~llf~11 i
~~~. ~ l~i~ ~~
f S ~
~ j
I
I
I
HU:~:U!.~ jiiill
~i'~ifh~ 1" i :
~IJ~!~i :~ .~! ~ I
· .!lJi' ~Z3'
H~!h ~i ;~..: r I
l:~~5&;~ ii1 ~.. I
WS~~ !! !i~ i I
Ii ill ~j ~d i :
ill;l1 ~In !
I
I
~
I
I
I
t'rf
..
. ~ 1
,- -
,
f~
! .
P
~
! T 0
'lJ ~
< i I
~.~ ;
;e~..~
~ 0"
iII~
E~
.!i!
h"
! I ~~
~i~ I I ~;I:
. ~ to
-T" ~----. i ~
C\RI' ... hj
- :- ~; h
I i I ~<iJ
I I ~ i"
h~
--Jm I r
I
I
--~ I
~
, ~I
i!:/l ~
1Il~ n~ ~
h ~;'" 8~
~~ ~"'''.....,
~~ ~!:lll ~<:>
~~ ,~~~~
~~ i r'l~ "<;;g
___~Ci _~~ ~
)0. ~Aj ~
~
~
~
~ J.,
1;] l'
~
~ tn
f--~
~
~
r
~) g
~
-I
w-li;buSTRI.... A\I[ ~
11
RAIL ROAD
BATTAGLIA LANIJ SURVEYORS. INC.
1692 NW MADRlDWAY, BOCA RATON,FL 33432 L.B.fS161
TEL: (561) 750.8108 FAX: (561) 750.8110
~~ i~~g~ ~
:~ ;>;~g~~ ~
~; ~~~~~ r
~~ ..::l~5il~ ~
i; ~~~~; ~
;~ ~:[> 21
~ < ~~~~.~ ~
_~m.c~~J'(~ 0
.. -- - ~g ~~g!::~ Z
~~ ~o~~~
"'z ~% 10,-"
~~ ~~.!~~
.2 ;]....~~::l
Ii" ."_..
"~ ,~~",
~~ ~5il~8S
~ 2 ~~~9;;;
08 2~lia~
~~ ~~ ~~;
. 0; "
-----..-- _..__..~.- -.--.-
I
EXHIBIT "B"
(f)
i\
m
.,
()
I
o
11
(f)
[
:u
<
m
-<
~
......\nJ....~~ ~~... UI't,... ....._ lVL''' "'--..... .,. a....- ,.... kM. l-tu _........ .-)AI.(.
a
II
.~M
~t
~Ei
Iii
~I
~~
~~
r
~
pN
g~~
~ f}
~i!
.-' ....,.
i
-..-:-'-
~..,
IY~
~ l(
r.. _
-. ..
,
l(
~5 n~w J
~~ '~i~~~
~~ ~al~~
l~! ;~;~; I
. .q-~")1
;.: &:."I:~
~~ :~~~Il
~~ Ah)l~
l~ !af~~
9~ ~~~~;
"'~ !~:~8
~~ ~i~~9
~~ .Jl._~
"" ~~~8~
i~ ~I:"il;; i
i 2 2~~q~
d d 2~ !"ij~ I
~ .... .. i '
---'''~~:.. --;: 7~---;---"W;};!I'j
,.,. ""', '\ '
. I I @ l
, I g : li
I'
S
I
l
I
I
I
qHfiPij~j
, ~u 8 ei
j Hi j ~
Ii! t
:; "j.' ~ I
.. .. II
a.~ if. ,
;2
~ .
! I
j f
~ !I
I Ii
:l
.wi
r:,
i~i
I
ZONINC: R-2 I
Fl.U": ...oR
lAND USE: DUPLEX
!
~
~
~
~
~i: i .
~~. i .
Co ~ ~
~!E ~J .. ~
il3 ~i ..
;;11 .
I~~ il;i
~ ~.....
~~ ei..
~
EXHIBIT
:.~ I ~
.~ ~
~ ~
_ i"' ~
~ ~~ ~~
~ ~ r.. t
~ . i'1 '..
~':' ~
~ ,~
_ . F~
- ;
"B"
;<
j;
.,
CD
o
-<
Z
-l
o
z
I I
!\L
~
w. flHOUSTRtAl ....~
i
...
l
,I
;IN
~~
?;
.,
...
