REVIEW COMMENTS
DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT
Planning and Zoning Division
Memorandum No. 04-232
01<k,,_' s Cb?<-G'
FROM:
Kurt Bressner,
City Manager fl~
Michael Rumpf,
Planning & Zoning Director
Quintus Greene, . b
Development Director\.?'
TO:
THROUGH:
DATE:
RE:
September 20, 2004
Lake Drive North (ABAN 04-003)
Abandonment of the north 4.2-foot wide walk easement -
Summary of staff recommendation
The above-referenced abandonment request involves a 4.2-foot wide walkway indicated on the plat of
Lakeside Gardens as being located between Lots 30 and 31, and was originally intended to provide
pedestrian access from Lake Drive North to the Intracoastal Waterway. This walkway, and a matching
walkway located at the eastern terminus of Potter Road, remains unimproved. Both walkways are
generally similar except the southern walkway also serves to protect a subsurface utility line. Following
the initial review by the Board and Commission, staff has further considered whether the subject walkway
serves a "public purpose", and should therefore be preserved.
Most relevant to this consideration is the current unimproved status, and width of the subject walkway,
which is 4.2 feet. Until now, current city staff was unaware of the walkways, for which the city is
responsible for maintaining. To properly and safely accommodate the public, physical improvements to
the walkway could require grading and paving, and possibly lighting, which is very difficult and costly to
provide and maintain within the platted width. Historically, the walkway likely provided an amenity to the
local neighborhood, with little or no physical enhancements; however, the city is obligated today to
provide minimum improvements that allow for safe and proper access to the "general" public, and not just
to the adjacent residents.
Therefore, staff continues to represent the findings and conclusion in the initial staff report that support
the request for abandonment based on the lack of public purpose for access. However, if the
Commission finds that the walkway serves a public purpose, and therefore denies the subject
abandonment request, staff recommends additional actions be taken to ultimately obtain the minimum
land necessary to construct and maintain the walkway (following the necessary budgeting). This task
could be accomplished through condemnation to acquire additional land as an easement or as an
expansion of the actual walkway right-of-way. A total of 12 feet could be required for proper
maintenance, and in particular for the south walkway which also contains the utility line. If the
Commission similarly finds the lack of public purpose, the city should subsequently abandon the
southern walkway as well leaving an easement in place specifically for utility purposes.
MR
CC: Jim Cherof, City Attorney
Leff Livergood, City Engineer
C:\DOCUMENTS AND SETTINGS\RUMPFM\LOCAL SETTINGS\TEMPORARY INTERNET FILES\OLKD\SUMMARY OF STAFF
FINDINGS.DOC
MEMORANDUM
10"'.' i ~!<;', .,
I I (.1..''',' " .
)n( '"
c..Ju n"",
1,,;1 If, ~
~ '......1 hi
. f., .
, :.. \
.., ::1
I' ,'I
.1'1
l..J
~'i:r"
__VU~
TO:
City Attorney - Boynton Beach
James Cheroff
- Cf]t;
-~,
PROJECT:
LAKESIDE GARDENS PROPERTY OWNER'S REPRESENTATIVE
MichaelA. Mrotek ~, ~,'-~ ~,n ~7 R,Ir, ~ 1
mI. \, ~ ,I \, ~ n'
'0,' "'~II:'
August 1,2004 b..I, f(JG - 4:IDt : ~
Affidavits/Facts & Summations .---J
\ L ' j
Lake Drive North (ABAN 04-003) 'nrr'ARn.~P; ,'C :':\!ELOPMENll
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Pursuant to your advice and request to Ramona Mrotek and Sherry Easterling on July 20,
2004 at the City Commission meeting, I have been elected to present the enclosed.
The additional enclosed Affidavits from property owners who were on vacation or
absence due to business are hereby submitted.
The enclosed facts concerning the above-cited Project are for the City Commission's
edification, review and consideration. The facts are as follows:
City of Boynton Beach - Ordinance 76-27 provides that:
1. (Line 43) The abandonment or vacation will "not" adversely affect other
property owners.
2. (Line 63) Upon proper submittal the City Clerk shall (Line 65) advise the
City Engineer, Planner, and Public Works. (Line 68/74) The reply is due in
20 days from the staff
3. (Line 82) Set a public hearing held by Planning and Zoning Board. (CRA)
4. (Line 88) Planning and Zoning shall submit recommendations to the City
Council of aU reports and recommendations.
5. (Line 94) The change of use of land requires all property owners within 300
feet to be notified by mail of date of public hearings, 15 days prior to the
hearing.
6. (Line 100) Planning and Zoning has 30 days from the time of receipt by the
City Clerk of application to:
(a) Hold a public hearing;
(b) Report to the City Council recommendations.
7. (Line 106) City Council shall consider recommendations within 10 days.
CONCLUSION:
Application Date:
Community Redevelopment Agency Hearing
City Commission Hearing (Tabled)
City Commission Hearing (To be Tabled)
City Commission Hearing (???)
April 26, 2004
July 13, 2004 = 78 days
July 20, 2004 = 85 days
August 3, 2004 = 99 days
August 17, 2004 = 113 days
The cynicism of Planning and Zoning maneuvers and delays blatantly obstructs the
provisions granted the people in Ordnance 76.27.
The Community Redevelopment Agency has heard and recommended the application to
abandon be DENIED.
Your efforts and consideration in this matter, as officers of the Court, is greatly
appreciated by all of the concerned citizens of Lakeside Gardens that this city
administration serves. ~ ~
4~
HAEL. OTEK
Presentation Representative
Cc: City Mayor/Commissioners
Lakeside Garden Property Owners
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority duly authorized to take acknowledgements
and administer oaths, personally appeared R, C H '" R Q H A ~ It! / f" " ^' ,
and who, upon being duly sworn, depose and states the following:
1. I am over the age of 21 years of age. -
2. I have personal knowledge of the matters stated herein.
3. I am a permanent homestead resident of Lakeside Gardens Subdivision for
.3 years and reside at 6'2 h P (J TTE ~ R oA 0
4. I and my family walk and use for our enjoyment the walkways providing
access to the intercoastal waters (Lake Worth) for as long as I have lived
and owned this property.
5. I and my neighbors have maintained the walkways, both North and South
as long as I have owned my property and they have before me.
6. I and my neighbors shall continue to maintain the walkways both North
and South.
7. I will continue to maintain said walkways without the assistance or
requirements of the City of Boynton Beach in all respects.
8. Both the North and South walkways were dedicated to the public for
perpetual use and I feel it is a provision of my property ownership existing
for the past 82 years.
FURTHER AFFIANT SA YETH NAUGHT.
~~
~ .. 1/
Signature
!?/CH-t,eO HAR/!I}ON
Printed Name
~
Ihe f9regoing in,tpImen! ~as s~rn to and subscribed before me this3a day of July, 2004 by
K fe-h A1\b ~ / ~<f'{\..J , who is personally known to me or who has produced
. as identification and I wjJp did take an o~
",\<Y PlJ OFAClALNOTARYSEAL /~
0'" <9<: RAMONAMROTEK
J:~ t COMMISSICN NUM~ Notary Public 1/11 {L.1 -/ r ~
.; MY CC:~kRES /l.;f111 w.1t ' '1 (I _ c. t.
OFf\.O APR,720OS Printed Name
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority dqly authorized to take acknowledgements
and administer oaths, personally appeared At{ , Lh ~ 'l / 11. ~ I () 0 t/ '
and who, upon being duly sworn, depose and states the following: -
1. I am over the age of 21 years of age.
2. I have personal knowledge ofthe matters stated herein.
3. I am a permanent homestead resident of Lakeside Gard
1- years and reside at ~ L{ Po ++ ~
4. I and my family walk and use for our enjoyment the walkways providing
access to the intercoastal waters (Lake Worth) for as long as I have lived
and owned this property.
5. I and my neighbors have maintained the walkways, both North and South
as long as I have owned my property and they have before me.
6. I and my neighbors shall continue to maintain the walkways both North
and South.
7. I will continue to maintain said walkways without the assistance or
requirements of the City of Boynton Beach in all respects.
8. Both the North and South walkways were dedicated to the public for
perpetual use and I feel it is a provision of my property ownership existing
for the past 82 years.
FURTHER AFFIANT SA YETH NAUGHT.
~~ 11~
Si tur
~~t' ( A. rff)~~
Printed Name
~
The foregoing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this 3 q day of July, 2004 by
rn r (.,~ AL-I A - F/ ()' I) , who is personally known to me or who has produced
<9~ RAMONAMAOTEJ( as identification ~ o~
lIo COMMISSICNNUMBER Notary Public
~ 00007281 IJ ^ ,~ALl-
o~ R4Y COf.tMISSION EXPIREs 1'- M" M (/ r n
F\. APR. 72005 Printed Name
^,11l'T!;/C
(S
AFFIDA VIT
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority duly authorized to take acknowledgements
and administer oaths, personally appeared <:; u S ~ A--O A- tt.S . ,
and who, upon being duly sworn, depose and states the following:
1.
I am over the age of 21 years of age.
2.
I have personal knowledge of the matters stated herein.
3.
