The URL can be used to link to this page

HPB 01-04-06 c o� 0AGENDA o te e' u HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING ty 34 CITY OF DELRAY BEACH Meeting Date: January 4, 2006 Time: 6:00 P.M. Type of Meeting: Regular Meeting Location: City Commission Chambers, City Hall The City shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the City. Please contact Doug Randolph at 243-7127(voice), or 243-7199 (TDD), 24 hours prior to the program or activity in order for the City to reasonably accommodate your request. Adaptive listening devices are available for meetings in the Commission Chambers. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Historic Preservation Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting or hearing, such persons will need a record of these proceedings, and for this purpose such persons may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. Such record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The City does not provide or prepare such record. Two or more City Commissioners may be in attendance. I. CALL TO ORDER II. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS A. 515 North Swinton Avenue, Del-Ida Park Historic District — Sandra Hoesley, Owner; Roger Cope, Authorized Agent. Consideration of a Certificate of Appropriateness for alterations and additions to the main dwelling, shed demolition, construction of a detached garage/guest cottage, swimming pool, fence, and landscape plan B. North side of NE 1st Street, between NE 15t Avenue and Pineapple Grove Way, Old School Square Historic District— Pineapple Grove LTD., Owner; Jeffrey Silberstein, Authorized Agent. Consideration of a Class V Site Plan Application associated with the construction of a mixed-use project and associated two-story parking facility, pool and garden deck, demolition of existing structures, and landscape plan. III. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS f IV. REPORTS AND COMMENTS • Public Comments • Reports from Historic District Representatives �1 • Board Members • Staff V. ADJOURN (m 6,.. :, ,, c(ici4.0-2_ , Amy E. Alv ez, Historic Preservation tanner Posted on: December 29, 2005 MINUTES OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD PUBLIC HEARING/REGULAR MEETING CITY OF DELRAY BEACH DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA MEETING DATE: January 4, 2006 LOCATION: CITY COMMISSION CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Francisco Perez, John Miller, Jr., Randee Schatz, Maura Dersh, and Joanne Peart MEMBERS ABSENT: Linda Lake, and Michelle Reich STAFF PRESENT: Mark McDonnell, Amy Alvarez, Scott Pape, Terrill Barton, and Denise Valek I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Chairman Perez at 6:07 p.m. Upon roll call it was determined that a quorum was present. II. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS: A. 515 North Swinton Avenue, Del-Ida Park Historic District, Sandra Hoesley, Owner, Roger Cope, Architect, Authorized Agent The item before the Board is consideration of a Certificate of Appropriateness for alterations and additions to the main dwelling, shed demolition, construction of a detached garage/guest cottage, installation of a swimming pool and fence, and associated landscape plan at 515 North Swinton Avenue, Del-Ida Park Historic District pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(H). Perez opened the Quasi Judicial Hearing. Staff Presentation: Ms. Alvarez entered the project file into the record and gave a staff presentation and summary of the staff report. Notice: None Applicant Presentation: Mr. Cope, authorized agent, advised that Ms. Hoesley purchased the home in May 2005. Eight months ago we submitted a very extensive rendering of this project, we were convinced that we went overboard with the design and what we are presenting tonight is a downsized version. Ms. Hoesley advised the following: Planning and Zoning Board Meeting January 4, 2006, 2006 Items I agree with in the Staff Report: • Reducing the height of the coach house. Items I don't care about: • Removing the cast concrete "coat of arms"from the garage/guest cottage. Items I do not agree with: • "The proposed garage/guest cottage too closely mimics the main dwelling and should therefore be revised. • That the proposed four (4) sets of French doors on the south elevation be limited to one (1) set located where the pair of 8/1 windows currently exist, so as to use the existing opening. This is the only side of the house that has a view. • That the existing arched window elements remain and windows of the same size opening be proposed. I disagree as these windows are original to the house, and are aluminum. • I would like to address the replacement of the windows with hurricane impact glass and install four (4) French doors. I respectfully request you advise me what you would like me to do with this house. Mr. Cope, presented a rendering of the house and the changes that would be incorporated. He specifically mentioned the mill finish 1970's projected awning arched windows that are inappropriate to the house. There is no reason why we should not be allowed to install 6 over 1 windows. There is also no reason why we should not be able to have four (4) sets of French doors off the newly created kitchen area which is in the back of the house. Mr. Cope's comments on the conditions are as follows: 1)-4) Disagree 5) Disagree—addition of wood frame windows and wood doors 6) Agree 7) Agree 8) Disagree 9) Disagree 10) Agree 11) Agree 12) Disagree 13) Disagree 14) Agree 15)-18) Agree The colors were approved as submitted as was the wrought iron capped rail fence. Public Comments: None. 2 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting January 4, 2006, 2006 Ms. Alvarez wanted to clarify the following: • Mimicking the architecture - per the Design Guidelines: "All new construction should compliment the historic architecture of the district. New construction should not create a false sense of historical development by utilizing conjectural features of stylistic elements taken from other buildings. As noted above, the garage/guest cottage, as proposed, too closely mimics the existing residence. This could potentially create a false sense of historical development in the district. " • Regarding the French doors — they will be visible from Swinton Avenue and they are overwhelming and not appropriate to the structure. One set of French doors would be appropriate. • Regarding the smaller window in the addition —if a larger window needs to be used it is fine; however, it should be similar in proportion to the addition. • The arched windows— I did not mean the windows themselves, I meant the arched opening. If that opening could be retained and a different type of window more appropriate to the structure. • All wood windows —that would be preferable. • Roof pitch of the garage— it does not have to be the same as the main dwelling. Mr. Cope advised the Board should look at the full sized drawings you can see what a great job we did putting this house together. We should not be limited to one pair of French doors since we have remodeled the kitchen. These comments are subjective. Ms. Hoesley passed around pictures of homes with French doors that she took in Palm Beach. Board Discussion: Board discussion ensued relative to following the Guidelines, the four sets of French doors, and the installation of wood windows throughout the home. Motion/Findings: Motion made by Mr. Miller, seconded by Ms. Schatz, to move approval of COA 2005-365 regarding alterations and additions to the main dwelling, shed demolition, construction of a detached garage/guest cottage, installation of a swimming pool and fence, and associated landscape plan at 515 North Swinton, Del-Ida Park Historic District by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.6(H), 4.5.1(E)(4), (E)(6-8), and 4.3.3 (Q), of the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, subject to the following conditions: Main Dwelling 1) That the existing arched openings remain and windows of the same size opening be proposed; 3 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting January 4, 2006, 2006 2) That the proposed four (4) sets of French doors on the south elevation be limited to one no more than three (3) sets located where the pair of 8/1 windows currently exist, so as to use the existing opening; 3) That wood or aluminum clad wood frame windows and doors be used throughout; 4) That a window and door schedule providing window specifications, manufacturers cut sheets including window profile, be submitted; 5) That photographs of all existing elevations be submitted; Garage/Guest Cottage 6) That the proportion (height:width) of the garage/guest cottage be revised as detailed in the staff report; 7) That the proposed cast concrete "coat of arms" be removed from the garage/guest cottage; 8) That the single casement window on the north elevation be doubled up, or a second window be located to the left to provide further balance; 9) That a barrel tile roof overhang be provided above the doors located on the first story of the east and north elevations; Other 10) That photographs of all elevations of the existing shed be submitted; 11) That a fence color is chosen and submitted; 12) That all hardscaping materials be noted on all applicable plans, and; 13) That the noted landscape technical items be addressed. 14) Colors approved as submitted: Body of House: Peach, No. GH162, Trim: Stark White, No. WW68, and wrought iron capped rail fence. Final Action: Motion Approved 5 to 0 B. Pineapple Grove Limited The action before the Board is approval of a COA-2004-231, which incorporates the following aspects of the development proposal for Pineapple Grove Limited, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(F): Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations, Waiver Request, and a Variance Request The subject property is located on the north side of NE 1st Street, between Pineapple Grove Way (NE 2"d Avenue) and NE 1st Avenue. Chairman Perez opened the Quasi Judicial Hearing. 4 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting January 4, 2006, 2006 Staff Presentation: Mr. Pape entered the project file into the record and gave a staff presentation and summary of the staff report. Ms. Alvarez advised that the Demolition Analysis was not included in the Staff Report. However, it was presented to the Board. Notice: At its meeting of September 7, 2005, the Design Review Committee reviewed the proposal and recommended approval of the development proposal, subject to revision of the color scheme to provide a more vibrant color scheme consistent with the Pineapple Grove Main Street redevelopment area. At its meeting of August 25, 2005, the CRA reviewed the proposal and recommended approval. At its meeting of September 12, 2005, the DDA reviewed the proposal and recommended approval. Courtesy notices have been provided to the following homeowner's associations, which have requested notice of developments in their areas: ■ Neighborhood Advisory Council • Bankers Row ■ Chamber of Commerce • Progressive Residents of Delray (PROD) ■ Old School Square • President's Council Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 500 foot radius of the subject property. Any letters of support or objection will be presented at the Historic Preservation Board meeting. Applicant Presentation: Mr. Louis Carbone, owner, presented the project to the Board. Public Comments: Ms. Alice Finst, 707 Place Tavant, voiced concerns with the traffic, the parking garage, and the roof lines. Ms. Shirley Johnson, 701 NW 4th Street, had concerns with the traffic that will be generated by the project, and the fact that the historic sections of Delray Beach are disappearing. Board Discussion: Board discussion ensued relative to exceeding the setbacks in place, the enormous amount of variances requested, the demolition, and placement of the pools in the courtyard garden areas. Terrill Barton, Esquire, advised she spoke with Louis Carbone and City staff regarding the variance requests. The applicant can either request a variance tonight or suggest considering a Conditional Use approval. 5 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting January 4, 2006, 2006 Motion/Findinqs: Variance: Motion made by Mr. Miller, seconded by Ms. Schatz, to deny the variance to LDR Section 4.3.4(K)[10 foot rear setback], based on a failure to make a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 4.5.1(J). Final Action: Denied 5 to 0 Waivers: 1. Motion made by Mr. Miller, seconded by Ms. Schatz to deny the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.5(C), which limits the height of walls within the required front or street side yard to 6 feet, based on a failure to make a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(6)(5). Final Action: Denied 5 to 0 2. Motion made by Mr. Miller, seconded by Ms. Schatz to deny the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.5(E), which requires the screening of walls in the front yard, based on a failure to make a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). Final Action: Denied 5 to 0 3. Motion made by Mr. Miller, seconded by Ms. Schatz to deny the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.5(F), which requires that walls located in the front yard be setback a minimum of 2 feet, based on a failure to make a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(6)(5). Final Action: Denied 5 to 0 4. Motion made by Mr. Miller, seconded by Ms. Schatz to approve the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.14(A), which requires 40 feet visibility triangles at the intersections of public rights-of- way, based on a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(6)(5). 5. Deny the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.15(G)(1), which prohibits swimming pools within the front setback area, based on a failure to make a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). Final Action: Motion Approved 5 to 0 Site Plan: Motion made by Mr. Miller, seconded by Ms. Schatz to approve COA 2004-231 and associated Class V site plan for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, subject to the following conditions of approval. 1. Address all Site Plan Technical Items and submit three (4) copies of the revised plans; 2. That the site plan be revised to provide a minimum of 25% open space for Lots 5 & 6. 6 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting January 4, 2006, 2006 3. That the duplex be redesigned to comply with the required 25 foot front setback based on the ultimate right-of-way for NE 1st Avenue. 4. That the landscape islands along the east side of the townhouses be increased to a depth of 20 feet or reduced to a maximum of 5 feet. 5. That the applicant resurface the intersection of NE 1st Avenue and NE 1 Street to match the intersection of Pineapple Grove Way and Atlantic Avenue 6. That all overhead utility lines (including the alley) be placed under ground. 