...0
""
"'"
22
~~
i~
0)
o
~
I
,
I
I
i
,
i
I
~ I
.,
a
r ~~.i~ i mn ~ i ~~ ~~ W 1$ s: ~ ~ e f ! ~~; ;~ ~
~ fEll s ~~IJI ~ ~ 30g ~~p II ~ H a ; "!dl i
!! iu -3~!;~ i !j:; ~.!: !Ie H ~ din:
~ P Ii h ll~~ ~ ! e d ~ 1! b-I
'i ,,:I ~i N ~ ~ S J ~ ! i ~~ .
~~;j; Hm r i ;q; R~~ ; n ~ ~ s i~ j
b~i i fi~~f if ;t! I;j ~; i J; i
!=~ I~ ~~ j~. ~ ~ Q "I:
~)
I ~ . ...,."'" ,~
l(
4
'$
.,J
II
....-
~~~ ~ "p'u~pa a~pJ
~~. ~ ~~agdij;i;:~q
Q :nh!!~~la!qf
CD !I i; H!s~ ~
~ "~8
~ j ~
ii
~
~
~
lIlI l\i
~
Q
~
e :~c ~-i~ n.
.~!!U hPn~2
6R6~~~d.I:~~d~~~
~ -:~
."\ .s
I- i I ~ I" 'If c.. G') "I KAISPY KAEME
e i ~ i fqJ. ~ ~ 41 IGU"f KIBE a= SOUlli R.OADA, L.L.C
Q " ,JI ~AD BOYNTON BEACH. R.OADA
~ ~ II ~z STEPlAH
,- -- -~-I
....,- .-- r- .
~- :~~= -=,:
'~~~J''''AI\e,
,,"\Z1~"'--=--~ L'" -..-'-' lVI/'" "..._ ~ ~.. ... __ ....... s.w. I-tGJI ....., hO'. sa.. I-MIL
a~ ! i .~!
~i~
I~ ~~~
. ,,~
R ~ ~C iq~
~ .. pI
. ~~q
II . ~:f~
~. i! h=
Sa
II ! I
~
I
~ i
1
I O~ om Q II fa ~ 0 Q Ie:: 18 ~ *
g ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ i ~ ~ II ft . f
~ ( i i I ~ a.; ~ I ! c I I ~
i . ! q : I ~ ~
i i g 5 j il I I I I ~ ! g ~ ~
~ !
EXHIBIT "B"
~
~
ji
i~!
.~~
m
m
0
~ -<
Z
-t
0
Z
m
~ m
>
()
::I:
m
0
C
r
m
<- -,
>
:0 I
0 I
(jj
;0 i
Q:I !
0
:e
~- _---\ I
i
-- ---1
i
!
i
. ).
~
".
..t.,
I; i ni ~ii ~~I~ ~m; ig~~; ~~~m~; !~ni ii i~~i ~~i ~~ii iiji i!i ~~i l~; ~~~m~ i~a~u~; ~~ iU;i iF~;i ;~; ~~~ ~;~H; J ~
v; II~f I~i ~~=; ;mi ::~il :!m~~1 n~i! i! lit: !.~; ~~.j! j;! ;~ ~i~ ~~! ~~~i~~i ;!ii~!:! n ~ii!~ ::IUI :!I W ~i~HJ w
n a ~ii ::~ ~d ~~h~ ~agl~ !~~qlje I.~~~ a! ;llg ~:~ ".! 'l~~ ii l:~ ut il~i. ~~~ ~Vig8~~."~ ~g~ ~~;~~f ~~~ :;1 N~~
~~! l~ ~~ =~~ r!i~i Ilii; i;a!~ii ;i!~~ J~ !H ;~~ i~l ~:; m~ ;;!d ~li~~I~ !S~;iH! Ii ~;: . ~dii i~i W :::~~
· ~ .~ ~i i.~ ~i.'l ~~.ii~! ~~.ii'q9~ ~~'ll! ~ !"t ~h ocR !~. t ll'- ~ ii.~ll" ~f"~.iiA;~ ~S u~" l~.igA ~~1 u:J ~R'i~
i H;o :!i nl! in;; ~~!~;;i~ @~~i I :t.r ~i~_i lis ~~i :! ~i i:1 i~i=i~ !!i:!!ii .ii~m ~~:~i i~i ~~i ; hI
I .ii~ ~* ..~!e b!o~ !>qi~ ~ !~Sg S ~~ ~:~ ~ j ~Jll ~.ii i~ T ~'ga~g ~~J2~X~!:ftl ja~ ~l:~h i~.ii ii i ~~;
J a: q. ~ aE~~= ~ J e. e ;. - , ;~ ~f! i~ ~~ !q1l5"~ ~~ ~i! ~ll:Jll ~~ ::. ; ~i~
q , r 13'\ ~~i; !~l:~~ii g ~ll~ -i t II ~ . ~
9 ,. ;< a r~
Ie i qlfmfffi~
i I"J' Zm
\: ~ I i f~Ra
" 1 KRISPY KAEME
.tt# I<fI3I"Y KfBE CI' SOIJTH A-ORlJA LLC.