I am a permanent homestead resident of Lakeside Gardens Subdivision for.tJ ~ U
I years and reside at JS"O 5" LM('~ D(\.Jvte..}\J, rBtJv~~ ~~-e.Fi<-ff
/
I and my family walk and use for our enjoyment the walkways providing
access to the intercoastal waters (Lake Worth) for as long as I have lived
and owned this property.
4.
5.
I and my neighbors have maintained the walkways, both North and South
as long as I have owned my property and they have before me.
6.
I and my neighbors shall continue to maintain the walkways both North
and South.
7.
I will continue to maintain said walkways without the assistance or
requirements of the City of Boynton Beach in all respects.
8.
Both the North and South walkways were dedicated to the public for
perpetual use and I feel it is a provision of my property ownership existing
for the past 82 years.
FURTHER AFFIANT SA YETH NAUGHT.
~~
S igtll!ture
S cw ~ IJ.~~". ~
Printed Name
fA-
The foregoing instw~.ent was sworn to and SUbSC, ribed before me this 50 day of July, 2004 by
Su S ~.v '1'!tl1\S . who is personally known to me ~"1f
- ~' as identification an~~oa~
. ~~fJ.V PV<9'''~6FACiAtNOTARY SEAL Notary Public
i:- RAMONA MROTeK L:) .
~ COMMISS/QII NUMBER ' ~ Ir\ t/\^..-I4-
~ ~ 00007281 Printed Name
~ ~ fAV COMMISSION EXPIRES
OF f\.O APR. 72005
" -"c.~-='~
~NJTe/L
AFFIDA VIT
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority duly authorized to take acknowledgements
and administer oaths, personally appeared /lJe,' I ':f"'_ Ah A-M.s
and who, upon being duly sworn, depose and states the following:
1.
I am over the age of 21 years of age.
2.
I have personal knowledge of the matters stated herein.
3.
I am a permanent homestead resident of Lakeside Gardens Subdivision fO~ (
/ years and reside at ~ sn S- LA-JloIL !JAM.. fl. 13~ eA-C- (
4.
I and my family walk and use for our enjoyment the walkways providing
access to the intercoastal waters (Lake Worth) for as long as I have lived
and owned this property.
5.
I and my neighbors have maintained the walkways, both North and South
as long as I have owned my property and they have before me.
6.
I and my neighbors shall continue to maintain the walkways both North
and South.
7.
I will continue to maintain said walkways without the assistance or
requirements of the City of Boynton Beach in all respects.
8.
Both the North and South walkways were dedicated to the public for
perpetual use and I feel it is a provision of my property ownership existing
for the past 82 years.
FURTHER AFFIANT SAYETII NAUGHT. ~_
A . 'l/lL
Signatur
A/J::-,'L :r. AD~~9
Printed Name
t'-
The fore~oing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this36 day of July, 2004 by
tve.\ L ~~ 1'lJ)A-Il1.$ -,whoispersonallyknowntomeorwhohasproduced
as identification an~ did take an oath. ~
~
Notary Public '
Mm.l),v\4-
Printed Name
( ~~"S ~-\
~1:-. J ,~YCOMMISSIONEXP!RES
OF f'-O ,_,.t~,!i~~,'
yn vto TElL
AFFIDA VIT
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
BEFORE ME, the undersigned au~rity duly authorized to, take acknowledgements
and administer oaths, personally appeared olf?mA ~e- m/~,-€f2- ,
and who, upon being duly sworn, depose and states the following:
1.
2.
3.
4. ,
I am over the age of 21 years of age.
I have personal knowledge of the matters stated herein.
I am a permanent homestead resident of Lakeside Gardens Subdivision for ,/<
2h years and reside at .2 to f 7 I AK~ A<'. AJo;e.m &vNmtJ /dE;A:: 11tH-.
, ( 33q3~
I and my family walk and use for our enjoyment the walkways providing
access to the intercoastal waters (Lake Worth) for as long as I have lived
and owned this property.
5.
I and my neighbors have maintained the walkways, both North and South
as long as I have owned my property and they have before me.
6.
I and my neighbors shall continue to maintain the walkways both North
and South.
7.
I will continue to maintain said walkways without the assistance or
requirements of the City of Boynton Beach in all respects.
8.
Both the North and South walkways were dedicated to the public for
perpetual use and I feel it is a provision of my property ownership existing
for the past 82 years.
FURTHER AFFIANT SA YETH NAUGHT.
~~~~
Si~ture
Vt;1~rnA ....M..vc ~ /,,~ Fe
Printed Name
The foregoing instrument was swprn to and subscribed before me thi30 day of July, 2004 by
t!. t> {\.. fVl A ~ (rU ll~, yL, , who is personally known to me or wh 0 has P'M,C, ed
. as identification and ~o did take an oath. fi' '
/ h~-~"-,,, / V4
Notary Public
~/n fIVVfr- m no nz Ie
Printed Name
(SE
...~v Pi./ '~'-Wi'1C1ALNOTARYSEAL.
0..... a~, RAMONAMROTEK
~ ~ (';')MMISSICN NUMBER
~ 00007281
~(C' ~ lAY ClJMMISSlON EXPIRES
OF f'-O ..<"".,,~R. 72005
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority duly authorized to take acknowledgements
and administer oaths, personally appeared ,~~' yt::JbII ~'J ,
and who, upon being duly sworn, depose and states the following:
1. I am over the age of 21 years of age.
2. I have personal knowledge of the matters stated herein.
3. I am a permanent homestead resident of Lakeside Gardens Subdivision for
/'1 years and reside at ~/t;/:; M.. -p, ,.,;
4. I and my family walk and use for our enjoyment the walkways providing
access to the intercoastal waters (Lake Worth) for as long as I have lived
and owned this property.
5. I and my neighbors have maintained the walkways, both North and South
as long as I have owned my property and they have before me.
6. I and my neighbors shall continue to maintain the walkways both North
and South.
7. I will continue to maintain said walkways without the assistance or
requirements of the City of Boynton Beach in all respects.
8. Both the North and South walkways were dedicated to the public for
perpetual use and I feel it is a provision of my property ownership existing
for the past 82 years.
FURTHER AFFIANT SA YETI! NAUGHT. J
~~~YO~&~d',
Si ture
~~~,...tL k ~KOR<;J.l-r
Printed Name
1-L
The foregoing instrument was swgrn to and subscribed before me this~ day of July, 2004 by
, who is personally known to me or who has produced
as identification an~ oa~
Notary Public
/l.A-M ~ m. tlc> f721{
Printed Name
S Itt\l)t\.1t
PatOflS/,t'
lip OFFlClALNO'I'ARY SEAL
(Sl ~<9~~ CO:::;:R
... ~ 00007281
~ ~ fAY COMMISSION EXPtRES
OF f\.O "~P_R. 7,2005
AFFIDAVIT
STATE OF FLORIDA
COUNTY OF PALM BEACH
BEFORE ME, the undersigned authori!y duly authorized to t
and administer oaths, personally appeared
and who, upon being duly sworn, depose and states the following:
1.
I am over the age of 21 years of age.
2.
I have personal knowledge of the matters stated herein.
3.
I am a permanent 1-. I If resident of Lakeside GarR Su~vision for
I r-nears and reside at (p ~ ~ D 1777 I ~ ~
I and my family walk and use for our enjoyment the walkways providing
access to the intercoastal waters (Lake Worth) for as long as I have lived,
and owned this property.
4.
5.
I and my neighbors have maintained the walkways, both North and South
as long as I have owned my property and they have before me.
6.
I and my neighbors shall continue to maintain the walkways both North
and South.
7.
I will continue to maintain said walkways without the assistance or
requirements of the City of Boynton Beach in all respects.
8.
Both the North and South walkways were dedicated to the public for
perpetual use and I feel it is a provision of my property ownership existing
for the past 82 years.
FURTHER AFFIANT SA YETH NAUGHT.
s(J;~~~
./l4l.# -~/~
Printed Name
)'-L
The foregoing instrument was sworn to and subscribed before me this J' day ofJuly, 2004 by
IWV N F It eo ct i) ~~ ' who is personally known to me or who has produced
polo i\.l ~ l\-. L.l" c.e.N ~ as identification and~th. ~
I '.J" .,,~'-~c:~;,:.:iAtNOtAAY"'" Notary Public
(M:: : :}I,:';' ,RAMONAMAOliK'" ./l.A.-m ~
~~j , . ,')iJiMISSICN NlMotBER Pnn' ted Name
1 Y'~ ~t-. ,.. 00007281
j . ",. - ' ,COMMISSION EXPIRES
""-"~;~ i . '", APR. 72005
~M w[
.. ,;." . II
'; ',. ~ . . .,~ .. I
It'... .. 1
~.
f
" .
,
~
;+:~.,~
.~\
" ,
, '
. 'OR':n' rTN'k,.1tT,CE' > ';.orO: ,,"17'6' ::':':2:~'
. '. .' ~~ .n..l.;"'" ,": ~'. . ". "'.~...' ..:'.
'. , . .
~,
,
l
'2
3'
4-
,;
G.
'7
[3
AN ORDINANCE OF' THE CITY Q~~'BOYNTON. BEA~H. ELORIDA.
, 'ESTABtrSHrNGA UNIFORM PR0'CEOURE ,FOR TlIE APPLICATION
TO THE CITY FOR VACATION: AND ABANOONMENT at STREETS,
. . . . ':. ,'. . '." - .' .: . . . . : ..,,' ~. . . t ". . .'
