Loading...
APPLICATION PROJECT NAME: Herit;ge Club LOCATION:Gulfstream Blvd & Federal Hwy PCN: 08-43-46-04-00-000-1060 I FILE NO.: HTEX 05-004 II TYPE OF APPLICATION: I AGENT/CONTACT PERSON: OWNER: Jason Mankoff - Weiner & Aronson, P.A. ADDRESS: ADDRESS: 102 North Swinton Avenue FAX: Delray Beach, FL 33444 PHONE: FAX: 561-272-6831 - PHONE: 561-265-2666 SUBMITTAL / RESUBMITT AL 5/25/05 1ST REVIEW COMMENTS DUE: PUBLIC NOTICE: TART MEETING: LAND DEVELOPMENT SIGNS POSTED (SITE PLANS): PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT BOARD MEETING: COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT 7/12/05 AGENCY BOARD CITY COMMISSION MEETING: 8/2/05 COMMENTS: S:\Planning\SHARED\WP\PROJECTS\Heritage Club @ Boynton Beach\HTEX 05-004\2005 PROJECT TRACKING INFO.doc :Jfww\ t>t~~i l '0'0";) L1} CIfI\ \ rO(}\ 1ur q1f^;r\'i1,~k '^ft{q~ .~ (OJ :: iO 0 . fG'v\Ctpif wJf W-/ k,eo-l ~ ~~ l~.( ~ It (~ w.J,. WEINER & ARONSON, P.A. ATTORNEYS AT LAW The Clark House 102 North Swinton Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 MAY 2 5 ~ULO Telephone: (561) 265-2666 Telecopier: (561) 272-6831 E-mail: jmankoff@zonelaw.com -.-:... -.. :_z.~_-..-. ----J May 25,2005 ~~@~u"\lm> MAY 2 5 2005 PLANNtNG AND ZONING DEPT. OF- COUI-JSEL: ROBERT MARC SCHWARTZ. P.A. Florida Bar Board Certitlec Real E'state Lawyer MICHAEL R. HARRIS L.LM. (l1"l Taxation) MICHAEL S. WEINER CAROLEJ.ARONSON JASON S. MANKOFF KERRY D. SAFIER PAM I R. MAUGHAM . \(!~l:t{Jf1.{I~l)f!Jj~e[y" Michael W. Rumpf Director of Planning & Zoning City of Boynton Beach 100 East Boynton Beach Blvd. Boynton Beach, Florida 33425 Re: Height exception for Heritage Club at Boynton BeC:t(;~ Our File No.: NCC0010 Dear Micr1Hel: This !etter is our request for r,elg"ri exception pursuant to Chapter 2 St~cticri 4~F) ot the City of Boynton Beach Land D&velopment Regulations. W'e arE: requestin~1 a he;9ht exception for up to 15-feet to allow the towers as a decorative feature k.r the pruject Thus, our application for a hef~Jht exception meets All thr: findings requirecl as foHows: \/I,II-,""'+hr-...t'nr> hc.igl-:t c.... ~e""+:r.n \. ill .........."..... ~'" "'.....,-...."',' c'ffr-.-4- ."'.... ..h... ;P\ i-+;.,...,. - -.-j ":,j;. ... ~. ~1",.;.",( _', ..... v v;:;.;:;, .J.. v....,,_ fo"""'-'J i ..i'i~.. .; ~...",,(, ""',. ",,,,,,,\ v. _~. _. ":;<f;" ".;, I:'..V __.-~.:':.: J~~! ;\..! proposed land uses. The height exception will not adversely affect this project or any that are adjacent to it. On the contrary, it will add to the area's aesthetic. appearance. b. Whether the height exception is necessary. This height exception is absolutely necessary as. a means of breaking up the horizontal massing of the building with minor (uninhabited) vertical elements. The aesthetics of the building depends upon the elements. The height limitation makes the architectural expression we want to promote impossible. O:\NCC0010\Letter to Rumpf re Height Exception.May 20, 2005.doc Mr. Michael W. Rumpf May 25,2005 Page 2 c. Whether the height exception will severely reduce light and air in adjacent areas. The height exception is only a small percentage of the overall project and will not reduce light and air from this site or adjacent areas. d. Whether the height exception will be a deterrent to the improvement or development of adjacent property in accord with existing regulations. The height exception will not deter future development and will actually serve to establish a much more pleasing architectural expression to this gateway area of the City. No adjacent properties will be affected. e. Whether the height exception will adversely affect property values in adjacent areas The height exception will make adjacent properties more valuable, as this project will be a vibrant and exciting addition to the redevelopment to this area of Federal Highway. . f.' . Whether the herght exception will adversely influence living conditions in the neighborhood. The height exception will not have any adverse effect on the neighborhood. The request would simply allow tower elements to be added to a hg~te~' effect to the proje~t. They are uninhabited arc~1itectural elements.' . g. Whether the height exception will 'constitute a grant of a special priv1Ie'dl:;!C' an individual owner as contrasted with the public welfare. The height exception will not constitute a grant of a special privilege or conform to the public welfare. Other similar projects have received height exceptions. he Whether sufficient evidence has been presented to justify the need for a height exception. As mentioned in the above statements, the height exception will not adversely affect this project or any adjacent properties. It will only add to the area's aesthetic appearance by breaking up the horizontal massing of the building with minor (uninhabited) vertical elements and will actually serve to establish a much more pleasing architectural express,on to this gateway area of the C~ty, The height exception is only a small percentage of the overall project and will not constitute a grant of a special privilege. O:\NCC001 O\Letter to Rumpf re Height Exception.May 20, 2005.doc Mr. Michael Rumpf May 25, 2005 Page 3 In addition, enclosed is a check in the amount of Two-Hundred Fifty ($250.00) Dollars for the processing fee for the height exception. I am confirming this matter will be heard at the July 12, 2005 CRA hearing and then will follow the same schedule along with the Land Use AmendmenURezoning and Site Plan. J son S. Mankoff aSM:vf:alv cc: Mr. Robert Mathias Mr. Donald Thomas Mr. Stuart Debowsky Michael S. Weiner, Esquire Ms. Ashlee L. Vargo O:\NCC001 OILetter to Rumpf re Height Exception.May 20, 2005.doc