7. That the street lighting for NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue be identified on the plans and that they consist of the typical acorn light fixture and spun concrete poles consistent with the redevelopment area. 8. That street bench and trash receptacles be installed along Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Street. 9. That a 5 foot dedication is required for NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue together with a 4 foot dedication for the alley. Final Action: Motion Approved 5 to 0 Landscape Plan: Motion made by Mr. Miller, seconded by Ms. Schatz to approve COA 2004-231 and associated landscape plan for Pineapple Grove Limited, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.6.16, subject to the condition that all Landscape Technical Items are addressed and three (3) copies of the revised plans are submitted. Final Action: Motion Approved 5 to 0 Elevations: Motion made by Mr. Miller, seconded by Ms. Dersh to Approve the COA and associated design elements for Pineapple Grove Limited, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.6.18, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the color scheme be revised to provide more vibrant colors and that variations of color schemes be provided to distinguish between units in accordance with direction by the Historic Preservation Board. 2. That the sliding glass doors are changed to French doors. Final Action: Motion Approved 5 to 0 Demolition: Motion made by Mr. Miller, seconded by Ms. Dersh, to approve demolition (Ms. Peart dissented). 7 Planning and Zoning Board Meeting January 4, 2006, 2006 Final Action: Motion Approved 4 to 1 Rescinded Demolition Motion made by Ms. Dersh, seconded by Ms. Peart, to rescind the above motion. Final Action: Passed 4 to 1 (Ms. Peart dissented) Demolition Motion made by Mr. Miller, seconded by Ms. Dersh to approve demolition of the building subject to the following conditions: 1. That the structure at 115 NE 1st Avenue is fully recorded prior to demolition and the survey details submitted to Staff. Structure recordings and survey details must include an existing site plan/survey, scaled architectural drawings to include floor plans and elevations, photographs of all elevations and any pertinent existing documentary information. Final Action: Motion Approved 4 to 1 (Ms. Peart dissented) III. DISCUSSION AND ACTION ITEMS: None IV. REPORTS AND COMMENTS: • Public Comments • Reports from Historic District Representatives • Board Members • Staff V. ADJOURN The meeting adjourned at 9:10 p.m. The undersigned is the Secretary of the Planning and Zoning Board and the information provided herein is the Minutes of the meeting of said body for January 4, 2006, which was formally adopted and approved by the Board on May 3, 2006.pD nise A. Valek, Executive Assistant/Board Liaison r,iievic_ 7.7-Hji4 If the Minutes that you have received are not completed as indicated above, then this means that these are not the official Minutes. They will become so after review and approval, which may involve some changes. 8 i DEtRAY BEACH _ D{LRAY BEACH t HISTORIC PRESERVATIOftBOARDIiiir M EMORANDUM STAFF REPORT t 1J93 _ ,. - si 1JJ3 2001 2001 Agent: Roger Cope Property Owner: Sandra Hoesley Project Location: 515 North Swinton Avenue, Del-Ida Park Historic District HPB Meeting Date: January-4, 2006 COA: 2005-365 ,ITEM~BEFORE THEBOARD The item before the Board is consideration of a Certificate of Appropriateness for alterations and additions to the main dwelling, shed demolition, construction of a detached garage/guest cottage, installation of a swimming pool and fence, and associated landscape plan at 515 North Swinton Avenue, Del-Ida Park Historic District pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(H). BACKGROUND ; The subject property consists of Lots 11 & 12, Block 4, Del-Ida Park, and is located on the southeast corner of Lake Court and North Swinton Avenue. The zoning for the property is R-1- AA (Single Family Residential). The property contains a two-story, single family residence and accessory shed. The Mediterranean Revival residence, built in 1925, is of wood frame construction clad in stucco and is a contributing structure in the Del-Ida Park Historic District inventory. The Florida Master Site File Site Inventory Form notes that the property was not originally located at the present site but was moved there from its original setting. The Sanborn Insurance Maps indicate that the building was moved to the property sometime between 1949 and 1963. There are no Board or administrative actions on file regarding this property. However, the City permit tracking system lists issued permits in 1993 and 2002 for re-roofing. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The application consists of the following components: • Alterations and additions to the existing historic residence; • Demolition of existing shed; • Construction of a detached garage/guest cottage; • Installation of a swimming pool; • Fence, and; • Landscape Plan. The existing two-story, Mediterranean Revival residence was constructed in 1925. The proposed alterations and additions include: 515 N Swinton Avenue COA 2005-365 • West(Front) Elevation: Remove paired, arched awning windows to the left of the front door and replace with a pair of single hung windows; remove all existing windows and replace with impact resistant windows. • South (Side) Elevation: Remove existing paired 6/1 windows, remove paired 8/1 windows, and remove square fixed window — all to be replaced with four (4) sets of single light, impact resistant French Doors; rear existing one story shed addition to be rebuilt and extended by approximately fifteen inches (15"), with the roof line slightly raised by three inches (3"); all other existing windows to be replaced with impact resistant windows. • East (Rear) Elevation: Replace set of three, second-story, awning windows with set of three, 6/1 single hung, impact resistant windows; remove set of two awning windows in one-story, rear shed addition; remove set of two awning windows on main wall plane to the right of shed addition in order to extend the shed addition to the right, approximately seven and a half feet (7'6"); replace single, arched awning window with one 6/1 single hung impact resistant window located to the right of the existing French doors. • North (Side) Elevation: Remove existing door and sidelights located at the rear shed addition in order to outwardly extend addition; replace existing arched awning windows located on either side of existing arched door with a 6/1, single hung, impact resistant window. The property also contains a shed measuring at sixteen feet by ten feet (16' x 10') and located to the southeast of the main residence, towards the rear property line. The applicant requests approval to demolish the shed in order to provide sufficient area for the proposed garage/guest cottage. The proposed garage/guest cottage, which faces North Swinton Avenue, would have a footprint of 565 square feet, with a total square footage of 1,130. The first floor would contain a two-car garage; while the second floor would contain a living room, guest bedroom, bathroom and office space. An exterior chimney finished in stucco would also be located on the north side elevation. A cantilevered stairway with an aluminum rail would be located on the south elevation. The exterior takes architectural elements from the main dwelling such as recessed arches above the French doors, cantilevered balconies with wrought iron rails, barrel tile hip roof, and cast concrete coat-of-arms. The garage doors, each a single doors, are clad in Pecky Cypress and cover arched openings. The proposed swimming pool, measuring at eighteen feet by thirty-five feet (18'x35'), is to be located between the main dwelling and proposed garage/guest cottage. No decking material has been specified. A four foot (4') tall aluminum fence is proposed along the front property line, two feet (2') to the interior, and continues along the north street-side property to the rear and around the garage and into the front yard. The existing shellrock circular driveway enters off of North Swinton Avenue and exits onto Lake Court. The proposed driveway would contain only one curbcut to the south of the property off of North Swinton Avenue and lead up to the proposed two-car garage/guest cottage. A driveway material has not been specified. An organically shaped pavered walkway would lead from the driveway area, through the front yard, and to the main entry of the two-story residence. Extensive landscaping will be planted throughout the property, concentrating on the front yard area. A few existing palm and citrus trees will be removed in order to make way for the new swimming pool and garage/guest cottage. 2/8 r 515 N Swinton Avenue COA 2005-365 ,Y _ ANALYSIS DESIGN ELEMENTS LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(4) and (E)(6-8) "Development Standards" provides guidelines in evaluating Certificates of Appropriateness for the alteration or addition of exterior architectural features and new construction. The applicable standards are as follows: The Board Shall Consider: (E)(4) A historic site, or building, structure, site, improvement, or appurtenance within a historic district shall be altered, restored, preserved, repaired, relocated, demolished, or otherwise changed in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, as amended from time to time. (E)(6) Demolition of historic sites, archaeological sites, or buildings, structures, improvements and appurtenances within historic districts will be regulated by the Historic Preservation Board in the manner described in Subsection (F). (E)(7) The construction of new buildings or structures, or the relocation, alteration, reconstruction, or major repair or maintenance of a non-contributing building or structure within a designated historic district shall meet the same compatibility standards as any material change in the exterior appearance of an existing non- contributing building. Any material change in the exterior appearance of any existing non-contributing building, structure, or appurtenance in a designated historic district shall be generally compatible with the form, proportion, mass, configuration, building material, texture, color, and location of historic buildings, structures, or sites adjoining or reasonably approximate to the non-contributing building, structure, or site. (E)(8) All improvements to buildings, structures, and appurtenances shall be visually compatible. Visual compatibility shall be determined in terms of height, front façade proportion, proportion of openings (windows and doors), rhythm of solids to voids on front facades, rhythm of buildings on streets, rhythm of entrance and/or porch projections, relationship of materials, texture and color, roof shapes, walls of continuity, scale of building, directional expression of front elevation. The following criterion has not been met: (a) Height: The height of proposed buildings or modifications shall be visually compatible in comparison or relation to the height of existing structures and buildings. The height of the proposed garage/guest cottage is not completely compatible with the existing historic structure. However, considering that it is a secondary structure on the lot, with an accessory use, its height should be lowered. The peak measures taller than the highest peak of the existing dwelling. Additionally, the height, in relation to the width, is out of proportion, giving further reason to be reduced. A roof pitch reduction could potentially solve the height issue, while an alteration of proportions would also be necessary. (b) Front Facade Proportion: The front facade of each building or structure shall be visually compatible with and in direct relationship to the width of the building and to the height of the front elevation of other adjacent or adjoining buildings within a historic district. The front façade proportion of the existing residence is visually compatible. However, the front facade proportion of the proposed garage/guest 515 N Swinton Avenue COA 2005-365 "wings" to either side of the garage doors give the appearance of an more proportionate building and lends to a visual compatibility. (h) Roof Shapes: The roof shape of a building or structure shall be visually compatible with the roof shape of a historic site, building, or structure within a historic district. The proposed roof shape is compatible with the existing structure on the property as well as existing shapes in the historic district. However, its pitch should be lowered to become visually compatible as a whole in the design. (I) Scale of a Building: The size of a building, the building mass in relation to open spaces, windows, door openings, balconies, and porches shall be visually compatible with the building size and building mass of historic sites, buildings, and structures within a historic district The scale of the proposed garage/guest cottage is in scale with the existing historic residence on the property as well as the surrounding areas in the historic district. However, its building proportion should be revised. The following is suggested by the Delray Beach Design Guidelines regarding alterations, additions, and new construction: •Do not cut new openings, alter existing openings, block windows, or install a replacement sash that does not fit the window. The alterations on the existing historic residence do not comply with this guideline. New openings are proposed on all elevations; this should be avoided. •Avoid obscuring or destroying characteristic features of the original building;the loss of historic material should be minimal. The arched window elements should not be lost, as these compliment the other arched elements throughout and is part of the historical character of the structure. •Do not introduce a new architectural style, or too closely mimic the style of the existing building. The architectural style of the garage/guest cottage has too closely mimicked that of the existing historic structure. The cast concrete "coat of arms" should be removed as this is a detail of the principal structure. The arched elements located above all sets of French doors should either be removed or only replicated on the front elevation. Additionally, the balconies on the south and north elevations should be removed. •All new construction should compliment the historic architecture of the district. New construction should not create a false sense of historical development by utilizing conjectural features of stylistic elements taken from other buildings. As noted above, the garage/guest cottage, as proposed, too closely mimics the existing residence. This could potentially create a false sense of historical development in the district. • The accessory building generally will not possess the same level of detail as the main building and should compliment the principal building. In order to compliment the principal building on the lot, the proposed garage/guest cottage should make the following revisions as part of conditions of approval: lower overall height by lowering the roof pitch, revise garage height:width proportions, reduce amount of balconies, remove arched elements above French doors, remove cast concrete "coat of arms", remove balconies on south and north elevations and replace with single hung 6/1 windows, to match others in the proposal. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation suggest the following: • The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. 18 515 N Swinton Avenue COA 2005-365 •Each property shall be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, shall not be undertaken. •Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a historic property shall be preserved. •Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. •New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. •New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. The above noted Standards should be taken into consideration when reviewing the proposed additions, alterations and new construction. The recommended conditions of approval are in keeping with the goal of the Standards, and should therefore be approved as presented. LDR Section 4.3.3 (Q), regarding Guest Cottages, states the following: (1) Can only be used by members of the family occupying the principal dwelling, their nonpaying guests, or persons employed for service on the premises (2) The structure shall not occupy more than 1/20th of the lot area and in no case shall exceed a floor area of 700 square feet. (3) The structure shall be located to observe the setback requirements as imposed for the principal structure. The proposed garage/guest cottage appears to be in compliance with this regulation. It should be noted that a kitchen, while not included in the design plans, cannot be a part of the accessory structure. This note is pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.1(E) which states that no Single Family Residence District shall a lot contain more than one principal residential structure. SWIMMING POOL, FENCE, AND LANDSCAPE PLAN The proposed swimming pool appears to be in compliance with the applicable LDRs, as it does not encroach into any setbacks and is at grade. A fence of forty-eight inches (48"), the minimum required as a safety barrier, has been proposed. However, the pool deck material has not been noted; all plans should note all existing and/or proposed hardscaping materials that are part of the final plan. As mentioned above, the proposed fence is forty-eight inches (48") in height and is made of aluminum. Its design is a capped rail with square posts and an intermediate rail towards the top rail. A color has not been specified. The landscape plan proposes extensive greenery throughout the front area of the property, designating the rear as a lawn area with a variety of existing trees to remain. The front section incorporates hardscaping into the landscaping by providing an organically designed pavered 515 N Swinton Avenue COA 2005-365 walkway from the driveway to the front door. The following landscape technical comments should be addressed: (1) The site and landscape plans must be consistent. The walkway that connects the driveway with the residence, as well as the attached porch, is shown in a different configuration. (2) All easements and utilities, including overhead lines, shall be shown on the landscape plan to avoid conflicts. The power poles are shown on the landscape plan but without the wires. (3) Any trees on neighboring properties that overhang onto this site shall be shown. There is a nlantinn in the right_of_way that was installed by the amity that is not on the landscape plan. A large existing tree along the south perimeter was not identified. All existing palms and trees, including what is planted in the right-of-way, shall be identified. (4) For corner properties, no hedge, wall or fence can be installed or maintained at a height that exceeds 36 inches (36")for a distance of forty feet (40') from the point of intersection of the two property/right-of-way lines. The proposed hedge, wall, trees and various plantings appear to be in conflict with this regulation. If any of the proposed plant material has the tendency to grow taller than 86 inches (36"), a note shall be placed on the plan that the plant material will be maintained at a height that is below the maximum height permitted. (5) When a driveway intersects a right-of-way, no hedge wall, or fence can be installed or maintained at a height that exceeds 36 inches (36") for a distance of twenty feet (20') from the point of intersection of the driveway and property/right-of-way lines. The sight/distance triangles shall be shown and the preceding note shall appear on the plan. (6) A note regarding the elimination of prohibited plant species shall appear on the plan. In addition, sod and irrigation in the rights-of-way is required and shall be noted on the plan. ASSESSMENT ANDCONCLUStON The existing residence at 515 North Swinton Avenue is a contributing structure in the Del-Ida Park Historic District and should be treated as such. The proposed alterations are too extensive as they are not in keeping with the goal of the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Guidelines nor the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, as noted above. The arched elements throughout all elevations lend further character to the dwelling and should not be removed, as proposed. The existing windows in these arched openings, while not original, could be replaced with a window size more compatible with the existing opening. On the south elevation, too many window openings are being altered. While it is understandable that the applicant might want to take advantage of the poolside view, four (4) sets of French doors are not appropriate for this structure on the same wall plane. Where the existing 8/1 windows are, one (1) set of French doors could-be placed in that opening without sacrificing the historic integrity of the fabric. Additionally, the existing 6/1 window openings should be maintained. The smaller window, while in proportion with the shed addition where it is located, could be replaced with a 4/1 window, similar to the 4/1 on the same elevation or another window of that same scale. The replacement of any other windows throughout is part of an overall repair scheme for the extant historic structure, which will continue to preserve the structure. All windows which are to be installed per this approval shall be aluminum clad wood frames. The proposed addition to the existing one-story rear shed extension is compatible in scale and massing and does not compromise the historical integrity. The proposed garage/guest cottage too closely mimics the main dwelling and should therefore be revised. The proportion need to be altered so as to not create a monolithic-type character on the east and west elevations. The roof pitch should also be lowered in order to decrease the height. The garage/guest cottage is an accessory structure and should be treated as such. Its appearance in neither height nor. design should not compete with the principal building, particularly when dealing with new construction in a historic district. Additionally, various architectural elements should be revised and/or removed in order to further diminish the 618 515 N Swinton Avenue COA 2005-365 competition between the two structures. These revisions have been noted throughout the staff report and are listed as conditions of approval. Based on the analysis above, positive findings with respect to the LDR Sections 2.4.6(H), 4.5.1(E)(4), (E)(6-8), and 4.3.3 (Q), the Delray Beach Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation can be made, subject to all noted conditions_ ALTERNATIVE'ACTCONS . . . .. . A. Continue with direction. B. Move approval of COA 2005-365 for 515 North Swinton, Del-Ida Park Historic District by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.6(H), 4.5.1(E)(4), (E)(6-8), and 4.3.3 (Q), of the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, subject to conditions. C. Deny approval of COA 2005-365 for 515 North Swinton, Del-Ida Park Historic District by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not meet criteria set forth in Sections2.4.6(H), 4.5.1(E)(4), (E)(6-8), and 4.3.3 (Q), of the Land Development Regulations, the Defray Beach Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. = RECOMMENDATION Move approval of COA 2005-365 regarding alterations and additions to the main dwelling, shed demolition, construction of a detached garage/guest cottage, installation of a swimming pool and fence, and associated landscape plan at 515 North Swinton, Del-Ida Park Historic District by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in Sections 2.4.6(H), 4.5.1(E)(4), (E)(6-8), and 4.3.3 (Q), of the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, subject to the following conditions: Main Dwelling 1) That the existing arched window elements remain and windows of the same size opening be proposed; 2) That the proposed four (4) sets of French doors on the south elevation be limited to one (1) set located where the pair of 8/1 windows currently exist, so as to use the existing opening; 3) That the existing pair of 6/1 windows on the south elevation remain or are replaced with a window of the same proportion and design; 4) That the square window in the shed addition remain or that it be replaced by a window of a similar proportion; 5) That aluminum clad wood frame windows and doors be used throughout; 515 N Swinton Avenue COA 2005-365 • 6) That a window and door schedule providing window specifications, manufacturers cut sheets including window profile, be submitted; 7) That photographs of all existing elevations be submitted; Garage/Guest Cottage 8) That the roof pitch of the garage/guest cottage be lowered to 5/12; 9) That the proportion (height:width) of the garage/guest cottage be revised as detailed in the staff report; 10)That the proposed cast concrete "coat of arms" be removed from the garage/guest cottage; 11)That the arched elements above the French doors and windows be removed, except on the front facade; 12)That the balcony rail be removed on the north and south elevations and the single French door on the south elevation be changed to a window; 13)That the single casement window on the north elevation be doubled up, or a second window be located to the left to provide further balance; 14)That a barrel tile roof overhang be provided above the doors located on the first story of the east and north elevations; Other 15)That photographs of all elevations of the existing shed be submitted; 16)That a fence color is chosen and submitted; 17)That all hardscaping materials be noted on all applicable plans, and; 18)That the noted landscape technical items be addressed. Report Prepared by: Amy E. Alvarez, Historic Preservation Planner. Attachments: Location map, site plan, elevations, photos, historical survey. 818 HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ---STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE: January 4, 2006 AGENDA ITEM: II. B. ITEM: Consideration of COA 2004-231 Which Incorporates The Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, And Architectural Elevations For Pineapple Grove Limited, Located On The North Side Of NE 1st Street, Between Pineapple Grove Way And NE 1st Avenue. . - POST CASON OFFICE METHODIST CHURCH GENERAL DATA: Owner/Applicant Pineapple Grove Ltd. Agent Jeffrey Silberstein Architects & N.W. 3RD ST. N.E. 3RD ST. Associates Location Located on the north side of NE 1st Street, between Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Avenue CI TY ATTORNEY d 0 Property Size 1.658 acres BUILDING 1 Future Land Use Map CC (Commercial Core) & OMU I 1 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.DR. N.E. 2ND ST. (Other Mixed Use) h = Current Zoning CBD (Central Business District) . . o & OSSHAD (Old School z Square Historic Arts District) W W Adjacent Zoning....North: OSSHAD & CBD HALL Q • >z East: CBD _ ... N.W. 1ST ST. N.E. 1ST ...... ST. South: CBD & OSSHAD West: OSSHAD ITY Existing Land Use Vacant Commercial & Multiple COENTER Family Residential Z z - z Proposed Land Use Construction of a 39-unit mixed - SCHOOL use project with 5,385 sq.ft of SQUARE retail, 5,764 sq. ft. of office, and ATLANTIC ,AVENUE - 4,868 sq. ft. restaurant. 111 Water Service Existing on site. ;-- Sewer Service Existing on site. a MI I.. _ - Ell - 0 i N ' S.W. 1ST ST._ S.E 3 w W Vl YI N N ' _ I , . - I I I 1 1 1 1 ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The action before the Board is approval of a COA-2004-231, which incorporates the following aspects of the development proposal for Pineapple Grove Limited, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(F): • Class V Site Plan • Landscape Plan • Architectural Elevations • Waiver Request • Variance Request The subject property is located on the north side of NE 1st Street, between Pineapple Grove Way (NE 2nd Avenue) and NE 1st Avenue. BACKGROUND The development proposal consists of the south 38.25 feet of Lot 5, 6, 7, 8, the south 34.75 feet of Lot 13, 14, 15, and 16 of Block 75 of the Town of Linton Plat and contains 1.658 acres. The eastern half of the development (Lots 13 through 16) is located in the CBD (Central Business District)zoning district and contains two buildings that were built in 1965. The western half of the development (Lots 5 through 8) is located in the OSSHAD (Old School Square Historic Arts District) and contains a multiple family development that was constructed in 1950 and was the former site of Neil's Market. It is noted that the south 34.75 feet of Lot 6 and all of Lots 7 and 8 are subject to the permitted uses and development regulations of the CBD zoning district. Further, the development proposal was submitted on May 3, 2004, which was prior to the final approval of the Downtown Design Guidelines by the City Commission on May 4, 2004. Therefore, the development proposal has been reviewed based on the regulations in place prior to the Downtown Design Guidelines. The action now before the Board is approval of the site plan, landscape plan, architectural elevations, a series of waivers and a variance. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The development proposal incorporates the following:__ • Demolition of the existing buildings and construction of a mixed-use project that contains 8 townhouses, 2 duplexes, and a three-story 5,764 square foot office building along the west side of the alley; construction of a mixed-use building along the east side of the alley that contains 4,868 square feet of restaurant floor area, 5,385 square feet of retail floor area, and 30 condominium dwelling units along the east side of the alley; • Construction of a two-story parking facility along the east side of the alley; • Construction of a pool and garden deck along the east side of the alley; and • Installation of dumpster enclosures and associated landscaping. The development proposal includes waivers to the following sections of the Land Development Regulations: Historic Preservation Board Meeting of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2004-231 1. LDR Section 4.6.5(C), which limits the height of walls within the required front or street side yard to 6 feet. 2. LDR Section 4.6.5(E), which requires the screening of walls in the front yard. 3. LDR Section 4.6.5(F), which requires that walls located in the front yard be setback a minimum of 2 feet. 4. LDR Section 4.6.14(A), which requires 40 feet visibility triangles at the intersections of public rights-of-way. 5. LDR Section 4.6.15(G)(1), which prohibits swimming pools within the front setback area. The development proposal includes a variance to LDR Section 4.3.4(K), which requires a rear setback of 10 feet, and 8 feetis proposed for the mixed use building along the east side of the alley. SITE PLAN ANALYSIS COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development application/request. LDR Section 4.3.4(K) Development Standards Matrix: The following table indicates that the proposal complies with LDR Section 4.3.4(K) as it pertains to that portion of the development located in the CBD zone district: Required Provided Building Height (maximum) 48' 48' Setbacks Rear 10' 8' (See Variance Analysis) The following table indicates that the proposal complies with LDR Section 4.3.4(K) as it pertains to.that portion of the development located in the OSSHAD zone district: Required Provided Building Height (max.) 35' 34' 9" Open Space 25% 15%* Maximum Lot Coverage 40% 28% Setbacks • Front 25' 20' ** • Side Interior(North & South) 7.5' 10' • Rear 10' 29' * Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(K), a minimum of 25% open space is required in the OSSHAD zoning district and 15% is proposed. A condition of approval is attached that the site plan be revised to provide a minimum of 25% open space for Lots 5 & 6. If the minimum required open space is not provided, consideration of the site plan must be delayed until a variance application is submitted and processed. ** The required front setback in the OSSHAD zoning district is 25 feet and 25 feet is proposed from the current right-of-way of NE 1st Avenue. However, as discussed later in this report, the applicant will be required to dedicate 5 feet along the NE 18t Avenue right-of-way. This will reduce the proposed front 2/2 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2004-231 setback to 20 feet. Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that the duplex be redesigned to comply with the required 25 foot front setback based on the ultimate right-of-way. Otherwise, consideration of the site plan must be delayed until a variance application is submitted and processed. Central Business District(CBD) District Regulations: Setbacks: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(G)(2)(a), within those sections of the CBD zoning district located in the Pineapple Grove Main Street area and east of the Intracoastal Waterway, a front setback of not less than 5 feet nor greater than 10 feet and a 5 foot side (street) setback shall be provided. There shall be no required side (interior) or rear building setbacks except where there is no dedicated access to the rear of a building, a 10 foot side setback shall be provided. The applicant has indicated that a non-vehicular access line will be placed along the south side of the property adjacent to NE 1st Street. This will locate the front yards for this project along both Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Avenue the lot front respectively. The proposed development complies with this requirement as a 5 foot minimum setback has been provided along Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Street. The development along NE 1st Avenue is a townhouse design that has a front setback that is consistent with the Old School Square Historic Arts District. Parking: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(G)(1) and utilizing the shared parking table of LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(8)(a)[Appendix C], the 39 residential units; 5,385 square feet of retail floor area; 5,764 square feet of office floor area; and 4,868 square feet of restaurant floor area, together require 130 parking spaces, and 103 parking spaces are provided on-site. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(B)(4), the applicant has been granted a credit of 30 spaces for property that is owned by the applicant on the south side of NE 1st Street, which has been acquired by the City for use as a public parking facility. Based on this credit, the proposed development provides 133 total parking spaces, which complies with the minimum parking requirement. Minimum Residential Floor Area: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(H)(3), the minimum floor area for multi-family residential dwelling units shall be as established for the Medium Density Residential (RM) zoning district in Section 4.3.4(K). The following table indicates that the proposed residential development satisfies the City's minimum Multiple Family development floor area: Minimum Floor Area* Minimum Proposed Floor Number of Units Area* One Bedroom 600 824 12 Two Bedroom 900 1,731 15 Three Bedroom 1,250 1,954 12 * Square Feet VARIANCE ANALYSIS Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(K), the required rear setback in the CBD zoning district is 10 feet and 8 feet is proposed for the mixed-use building along the east side of the alley. The applicant 3/3 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2004-231 has submitted a waiver request to reduce the rear yard setback and has submitted the following narrative in support of the request: "The project was designed to meet the 10'setback from the existing rear property line. Upon review of the submitted plans, the City has requested a ROW dedication of 2 feet on each side of the alley witch [sic] is west of the rear of the proposed structure, thereby reducing the rear setback to 8. The applicant has proposed to widen the alley to 24' (at staff's suggestion) thereby creating a ROW that is wider than requested new 20'ROW[sic]. This approach is in the interest of the public's safety and welfare. Visually and physically the setback will read as 10'from the existing property line and hence will not alter the character of the neighborhood. Lastly, HBD has consistently recommended approval for deduction [sic] of setbacks due to the City's requests for ROW dedications. The Board's justification has been based for example on the premise if a 5'ROW dedication was requested than [sic] the applicant should be allowed a 5'setback reduction as this would have no impact visually on the streetscape and character of the area." The criteria for a variance are provided in Appendix "C" of this report. The building subject to the setback variance is located in the CBD zoning district and has no historic significance. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(1), setbacks are established from the property line based on the ultimate right-of-way. In the downtown area, the City has required dedication of right-of-way to meet the 20 foot alley dimension. The City has not provided relief for the rear setback along the alley for new development. The proposed variance is not necessary for the adaptive reuse of an existing structure or site (all development is new). Further, the setback is necessary to mitigate the "canyon" effect within the alleys. Given this mitigation, the granting of the variance would be contrary to the public interest, safety, or welfare. Based on the above, the variance request does not meet the required basis in Section 4.5.1(J). Therefore, the variance should be denied and the development redesigned to meet the required 10 foot rear setback. WAIVER ANALYSIS Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; or, (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. Wall Height: Per LDR Section 4.6.5(C), the maximum height of walls within the required front or street side yard is 6 feet. The proposed wall and gates along the west side of the property are 11 feet 8 inches high. The applicant has requested a waiver to allow an increase in the height of the wall. The applicant has submitted the following narrative in support of the waiver: "The applicant believes that this design element is consistent with the neighborhood. The wall height complies with the LDR requirement except where they break to denote the entry. Similar applications can be found in other parts of the City. The applicant requests relief." 4/4 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of January 4,2006 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2004-231 Waiver Analysis: There are several of these pergola gate features along NE 1st Avenue that are approximately 8 feet high. The proposed 11 feet 8 inch pergola/wall features would not be consistent with the neighborhood. Furthermore, there are no cases that staff is aware of concerning increasing the height of the wall or gate. Based on the above, a positive finding cannot be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5),Waiver Findings. Wall Setback Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.5(E) & (F), masonry walls located in the front yard must be screened by landscape material that is to be maintained at a minimum height equal to half the height of the wall. Landscape materials must be of the type that will reach the required height within two years of planting. These walls must be setback 2 feet from the property line to provide adequate area for vegetation to mature. The proposed wall is located along the property line with no setback and landscaping. The applicant has requested a waiver to eliminate the required wall setback and landscaping. The applicant has submitted the following narrative in support of the waiver: 'The applicant believes that this design element is consistent with the neighborhood. For instance, one block north, property walls abut the property line with vines trained to grow over the walls. We have proposed similar landscaping scheme. The applicant requests relief" Waiver Analysis: There are several homes along NE 1st Avenue that do not provide the required setback or landscaping. It is noted that these requirements were not effect at the time these walls were constructed. The purpose for the setback and landscaping is to soften these features. Otherwise, the wall would directly abut the public sidewalk and create a harsh pedestrian environment. Consequently, a positive finding cannot be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5),Waiver Findings. Sight Visibility Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.14(A), a 40 foot visibility triangle is required at the intersections of public rights-of-way. The building at the intersection of Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Street and the garden wall at the intersection of NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue encroach into the required visibility triangle. The applicant has requested a waiver to reduce these visibility triangles, however, a narrative in support of the waiver-has not been provided. Waiver Analysis: There is no concern with respect to the reduced visibility triangles since the restaurant encroaches approximately 4 feet into this area and the wall encroaches approximately 6 feet. Given the location of the stop bars along Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Avenue, there will be adequate sight lines for cross traffic along NE 1st Street. It is also noted that NE 1st Street will be converted to two-way traffic flow, which should serve to calm traffic with respect to vehicle speeds. Similar circumstances on other properties would lead to the same conclusion. Consequently, positive findings can be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), Waiver Findings. 5/5 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of January 4,2006 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2004-231 Swimming Pool Setbacks: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.15(G)(1), swimming pools are allowed to extend into a rear or side setback area but no closer than 10 feet to any property line. However, swimming pools are prohibited within the front setback since there is no provision for their encroachment. The proposed duplex and townhouse pools are located completely within the front yard setback. The applicant has submitted a waiver request to allow the pools within the front setback. The applicant submitted the following narrative in support of the waiver request: "...In order to provide for a more pedestrian friendly streetscape and as had been requested by the Historic Preservation Board and Pineapple Grove Main Street Board we opted to located the garages and vehicular access to the town homes to the rear instead of locating garages in the front yards. As a result, the town homes have their courtyard gardens with pools in the front rather than the rear. We belietre this application is standard for this type of development. As noted, the location of the pools within the setback has been approved by other projects located within the Historic Districts of Delray Beach." Waiver Analysis: The Historic Preservation Board approved relief for pools within the front setback for the Marina Bay Townhomes project. This approval was based on the design of the project, which had vehicular access to the rear of the units. It is noted that the Pineapple Grove Limited project offers recreational facilities that the townhouses could have access to, which includes a common pool. There is a concern that the pools within the front yard would detract from the character of this neighborhood, which have no pools in the front yard. Consequently, a positive cannot be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), Waiver Findings. Landscape Islands: The landscape islands along the east side of the townhomes range from 12 feet to 14 feet. There is a concern with respect to vehicles parking in these areas. If a vehicle parks in these areas, they will encroach into the one-way drive aisle and impede traffic. These landscape islands need to be increased to a depth of 20 feet or reduced to a maximum of 5 feet (to discourage parking) and this is attached as a condition of approval. If the islands are shortened, the air conditioning units would need to be relocated (likely to roof wells). Pineapple Grove Main Street Redevelopment Plan: The Pineapple Grove Main Street Neighborhood Plan (The Plan) contains several design guidelines that address redevelopment efforts within this area. The following is an analysis of the applicable design guidelines: Street Improvements: The Plan indicates that the intersection at NE 15t Street and NE 1st Avenue be resurfaced with paver bricks to match the intersection of Pineapple Grove Way and Atlantic Avenue. A condition of approval is attached that the applicant resurface this intersection accordingly. Overhead Power Lines: 6/6 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of January 4,2006 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2004-231 Overhead cables (electric, telephone, CATV) are required to be placed under ground whenever feasible. A condition of approval is attached that all overhead utility lines (including the alley) be placed under ground. Street and Parking Lot Lighting: Pursuant to The Plan, the street and parking lot lighting should be consistent with the Pineapple Grove Main Street lighting. The light poles and fixtures should have a pedestrian scale of 12 feet to 14 feet. The street lights should be staggered from one side of the street to the other with a separation of approximately 75 feet. The lamps must be metal halide and powder-coated cast aluminum for the pole and fixture and fitted to accept banners. A condition of approval is attached that the street lighting for NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue be identified on the plans and that they consist of the typical acorn light fixture and spun concrete poles for the redevelopment area. Street Furniture: The Plan indicates that benches and trash receptacles will be provided. It will be necessary for the applicant to obtain the approved street bench, trash receptacle and bollard details from the Engineering Department and this attached as a condition of approval. Right-of-Way Dedication: Pursuant to LDR Sections 5.3.1 (A) and (D) and Table T-1 of the. Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element, the following table describes the required rights-of-way and the existing rights-of-way adjacent to the subject property: Right-of-Way Required Existing Proposed Required Dedication Pineapple Grove Way 60' 50' 50' 0' NE 1" Street 55' 50' 50' 5' NE 1st Avenue 60' 50' 50' 5' Alley 20'or dominant width 16' 20' 4' Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1(D)(4), a reduction in the required right-of-way width of existing streets may be granted by the City Engineer upon favorable recommendation from the Development Services Management Group (DSMG). The City Engineer and DSMG considered the reductions and approved the reduction of right-of-way for Pineapple Grove Way to the existing width. However, a 5 foot dedication will be required for NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue together with a 4 foot dedication for the alley and is attached as a condition of approval. As noted previously, the dedication of the 5 feet for NE 1st Avenue will require redesign of the duplex, which requires a 25 foot front setback from the ultimate right-of-way line. Technical Items: While the revised site plan has accommodated some staff concerns; the following items remain outstanding, and will need to be addressed prior to building permit submittal (unless stated otherwise): 1. That an easement is provided for the encroachment of the townhouse roof eaves that encroach over the duplex property lines. 2. That a 20 foot corner clip is provided at the northwest corner of NE 2nd Avenue and NE 1st Street and northeast corner of NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue. 7/7 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2004-231 3. That the finished floor elevation is established as a minimum of 18 inches above the centerline of roadway along NE 1st Avenue. • 4. That type "F" curbing shall be required along NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue. 5. That an exclusive 12 foot water easement be provided over water main. 6. That a minimum of 10 feet be provided between the water main and the building. 7. That tactile warning devices are installed at the entrances to the parking garage to warn drivers. 8. That the site data table is revised to remove the 8 parallel parking spaces from the total provided. 9. That the location of the grease trap is noted on the site plan. 10.That the location of the nearest existing fire hydrants and additional fire hydrants per the direction of the Fire Department and City Engineer be provided. 11.That a composite utility plan including the proposed landscaping is provided prior to certification of the site plan. 12. That a 10 foot general utility easement is provided through the property. 13. That the located and method of mail collection be noted on the site plan. 14.That the applicant contributes $7,500.00 toward a bus shelter. 15. That a revised traffic statement be submitted that reflects the current development proposal. 16.That a finding of concurrency be submitted from the School District of Palm Beach County. LANDSCAPE ANALYSIS The proposed landscaping consists primarily of foundation areas and street trees that include Royal Palms, existing Cassia trees, Live Oak trees, Japanese Fern trees, Green Malayan Coconut Palms, and Alexander Palms. These areas will be under planted with Arboricola, Variegated Ginger, Black Magic Ti Plant, Redtip Cocoplum, Purple Crinum Lily, Fakahatchee Grass, Ficus hedge, Foxtail Fern, Lobster Claw Ginger, Green Island Ginger, Horizontal Cocoplum, Hibiscus Standard, Ixora Nora Grant, Yellow Lantana, Mona Lavender, Lady Palm, White Bird of Paradise, Red Sister Ti Plant, Trinette, Wart Fern, and Sweet Viburnum. The landscape plan complies with LDR Section 4.6.16, except with regard to the north perimeter landscape strip, which is discussed below. Landscape Technical Items: The following Landscape Plan items remain outstanding, and will need to be addressed prior to building permit submission. 1. That conflicts between landscaping, utilities, and light poles are resolved in accordance with the City Horticulturalist. 2. That all visibility triangles are graphically noted on the landscape plan. 8/8 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2004-231 DESIGN ELEMENTS The proposed residential and mixed-use buildings are in the vernacular style. The townhouses and duplex have a combination of gable and hip roofs with silver standing seam metal. All buildings will be painted white and have variations of lap siding and stucco. The architecture of these units are monotonous with little variations. The Board may want to consider requiring variations in architectural appurtenances such as rail, awning, window, and door styles to differentiate between units. The Pineapple Grove Main Street Design Review Committee considered the elevations and recommended the color scheme be revised to provide more vibrant colors. A condition of approval is attached that the color scheme be revised to provide more vibrant colors and that variations of color schemes be provided to distinguish between units. The applicant has indicated that the sliding glass doors are manufactured to match French doors. In order to maintain a higher quality of development, a condition of approval is attached that the sliding glass doors are changed to French doors. REQUIRED FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the approval of development applications, certain findings must be made in a form which is part of the official record. This may be achieved through information on the application, written materials submitted by the applicant, the staff report, or minutes. Findings shall be made by the body which has the authority to approve or deny the development application. These findings relate to the Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan Consistency, Concurrency, and Compliance with the Land Development Regulations. At its meeting of May 7, 2002, the City Commission made positive findings with respect to the Future Land Use Map, Comprehensive Plan Consistency, and Concurrency provided conditions of approval are addressed. However,the following is provided: Section 3.1.1 (A) - Future Land Use Map: That portion of the subject property west of the alley has a FLUM (Future Land Use Map) designation of OMU (Other Mixed Use) and zoning designation of OSSHAD. The portion of the property located east of the alley has a Future Land Use Map designation of CC (Commercial Core) and a zoning designation of CBD (Central Business District). The zoning districts are consistent with the CC Future Land Use Map designations. As noted in the background section, the southern 34.75 feet of Lot 6 and all of Lots 7 and 8 are subject to the permitted uses and development regulations of the CBD zoning district. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(B)(4), within the CBD zoning district, mixed use developments are allowed. The development will have less than the 30 units per acre (23.32 dwelling units per acre), which is considered a permitted use in the CBD zoning district. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.24(B)(1), the proposed duplex is considered an allowed use in the OSSHAD zoning district. Thus, positive findings can be made with respect to Future Land Use Map consistency. Section 3.1.1 (B) -Concurrency: As described in Appendix A, a positive finding of concurrency can be made as it relates to water, sewer, streets and traffic, drainage, parks and recreation, open space, and solid waste. Section 3.1.1 (C) -Consistency(Standards for Site Plan Actions): As described in Appendix B, a positive finding of consistency can be made as it relates to Standards for Site Plan Actions. 9/9 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of January 4,2006 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2004-231 Section 3.1.1 (D) -Compliance With the Land Development Regulations: As described under the Site Plan Analysis of this report, a positive finding of compliance with the LDRs can be made, provided that all outstanding items attached as conditions of approval are addressed. Comprehensive Plan Policies: A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following applicable objectives or policies were noted: Future Land Use Element Objective A-1 - Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate and complies in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations, is complimentary to adjacent land uses, and fulfills remaining land use needs. The property contains several vacant commercial buildings and multiple family structures and also includes the former site of Neal's Market (demolished). There are no special physical, historic, or environmental characteristics of the land that would be negatively impacted by the proposed mixed-use development. The development will be complimentary with the surrounding commercial developments and provide a customer base for area businesses on a year-round basis instead of seasonal, which provides economic stability for the area. In terms of fulfilling remaining land use needs, the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan states as follows: One of the most important objectives of the City's overall housing policy is the establishment of housing in the downtown area. In the years since adoption of the 1989 Comprehensive Plan the downtown has changed from a somewhat sleepy, seasonally oriented shopping district to a vibrant year-round retail, service, and entertainment area with an active nightlife. A critical missing element is a significant housing development. The City recognizes the importance of providing housing in close proximity to shopping, employment, and transportation, and the need to have a residential base to support the businesses in the downtown area. The proposed development will help to fulfill this stated land use need, and is therefore consistent with this policy. Future Land Use Element Policy C-4.4. — The City supports the efforts to revitalize the Pineapple Grove Main Street (PGMS) area, and the use of the Main Street approach: organization, promotion, design, and economic restructuring. While the CRA is the lead support agency for the PGMS organization, the City will provide technical support and assistance through the Planning &Zoning and Community Improvement Departments. The Pineapple Grove Main Street Neighborhood Plan contains several design guidelines that address redevelopment efforts within this area. These items were previously discussed under the "Compliance with LDRs" Section of this report. Transportation Element Policy D-2.2 — Bicycle parking and facilities shall be required on all new development and redevelopment. Particular emphasis is to be placed on development within the TCEA Area. Bicycle parking is provided within the covered parking area and at the northeast corner of the development. 10/10 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2004-231 Open Space and Recreation Element Policy A-3.1 -Tot lots and recreation areas serving children from toddlers to teens, shall be a feature of all new housing developments as part of the design to accommodate households having a range of ages. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential developments located in the downtown area, and for infill projects having fewer than 25 units. This policy may be waived for projects in the downtown because the City recognizes the following: that households located in the downtown are likely to have fewer children than those located in suburban settings; that land in the central business district is at a premium and it can be cost prohibitive to provide recreational features such as tennis courts, volleyball courts, etc.; and, that there are other cultural and recreational opportunities located in the downtown that are not readily available to residents of suburban apartment complexes. Some of the recreational, cultural, and open space opportunities located in proximity to the project include: Veteran's Park, which includes a large playground and recreational area; the Atlantic Ocean, the City's Tennis Center, Old School Square Cultural Center, the Milagro Center. Based on the above, this policy is not applicable to this project. Housing Element Objective B-2 - Redevelopment and the development of new land shall result in the provision of a variety of housing types which shall continue to accommodate the diverse makeup of the City's demographic profile, and meet the housing needs identified in this Element. Policies, which will implement this objective, include: Housing Element Policy B-2.2 - The development of new adult oriented communities within the City is discouraged. New housing developments shall be designed to accommodate households having a range of ages, especially families with children, and shall be required to provide 3 and 4 bedroom units and activity areas for children ranging from toddlers to teens. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential development located in the downtown area, and for infill projects having fewer than 25 units. This development provides 7 three bedroom units (43%) and will not be excluded to occupancy by adults only. However, it is acknowledged that downtown dwellings are not typically occupied by households with children. This complex will primarily accommodate young and middle-age professionals. As allowed by this policy, it is appropriate that there not be a requirement to provide 4 bedroom units and specific activity areas for children. Housing Element Policy B-2.6 - Housing in and near the downtown area, in close proximity to employment opportunities and services, is a critical need. In order to help stimulate demand for new housing in and around the Central Business District, the development of new rental housing projects outside of the TCEA and North Federal Highway area is discouraged. The development proposal complies with this policy as it provides the desired type of residential development within the CBD. Housing Objective A-12: To assist residents of the City in maintaining and enhancing their neighborhood environment, the City shall take steps to ensure that modifications in and around the neighborhood do not lead to its decline, such as those described in the following policies. Housing Policy A-12.3: In evaluating proposals for new development or redevelopment, the City shall consider the effect that the proposal will have on the stability of nearby neighborhoods. Factors such as noise, odors, dust, traffic volumes and circulation 11/11 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of January 4,2006 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2004-231 patterns shall be reviewed in terms of their potential to negatively impact the safety, habitability and stability of residential areas. If it is determined that a proposed development will result in a degradation of any neighborhood, the project shall be modified accordingly or denied. This project is located within the commercial core area of the City. As noted previously, the residents and commercial components of this development will aid in the economic stability of the Pineapple Grove Main Street area as well as the Atlantic Avenue downtown area. The project is located within an area that consists of the traditional road grid system. This system is conducive to traffic distribution, wherein, automobiles have a diverse choice of options to navigating the downtown area. Motorists are able to navigate the local grid street system to avoid congestion in order to reach collector and arterial roads such as Pineapple Grove Way, NE 1st Street, NE 1st Avenue, NE 2nd Street, Swinton Avenue, NE 4th Street/Lake Ida Road, Atlantic Avenue, and Federal Highway. Given the diffusion of vehicle trips, it is unlikely that adjacent neighborhoods will bef negatively impacted by the additional traffic. Section 2.4.5(F)(5) -Compatibility(Site Plan Findings): The approving body must make a finding that development of the property pursuant to the site plan will be compatible and harmonious with adjacent and nearby properties and the City as a whole, so as not to cause substantial depreciation of property values. The subject property is bordered to the north, south and west by Old School Square Historic Arts District zoning district and to east and south by the CBD zoning district. The adjacent land uses include: to the north and west single family residential and commercial uses; to the east and south by commercial and Old School Square. The mixed-use development proposal will significantly enhance the aesthetics of the subject property together with the neighborhood. The duplexes and townhouses will provide an appropriate transition between the Pineapple Grove Way commercial uses and the lower intensity historic neighborhood to the west. The proposed redevelopment will provide year- round customer and employment base for the nearby commercial redevelopment along Pineapple Grove Way as well as new opportunities for businesses. The stability of the downtown area will be enhanced by the addition of the households that will patronize area businesses and contribute to the long term revitalization of this redevelopment area together with employment base of the commercial uses. REVIEW BY OTHERS The development proposal is located in an area which requires review by the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) and the DDA (Downtown Development Authority). Pineapple Grove Design Review Committee At its meeting of September 7, 2005, the Design Review Committee reviewed the proposal and recommended approval of the development proposal, subject to revision of the color scheme to provide a more vibrant color scheme consistent with the Pineapple Grove Main Street redevelopment area. Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) At its meeting of August 25, 2005, the CRA reviewed the proposal and recommended approval. Downtown Development Authority (DDA) 12/12 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of January 4,2006 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2004-231 At its meeting of September 12, 2005, the DDA reviewed the proposal and recommended approval. Courtesy Notice: Courtesy notices have been provided to the following homeowner's associations, which have requested notice of developments in their areas: • Neighborhood Advisory Council • Chamber of Commerce • Old School Square • Bankers Row • Progressive Residents of Delray (PROD) • President's Council Public Notice: Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 500 foot radius of the subject property. Any letters of support or objection will be presented at the Historic Preservation Board meeting. ASSESSMENT.AND CONCLUSION The proposed mixed-use portion of the development will further enhance vibrancy of the downtown area and the continued redevelopment of the Pineapple Grove redevelopment area. The townhouses and duplexes will provide an appropriate transition between the more intense commercial area along Pineapple Grove Way and the low intensity historic neighborhood. The development proposal includes several waivers, several of which cannot be supported including the pools in the front setback, wall setback and landscaping, and the variance to the rear setback. The proposed use is consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Chapter 3 of the Land Development Regulations. Positive findings can be made with respect to Section 2.4.5(F)(5) regarding compatibility of the proposed development with surrounding properties. Positive findings can be made with respect to compliance with the Land Development Regulations provided the conditions of approval are addressed. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Postpone with direction. B. Move approval of COA 2004-231, associated Class V site plan approval, landscape plan, design elements, waivers, and variance for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, subject to conditions of approval. C. Move denial of COA 2004-231, associated Class V site plan approval, landscape plan, design elements, waivers, and variance for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, does not meet criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan. 13/13 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of January 4,2006 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2004-231 STAFF RECOMMENDATION By Separate Motions: Variance: Deny the variance to LDR Section 4.3.4(K)[10 foot rear setback], based on a failure to make a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 4.5.1(J). Waivers: 1. Deny the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.5(C), which limits the height of walls within the required front or street side yard to 6 feet, based on a failure to make a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 2. Deny the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.5(E), which requires the screening of walls in the front yard, based on a failure to make a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 3. Deny the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.5(F), which requires that walls located in the front yard be setback a minimum of 2 feet, based on a failure to make a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 4. Approve the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.14(A), which requires 40 feet visibility triangles at the intersections of public rights-of-way, based on a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(6)(5). 5. Deny the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.15(G)(1), which prohibits swimming pools within the front setback area, based on a failure to make a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). Site Plan: Approve COA 2004-231 and associated Class V site plan for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, subject to the following conditions of approval. 1. Address all Site Plan Technical Items and submit three (4) copies of the revised plans; 2. That the site plan be revised to provide a minimum of 25% open space for Lots 5 & 6. 3. That the duplex be redesigned to comply with the required 25 foot front setback based on the ultimate right-of-way for NE 1st Avenue. 4. That the landscape islands along the east side of the townhouses be increased to a depth of 20 feet or reduced to a maximum of 5 feet. 5. That the applicant resurface the intersection of NE 1st Avenue and NE 1 Street to match the intersection of Pineapple Grove Way and Atlantic Avenue 6. That all overhead utility lines (including the alley) be placed under ground. 14/14 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of January 4,2006 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2004-231 7. That the street lighting for NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue be identified on the plans and that they consist of the typical acorn light fixture and spun concrete poles consistent with the redevelopment area. 8. That street bench and trash receptacles be installed along Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Street. 9. That a 5 foot dedication is required for NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue together with a 4 foot dedication for the alley. Landscape Plan: Approve COA 2004-231 and associated landscape plan for Pineapple Grove Limited, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.6.16, subject to the condition that all Landscape Technical Items are addressed and three (3) copies of the revised plans are submitted. Elevations: Approve the COA and associated design elements for Pineapple Grove Limited, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.6.18, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the color scheme be revised to provide more vibrant colors and that variations of color schemes be provided to distinguish between units in accordance with direction by the Historic Preservation Board. 2. That the sliding glass doors are changed to French doors. Attachments: • Appendix A • Appendix B • Appendix C • Site Plan • Architectural Elevations • Landscape Plan Report prepared by: Scott D. Pape, Senior Planner 15/15 Appendix A Page 1 APPENDIX A CONCURRENCY,. FINDING;S Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(B) Concurrency as defined pursuant to Objective B-2 of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan must be met and a determination made that the public facility needs of the requested land use and/or development application will not exceed the ability of the City to fund and provide, or to require the provision of, needed capital improvements for the following areas: Water and Sewer: With respect to water and sewer service, the following is noted: ➢ Water service will be available to the site via lateral connection to a proposed 8" main along the interior of the-property from an existing 8" main along NE 1st Street. ➢ Sewer service exists to the site via an 8" sewer main located within the alley. ➢ The location of existing and proposed fire hydrants must be noted on the engineering plans and is attached as a site plan technical item. Pursuant to the City's Comprehensive Plan, treatment capacity is available at the City's Water Treatment Plant and the South Central County Waste Water Treatment Plant for the City at build-out. Based upon the above, positive findings can be made with respect to these levels of service standards. Streets and Traffic: The applicant submitted a traffic statement that indicates that the mixed use development will generate a net of 1,439 average daily trips (144 p.m. peak trips) onto the surrounding streets compared to generation of the existing uses. Notification has been received from the Palm Beach County Traffic Division that the proposed development meets traffic concurrency. It is noted that the traffic statement was based on a previous development proposal that included 50 multiple family dwelling units, 2,260 square feet of high turn-over restaurant, 6,450 square feet of general office, and 8,000 square feet of general retail. The development proposal under consideration has been scaled back in terms of the number of units. The commercial floor area has been revised to increase the restaurant area and reduce the general retail and office floor area. A technical item is attached that the traffic statement be revised accordingly. The property is located within the Coastal Exception Areas of Palm Beach County and therefore meets the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County with respect to the residential units. The subject property is located in the City's TCEA (Traffic Concurrency Exception Area), which encompasses the CBD, CBD-RC, and OSSHAD zoning districts, as well as the West Atlantic Avenue corridor. The TCEA was established in December, 1995 to aid in the revitalization of downtown, with a purpose of reducing the adverse impacts of transportation concurrency requirements on urban infill development and redevelopment. These revitalization efforts are achieved by exempting development within the TCEA from the requirements of traffic concurrency. A positive finding can be made with respect to traffic concurrency. Parks and Recreation Facilities: The Open Space and Recreation Element of the Comprehensive Plan indicates in its conclusion that "The City will have sufficient recreation facilities at build-out to meet the adopted standards': A park impact fee is collected to offset any impacts that the project may have on the City's recreational facilities. Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.2, a park impact fee of $500.00 Appendix A Page 2 per dwelling unit will be collected prior to issuance of a building permit for each unit. A total fee of$19,500 will be required of this development for parks and recreation purposes. Solid Waste: Trash generated each year by the 39 residential units, 5,385 square feet of retail, 5,764 square feet of office, and 4,868 square feet of restaurant will be 123.91 tons of solid waste per year. Per the Solid Waste Authority, the trash generated by this proposal can be accommodated by existing facilities. Therefore, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Drainage: Preliminary drainage plans weje submitted which indicate that drainage will be accommodated via sheet flow to culverts that will direct stormwater to an exfiltration trench system. Based on the above, positive findings with respect to this level of service standard can be made. School Concurrency: A concurrency application needs to be submitted to the School District of Palm Beach County. A finding of concurrency needs to be submitted from the School District and is attached as a technical item. 17/17 Appendix B Page 1 £; APPENDIX> B STANDAR ©S FOR SITE PLAN ACTIONS A. Building design, landscaping, and lighting (glare) shall be such that they do not create unwarranted distractions or blockage of visibility as it pertains to traffic circulation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent B. Separation of different forms of transportation shall be encouraged. This includes pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles in a manner consistent with policies found under Objectives D-1 and D-2 of the Transportation Element. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent C. Open space enhancements as described in Policies found under Objective B-1 of the Open Space and Recreation Element are appropriately addressed. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent D. The City shall evaluate the effect that any street widening or traffic circulation modification may have upon an existing neighborhood. If it is determined that the widening or modification will be detrimental and result in a degradation of the neighborhood, the project shall not be permitted. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent E. Development of vacant land which is zoned for residential purposes shall be planned in a manner which is consistent with adjacent development regardless of zoning designations. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent F. Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity are appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations; complementary to adjacent land uses; and fulfills remaining land use needs. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent Appendix B Page 2 G. Redevelopment and the development of new land shall result in the provision of a variety of housing types which shall continue to accommodate the diverse makeup of the City's demographic profile, and meet the housing needs identified in the Housing Element. This shall be accomplished through the implementation of policies under Objective B-2 of the Housing Element. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent H. The City shall consider the effect that the proposal will have on the stability of nearby neighborhoods. Factors such as noise, odors, dust, traffic volumes and circulation patterns shall be reviewed in terms of their potential to negatively impact the safety, habitability and stability of residential areas. If it is determined that a proposed development will result in a degradation of any neighborhood, the project shall be modified accordingly or denied. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent I. Development shall not be approved if traffic associated with such development would create a new high accident location, or exacerbate an existing situation causing it to become a high accident location, without such development taking actions to remedy the accident situation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent J. Tot lots and recreational areas, serving children from toddler to teens, shall be a feature of all new housing developments as part of the design to accommodate households having a range of ages. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential developments located in the downtown area, and for infill projects having fewer than 25 units. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent 19/19 Appendix C Page 1 Page 1 APPENDIX C CRITERIA FOR GRANTING VARIANC ES Pursuant to Section 2.4.7(A)(5), the Historic Preservation Board must make the following findings prior to granting a variance: (A) That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not generally applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings subject to the same zoning (The matter of economic hardship shall not constitute a basis for the granting of a variance); (B) That literal interpretation of the regulations would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties subject to the same zoning; (C) That the special conditions and circumstances have not resulted from actions of the applicant; (D) That granting the variance will not confer into the applicant any special privilege that is denied to other lands, structures, and buildings under the same zoning. Neither the permitted, nor nonconforming use, of neighborhood lands, structures, or buildings under the same zoning shall be considered grounds for the issuance of a variance; (E) That the reasons set forth in the variance petition justify the granting of the variance, and that the variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure; and, (F) That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with general purpose and intent of existing regulations, will not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Pursuant to Section 4.5.1(J), in acting on a variance requests the Board may also be guided by the following as an alternative to the above criteria: (1) That a variance is necessary to maintain the historic character of property through demonstrating that: (a) A variance would not be contrary to the public interest, safety, or welfare. (b) Special conditions and circumstances exist, because of the historic setting, location, nature, or character of the land, structure, appurtenances, sign, or building involved, which are not applicable to other lands, structures, appurtenances, signs, or buildings in the same zoning district, which have not been designated as historic sites or a historic district nor listed on the Local Register of Historic Places. (c) Literal interpretation of the provisions of existing ordinances would alter the historic site to such an extent that it would not be feasible to preserve the historic character, of the historic district or historic site. (d) The variance requested is the minimum necessary to preserve the historic character of a historic site or a historic district. (2) Or, as an alternative to Sub-Section (J)(1), that a variance is necessary to accommodate an appropriate adaptive reuse of a structure within a Historic District or upon a Historic Site through demonstrating that: (a) A variance would not be contrary to the public interest, safety, or welfare. (a) The variance would not significantly diminish the historic character of the Historic District or Site (b) That the variance requested is the minimum necessary to effect the adaptive reuse of an existing structure or site. Appendix C Page 2 (3) The Board shall otherwise follow procedures and impose conditions as required of the Board of Adjustments. 21/21 > - > > >— > a a a a Q N.W. 3RD ST. N.E. 3RD ST. N.E. 3RD ST. ■ H M. Ln CITY Z ATTORNEY N M W BUILDING I _' Z MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.DR. N.E. 2ND ST. w .. - I - Ell� � Z w��'� I� w -Ns�J- Z �- zCC CITY > .w-HALL QAiii z LIJ jj/ ......:. .::.... N.W. 1ST ST. N.E. 1ST ST. I- 0 �' Z COMMUNITY _ O CENTER w Z _ z z z 0 TENNIS OLD cn it STADIUMSCHOL I J SQUARE I z T— A T L A IN T I C AVENUE SOUTH I 1 1:::: COUNTYCOURT > < aHOUSE a a Q atift Z O x z N ~N Z • _ S.W. 1ST ST. — S.E. 1ST - ST. _, �— FIDELITY FEDERAL (n = BANK w b' w w Lo 3 $ vi_ vi vi vi vi v-- W Cl) N --.01.- PINEAPPLE GROVE LTD. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FL PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT -- DIGITAL BASE MAP SYSTEM -- MAP REF: LM889 • Jeffrey Silberstein Anbhod IIAI.Oolstso,In H■ Ind■V••1 - I ow.,I .A nulrl / , uT.,; III.I1•.MI Pau III.p•.ew Lull:1,111,II.1.I I n.,,II 1 1 al It w hew n v =' a �� Il ill ll§11,' m r.��Nyy1��/•F�r•�r•11 ,-. gn DUPLE%; Q !.� v �it N,t. III iI•U�,r-,l Iv ~n.•NI•y1� 4nN SEE SHEET L-2 . 4 � -r■ !7 ..• I...'� I ;,p II,,I �■ 1�1 • w •"""n' FOR DUPLEX ! wu..s..sn- J �'I��10, IGCMMERGIAV RETAIL I I V. AREA PLANTING -t - uwnn. ti s' a? ll�g ,i geli IL - 9k i i� 0 PINEAPPLE GROVE, LTD, DETAILS •• j t r I� m - �Numnu I,II � DELRAY BEACH na DUPLEX , r��' •,rm v '�unluu� � Ilr I 114, I_ 1�,v I I_dIIUIl .�I,I!I�,IIl�'11 m tir� ``ram� \PIIIIIII I t m � 11 _ -iimmi • iiIr" vy - ram'.,r,,,Ni w / m I, .'—'I �1!Rill; I �'ttllll' II l�llll,1 i �._Y Mr , j 111111111 }, �. : yr ' �nl.`a� ►vil?�l� II I -�. I COMMERCIAL/RETAIL ,y;11 Lu ""� Jerry Turner I� •"• An II Iu� I �� ; pl z ,� & Associates sn._,z;, m / wn�■ Vj � .■i� I . Ixll 1,I i Lu 277 S.E,6th Avenue SEE SHEET L-2 m v 1 o+ 0a �" ® I■ �,I„I III Dellay Beach,Florida i' IiFi.21� m p� m D..- DETAILS �LVI nn �r51 �� ■�� v ;1� 4 ry!11tIn Tel;681.276.0453 1 ' m• D,um m\ — 111. .. v Fax:561.997.8687 �, Imig'ul if a� �•I� �� _1ua �I W LANDSCAPE Z I!TI •.Iol`',i�- �__\ la gi�llj Z I ARCHITECT w 1 . ut c=inr. i . `�l CGMMERCIAURETAII 11I�1 >1 il, '�� r-° __arm _� In ,I 'm 4 © II11Yrio- ■ ic Iluuw I 1\- • W p� ril i � ., L am! w:..iff ©. \\\\\�l ,I,II 6„I► it I'� wino., A'j •,,11 IIIIIIIII 18, it Z i' �, 1 �� J 'I �=�innnnl. a . li I zrx 7 1 -' ~ sA Iyi I� v _ I' �' I ��r 1 0 11111 10LL SEE SHEET L-2 • 1/D. Ngi�,a's°°°°t'+x.' ■� a 1 `g r v u � a II L di ! .��mi. I+.► 117 ry��N1i■ J • DETAIL"G" ..S I ■ I l u di �t 11 II l u, „ I i, i 4 ' 1,''ll t!i"t�tlul,'Wln!, tice,l and I�I�,t i� II I�, ,�7,� 4.11 1;111iIIt'Iil I E'II I I I , 911I III „rd I� x1 e,aM r4•10 ' 118 I r 11� a wa¶. I p�•.ao->ril! Iti�l!i,�l�� I I r mix 111 �I I�II I,I I :I I r ��I� m■13 !:Id+) itl Elul 11i17 1 el I1 'I.•7C11 I i,lA II �'iP1 I III I f ;,,II II !f I t :'a/r - �1 ... I cal i TO Roman • ® m .1. \ m 'Cr `.., ®v , Q f v iligillilliellIP b %a.;,,ii 'I/ . .•L iTo 16. ..w,w«. f - —- — — 4• — N1S-STREET — a — — II • ��I� y :`'";':w ' Isis:�. ;°"'"t1%%%="'� REVISIONS orZ.rt•nw.•..• ' ]I now r .r nw.w+. STAPT E1.•II IA.In.n..,e.,./ July 15,2005 eLANDSCAPE PLAN L-1 .8 1 Drawn by;DT t"'20'0" ' C:UCADUTILTWe1PINEIPP 0..•I• *an. Jeffrey i goleln IR AR All MI Ark GO Mr Arw1.a om e i ACk, o,i,n I 11 c_- p p Im rFO rIW■ GO HI HI•ill.1H1 3 M I..: 1.if1 1111 e �. 2�' IB'.I, i.AP,.�._ ' • puu:pmu.w•p=nnm.m /C`nilt��lh►„ii�IA!��J►Aow!'114W1 } ■_/j�� m0 ��!gi:E�fl/ oocr�o�%%o"Oooa°�'r��"+ ��'�� 7 ��17��e�E�a�',•��r N�Brie 31i=Lm!i itI tiPiii•Mmii f£Y.'xulEl}Mlitt IVI£fuS F f i "f}INVI; r.•" O mgio0 A , �' V N a'i,"'.'i.. ". :r p vIF"'I`m ICI r a.40` 1,0.04;:i0}a:,rt,E000Ll�o_ one,on..b. ,y„ .NM /i Ur4111.='0` f133.EIj;s... • �•- _ 4 ..'.",. .� ...III. �,.- 'i1 t'I}r DUPLEX v is#i i,:,". ,� t.. �Jr£i,ts"I :' Barr, :c,; ;.ofliti•,='€11111;(5 °°£'`.i �I_ `::I r uv } £. 411t.1: G v q.,3,4u.4.,..,`;}::£}%.{'r=i£::;£i£i: s .µ n.{'+eV ® .14:1:v`�: 'jti}•t;j; ,j E;6 11t 1t t 1 «i.st r: l m 'S r_'f:.=1E '„'!II' ►..+".�".µ 1,•1..o f 411=:r4 13,siF£I�t�ri :£i ==0, 4i3?If}�rx © Ji'jE,:,£3:1 (F ® 0rfjI t0} `',}gg:f,� „ r fl•£ r1} £yl•; _ m ,<,_ I:3t!ri• !II PINE P p 1,;11> �d,= ,i !!r' tE f3%E I� © ��, ;. m ,��,li,:f r:t;i t,i,,}li , t;==t, =}I1131131111i i1r:lu�ll! v N. ® ''3�1"'3` ' cc A P LE GROVE LTD. t r r r..• v ., h. f?"£,! •£rlr€;s'° i C DEL RAY BEACH I',D v s1a:I E�= Attu I Y E £itl yr�sf j£r 4 . 10:<.t:£,:%Wi. ==t t p b '1u} :}}}r's=#t.Ntir?,, i.�if .Iltt lidIM ;.!x iiiig'}t ?=?Kl 1 Ara. .��► p . ' �`',;=}1£;;kt t..,..._} V Ftfeli crri _nn�ribri ••a nnlc�s^r_o, v—A 000`�itti ;�A cN a�iaisannnnnm AI.}1�1■•rp 3 0-':11 ® kliv .n m P4316 ft ; I IIIIIit�:. 1�Im�.1 .1�1 'd:) 5 u'Y 7 -r a} .v m I >:�Ioi }tt I ® :;,n:, TOWNHOUSE 'V ti °mg%1=1110. DUPLEX iam rnk n n Ni }I3tlti; All ON :•11Er£;„; © ,' .<':•::::•;::-�.. DEVIL ?� Jerry`burner m y . %I'dp; ;1E11E1i I _v ® Al v d .oe ;s'a,�w- - +r.► 4 & Associates ® lea. £ rtll t!Y t. s:}II:Ini%f=r} p :6i '+'' c'•r V R:,:i: 1µp £ :. a L 1" ! £ t r+t'�� ® 277 S,E.6t Avenue ' 1 I �i' 9., aftdil 1'1 I=all o m ® _li:' ilS32113'I':`• -M• .€':lrt£3 :t<,; ate. v I h 'IF — .,;.• 4u1ir£:+,f€ui9<!i=t::l=t=!=1fx:nt£ii;"€€;fiiir�l=t=£rttilt'swi p p t;. Delray6eech,Florlda Al :>,:hp y ini��.O0 OOonoo ,I V •-• — Ill m i:' ® 33483 0� 1ayj30150fi I*O`�00000,10, 000000000On m m d v 1. 11Ma Mk.� V� sdsgr� ``• oMo C,:� —d am— p p Tel;b81.278-0463 • 0 w+r`3 tts,0,�� 00 ' ao� •+•• O �� p� 22 Fax;661.997.8867 v fF=�_ rd+`c �Ir��wa� oqa°°°o'rt•"';!aoou0^ M•r,go0°do0oi d`W+ •>S > j - -. �A_ °s am{:n.S1®�a•t d}nC`•' �.o-an�.i_ Al®v Jp}o �I�IIIIt LANDSCAPE 1�p , ss4%1.Fwa�a }a a1c�'xia I�E�IIII I I ..._ 4113. a T • m p ' r., ,:.1• L f t.. . • %t M/=£ ,:3,:!(tN �_ �' "'oz.- 3 +.' ! ARCHITECT ® ® An 7 0 0 © p ® 2N t® ©® y;2.;j.i';i£t£t,• !I m ® 0 '�i V v • s all s,..31s=1111{t Tii=,t}=£t:t£t}=£f';t!,,i,,x �'Al -,i=«1 t, £I}tl=E,=,.,.,.,t:,:i'MIII , CD 0 p f`jj11aA,r12 tr 3£t:rtt;'"'(=£:;,t;•,,y!i'; t ® ,11� 5 v i��,. ;.s�.?�£E£11}i:tcii.'•£ti!{'r'`;•(i:ir3i>s Iiiii YF1Y71 •• :•:Anoiooainnnrirn CD Al v m DUPLEX AREA As. © ® TOWNHOUSE DETAIL m _® m DETAIL "B" ,401 v sir OOOcroo0,ex* aoroou; t-rwccooao` ,1,4 g- .III Al IZ 00 �'. p1* '»'"'`'liggioo �D@t_-.IIIIhE I.I Al • wr :3••1�,_,N,;4's;'.4.•. _mod REVISIONS E020.1ENII wnw■ DETAIL "G" • Juy115,200! CD LANDSCAPEDETAILS / \ L.2'O 2 1/13,.t'a. "/II\� Drum by:D. �� CUCADUTILIDWDNINEAPP ,t.'t• •• 1 • J w. .... 1T Jeffrey SIIberateln AroMK11 M.od.l11,IN, I [ I Ir•c• • 74SITE o„nrUuh nala !em.LKI I Tl❑ 11..If1•1111 r.11 111•1/1•1111 1 t• lh Um,nlNlup..u. , NGISFeORINO PROPERTY ., Y j D.. S'qq!SNT • h it rUY DGDILATI N F IR 171ST _ 1'RIbNt or MrMrll Mn19 r+r.41.y M. 1 17�FT•� I WAY DEDICATION �I !'-0 . � n1�K 1 tnnA.n 1" ,,e. to O��Ff d b1.y M e_C 7".••ee:ir'rj;•:.tr.rzt•::15:.,'" YiJllNwStwp 1 ? ■■':l 1=I'i11I 711eI II ... •1 -'— — _ — �'.iri ` . "wv.�wyi��"]� AI�hIIW� ,I == II II All II I II'III Ili='I111(PI ;^;:] UQ 111111 -�•'g l�ii111111111 I�III IUII' r� OLOCATION MAP ^'.i 1 hili._-_ V�III�II211 u a �� I�I I III ��Ilnl�llllll�IL, ..• (� #LA�11NT. PINEAPPLE GROVE,LTD. PI I _',V,,1_� \ I�r II — _III IIIIIII ll ll l lllll llll l 1111lllo. • DELRAY BEACH C� '� �-illiIII�iriklr1�l'I�1, ', ,_ 10.1�4. ay, ��4*4"- �:� 4. 1 !»Nn F.t.ueov.ler <ioN.:,:; N II��I�I �� II G II�AIIUI■ �—�rI�fi� �''IIII�I. 111. O0 O a �`�}:', ., S. lnR. r i _ .� sdQAll _s_II II' �,�• ply.. ...:wr:w coP R. .W ��!,,'��1 7�h—liViIwll = O O❑ _ t p . r i�r �. _ _ I�I, ___9 R4� /- J. inn 1 _nu■111c.:;, 11■11ruw� I *� i„.,,,.:.,.,,.. ...:..„„:„..:.:.::,:.....::. r -? _Ill Wlllifins. II �I I ;q t�� *,. ��_ _ I n (I �. I 1 1�QQIIQIQIIQ@IIQIIQIIII- rluill �____T `"• " r_ I _ I �; t ��'��''"��"j��,��j�� 1, = a W R l 9,u Intl +r. ,. 0 o rr-7-1 �=�1 {'1IIII I�11�1■ I .m a�t ❑ ,'. ,.Z o^ w : ' ,S. a, 'r1�m�IIICI�iIgd�= • II II ❑O❑ 3,l ; .� ia � -11�IIIllII1II 1IZrr I II II =_ a o o ,os wA. g .E 1110�111(I ICIII I_ :I 1'', � y�• 9i1.. IIIII�1111 I[IIIIII 0 1 I II QIIQQINIuuuuQQululul�l'�11QVIIUI W "�' W W C. �.II z t} h ��y' IIIIIN�IIIIlll111�=_ IIIIuNQllmmmlllllQQIIQQuI';plll� it y s',1^ Z IAp liLy1 .., i :��-III I IIIIII , I II II,�I . II =,Yip�.. •.• 1RIn11t C,rlYf/fT4CK1 M40Pt[RI,.::. IC1 } do1MAp., ... 0♦ ICE II I'I y? . �0 .,...1hYM9/M q9l M.:r,awMMi,...ry'11 �III�IIII Ilullllll_ \\\\\ II m ❑O❑ g4ar�9M a o • I °� „.— _4 ❑O �= .rrr Ya,.w+...r .ma�.I.I w 1r w w IIII II��III '--' 't. l�—��-Ih ❑O❑ .� y.fi NII+iM.M•R!4Mr►ww N}I` 1 •�•I•�M.M+h Crl I W .1 nti.Ab _� __4 _ + 4 • .� 1� +b W nr wl.wr r'4 .0. l Ilillulll I ■1■111■�= _'Ilpll��_1I1II r;� Y,.ry - w. 1. � I Ili I111I1N�HIIuIIIIIII I II D 11=— 4/iMW P.M A. NaY YM rlw lHw r.1HNM: ` I� —I9111tloIVdHltl I II��hIIIIIIIQQIIIIIQIQIIQQIIIIIDI';,It��., w I ;6. IP=U 1 I5 u 1 11 la 1 I I�I�n��pppppllggq�� '►II p'-__ I lu (h"S�pI1hpl-4 _— na c. u Iw,t,.,.;uw u Ip��l l� I I�I II I AAIIfIJ11LLl� �''e :-' = II IID III �� II��Il lu f f1 T. 