'ALLEYSfc SPEC!Al,PURPO$~EA~~M~NTS,A;ND O'J,'HEJ:ti NONFEE
" OOE1tESt~ OF,:'l'BE,CIT.Y.;;DESI~A'1'~NG: WIETEQl;:l!BYfWHICH
.~gg~~~iI~~~=~~~~_G
, fROVIS!ONS:... :~' ~~GTIVE]~)i\:.WEAND;FOR;O~R:PuR'P0S:ES .
..
..
''i.
" ,
9 BE IT' Oftf.lM~D' BX 'I'aEGITY GOUNCmOF THE CITY OF' BOYNTON
10 ;BEACH.. .FLORIDA:
I
~
Ii :Se9tiQnl:, Short title
1:2. This Ordinance shan be:designated and may be cited as the City of Boynton
t3 Beach ,Street and 'Easement Abandonment :O:rdinance .
L
f
j
.'
~
;...
If
'"
~
~,
0,
r
i
r
f
I
I ..
~.
;
i'
"
J
1
Ii
r
1
j,
j'
Ii
"
,~
Ii
r
r
1,
1
h
l4-SectioIl 2:PurpOS8S af Ordinance
~ Thepurppses of this Or~nance are to.. establish uniformpracedure for the
Ib application to. theei ty for ,the vacation and abandonment' of city streets. alleys.
11 special purpose eas~ments and other ponfee inte1!ests: o.f the jCity; to. designate
" ,
18those individuals' wh9' shall have the responsibility for the proce~sing of such
-.. .
19 applications; and to pro.vide the methods and procedure$ for processing said
2Papplications .
21 Section:3: Application form
'22 All requests '~or vacation and abando.nment of city str~eti3. alleys. special
purpo.se easements and other nanfee interests, which, the City may have in real
2l/propertyshall be made in' writing upon an applicati(:ln form f'Q.rnished by the City.
2~Such application shall be executed. in triplicate by the party or parties requesting
24the same who shall verify under oath that the information contained therein is true
21and co~rect. The application shallbe filed witbtheCity Clerk and shall set forth
the following information:
I
"
l
~~ , fa) The ~ame and aqdress of the applica:nt or applic~ts .
ao (b) A complete and accurate legal description of the: street, alley, special
31 purpose easement or other .nonfee interest of the City or. anr portion thereof sought
. I
32. to be abandoned or vacated. Where possible , the legal des~ription sh.all he a.ccom-
~.3panied by plat.'map or dr,awing showing~the genelial area i~volved and the location
I:
I
I
I
I
i
I
i
r
.:' ...
r . .. '.
,1,340fthe Bpeeif[c. prop~rty. interest to be abandoned or vacated.
~ (c) ,Whether title 'or inter~Bt of the Cityand~ the public in and, to the proper
.
. -
.: '"
sought to be, abandoned or vacated 'was acquired by deedl dedic~tion or prescrip-
, " " , , . I
' ,
a7tion, atl.d if ,recorde'd:in the public records. the book and page number fhe,reof.
38 Cd)' The reaSon for the request of the,,abancionment :or va'cation ~
39 (e) The n'ames, and addresses of the owners and occupants of real proper
" I
poundfngand'abuttill,gthe proPE!rty soug~t to be abandonedjmr vacated.
I
"41" (f) 'The' applicatlt :shall certify thatthe ptopero/i,sop.ght to be abandoned or
, ,
vacated waS nqtaequired or' dedicated for state' or federal h~ghway purposes and
'that tpe 'aband0n~ent or vacation wi~l not. adversely affect o~her property owners
rUrIT,easonably limit access to their property .
45"
(g)' ~l,1ch otherrelev-ent information as ,the City may require.
4,b Section 4: Applic,ation Fee
, ,
47 .Each a.pplication filed with the City Clerk, other th~n an application initiat
I, ,', "
by Motion of the City Council. shall be acCompanied by payment of a fee covering
I '
qthe cost of admtnistrative review. site analysis and investigation and publication
~in one of the following amounts:
, 6f' (a) Applicatio~s for vacation and abandonment of City streets and alleys
shall be accompanied py a fee of $250.00.
6'3 (b) Application for vacation and abandonment of special purpose easement
-
... ~ch as utility ,~asements I and other nonfee interests of the City shall be
r'accompaniedby a fee of $50 .00.
oc.. Upon:tjhe application being properly submitted. it shall be accepted and
filed by the Cl~rk. who shall give a receipt to the applicant for the fee paid.
61!3
SectioJ,l 5: Processing of Application
, ,
I
~
fa) Action, by City Clerk. Upon receipt of the application and fee. the
. j .
City Clerk shail reView the, same fOI-completeness and for compliance with the,
~/requirements of this Ordinance. The City C.1erkmay reject the application if a
similar application has been considered at any time within six (6) months of the
~datethe later application is submitted. Upon proper submittal. the City Clerk
~hall proceed as follows:
(:,~ (1) , Ai:lvise the City Engineer. City Planner and Director of Public Works
!
. - ~
<<:.of the applicatipn by forwarding a 'duplicate copy thereof to itheir attention and
, ,
- . . '
b7requestin:g the~r review and' recommendationsof,approyal o~ disapproval thereof
68co 'be made to the Ci~yClerk within not more than, twenty (20) days time. Upon
n
., '.. ,"~""
11 '
'ji
. "
. .
. ..
, ," . .. ,
recei~ of said dup~cate copr.the CityEri.gin~er shan conduct his on-site analysis
7~dj,n.-vestig~tio:p.;9f the ,proP;8f~s():u;gh~tobe ab~d.qnE!t1(jrvaea~ed, and shall 8:~-:',
. . ' '. . .... .
lvise,:each:~l,l,d every public,uti1i~ ~ompany' that'may b.e involved;, or', concerned, with
, ,
12the abandG:i:lmentbyse~ding:theri1'a copypf the'~ppl,ication a~d requesting t~efr '
13review and :tec6minend.~tions0f approval or' disapproval thereon to be made to the
"'-,
,
. .' .' , . \,
. #C~ty,Clerk withinnQt;~re t~~i;l,tW~nty:':4ays'~#i~~';poS;tm~ke:~ date of m~g.
.' ", " ",. "'.' '.' ..... . .! . ,
~'" (2): Notify,by~egular ~ail,the, OWriers::an:4q~~up,a,nts ;of reaLproperty l;>ound
. "
.,
~g: and \ ab*:l:tting"~he'- prdperty so\;ight to: be'abandon~d 'or \Ta~ated .,Theowner of ,
7Jproper~ shaUlil,~.deem~d to'be'the:person shown on the current city tax assessmen
16roll.:asbein'gthe;o'wner llild su~h no'ti.Ge shall be sent to: tJ.?e address, given on the
l1eas~ment roll,fOr that perspn." It shill not be necessary to s~nd such noti;ce by mail
/!Jfiro any own~~ 01", occtlp;aniof property who has si~ed the application for abandon-
e/ment as a,requesting party.
81.' (3) Seta ',date for public he~ringon'tbeapplication to beheld by the Plarmin
j',~
l.f
1[.
, Mand Zoning Boar~. and refer the matter to said ;Board' by :foriwardiIig th~ original
84applicaticm ,and all,reports and recommendations of,approvs+ or disapproval ~hereof
8~ (4) Notify the: general public by publishing ,notice' in a newspaper of general
is
!.i
,;'f.:
:....,
;,
;
circulation iri the city of the public' hearing to be held .00. :the application by the '
f//planning and Zoning Board.
eB (5) Af'ter the Planning and Zoriing Board shall submit its recommendation on
tfithe application. advise the City Council ofailr~ports and recommendations of
qoapp~oval er disapproval thereof .
, ,
' ,
, If/ (6) 'Notifyby regular m~l the owners and 6cci1pants:of real property bound
1. ing and abutting the proper.tysopghttobe abandoned or vacated and each and ever,
"
, ,
~publi9 ytiIity c~mpany that was notified theretofore by the C~ty Engineer ~ .and'in
lj4case of a cq.ange in th,e land use of the comprehensi Vc;l plan.' allownere of property ,
fttwi thin, 300 :t:eet in aU'db:ections fr.om the 'lines, of the property involved. of the date
~ofthepublic hearing 01;1 the proposed ordinance m~ntioned below, and the City
Cfflerk shall 'cause to be published in a newspaper of geneI:~ circulation in the city
.3 3
.ff
"
:~
l'
, I
I
I
I , ,
r@tl;t:e,titn;ca, ~n~':~laqeof';~~blie,~ar~ug ~~~ thepro.posed. or~Ii~~e~ ,at ,le:~stfiftee~
ifi (15) 'ds.-ys prior toth~;,public ~earing~:
, "
" .i "
"~, '
j
.. -.
~. '" ~
.
I/)? Jb):A~(m 'by' PlaIining<and'Zoning Boaxd..The Planni~g and Zoning
~/Board shallhplldapublic'hearing ,and:l3h~l repor~ ~ts x:eco~me1idationsor status
" ,
02oIi, 'tne applic~tion f~,a,ba.nddnmentor, vacat?-qnto' '~he:G;ty Gbu~~i1;Within ~~irty,
" '. . . ": <'. ". ," -', . . '.