IlOYTON ElEACl-l, A-ORlJA
LAlO3C.APE PlAN
1- ..- -~ I]
~ ..~ -~---~;~
1M.. _ "11_.
EXHBIT "C"
Major Site Plan Modification
Project name: Krispy Kreme
File number: MSPM 03-012
Reference: 1 S(review plans identified as a Maior Site Plan Modification with an October 22,2003 Planning
and Zoning Department date stamp marking
DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT
PUBLIC WORKS - General
Comments: None
PUBLIC WORKS - Traffic
Comments: None
ENGINEERING DIVISION
Comments: None
UTILITIES
Comments:
1. At the time of permitting, provide a plan that shows all easements so that it
may be verified that the monument sign is a minimum of 10 feet away from
any utility main or service lateral.
2. The provided plans should reflect existing conditions. Work is shown on the
provided site plan that indicates proposed work. At the time of permitting,
please revise the plans accordingly.
FIRE
Comments: None
POLICE
Comments: None
BUILDING DIVISION
Comments:
3. 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 ASCE 7, Chapter 6, and the
provisions of 2001 FBC, Section 1606 (Wind Loads). 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. Clearly show
the location and height of the existing sign on the drawings. New wind load
COA
12/10/03
2
DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT
calculations shall be submitted at the time of permit application. 2001 FBC
1606.1.
4. At time of permit review, submit signed and sealed working drawings of the
proposed construction.
PARKS AND RECREATION
Comments: None
FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST
Comments:
5. The owner shall replace all of the dead trees on the site. There are two (2)
dead trees on the north side of the site next to the Cassia trees. There are also
six (6) to eight (8) dead trees along the outside (south) landscape buffer next
to the other Cassia trees.
PLANNING AND ZONING
Comments:
6. Staff recommends that the applicant relocate the existing sign structure to the
east rather than erecting a 20-foot tall pole sign. A possible solution would be
for the monument sign to be located near the main entrance. A variance
request should be explored with staff (for a sign closer than 10 feet from the
property line as normally required by code) due to the possibility of a
hardship of such a wide Boynton Beach Boulevard right-of-way.
ADDITIONAL PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD COMMENTS:
Comments:
7. To be determined.
ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Comments:
8. To be determined.
S:\Planning\SHARED\ WP\PROJECTS\krispy kreme\MSPM 03-012\COA.doc
1"( REVIEW COMMENTS
Major Site Plan Modification
Project name: Krispy Kreme
File number: MSPM 03-012
Reference: I S(review plans identified as a Maior Site Plan Modification with an October 22, 2003 Planning and
Zoning Department date stamp marking.
DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT
PUBLIC WORKS - General
Comments: NONE
I PUBLIC WORKS - Traffic I I I
Comments: NONE
I Comments: NONE ENGINEERING DIVISION I I I
UTILITIES
Comments:
1. Provide a plan that shows all easements so that it may be verified that the
monument sign is a minimum of 10 feet away from any utility main or
service lateral.
2. The provided plans should reflect existing conditions. Work is shown on
the provided site plan that indicates proposed work. Please revise the plans
accordingly.