," - . "
'.', .
" ,
oJ ~3 0) 'claYs aft~r.! the JI.p':pliC~ti9D, has b e~nfi~ed w~th~e City 'ylerk .~rid sh,all,
04specificaIly' i~c.'hide>~ its'report, the recommendatio.ns or:apP,:fova1 9:t" qisapproval
, ,
ottheretofOre: :rued with it;
. ': . ~ .
ob: (0)' Actibn'by, ;CHy' Council.: 'rhe'City Council shall'consider there~orts
'. ;1. , .' . '. " . . '.
, , '
01 and recommendatiQJason'applications for ,abandonment or:va:cation as hereInabove'
o!,provided for', withui.'ten (lO)days of its ;receipt of same~; and shall, after public
09 :hearing ~nd Cilie consideration, either accept ,modify or deny the recommendation
oloin accorda.nce~th the best interests of the public w'elfar~ .:' 'If by s~d ~cceptance"
OI' modification or: de~al, of the r,ecommendation. a change in, the land us~ of the com-
, ,
OfJ.prehensive plan isr~qui~ed.or'jf the aforesaid action by ~l1eCity Counoil neces-
. ., .-
' , .
' ,
, ,
ot.3s1tate,s' a ,chang~lnthe e:rlstin:g,property interests orrights~ ~n orciiriance setting
, Oltkorth said change shall be introduceda~ soon as pos'siblE~.
Of' Section 8; Authority 'to Codify"
, ,
Ofb It is the intention'of the City CC?Uncil~and It is hereby ordained that ,the
o/1provi,sions, of this Ordimmce;shaU bee<;>ttle:and,be IIll:lde a part of the Code of
olBOrdiminces,of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida; that the,~ectiona of this Ordin-
, ,
ol1ance may be renumbered or relettered to. accomplish such intention;, and tilat the,
o~ord "()rdi.J;lance" may be changed to~'chapter". "section" ~ lIarticle", or other,
o2.1appropriate word.
o').'/, Section 7:S~~ability
o).~ EacJl oftheprovision$ of this Ordinance is separable> including word,
o,,-.jc1ause~ phras~ or,sentep.ce.: and if any portion thereof sllall'be declar'ed invalid.
/ "
<7~rhe remaining,portion ~hall not be affected but shall remain,fn full force and,effect.
4.
4
I
"',"" '/~I-'""
//~!
"".,. '.",'; , ,~
, , , I '
, .
, . '. ~.
" I
, "I
.... I
i'
I
''3. '
~l, ,
1
...;'
I
i
,I
;
!:
, ',' , ',':, , ' 1
s ~ '8' Re:...~~.'Jt 'Fro~' " , ,I
',: :e" ,~~, "';.~_ ,rp~,~,',n 'r" ...:. _,.n" " _' ' ;" " " .' ~
' ", Aif~~~_li~~',~li;~~'~f,~~n~ces: i11~~;~~eirith",~e hereby -tepeale .
. '. ~ :. .. . ~. . .' . . . . ."". -. ... ~ ~. . . :. .... .'. - "
:~J,~.,:',An":Eff~v.~:,J>..'. . " , ,'.. .' ' I
,j', '.'. .
;;} ,
:r
1"
I . . . . .
" ;This:,9r~ance s.~'h,eoo~e effecti~~in tbe.,m~~!!r ~d, at;~e ~e proYided
,:,,' .
f' "
.' !
'bv'law '
. .J,., ".., ":.
'"'
~.
. . . .
, Fi~st ~~~~,~~,<,,:~~: :~ay'of,JulY~ A:.t).,.;.~9J6;.'
: 'se~~d.'~' ~.~~~,'~d,pas~age:~ ~ !{7.::, .<i~Y Of,
, ,k:D. 1976,. '
o ,
i~j~
i
~~'
'f
. ~', '
:1 ~.
'.
I"
.. "
: !',".
, ,
. i
, CITY, oF BOnn'QN ~BEAcR FLORIDA'
" . . . " " : ': . -. : i.' . '. .
I
f:;
, ,
~.
:).' .
",
~ :".
. ~~:
ATrEST:
.~~<~
.. . ," & ".
. ~ ..... .W>cil. ... ..er... ..
, . '
, , 0
, .. .
. ~i~",L.
: . CoUi:1cil mber' t." ' ,~.
." " I .
I
it.,
.;---
- '
.. .J-
F'
.!
L
~.
t"
, .~.
''''',
!
1.:1'
~.~
' . 9ity Cl~rk': ", : ,: ".. "
J,'
""
/ <- ~e ..0~ ~</'r:t'
,f3~ rV
~pf, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Lamanna, Rosemarie on behalf of Cherof, James
Thursday, July 15, 2004 1 :57 PM
Livergood, Jeffrey; Rumpf, Michael; Kelley, David; Prainito, Janet
FW: Abandonment of walkway for public access to ICW
-----Original Message-----
From: Cherof, James [mailto:jcherof@cityatty.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 1:46 PM
To: 'Cherof, James'
Subject: RE: Abandonment of walkway for public access to ICW
Jeff, Mike R., Dave Kelly
The Plat language does not specifically identify the path as a public ROW,
not does it contain dedication language as it does for street, avenues and
roads. I'm not sure if there is any record of acceptance by the City, but we
will ask the Clerk to check the public record. Absent an acceptance, or
ownership by adverse possession, I don't think its the City's to maintain or
abandon.
This may get tabled at agenda preview.
Give me a call.
-----Original Message-----
From: Cherof, James [mailto:CherofJ@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us]
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 11:17 AM
To: 'jcherof@cityatty.com'
Subject: FW: Abandonment of walkway for public access to ICW
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Livergood, Jeffrey
> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 10:57 AM
> To: Rumpf, Michael; Magazine, Chuck; Wildner, John
> Cc: Breese, Ed; Cherof, James; Kelley, David
> Subject: RE: Abandonment of walkway for public access to ICW
>
> Mike,
>
> We looked into this yesterday. This was a matter that I was not aware of
> until yesterday. This is a very tough issue. First, as a City, we must
> decide if we are bound to provide continued access to the ICW for all
> residents. The access is platted as a public right of way. Cities
> abandon public right of way all the time when maintaining the right of way
> is not in the public interest. In this scenario, I am considering the
> public to be all residents, and not just those adjacent to, or residing in
> the vicinity of, the right of way to be abandoned. Legal can opine on any
> perpetual legal right that area residents may, or may not, have to
> continue to use these rights of way to access the ICW. Is it possible to
> just maintain one access point and abandon the other? My guess is yes
> because access to the ICW would be maintained.
>
> If we consider the public good to mean all 66,000+ residents, then we
> really have two options.
>
> 1. Keep access to the ICW in one or both of the rights of way. In this
1
> option, we are bound to malntain the access now that we know about it and
> because it is a public right of way. The right of way is only 4.2 feet
> wide (someone correct me if I am wrong on this) and is not sufficient
> width to reasonably maintain access. The access is not paved (soft sand)
> and vegetation is allowed to grow over the path from adjacent properties.
> We are unable to get any kind of equipment in the right of way thus all
> maintenance would have to be by hand. Furthermore, it appears that there
> is an old drainage pipe leading through the south right of way. It is not
> possible replace this pipe. If we keep either or both of these rights of
> ways, I believe we need to pursue additional property via acquisition or
> easement so we can maintain the access according to today's standards.
>
> 2. Abandon both access rights of way. This option removes all
> responsibility from the City to maintain the access right of way and
> eliminates all liability associated with maintenance. Frankly, from a
> Public Works perspective, this is preferred. However, I am unable to
> gauge the City's duty or responsibility to provide this access to area
> residents, even though it was platted many years ago and is not of
> sufficient width by today's standards. Again, legal should consider this.
>
> If I can provide additional information, please let me know.
>
>
>
> Jeffrey R. Livergood, P.E.
> Director of Public Works
> City of Boynton Beach
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rumpf, Michael
> Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 11:45 AM
> To: Livergood, JeffreYi Magazine, Chucki Wildner, John
> Subject: Abandonment of walkway for public access to ICW
> Importance: High
>
> Gentleman, you need to be informed (If you aren't already) that the CRA
> has recommended the denial of this request to abandon a 4.2 foot access
> walk intended for residents of Lakeside Gardens Subdivision. The residents
> attended and spoke of its value to them. Staff recommended in favor of
> abandonment due to size, location, unimproved nature of it and the
> waterfront. We mentioned the issue of liability.
>
> There are two but only one considered at this time via private petition.
> The subject walk is located at the eastern end of Dimick Road. Too small
> to see on an aeriali you need to view the plat. Please take a minute to
> discuss it with me today, or view the plat. I will be in Leadership
> Boynton all day tomorrow and will leave for a two week vacation on Friday.
> Maxime is the assigned planner but Ed Breese will be in charge next week.
> If you have a strong opinion on this, please formulate your position and
> inform Ed Breese prior to Tuesday night's Commission meeting. Or ideally,
> by Friday's pre-agenda meeting. Thanks, Mike
>
> Report is attached << File: Staff Report.doc >>
2
1& r(~
U((l4(~IY-(~'~
~f, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Livergood, Jeffrey
Thursday, July 15, 2004 10:57 AM
Rumpf, Michael; Magazine, Chuck; Wildner, John
Breese, Ed; Cherof, James; Kelley, David
RE: Abandonment of walkway for public access to ICW
Mike,
We looked into this yesterday. This was a matter that I was not aware of until yesterday. This is a very tough issue. First,
as a City, we must decide if we are bound to provide continued access to the ICW for all residents. The access is platted
as a public right of way. Cities abandon public right of way all the time when maintaining the right of way is not in the
public interest. In this scenario, I am considering the public to be all residents, and not just those adjacent to, or residing in
the vicinity of, the right of way to be abandoned. Legal can opine on any perpetual legal right that area residents may, or
may not, have to continue to use these rights of way to access the ICW. Is it possible to just maintain one access point
and abandon the other? My guess is yes because access to the ICW would be maintained.
If we consider the public good to mean all 66,000+ residents, then we really have two options.
1. Keep access to the ICW in one or both of the rights of way. In this option, we are bound to maintain the access now
that we know about it and because it is a public right of way. The right of way is only 4.2 feet wide (someone correct me if
I am wrong on this) and is not sufficient width to reasonably maintain access. The access is not paved (soft sand) and
vegetation is allowed to grow over the path from adjacent properties. We are unable to get any kind of equipment in the
right of way thus all maintenance would have to be by hand. Furthermore, it appears that there is an old drainage pipe
leading through the south right of way. It is not possible replace this pipe. If we keep either or both of these rights of
ways, I believe we need to pursue additional property via acquisition or easement so we can maintain the access
according to today's standards.
2. Abandon both access rights of way. This option removes all responsibility from the City to maintain the access right of
way and eliminates all liability associated with maintenance. Frankly, from a Public Works perspective, this is preferred.
However, I am unable to gauge the City's duty or responsibility to provide this access to area residents, even though it was
platted many years ago and is not of sufficient width by today's standards. Again, legal should consider this.
If I can provide additional information, please let me know.
Jeffrey R. Livergood, P.E.
Director of Public Works
City of Boynton Beach
-----Original Message-----
From: Rumpf, Michael
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 11:45 AM
To: Livergood, Jeffrey; Magazine, Chuck; Wildner, John
Subject: Abandonment of walkway for public access to ICW
Importance: High
Gentleman, you need to be informed (If you aren't already) that the CRA has recommended the denial of this request
to abandon a 4.2 foot access walk intended for residents of Lakeside Gardens Subdivision. The residents attended
and spoke of its value to them. Staff recommended in favor of abandonment due to size, location, unimproved nature
of it and the waterfront. We mentioned the issue of liability.
There are two but only one considered at this time via private petition. The subject walk is located at the eastern end of
Dimick Road. Too small to see on an aerial; you need to view the plat. Please take a minute to discuss it with me
today, or view the plat. I will be in Leadership Boynton all day tomorrow and will leave for a two week vacation on
Friday. Maxime is the assigned planner but Ed Breese will be in charge next week. If you have a strong opinion on
this, please formulate your position and inform Ed Breese prior to Tuesday night's Commission meeting. Or ideally, by
Friday's pre-agenda meeting. Thanks, Mike
Report is attached << File: Staff Report.doc >>
1
Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Rumpf, Michael
Thursday, July 15, 2004 3:19 PM
Breese, Ed; Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
Fw: Abandonment of walkway for public access to ICW
This remains interesting.
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld
-----Original Message-----
From: Kelley, David <kelleyd@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us>
To: Cherof, James <CherofJ@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us>
CC: Livergood, Jeffrey <LivergoodJ@ci.boynton-beach.fl.uS>i Rumpf, Michael
<RumpfM@ci.boynton-beach.fl.uS>i prainito, Janet <PrainitoJ@ci.boynton-beach.fl.uS>i
Lamanna, Rosemarie <LamannaR@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us>
Sent: Thu Jul 15 14:19:54 2004
Subject: RE: Abandonment of walkway for public access to ICW
Jim:
In all due respect, I feel that your assessment that these walkways that Jeff has noted
previously, and your note that "absent an acceptance, ..." is wrong. These walkways are
clearly shown on the record plat as public walks, tied into the dedicated roadway (Lake
Drive) and are definitely public. The location in particular is the Plat of Lakeside
Gardens, as recorded in P.B. 8, Pg. 57, Public Records of Palm Beach County, Florida.
This was recorded on January 22, 1924. The dedication dedicates all public right-of-ways
to the public (including these two 4.2 feet walkways to the ICW), but allow for the
abandonment by the public or their discontinuance by law.
They need to be addresses via the abandonment procedures that the city has in place if in
fact they are "to be taken out of the picture".
Dave... .
-----Original Message-----
From: Lamanna, Rosemarie On Behalf Of Cherof, James
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 1:57 PM
To: Livergood, JeffreYi Rumpf, Michaeli Kelley, Davidi prainito, Janet
Subject: FW: Abandonment of walkway for public access to ICW
-----Original Message-----
From: Cherof, James [mailto:jcherof@cityatty.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 1:46 PM
To: 'Cherof, James'
Subject: RE: Abandonment of walkway for public access to ICW
Jeff, Mike R., Dave Kelly
The Plat language does not specifically identify the path as a public ROW,
not does it contain dedication language as it does for street, avenues and
roads. I'm not sure if there is any record of acceptance by the City, but we
will ask the Clerk to check the public record. Absent an acceptance, or
ownership by adverse possession, I don't think its the City's to maintain or
abandon.
This may get tabled at agenda preview.
Give me a call.
1
-----Original Message-----
From: Cherof, James [mailto:CherofJ@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us]
Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 11:17 AM
To: 'jcherof@cityatty.com'
Subject: FW: Abandonment of walkway for public access to ICW
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Livergood, Jeffrey
> Sent: Thursday, July 15, 2004 10:57 AM
> To: Rumpf, Michael; Magazine, Chuck; Wildner, John
> Cc: Breese, Ed; Cherof, James; Kelley, David
> Subject: RE: Abandonment of walkway for public access to ICW
>
> Mike,
>
> We looked into this yesterday. This was a matter that I was not aware of
> until yesterday. This is a very tough issue. First, as a City, we must
> decide if we are bound to provide continued access to the ICW for all
> residents. The access is platted as a public right of way. Cities
> abandon public right of way all the time when maintaining the right of way
> is not in the public interest. In this scenario, I am considering the
> public to be all residents, and not just those adjacent to, or residing in
> the vicinity of, the right of way to be abandoned. Legal can opine on any
> perpetual legal right that area residents may, or may not, have to
> continue to use these rights of way to access the ICW. Is it possible to
> just maintain one access point and abandon the other? My guess is yes
> because access to the ICW would be maintained.
>
> If we consider the public good to mean all 66,000+ residents, then we
> really have two options.
>
> 1. Keep access to the ICW in one or both of the rights of way. In this
> option, we are bound to maintain the access now that we know about it and
> because it is a public right of way. The right of way is only 4.2 feet
> wide (someone correct me if I am wrong on this) and is not sufficient
> width to reasonably maintain access. The access is not paved (soft sand)
> and vegetation is allowed to grow over the path from adjacent properties.
> We are unable to get any kind of equipment in the right of way thus all
> maintenance would have to be by hand. Furthermore, it appears that there
> is an old drainage pipe leading through the south right of way. It is not
> possible replace this pipe. If we keep either or both of these rights of
> ways, I believe we need to pursue additional property via acquisition or
> easement so we can maintain the access according to today's standards.
>
> 2. Abandon both access rights of way. This option removes all
> responsibility from the City to maintain the access right of way and
> eliminates all liability associated with maintenance. Frankly, from a
> Public Works perspective, this is preferred. However, I am unable to
> gauge the City's duty or responsibility to provide this access to area
> residents, even though it was platted many years ago and is not of
> sufficient width by today's standards. Again, legal should consider this.
>
> If I can provide additional information, please let me know.
>
>
>
> Jeffrey R. Livergood, P.E.
> Director of Public Works
> City of Boynton Beach
>
> -----Original Message-----
2
> From: Rumpf, Michael
> Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 11:45 AM
> To: Livergood, Jeffrey; Magazine, Chuck; Wildner, John
> Subject: Abandonment of walkway for public access to ICW
> Importance: High
>
> Gentleman, you need to be informed (If you aren't already) that the CRA
> has recommended the denial of this request to abandon a 4.2 foot access
> walk intended for residents of Lakeside Gardens Subdivision. The residents
> attended and spoke of its value to them. Staff recommended in favor of
> abandonment due to size, location, unimproved nature of it and the
> waterfront. We mentioned the issue of liability.
>
> There are two but only one considered at this time via private petition.
> The subject walk is located at the eastern end of Dimick Road. Too small
> to see on an aerial; you need to view the plat. Please take a minute to
> discuss it with me today, or view the plat. I will be in Leadership
> Boynton all day tomorrow and will leave for a two week vacation on Friday.
> Maxime is the assigned planner but Ed Breese will be in charge next week.