FIRE
Comments: NONE
POLICE
Comments: NONE
BUILDING DIVISION
Comments:
3. 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 ASCE 7, Chapter 6, and
the provisions of 2001 FBC, Section 1606 (Wind Loads). 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.
Clearly show the location and height of the existing sign on the drawings.
New wind load calculations shall be submitted at the time of permit
application. 2001 FBC 1606.1.
1 ST REVIEW COMMENTS
11/26/03
2
DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT
4. At time of permit review, submit signed and sealed working drawings of the
proposed construction.
5. Provide text on the drawings that clearly describe the major site plan
modification. What is being modified? BBA to the 2001 FBC, Section
104.2.1.
PARKS AND RECREATION
Comments: NONE
FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST
Comments: NONE
PLANNING AND ZONING
Comments:
6. Applicable code changes are pending. Legal review of request in progress.
MWR/sc
S:\Planning\SHAREDlWP\PROJECTS\krispy kreme\MSPM 03-012\1ST REVIEW COMMENTS.doc
Facsimile
TRANSMITTAL
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH
100 E. BOYNTON BEACH BOULEVARD
P.O. BOX 310
BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA 33425-0310
FAX: (561) 742-6259
PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION
to: Michelle Hoyland! Jason Mankkoff
fax #: 272-6831
date: November 26, 2003
from: Sherie Coale
re: 1::;1 REVIEW COMMENTS FOR Krispy Kreme
Please find attached the first review comments for your project. To stay on the
current review schedule, please do the following steps listed below, and bring all
documents to the TRC scheduled for Tuesday, December 18,2003,
1. Revise your plans incorporating all comments listed herein, including the addition of
notes on plans to confirm response to general statements! comments, and bring 10 copies
to the TRC review meeting (full sets including all pages originally submitted);
2. Submit the additional information as requested within the attached comments; ( i.e. traffic
analysis, engineering certification, etc.)
3. Prepare a written response (7 copies) consisting of a list briefly summarizing how each
comment has been addressed on the revised plans or with the supplemental information
including location on the plans ( this promotes an expeditious 2nd review by staff and
your project representatives during the TRC meeting );and
4. Submit reductions (8 12 X 11) for the proposed site plans, elevations and landscaping plan
(this is required for the final report and public
presentation). Planning and Zoning Division
City of Boynton Beach
Boynton Beach, Florida 33425
The applicant should not attend a TRC (2nd review) until
all documents have been revised and copied for staff
742-6260
Fax: 742-6259
review. Ifplans will not be fully revised and brought to the scheduled TRC meeting, contact Ed
Breese in this office by the Thursday prior to the scheduled meeting date. Projects deviating
from the original schedule are eligible for review at subsequent meetings, which are held every
Tuesday. To reschedule, contact Sherie Coale, by the Thursday prior to the Tuesday TRC
meeting that you desire to attend. The remainder of the review schedule will be adjusted
accordingly. If you have questions on the attached comments, please contact the respective
reviewer using the attached list of TRC representatives.
If the plans are reasonably complete and all significant comments are addressed following TRC
(2nd review), the project is forwarded to the Planning and Development Board Meeting that falls
approximately 2 to 3 weeks following the TRC meeting. An "*,, by any comment identifies a
comment that must be addressed prior to moving forward to the Planning and Development
board.
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 of the proposed project. This information is necessary for
the project to proceed. If you have submitted this information, please disregard this note.
DEPARTMENT REPRESENTATIVE REPRESENT A TIVES' 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 742-6227 742-6233
Forester/Environmentalist Kevin Hallahan Kevin Hallahan 742-6267 742-6259
Planning & Zoning Michael Rumpf, Ed Breese 742-6262 742-6259
CHAIRMAN
S:\Planning\SHAREDlWP\PROJECTS\krispy kremeIMSPM 03-012\lst Review comments FAX COVERdoc
I TRANSMIS"IO" ''ERHCATIOI REPffi~]
lI\1[~ 11/ 2() '200:J ., 1"-
~ III ME:
F.IlX
lE...
~E~, # BR(E:~, f40'3:IE:
..-.---.-..---------------.-.... ...-- ---....