> If you have a strong opinion on this, please formulate your position and
> inform Ed Breese prior to Tuesday night's Commission meeting. Or ideally,
> by Friday's pre-agenda meeting. Thanks, Mike
>
> Report is attached << File: Staff Report.doc >>
3
Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Breese, Ed
Thursday, July 15, 2004 11: 11 AM
Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
FW: Abandonment of walkway for public access to ICW
Max,
To keep you up to speed! Ed
-----Original Message-----
From: Livergood, Jeffrey
Sent: Thursday, July is, 2004 10:57 AM
To: Rumpf, Michael; Magazine, Chuck; Wildner, John
Cc: Breese, Ed; Cherof, James; Kelley, David
Subject: RE: Abandonment of walkway for public access to JCW
Mike,
We looked into this yesterday. This was a matter that I was not aware of until yesterday. This is a very tough issue. First,
as a City, we must decide if we are bound to provide continued access to the ICW for all residents. The access is platted
as a public right of way. Cities abandon public right of way all the time when maintaining the right of way is not in the
public interest. In this scenario, I am considering the public to be all residents, and not just those adjacent to, or residing in
the vicinity of, the right of way to be abandoned. Legal can opine on any perpetual legal right that area residents may, or
may not, have to continue to use these rights of way to access the ICW. Is it possible to just maintain one access point
and abandon the other? My guess is yes because access to the ICW would be maintained.
If we consider the public good to mean all 66,000+ residents, then we really have two options.
1. Keep access to the ICW in one or both of the rights of way. In this option, we are bound to maintain the access now
that we know about it and because it is a public right of way. The right of way is only 4.2 feet wide (someone correct me if
I am wrong on this) and is not sufficient width to reasonably maintain access. The access is not paved (soft sand) and
vegetation is allowed to grow over the path from adjacent properties. We are unable to get any kind of equipment in the
right of way thus all maintenance would have to be by hand. Furthermore, it appears that there is an old drainage pipe
leading through the south right of way. It is not possible replace this pipe. If we keep either or both of these rights of
ways, I believe we need to pursue additional property via acquisition or easement so we can maintain the access
according to today's standards.
2. Abandon both access rights of way. This option removes all responsibility from the City to maintain the access right of
way and eliminates all liability associated with maintenance. Frankly, from a Public Works perspective, this is preferred.
However, I am unable to gauge the City's duty or responsibility to provide this access to area residents, even though it was
platted many years ago and is not of sufficient width by today's standards. Again, legal should consider this.
If I can provide additional information, please let me know.
Jeffrey R. Livergood, P.E.
Director of Public Works
City of Boynton Beach
-----Original Message-----
From: Rumpf, Michael
Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 2004 11:45 AM
To: Livergood, Jeffrey; Magazine, Chuck; Wildner, John
Subject: Abandonment of walkway for public access to JCW
Importance: High
Gentleman, you need to be informed (If you aren't already) that the CRA has recommended the denial of this request
to abandon a 4.2 foot access walk intended for residents of Lakeside Gardens Subdivision. The residents attended
and spoke of its value to them. Staff recommended in favor of abandonment due to size, location, unimproved nature
of it and the waterfront. We mentioned the issue of liability.
1
There are two but only one considered at this time via private petition. The subject walk is located at the eastern end of
Dimick Road. Too small to see on an aerial; you need to view the plat. Please take a minute to discuss it with me
today, or view the plat. I will be in Leadership Boynton all day tomorrow and will leave for a two week vacation on
Friday. Maxime is the assigned planner but Ed Breese will be in charge next week. If you have a strong opinion on
this, please formulate your position and inform Ed Breese prior to Tuesday night's Commission meeting. Or ideally, by
Friday's pre-agenda meeting. Thanks, Mike
Report is attached << File: Staff Report.doc >>
2
Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Pawelczyk, Mike
Wednesday, June 30, 2004 11 :34 AM
Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
Rumpf, Michael; Lamanna, Rosemarie
RE: Abandonment of Walkway
Max:
We have no further comments on the proposed abandonment, provided that the applicants are aware of the reverter in the
plat and the City is not required to provide public access to the Intracoastal Waterway at that location.
Michael J. Pawelczyk
Assistant City Attorney
-----Original Message-----
From: Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 11:19 AM
To: Pawelczyk, Mike
Subject: RE: Abandonment of Walkway
Thanks for your response Mike. The Title Certificate your referring to is for the 4.2 foot walk easement. The property
abutting the easement is owned by Avon Investments, Inc. as shown on the Palm Beach County Property Appraisal.
This Title Certificate was provided by the applicant as the Ownership and Encumbrance Report.
The easement in this subdivision is dedicated to public access to the Intracoastal. Based on Engineering Division, the
easement could be abandoned, but per the plat would revert to the original developers, their heirs, assigns.
Hope this help.
Max
-----Original Message-----
From: Pawelczyk, Mike
Sent: Wednesday, June 23,20049:16 AM
To: Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
Cc: Lamanna, Rosemarie
Subject: Abandonment of Walkway
Max:
This is in response to your Memorandum PZ 04-140, dated June 18,2004, and regarding the above matter.
have reviewed the information you provided to this office and comment as follows:
1. The owner listed on the application, Avon Investments, Inc., is inconsistent with that which is
referenced on the Title Certificate submitted with the application. Please clarify the ownership issue.
2. Have you verified that the walkway easement is in favor of the City of Boynton Beach pursuant to
the plat referenced in the application materials submitted? It appears that the City is being asked to abandon an
easement, not dedicated property. Correct?
Should you have any questions or any additional information on this item that will be helpful in our review, please
contact me.
Michael J. Pawelczyk
Assistant City Attorney
1
Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Lamanna, Rosemarie
Wednesday, June 23, 2004 2:32 PM
Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
FW: Abandonment of Walkway
-----Original Message-----
From: Pawelczyk, Michael [mailto:mpawelczyk@cityatty.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 2:17 PM
To: 'LamannaR@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us'
Subject: RE: Abandonment of Walkway
Please forward this to Max.
Max:
I will further examine. Can you forward over a copy of plat? Does the
applicant know about the reverter?
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pawelczyk, Mike [SMTP:PawelczykM@ci.boynton-beach.fl.us]
> Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 11:46 AM
> To: 'mpawelczyk@cityatty.com'
> Subject: FW: Abandonment of walkway
>
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 11:19 AM
> > To: Pawelczyk, Mike
> > Subject: RE: Abandonment of Walkway
> >
> > Thanks for your response Mike. The Title Certificate your referring to
> is
> > for the 4.2 foot walk easement. The property abutting the easement is
> > owned by Avon Investments, Inc. as shown on the Palm Beach County
> Property
> > Appraisal. This Title Certificate was provided by the applicant as the
> > Ownership and Encumbrance Report.
> >
> > The easement in this subdivision is dedicated to public access to the
> > Intracoastal. Based on Engineering Division, the easement could be
> > abandoned, but per the plat would revert to the original developers,
> their
> > heirs, assigns.
> > Hope this help.
> >
> > Max
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Pawelczyk, Mike
> > Sent: Wednesday, June 23, 2004 9:16 AM
> > To: Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
> > Cc: Lamanna, Rosemarie
> > Subject: Abandonment of walkway
> >
> > Max:
> >
> > This is in response to your Memorandum PZ 04-140, dated June 18, 2004,
1
> and
> > regarding the above matter. I have reviewed the information you
> provided
> > to this office and comment as follows:
> >
> > 1. The owner listed on the application, Avon Investments, Inc.,
> > is inconsistent with that which is referenced on the Title Certificate
> > submitted with the application. Please clarify the ownership issue.
> >
> > 2. Have you verified that the walkway easement is in favor of
> > the City of Boynton Beach pursuant to the plat referenced in the
> > application materials submitted? It appears that the City is being
> asked
> > to abandon an easement, not dedicated property. Correct?
> >
> > Should you have any questions or any additional information on this item
> > that will be helpful in our review, please contact me.
> >
> > Michael J. Pawelczyk
> > Assistant City Attorney
2
;;(~
-~
~f, Michael
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Breese, Ed
Friday, May 07,2004 11 :37 AM
Rumpf, Michael; Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
FW: ABAN 04-003
Per our discussion at Applicaion Review meeting of 4-30-04, see Engineering research and response. Ed
-----Original Message-----
From: Logan, Laurinda
Sent: Friday, May 07,200411:29 AM
To: Breese, Ed
Cc: Kelley, David
Subject: ABAN 04-003
As requested we have reviewed the plat for Lakeside Gardens with respect to a request to abandon a 4.2 ft. sidewalk
easement. The sidewalk easement could in fact be abandoned, but per the plat, would revert to the original developers,
their heirs, assigns, etc. if the abandonment actually was allowed. There are two sidewalk easements in this subdivision,
between Lots 30 and 31 and Lots 98 and 99, dedicated to the public for access to the Intracoastal.
I hope this answers your questions. If you have additional concerns or need additional information please feel free to give
me a call.
LCHHlVc-dCl LogC1Vc, P.c.
Ev\.'gL-v\.-eev
x (;/,/1- ;<2
1
Breese, Ed
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Logan, Laurinda
Friday, May 07, 2004 11 :29 AM
Breese, Ed
Kelley, David
ABAN 04-003
As requested we have reviewed the plat for Lakeside Gardens with respect to a request to abandon a 4.2 ft. sidewalk
easement. The sidewalk easement could in fact be abandoned, but per the plat, would revert to the original developers,
their heirs, assigns, etc. if the abandonment actually was allowed. There are two sidewalk easements in this subdivision,
between Lots 30 and 31 and Lots 98 and 99, dedicated to the public for access to the Intracoastal.
I hope this answers your questions. If you have additional concerns or need additional information please feel free to give
me a call.
L(1
V\" P.G.
Evv?J~v\'ee\/
,x 0"4 s;:-:
1
Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Pawelczyk, Mike
Wednesday, June 30, 200411 :34 AM
Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
Rumpf, Michael; Lamanna, Rosemarie
RE: Abandonment of Walkway
Max:
We have no further comments on the proposed abandonment, provided that the applicants are aware of the reverter in the
plat and the City is not required to provide public access to the Intracoastal Waterway at that location.
Michael J. Pawelczyk
Assistant City Attorney
-----Original Message-----
From: Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
Sent: Wednesday, June 23,200411:19 AM
To: Pawelczyk, Mike
Subject: RE: Abandonment of Walkway
Thanks for your response Mike. The Title Certificate your referring to is for the 4.2 foot walk easement. The property
abutting the easement is owned by Avon Investments, Inc. as shown on the Palm Beach County Property Appraisal.
This Title Certificate was provided by the applicant as the Ownership and Encumbrance Report.
The easement in this subdivision is dedicated to public access to the Intracoastal. Based on Engineering Division, the
easement could be abandoned, but per the plat would revert to the original developers, their heirs, assigns.
Hope this help.
Max
-----Original Message-----
From: Pawelczyk, Mike
Sent: Wednesday, June 23,20049:16 AM
To: Ducoste-Amedee, Maxime
Cc: Lamanna, Rosemarie
Subject: Abandonment of Walkway
Max:
This is in response to your Memorandum PZ 04-140, dated June 18,2004, and regarding the above matter.
have reviewed the information you provided to this office and comment as follows:
1. The owner listed on the application, Avon Investments, Inc., is inconsistent with that which is
referenced on the Title Certificate submitted with the application. Please clarify the ownership issue.
2. Have you verified that the walkway easement is in favor of the City of Boynton Beach pursuant to
the plat referenced in the application materials submitted? It appears that the City is being asked to abandon an
easement, not dedicated property. Correct?
Should you have any questions or any additional information on this item that will be helpful in our review, please
contact me.
Michael J. Pawelczyk
Assistant City Attorney
1
t
DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
PLANNING AND ZONING DIVISION
MEMORANDUM NO. PZ 04-151
THRU:
Chair and Members
Community Redevelopment Agency Board
Michael W. Rumpf t\..~~
Planning and Zoning Director
TO:
FROM:
Maxime Ducoste-A.
Planner
DATE:
June 30, 2004
SUBJECT:
Lake Drive North
Abandonment of the north 4.2-foot wide walk easement.
(ABAN 04-003)
NATURE OF REQUEST
The agent for Avon Investments, Inc., Rodney J. Regan, is requesting to abandon the north 4.2-foot wide walk.
This unimproved easement measures 160.64 feet in length and is located between Lot 30 to the north and Lot
31 to the south and provides access to the Intracoastal Waterway from Lake Drive North. This abandonment
request was submitted on March 26, 2004. It is described as follows:
The north 4.2-foot walk (easement), in LAKESIDE GARDENS, a subdivision of the Town of
BOYNTON, Florida, according to the Plat of said subdivision recorded in the Office of the Clerk of
the Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, in Plat Book 8 at Page 57, located
between Lake Drive North and the Intracoastal Waterway.
The location map attached as Exhibit "A" shows the general vicinity of the portion of the road easement to be
abandoned. The attached Exhibit "B"- shows the location of the proposed abandonment and its legal description.
The following is a description of the zoning districts and land uses of the properties that surround the subject
easement.
North -
A single-family house zoned R-l-AA, single-family residential district;
South -
A single-family house zoned R-l-AA, single-family residential district; and
East
Intracoastal Waterway right-of-way; and
West -
Lake Drive North right-of-way and farther west a single-family house zoned R-l-AA,
single-family residential district
BACKGROUND
In January of 1922, the Plat of Lakeside Gardens was approved (Exhibit "B-1"). This subdivision included
two (2) avenues (Dimick Avenue and Potter Avenue), one (1) drive (Lake Drive North) dedicated to the
perpetual use by the public, reserving unto the developers or successors the right of reversion if not used as
such. As such this clause is in favor of the original interest party if any right of way is abandoned. Pursuant
to Florida Statutes Sections 117.085, reversions contained in plats recorded prior to July 1, 1972 would be
extinguished if specific action were not taken to establish such rights on or before July 1, 1973. Also
Page 2
Memorandum No. PZ 04-151
ABAN 04-003
(indicated on the Plat are two (2) "walks", which provide access to the waterfront with no specific dedications.
The plat of Lakeside Gardens includes avenues, drive and walks. The avenues and drive contained in the Plat of
Lakeside Gardens are dedicated to the public, however the plat does not provide any specific reference to the
intent and purpose of the two (2) "walks", which were intended to provide access to the Intracoastal Waterway
from Lake Drive North. It should be noted that these walk easements are not being used as intended nor are
they properly maintained. Both are overgrown with grass and other vegetation and, fences are encroaching from
either side of the south walk. The subject walk easement terminates at the bank of the Intracoastal Waterway,
which at this location is unimproved and consists of large rocks assumed to buffer the shoreline from the wave
action. If these walks remain, the city is obligated to maintain them, and possibly improve the shoreline to
minimize safety hazards and liability. However, due to the limited width of these walkways, the limited width at
the water, and the unimproved shoreline, this path is not ideal for public access.
The applicant has the intention of vacating the north 4.2-foot wide walk to consolidate it with the abutting
property to the south (Lots 31 and 32) in order to reconstruct a new single-family house. That portion of the walk
when abandoned will revert to the abutting property owners; one-half to the owner to the north and one-half to
the owner to the south.
ANAL YSIS
Pursuant to Chapter 22, Article III, Section 4, public notice was given to the property owners that abut the
easement to be abandoned, all utility companies have been notified and the request has been advertised in the
newspaper. A summary of the responses from the utility companies and city staff is as follows:
CITY DEPARTMENTSIDIVISIONS
Engineering
Public Works/Utilities
Planning and Zoning
No objection
No objection
No objection
PUBLIC UTILITY COMPANIES
Florida Power and Light
Bell South
Florida Public Utilities Company
Cable Company (Adelphia)
Cable Company (Com cast)
No objection
No objection
No objection
No objection
N/A
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that this request to abandon the north 4.2-foot wide unimproved walk easement, located
immediately east of Lake Drive North, and as described above, be approved. This recommendation is based on
staff's findings that the unimproved walk easement serves no public purpose, and could potentially create
hazardous situations and be detrimental to the public welfare. Any conditions required by the Community
Redevelopment Agency Board and the City Commission will be placed in Exhibit "C" - Conditions of Approval.
xc: Central File
S:IPlanningISHAREDlWPIPROJECTSILake Drive NorthlABANISlaff Report,doc
..
1 ~n. = 100.0 feet
-3
-----
R-3
R 1- A
LAKE DRIVE NORTH LOCATION MAP EXHIBIT "A"
WORTH -EXHIBIT "B"
, .f!:IIAY ,~
4.20'
~ 00'4(,'OO'E 1
~I~
PIMICK ~.
1
i-'''' i ,,,
., ..
f)l"~"" ~ ~,
~.,..O, ~
'1-,,,, ~ .... = ~ ~7
.,10.' " j: ' .,. ~ ~ 'It
~.,..O.,~ ~ U
\11.,.1" ~
, i: q
i q,
;..: q7
~. rOTTEll: ~. '1&
qq
~ l..O(,AT ION MAP
N. T .C;.
~
;,. ....
~ "
I;) I;)
" "
I;) .... PItA I N/l6e NOTE">:
'" f'\.OOI) ZDN:: .0.7 IB- q) Oq/~/61
3 3 ca.t.UlllY-rNCI- NO. 11" q, (lOO4 C
u.J u.J 11M' ~I".lfl): ~~~, I '1&1
8 8 un ~ .,'~ '}Q FT +/-
8 8
!;) !;)
<:> <:>
Z Z PItOf'E!nY ~:
t..AKE PIt 1 \IE NOIml
rlOYNTON !lfA(;H, F\..Ol/ IDA ~H"
CEIITIFY TO:
I
NOTE"> :
I. lJN:lfI:liltOlJlll) LlT 11..1 TI e WElte NOT
L.O(;ATEP r:xCEPT .0.<; 'lI1O\1IN,
1. ~~~~~E~,
1t1/iHT-OF-"Avo;, ~ATIClN' ItD OTHEIt
<;IMII-AIt MATTEI!~ OF ~
~. a.evATlON':> ~E NATIONAl- IiEOPETIC
VElITIC~ PA1U.4 Of' I qtq, '
-I. ~IN/i<; ~ ~".lfl) ON n-e I1IE':>T It'" 1..11'1:
OF t..AKE <; I De PIt I \IE , A'>">UIeP TO ~
N 00 00'00' E.
,. ~ON It(ll) J>K) (,f>r L.ti-E">'} NOTED.
,. PENOTE"J n:or()';fl) I..OT /iItADf"J.