DATE, TIME
FAX NO. I NAME
DURATION
PAGE(S)
RESULT
MODE
11/: 6 13: 0~;
g:27: 6831
01~: 1'1: 07
04
OIC
STAtDARD
ECM
TRC Memorandum
~
Coale, Sherie
Page 1 of 1
r---
From: Hallahan, Kevin
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 3:16 PM
To: Breese, Ed
Cc: Coale, Sherie
Subject: Krispe Kreme-MSPM 03-012
Planning Memorandum: Forester / Environmentalist
To:
Eric Johnson, Planner
From:
Kevin J. Hallahan, Forester / Environmentalist
Subject:
Krispe Kreme
Major Site Plan Modification
MSPM 03-012
Date:
November 14,2003
I do not have any comments on the proposed major site plan modification.
Construction for this proposed proj~ existing site landscape.
.~eLr
1,
Kjh
File
11/1412003
v(,
~
CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
TO:
Michael W. Rumpf DATE:
Dir. of Planning & Zoning
11/13/03
FILE: MSPM 03-012
FROM:
Off. John Huntington
Police Department
CPTED Practitioner
SUBJECT: Krispy Kreme
REFERENCES: Site Plan
ENCLOSURES:
I have viewed the above building plans and have the following comments:
No Comments
/
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:
MSPM 03-012 1st review
Project Name and Address:
Krispy Kreme
640 W. Boynton Beach Blvd.
Reviewed by:
~
Rodqer Kemmer, Fire Protection Enqineer
Department:
Fire and Life Safety
Phone:
(561) 742-6753
Comments to:
Sherie Coale by email on 11/5/03
Code Requirements
It is our understanding that this project is limited to the erection of a sign.
Accordingly, we have no comments.
cc: Steve Gale
Bob Borden
/
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS
ENGINEERING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM NO. 03-211
TO:
FROM:
Ed Breese, Principal Planner, Planning and Zoning
Laurinda Logan, P.E., Senior Engineer ~
::::: ::~:::ts l_
Major Site Plan Modification
Krispy Kreme
File No. MSPM 03-012
DATE:
RE:
The above referenced Major Site Plan Modification, received on October 29, 2003, was reviewed against
the requirements outlined in the City of Boynton Beach Code of Ordinances. The requested modification
is for an increase in the sign height. Public Works, Engineering and Utilities have no objection to the
proposed modification.
Please note to the applicant that the provided plans should reflect existing conditions. Work is shown on
the provided site plan that indicates proposed work. It is requested that the plans be revised accordingly.
Please request the applicant to provide a plan that shows all easements so that it may be verified that
the monument sign is a minimum of 10ft. away from any utility main or service lateral.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please feel free to give me a call at x6482.
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
S:\Engineering\Kribs\Krispy Kreme Major Site Plan Mod Review Comments. doc
~
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
BUILDING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM NO. 03-237
List of A6ronvms/Abbreviations:
ASCE - American Society of Civil
Engineers
BBA - Boynton Beach Amendments
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 Regulations
EPA - Environment Protection Agency
FBC - Florida Building Code
FIRM - Flood Insurance Rate Map
F.S. - Florida Statutes
LOR - Land Development Regulations
NEC - National Electric Code
NFPA - National Fire Prevention Assn
NGVD - National Geodetic Vertical
Datum of 1929
SFWMD - South Florida Water
Management District
TO: Michael W. Rumpf
Director of Planning and Zoning
FROM: Timothy K. Large e~
TRC Member/Building Division
DATE: October 31,2003
SUBJECT: Project - Krispy Kreme
File No. - MSPM 03-012 - 1st review
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.
BuildinQ Division (Site Specific and Permit Comments) - Timothv K. Larqe (561) 742-6352
1 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 ASCE 7, Chapter 6, and the provisions of 2001 FBC, Section 1606 (Wind
Loads). 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. Clearly
show the location and height of the existing sign on the drawings. New wind load
calculations shall be submitted at the time of permit application. 2001 FBC 1606.1.
2 At time of permit review, submit signed and sealed working drawings of the proposed
construction.
3 Provide text on the drawings that clearly describe the major site plan modification. What is
being modified? BBA to the 2001 FBC, Section 104.2.1.
bf
S:\Development\Building\ TRC\ TRC 2003\Krispy Kreme
Page 1 of 1