7. DENOTe 6<1<;TIN6 I..OT 6ItADE<;,
1-E6lN> :
F -FIEU>
fN) . - FOIJIII)
(;ON(; . - (;ON(;1tETE
B-. - a.E\lATlON
Nt., - NAIl.. t PI<;C
It/'l - 1t1/iHT OF "AY
<;.1>. . ~ r>EU-
Iltt' - 11t0N It(ll) t (,f>r
U.E. -LlTll..llY EA~
NHT - NAIl.. J>K) TIN TN>
M.E. . MAINlB'IANCE ~
1'1"41.. - ~ I PA rO'll:K 4 1..16HT
r.,.e,r.- r~ (;ON'TItOl.. 1'0lNT
l!l . .ATEI': I.lETElt
$ .~
..
~
'1-,1>
.,1'" ,
. ,1-,1> ~ .,..0
'II"
~.,.." N' 'OO'E
V1 4.20'
I~
~...o ~'I. "'-
~.., ~ ~~
,.~J1f -L-AKE DR I VE NORTH
I~
NOT VAL-ID WITHOUT THE C;16NATURE AKJ THE OR161NA1.. RAI<;ED ")EAL. Of A fL.ORlDA I..I(;EN'JED 'WRVEYOR
AKJ MAP ER. '
ootJN?ARY '?URVEY
l1-E NORTH <4. t. WALK (EA'!IEt.ENT), IN \..AKt31 DE 6AROEN'}. A """'" I V I '71 ON Of
TH! TOIN Of' I'OYNTON. I"\..ORIDA. A<iWRDIN6 TO TH! I"LAT Of' <}AID
.,t.eDIVI'7ION REGORDED IN l1-E OFFICE OF l1-E a.ERK Of l1-E CIRWIT liOIJIIT IN
AN:> ~ I"ALM r>eAGH <iOlMY. F\..ORIDA. IN I"\..AT ElOOK & AT I"AGE 57.
'"
....l
~
4-02-04
~PA~:
I . -20'
~:
".1>. ~ 11,Er.
,~
U\l1 VE~AL- 4?LJRVEY I N6 4?Y4?TE:M; I I NV.
cenlFIGATe OF ~IZATION tu.efR Lt> 'C!61
%,1) L-AKE OR I'VE NOImi
I:lOYNTON ceAGH ~IOA "4" ,
OFFICE: ,,, -7"-04'1 fAX:'" -7"-0CI06
04-04-041
LAKBSIDE
GARDE~S
being a subdivision of
the north 68J.4 ft. of the south 983.4 ft. of both Govt. Lot ~ in
Sec. '5 and that part of the S.\v.~ of the N.vv.~ of Section
15 lying east of the Dixie Highway, all in TWP.45 .south
R. 43 E., Palm Beach County, Fla.
1922
Scale: 60 ft. to the Inch.
~~'
EXHI~JT "B-1 n
~LJ
Lake
Kelsey D. Purdy
Stiles C. Hall
Owners << Developers
Seaboard Eng1~. Assn.,
P. R. Do""","ers, Chief Engr.,
Fla. Cert. 137.
_4-
.7~ ~
I (p
'l' ,;;:0-
~
.,
, 0
> <)
, ~
_........" --- -""'" -
- ~I' -'r-~-r"":""r--
II ! I I i
, I ' , I
~ I
30" J I 3<:! 33 3'/135
-.~f--""~~'-"
--
..,~,-'
Z5 <:!6 i! 7 i.'8 2.9
Worth
, ~_.~ ~~
,
:
"",-=,
t /If"~
l-
~ ,.
~ ~
36 :;' 7 _9;: .93 .94 .95 .96 .9 7.98 .99 100 /0/ /Oi! /03 /04 /0.5
,2j:O .~ ..
k
- - - --
,?j:O t2~:O ~
",-,t'
- I- ---
.
,;
>
LAKE"
/11.".
- - - - - - - - - ..'~ - - - - .-
.. .?.$.O "'.;:S.o".. ~..
~:r
DRIVE
- -
,j, 0 Hfut.
o
~
.{O.O
1~/,OrS,O .. I .. , .. . . ..
~/S-r :lUlU H,s- - -: - T - i- -I - ..,..-
I I I I! 'I I
1~~3:4ZI-f/ 401JS!38 !?I 1.90 f'.9
,~ ; ! t I' "I' I
I . , , ! :,
I ~ ! ;: , I
Llil I I I
10 ' /"6,0
I~ 44
" 25.031.;'" -10.0 ~;Pnr .2S.0 .. ~.. .es.OHM.
- -- - "I." l,s.r .iNs ~ - - - --
I i I
10 I 0
88 8 71 S~~, r.)' i~ 1// ,I/O 10S /08/07 06..;1
~ Plh~~ \ ~I
, ~ ~! l;: "
~ ~I~i~ ~
/. '6, 0 0 IlIol 0 /.5 0
8S i~' ~ !~ I 112
~ I
~...t.ll.t_~~...c
s.e ~ .. H f.5.0i .35.0
-- - 1-'
I ,../~-
I ,
~2"" i!.3 i!Z I' Z I i i!~ ~
~ ~ 11: ~I Q
~-- /n~ ~
j~ 1.9 ' ,~~
f~
.~
47
8<:'
4!J
1'4
i'i
(~
l'-i
I, I
Jf'6
83
48
el
80 J.900 ~r'!'-I .
78
1/8
I I
I I
, N ,
, ;:{' I /Z6
: 01 ~ ~---
70 j" 8 ;; ::[40
/!'''',O ,2$00 .3'/> ~ ~o 2$0 "
. , , I ~
~ 1:'1 I l '-
~, ~ 0 ~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~I ~ ~ ~ * ~
"1 ~ "l Ii ~ ~ Q
66 (7 L8 ',~ ~"" ,....
'< "69~ '1' I ~ ~"
~ , IIi?8 'Ii
'li ~ ~ I /Z:> /30/31 /.:JZ "
~ ' ~ ' ,,~ -, ~,
, ~ I I ~ -~ ; q ,
- -- f-- JIS 40.0 I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
1!:.U9,j/.c<, I$'L ,(~.r"'" '\ ..... ~
.Mo" ,",,0 Jo .3~~ ~/9 -: - - r _
Mo" -L:'. ~
,I:IIGa"""AY ~M"O
~
--
/s
/4 3.J'/.j ~y.lr. ~
I, :.J_QOV ..,)t'>.1. 4.9
13
1_
, '
j
I
I
i
5i?
50
51
/,i'
1---'----
/1
10
I.
53
'Z..-
.9
54
~
, I~
, l~
8
~I :
,
~5
7~! I 5f'
6 I: ~ Q 57
i /~5-.0 I:~ f. ~! /s~.o
~\U' iZ~O 3~t ; J/"O iSoa .. ~ ..
~ 1),- tf, ~ ~'.: 1
~ I ~ ~I ,^ ~ ~ ~ ~ I I
< ,~v ;: "v" Ii L:~OI
!/~ 2 .3 "\ I~ ,;;~ ~ ~'" ' I
.~;AO'{ ~ \ ,-9 ~ 5, ~ ~~8~, ;:9 60 l 'i~,,~ I
1 .es.:. ~ ,,- '-. '_ ~ 1" ",0<) 61: ~I ~ ~ 6/~ 6Z: 63 ~~~ 65~
~ 0,,_ ~~. IT>l~ ..~,y...~_ "~ r: ~
.., DI"I'-;;;.,...,D30,.;:~.2~, :.!J9 -1--___ '
'~~-<..... ~ "-'---:---:...~ -:: -
1 - .:...
,,?s, 0 0
i .~
i
I l.i t:?
~
~-~C.
z
m
Ii
..r/~
.-..
1/3
~I
j! l~
i
-114"
I'
I
I'
/IS
116
I~ t-'910 sy.;:t.
1/7
I ,
I . I
I I
I I
I'
I ~ I
78
//.2
77
IZO
/~/
76
7~'
/E2
. ,~
. I~
I~
/.i?3
74
~I
Iii;
/.i?4
73
;-,?
/Z5
71
It.~.
~
" -~~'!_~
,"---,
L30'\0--j:
~.
'/,
~-
.
~
~
~
..
u Ies. 0
.....s::>.
0,
TV,
N
o
C)
"l
~
~
i'~
6' ,
.3 "
",\ "
-) 0 .
~i't __
--:J";.;.;-...7 "M'" ~
EXHIBIT "e"
Conditions of Approval
Project name: Lake Drive North
File number: ABAN 04-003
DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT
PUBLIC WORKS- General
Comments: None
PUBLIC WORKS- Traffic
Comments: None
UTILITIES
,
Comments: None
FIRE
Comments: None
POLICE
Comments: None
ENGINEERING DIVISION
Comments: None
BUILDING DIVISION
Comments: None
PARKS AND RECREATION
Comments: None
FORESTER/ENVIRONMENTALIST
Comments: None
PLANNING AND ZONING
Comments: None
ADDITIONAL COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BOARD
CONDITIONS
Conditions of Approval
2
DEPARTMENTS INCLUDE REJECT
Comments:
1. To be determined.
ADDITIONAL CITY COMMISSION CONDITIONS
Comments:
I 1. To be determined. I I I
S:\Planmng\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Lake Dnve North\ABAN\COA.doc