'W 4:e�d.".7V' ejf.t '* III II Iz —,,., I I ii' iiii I III U I (Y II I� II I III I II -ems .aa,ww,w'�..1r.«w.a . �IIIII Il �II p4 IWIuOu==',-U11I-mlulu_'IW li��il-1�6!I,Illlpllu-AIII:_3, n��l ": : . ��r , o m 3 !-0 =f � ' 'Ijlf�Ir+Ij 1IfI I �tkill1�� 1 0s: IIIIU,1I,1.0.I11 I 'luuya ulllll' lulu, ir.rw• 7' •:. . c� 1 ".""_ I IIIIIII�11�11� 0 1 13'' 1 � .;IIIIW a II '-I. 1 u�� ...n1 9 'uwy .. JII Nl m , VA 14R Ir_5 1t? 1 9 CI f;1 1 i 151 nNll I IIQW3 �-- 9µN '!w,, :,w . w .w �la-rr 1► ..g=1 . l_a ..I._d ,Ta. __ ".,�+w.fw'il w:„,„r 6wiira.. ,t,;wrN.:» O• _ ��/ yr 1i• 41:""....Y.AIr 1.11 104•Y 04 1.V Lit•'9.M I �i l irM1.}w4.V.1M1�fM tFW.FIA!M' MW!7M.'IW L 4. 4. c b 6 J . .4.;intni.i:Y•.M!t!{.'TM.•L.I�I':::::,,P•.k lvi,I.iy.: 4. '' 4- NE 1ST STREET �- �� r- * �'^^ N 1 c ..1..11!LW,rnr n Trp N.l �:..:;: I L..l;1LlAMl{O.W e..;rG9M ( .'..wn.M{Ni:iiiijil4 Yp.M i ( ,limn .ttt:t I•�Mbh• :441 AYst NN..•11 i:4,;•;7, ` ',:•11cNwt • l ,„„,...,,,.„.„,«�..�..,,, REVISIONS !NM.,+,n ::,::,: 11'• w,w.Llww.MMiIL11+.1(a:� :'••'• o L01 Ftiv!!v!4T11!:4!1•xP!Pa !:!gM:!e:•¢ ji>s.::::.+;.: July15,2005 TT1#Q�#�:PRIO.CQM11'141TIOKiTA/1Rf iN.NIIiFLpYr.j:i( r. , orlwn by;Tos 1 ROOF PLAN /� o.NcGltldunPropcu4drdwlpnelpplpow`• •'•" SCALE:1'.20'.1'•0• C I� rn9 onu.mn.n w r...,.......,..n., I i I NEIGHBORING,PROPERTY', I Jonrey i�noeraietn I II -, I Alchlt.q t S'NIGHT..F 7 e o[N■ WAY DEDiICATIr,'N I w be I o os' a [ —YI- ' 2'RIGHT OF '� T.11 [., t It i DEDICATION P. I ) IBS O .< ..... 1.1 I hl l.nlM Pldou.nl 1.II141 It `1 t T..1�71,1 iI I — �. Ell. ` • ,II �rll�' �■ I , `' ®" * .d tl �I ! \\; _ ____ I • ....g...4 M r4 y F pw.rb r. •t LQCw 4 1 \\\1 ■\\ ♦ •1Y1YY 11�� DUPLEX', ■ it \_ \� ' A M...mn.i pima ✓ 1I I Orr` COMMERCIAU RETAIL y t.:ull ---'I p s II p g a .„r..e. k ry.'....:..M/...40,11 Cr .n. /M E1 ® -, I�„, uu.....m._K rim n.., �e, y I '� tlI _. I „ 3 d : 1746 sq ft w; '*"a' ♦ t II 1 !ill I: ..14 I p Homo 1 tN veS UPLEX , .r,: . y,�6 I�"II ;—ie�© ]I:w �.___ ,.,. •g_.o\\\� It , ,p p.r.- PINEAPPLE GROVE,LTD, �nD r.t�1 •- .j' I,, I J 3 '° OF ff;;.0.N ' I 1` ' , '. --Id _ d d &g .1� ¢ 'DELRAYBEACH ri.;t 0 '1,,, r,urnl �' p < ' .• [ I, !t LEGEND NOTE ' Fl',III• 1 II - ';pl. ► In '' I- $ !9 '"^ I i �II' t:%:;:%:% EXISTING POWERLINES 0 h , t•'s ggl. BRICK PAVERS r!� 7 1 g ON ALLEYWAY TO BE r`� QM1I .• � � [� i p° _ �•• Y ' I -mmHg r, $ cam, LANDSCAPE LOCATED UNDERGROUND : ..r..r 04 �J p„ �t+y __1 Tom'^p. g .IIIIIIIII 1I1! [ � I•:., �' a r punt 111:1,� r'I 11= i 1E1. p„ p! 8 '6,0 I COMMEROIAU RETAILqgp •M1diTw I I d � I W b.”"40d$.dw".!'19 D;.'','4101 01 Ir.Mx,4T.btl.1.1!IN04m'N[MI Y' IE Q�1 =:r, I. �i 3 ,— ■ 1 ,. I, i \\\\\may 1816 sqft , [I'` = I e W pod.... 1 � — I1� p„. 8 p F, f1, .33,a�enacrwe�manaw[ .�,d rwla.d!a ur» /uauz;w.�.bD = 1ii n Itr, µ I I t a W I wDplaro•w�w.a 1 p N ru.lropw arl a.l.I ITw Y r.«IAl' �DlIIIiO1 M."el,,,p. n�;r,°M9dD1 o W Q© i x. p, 4 4?r 1- s d¢3 'I!rlun� �� • l' ¢ ':.:.DIP:':::. �'1 rCa '_ —, d w `•••• IPM B- 'Ilnit hM'Rm �1q 1�s)q• ,I al. /, "6 -- f�/;�- I� IL , a t, ' vmA '•. easie�k F- ;,,,1 11.1.E min I� -' ...«» 1r ' • _t .d MAIM r\... III' N ¢ 1 1.1: ` .iaea w r' �© .,,, a r- © [MAIM N. 1 W . --- I d IIIIIII f.� W !7 .. Ke�;� I. s r :g ' �mnun� i z ©; —J I� II ....'� i,.. m, aA g COMMEPCI�U RETAIL I_ �.,' // 5 - HANDICAP rmux ON if) r 1 _ r l I,—°� 118 .`�_ ®rr\\ 2 1828 sq ft .v'-= 6 ill �►I� ..n✓ :gyp''-;�'y� iiin171. f'Lllr .1�"-I '1 f �� t „ I .... i \ •ew[ Ir rcrM1 ' \��1 I11` p ' in[I ^� A dlllllll Sr . r ROA y _ 10 /111111111 �. 1i1 'ia© p Iss ,, d ' I , r „d trn , d ®� //NrB pCA. w�l-� ` r� i it t O\\\\ gym! 111 /�lapn 11. frl -i .•.• .'; �I E6 ��=s6.52mi� : Ii1 04• dE �I � '1�...r, �d It rs Y' COMMiC�AUR AIL ":IIl III u A I __I ►� ��I E 1iplim ° r iiei °In 4allE�l� a FIF/'�19=1I01 I 4028 S ft-RESTAURANT (7 ." d `I• `YIN,. -�l`� r�° .. d 9 .v Y x ✓v Iv....,,� 040 E0 Fr r I'.!. 1 D r_e• do , p4 II{ 11 2 OFFICE 1794 1 E11 S 1 E� r Di t • mm 4. t I 1ll A 11 Z 'l 11 ) >'�� i 1 11 o p. If v/wvD'TAU mv[.:wv fKA�I 11'i. 1 1 [ II 1 y:l [, 1 1 narl 11 I"r'a I nit,[: p rl—T w+ �A1 1 I x 1 1>^c 1 1_ IY r [ 1, CiwpuD MPACT rr n' _ctirJ��, PARKING STANDARDS L 4" �� I ♦ OSCALE:NTS REVISIONS - __J a, caaMltwre 4- NE 1ST STREET a f- ovum -.''.\1 r • \ July 16,DS ( A2005 -t0 l ' Drtval by:T DS OPARKING FIRST LEVEL AND FIRST FLOOR••OFFICE,COMMERCIAL AND TOWNHOMES 0Mr[hItedurelPmI1G14Nxed URRPROPde w.mth ow-i•dwy MO'0'.1'•0' TIC V0/t00s 414 PM •-IJ.-t_lene I.v l pl.n.dep I I NEIrSHBORINEr PROPERTY, I I JeffreyM Ubberrsteli I J e 114 NI Ind•Ir♦.1 9' 16H7 OF. A elhgbp41ry,tl111/11 WAY De !CATION I - Trn /11•m•nq M y 133�O DEDICATION rTr ... . � 1•.pu IJmmUN4nmam ` WAY i J '-'::,::'41:,',I1E1111111 .24;61krifiEric : ::.J., ... v 1 , �•fi: w I It _ �.,,osgs „row q ,'q /f MMM'♦MMn.�♦iF.u♦1� COMMERCIAU RETAIL I h��.M�:4 TTFie4'. o ♦ 4 N..y,1,♦I�,�♦1 __ q 1746 sq ft ` M,.I',.'4n►... w 4r rowel 1,..::. -. I r1� '« w Ih� I""' q 4IIDe511 UPL'EX I � 11!IIIIIII1 q �.�1� ," "e2"®1' _��.\ 12''- PINEAPPLE GROVE,LTD of1 Ik.o.N. Igtonip — ,r... �lu:nin� ►.r ;:, $ DELRAYBEACH ^'"I a; wa ',� .fir ' ., I'" / I _ :11 ." 1 a �_ LEGEND NOTE 1 '' 0 i�YJ Ii1f�� ualu7 r^r31 _It m _..$ i I l .`:`:`: EXISTING POWERLINES • 1� .`` BRICK PAVERS WiP QIf1�', i q r r I 2t.::s ON ALLEYWAY TO BE ha, a nnnm pF LANDSCAPE LOCATED UNDERGROUND I! qg ._— +i pp...! ,. 1 �� 'r q COMMERCIAL/RETAIL i,. • `93' L�al7A ' :r':•}'; :i�:i} i•:';i: �f� I µNA, .I W I 2 I).0.0.udlal..,),) AyI,A:t,141p,prfl,Atglll.4 IMfdw..ba 1U::: �e:'-' �:r� 's „"" q 1816 sqft 'I Z eauaai�wopluu>,uiomflr..�l .rla..dim+xl+.l4,it.ar«r n,a;i. ' w �� M• Wfe WLpo w,Y¢JNU11 F . ] 1onM•.1 Tat,l♦60fM•{1,W10In VAN_ 1 q awa �r3 � q .RAu rwval ,unaaf.lwll �sJ Ham} ,I' 1 •. .AW41JI 3 '� W Y L.. 1 '„ i memo q 'la!IIIII, /.� �C Q y . I „ q p. rq'rq� 1Zet 4 ilea f. Z A a ° R. � .nr^' m,.u.. I F. _ ,lmrca.. a (V Q� �ml..r it k4 ti r 19 y el © -J q k.•I I " luaus 1..,....!, I� w d LU I I I , �rl ® I' q I. �IIIIIIIII� Z x.woKUFavI••fn.. Ines q Sy�,I = Z II rn�r!'' • , q ...,.'II I--- q COMMERCIAURETAIL / i — ,,,,, ill O ' d ©A r ,e-- . I, ! _ _ � mil.. _ ___ :"T.'"' i 19 °� Ile ' 1823'sq ft I� c �yl��piic�. H mill liIN Y P .,... • �i Q© —1 I !;: ,u $ IIII �nlnn� ►r "ig lo%Mt" aaaTseaihrc 13 1r,;r. �r31 'fE�81 " 91.D11 q � �LJ aiu� q // �I7 �- M 1 1 1. IOL COMME CIIAAU R-All. Ira ■6 Iv eN� I Q®s It I iiiI &k 1�1 II:` w ra •. © ..• 19SS uYJII °pu �.�� ' .7 nl .,. -aN 4028 sq ft-RESTAURANT• 1 ,— R Illlifl I ) !!.,-...!';'ill OUTDOOR I�l f H• ,', i ©I1•�.., dill 'UI!• w y1 '"'I I 1'1 1 81080PT EA 11,f. 4 p�e;�ip n�u e.na ove 1 n.UFu1 Om it y ly r ttII 444.10to.. I3 11' •II,Awlll 1 tCY�. 11� J=1 1:1, t.. .I� 11 l .'� •--- .WDIW IY.IY PLUS►uw 4f1 1 v:[1 1 I)1Al,4,II.; I,i L 1-, .`•1 •I \ _1 •-r r ,, 2 PARKING STANDARDS I .1 a:sx- i ♦ OSCAM;NTS a L 4- ♦11 I I REVISIONS ' J df °' 4- NE 1ST STREET 4- a NOWJuly 10,2006 Dr1wn llyt TOS PARKING UPPER LEVEL AND FIRST FLOOR •OFFICE,COMME CIAL AND TOWNHOMES r-- GAAaliclutl\RIOII+lmhkuubin1101.• , •1:" • • \ I /9CAL6:1/1 N'.I•JI• rns ♦nan nn.Mt.0 wl...Int...I.•..,.,...... Jeffrey Silberstein I NEI&HBORIN6 PROPB}RTY Mhh.c1 In • ... III I .... . . 114 N[ A.1 5'RI6H7 OP A 4 QW111+111 WAY DEGIIGATIbN I I111 11 �11 Plant• ... q . 1.1.I11N 11e111NIN"N11�I1 Ti`,�rr 11 P `=!ice'-- — _ — — � " C h'I �,_, �n I N1 M.hermnm'v..1�0rry,,rl1yr�{x, it eY ►,►, • our..p.vitu"1.r7plw. IT.dot ✓ I■ • ��'EN II '�� l r+� r.:_o �• •Elk. '- i', / .flan wMw1l1M:=5 Aomori H♦Ih1nNn oloolm 1' y ;Milian..ncitimii na Is1I I }�I I !� I ...!`i a ;' ♦ LEGENDwoo rem.,porms.-1.714.4 C1 ,,,� .�I%jooi r II. T_1 " - �" I '•;• ' 1 :: BRICKPAVERS • • "" Ij� PINEAPPLE GROVE LTD, ¢ ■1 I o o DELRAY BEACH o unnu 1 OF r�.o w _ I i /I— nunni 1 ¢ �, .1 5j fYIPTh [ �� {{ I I I _iu �I ]I Ry CAMS 1 I R M S 1 MwD i /t L1 1 hn I: __.. �4 LI �•1l r Ali 1 1 U,y' y .IIIIIINIII�en �IIIIa, c10 P• i m IN 1 Lu YI NW vw I��'.i',- `= » _+ 'nl "I M TNe w. !I.. h.r flh l�Il:p 6tl1'l '' 1 w,'r.' E [•iO3 .1= psi , Jllnllnl 1� r I •f:T�'L Ir I ..: J - _ r 11111111111 ,., I u.l 111�aY.1 il\�I r�l. r.. `i'Mji n,11.L... 1 I. _ f1.1 111 T l If I I } 1 L Y A1.i'w .IIIIAIn�.. �j �n.a4� 1 a�-17a1'Zvi :1 H • 10,I�a 11 ir.. / \ 1lehrr I WV a-Si Ir vi .. E II. 117. n,;(„>I ;17' 11.e. ii�. — I I 1� ,I [g�j (••NI 11 F..(11(1 11 1 11. Ii F hi) i 1 I.. $11ir,. ,'T'Og1',f r `• II.1 1/I .I11.....01.) 1b■ {1/m.Nfl i SiN -f ..I _ W t LV = I 0.011I� 1 e ie.( h:i1e7. 1 LW tax If* o Lu __I _ '� -� II I ._ ° Z I r ;17 L,111 1,. $ dr�,� = .n iemnni :!�':` ,,a - I " :� �'` © 0 U b 11 r •■11' l`=. Q LOO LANDlGA- IImIIn � —I „iu- > poo` riaA l '� //�1i'�' ¢ '� $ I lti �•�J {�n v' • - ,i , �', 0 ??,.,.,Hi1 n d 11 I R „11d I ¢r <C r .mumnm'- �!h{ ssmlar-'�' • 0 , . , O r �I _ I I I I I�..Pool. 1bm I:� [I 1; Z y cn -la- c 8) 1 I I I I I N ate- : :. LI1 ,I; .i nl0I .. ►/,,.tu 'til ,, L" R'r I = Z , 1�1 it l I I L L_.[ °lei n .■ I 1g. �. alinn1,b Ei{ rn` N. II C " w f �i�h G 7 - ,., In°I°I iiiiiiiiim 1.'1 1 K �onm�ala^ co.raria , \ 1�- �� ►.a ■naan:L 7; ' [I 1 ems= 2:. ■.m-nnr mnnnl III lannn LJ.C7• , ri -2 try �` i - :. I ie'' [ID; 'I [IF, ".[I Ij • r-1] C�l,, [I_I] 171.:. I .r 1I . r,_�.' iv [1a 1 r . I Q P � _1-P P 1 [ill• fir �u IMO 4"• 34- I F REVISIONS . A sun 4- NE 1ST STREET I JWINO '- 4- / Jury,6,2005 • . A- .. Dram by:TD8 I 2NDFLOORPLAN 1 n e:UduleaureProec44uidwl k n•I• • 1 SCALE:1/1B"•1'•0 / II me 0/IAIO K mn. n.,..l...•.1+ I I ijJeffrey SilbersteinNL:I6HBORIN6 PROPERTYI '�fohhMBAN�N/.no a•In1 p»A/1011 B'1j16HT«•P & © r•u Iu.n/.//./ WAY DEgIGATI+N +, I r yP �� nn fit•m•oi./ ui IfulYnuMnYnn l.I .ul 1S T IC CI,1'Ildl�up ''1 I _ .i...14.......w...b• .{�� NNiW rNw rwiti�_�,r,1_ • c, .,� Iln IuauluuA3931� I I I I r sN1111 ! LEGEND .a..,/. t N 1 t ,1 li�l; BRICK PAVERS liptil d61116 PINEAPPLE GROVE,LTD. ►3 ° ' DELRAY BEACH ti OF I .0,1^1. pau!* I• ■ V{•� '��■ �I �'�• ;.S.a1M, 4N IN.MMj 4k1,!• Ar a'M*h•f.Apb•MM:r•li.; ' ''rr,,uu�F--- y-- II III.' ,tF w.d de.4a/M Ynr it yM41;iiNMr lIt14.11.110...1 4 0 JI iiu�� ¢/�'."�AC:i yi ill ....•.. . ,i G Y;uu+a r d i u i aab�..,"1 u '� Ill ."" ,, 'I — JJIIIIIIAI r j 'f°.:.�" " r wr 11111111111 1wo tdii h1 +4. I. r..,1•A.i t"5n YI A.e IN — r.. .,�■ .'� I �,.,_ .:. Q �3 '.r1l�r i a 1 w Y y,t.a... . Y �n n. . 19�:{� i h N d•1,f1Y♦ W C11 h { lf, ► ®o 9r t. `� ,a:I:11i1.1.h:I{• .. to ff n'.l.f..yIq. MO tq•.1•M6Y1' �' — r p I I I Y I I I - r� •It•'.7.. I a(.i'itr l�hRii.i Y1 io u�� S w�...i>YI/iy1� ••. • 0 L ► 1./ .•�IIGi".i' �� -1 I I ,I•.M.,.../ r 1 p W I. .G I ci) II CV r ■ � ,. ■ ©II Ir I W • .. � 'ullllm Z - py�;'3 �� A�A, I I Illy..- I II _ 0 • �, :Jrt�E p 1L4 • ED -- � AAIIIA i�tU I I' 7 E. il I +Amnu, tit 2 nmul 'C�1 I unl, I,, �)10.� • 9 �\ �Iwl� emu C_1 I I I•d 7A o N I ♦ REVISIONS . L f•. 'i ITCOMMITS OMNI 4- 4- NE 1ST STREET 4- I-------) f- • July ts,zoos A-4.0 �3RD FLOOR PLAN ' //�J��\\ G WdJtNN 1P o/d1NYad awo ne/AWI A 7\bAy1NdN lkq ��„�••,,,,• ,,,� %II\` TD$ 9/I//$007 017 All A•1-A•7_Itme Glom.INA.o I I NEI6HEORIN6 PROPERTY, I J.J • JBrtIBy LIIIDBr:nein !..H• I •1 I 9.Ir./.1.--- -1111 • 5'F lt5HT mN Toll n—n WAY DELIIGATI I r - ..of of•.T1•en. r' , o< n .,.. F." 1•ntlf hinbnnypnnn...n -r Nail — — — $t l �iiiililf� - 0=1l - u,� - - I 0 A.... A..w W ,,,. ., T I 1,4 '$/�� k `+/ _am rA or 5;166nN6 MIM•6o. 5_ I I I I I "palm 111ln I 1 11 CJ G -.••_ I• '," "'...... """N I )i1 II WPM r 4s Al LIWIP. 4r ...w .n""".rv.+, N� �i�Il. 1I �I C� moon Q 1 t LEGEND 1 t �� Imlllu� �- 1I .:,y �I�Y]` ;,;;,,;; BRICK PAVERS PINEAPPLE GROVE,LTD. s IailI �� I—/ inl ►�, �� Iof r .o.w. 1 I Hi • Imriiii ` DELRAY BEACH 1, mono Ii• 7_ Ic■i 11 11/ LJnn ..46 I 1,-,, ei.rtA.,.wf ...nW.rn] ..v ax.o•rp.)•.:uKiwui.fi.in.inw�.•rai...,: 0 — Dill 111 iii - I` w ynr,, 't;;;,. AMOTM uftY o.j. firNW .N:.10111 1 fi A.&: / . s1 AY... 1 .]n•tu 1 1 N f:T W...1,f M 0 III1111Er.. ■1 ..i Anllynl' r I r .• :III I III 1 Al&1 ��S1'i.Nnr .1 l:1::Sk1 fL ,l1I!1FA4f *R \•1(-::' I rsgg I IDn'.7"( ',1wr �0.1//2-;,;3•7wll••a."...11..•11i, \_ f' � 11 p$ ]Lw•]eU I`h 1 A... � 1 i _i.111111 �_.I — 11 /— 11 -• I ' � w N il.flii h .�!•Nw ]..111.p� .•L.r.I P 11{h Il.�.r W . SUE�I11111� 4 W 1 '-I• . • I1L .-,' 1 �, .tl'AN�y�1..Lw.IY ]/. IP 11 Yi+f) flU(h ].Lr 11 J �' MINI11111 i I I ml ' Q li'� .Wi;Pigr� {ITT i';fit"' 1 111111 ■r ►fiw n�, . . • n • i A] `_s z , l��1tF .f w 1 , •1 1111111 ■� •i 11 N Z1IIIIIII �� 11 11 4mllllll ri I z .. . . ... . . .... .... . .. . . 111111 IN I_CM: �' nnl,,,,' 111111 ■■ . o � iG�N' ■. 7 <' 1 K/ Icy =II 11 IIla1�k G 7 IIIIIII��I 110 I �uumnl ►�i E I 111111L1�11 1E° w EMI —'ll '::L . ., wpm _ � ilY liI�III III I 1 I J11I IIIIIIP< Ilk . UY�� 1 16 Lt 8 ' 1 t 1 ii, . ..;,;, • ,..• ' . = il 1�i��11�=1 ,, 1 t . 1,I,� rllll_ II.a in•at1,�411 I I il,galinrrnlllll✓ 1 I (1_I' Ng. r ,�.. f- F~ 1 ♦r REVISIONS L Q ukyr WIN 4- NE 1ST STREET 4- 1 I 4- Juyls,zoas ,, A- .1 4TH FLOOR PLAN-ROOF PLAN TOWN HOMES&DUPLEX ^n 01A cNl.oulwmjade4nl].dwlp4wpq.y. 5^^SST (\� /A\ Tpf 9/14/2001 MIT AM A-3-A•41_Ilo.n pluq-1-1d.o anAl L.1..•..�.n+ LEGEND; Jeffrey Silberstein ❑a STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF SILVER ArdIMC1/A.IDD4°.,Ina ..INS lad 11tr..1 ID LOUVRE SHUTTERS COLOR WHITE DomstaA 14n1.°ul OWOODTREWSCOLORWHITE T.II 161..n.SW r.n Nt•1/.•Da1. ❑FABRIC AWNING COLOR SUNBRELLA 1.141 ala.or.abood..1 ROYAL BLUE ❑s TRIANGULAR WOOD NEE BRACES OSSHAD OSSHAD.PINEAPPLE GROVE.CBD COLOR WHITE ... p u 'o na EXPOSED RAFTER TAILS COLOR WHITE """....,D".. „ "N''z p *We r wy�NOMF1Nri/Vw ° m ° if:_ ❑T tI INCH LAP SIDING GOUDA WHITE w. 1T..t �'.A ��q"r �„ ° ° pII p°[� WOOD PICKET RAILING COLOR WHITE :"«.�.i ww..1.• },�� .•u n. r ` ,..C DIII / � .. ,, - `® I111!IIIII m. ~ Yw 1. w. {^» . d 4^ 1365.11... .IBn@W Comm ,t=ll3' %a illinit�,at.'1"�IIIIIII�IB� IIIIIIIIII"+ F61111NIId © Q9TUCC0 FINISH COLOR WHITE 41+INdN "' ! •ll 111�s 11111'll m 11 IIsI II511 II II'� 1[ II''II-' II 'II'IirJt 1'111H11 IL11.,11 I`I'i '° '""�" ^� ` I I I -_l 1 -_I I I - I I 1 "U i I 31 1'u1 i 1 .I, �j �j' +o WOOD FINISH COLUMNS COLOR WHITE ° u, 1 I n�u+ a `13 o u r ii u u u ill II r r.1 i rr I in,in 1r 1r II •+�W w t ++CLEAR IMPACT WINDOWS AND DOORS. PINEAPPLE GROVE,LTD. p _I I I I H I n I I jI I IA I II ,i n —G FRAMES WHITE O—w e ti9 r ° P a Y 3L.7 I � � . .. +2BAHAMA6HUTTER AWN INO•WHITE DELRAY BEACH 4-1.- . I !IC.Illit III II.:__ 'L., ;.�• II .I 4 1 I..:1�!I4. _�:1 .. .II I II, � I�1��- LIl 1 :c : - ❑ ,,,.. m m p m I a WHITE PANEL HURRICANE IMPACT NE 1IT STREET"" GARAGE DOOR•WHITE Ej SOLID WOOD DOOR COLOR ECRELO ELEVATION:NE 1ST AVENUE ,a DECORATIVE WOOD SCALE:1/te'.1'-0' u u ° k- I�iiiDll�Iflli��gl4�iiuuiul lyuu;IIIII l�IIl GioI�il liuil�ol OSSHAD,PINEAPPLE GROVE,CBD OSSHAD 1 0 I - :II - I II�IIIIIIUII I I I�IIIIHQt }� rw ° "• m ° m ,...... 1 °o jai I II I II'-- II L`II IIII II IIII," i�'�.,' p ° 1 \ ° / _ ma's' ° .. ° nu uil �� m nyulli61I1111 _ m I' 11'I;.:,I. _ I �! > � �' LI I •'I.III ° 1 ;I j Oil 11,11 II 11 �111 II 11=111 II ''I i11 II 11-,II II II:111�11 II)C11C4 m . plllllmlll S Il es , - ,,, !- �� laTAVe +�r. I -�; t''.. 111 _ t 1r' "*Z* NeC) DUPLEX ELEVATION:SOUTH 1 I_II i,ii I Iti11 I( un 1ic r ll II It=11 I 11 II I-11011 p .� 11.,LII I SCALE:1/1e.ro•„ J JI II I IDaC ° ' I I... ,..may+"` . 11 ; p. w L _ _�� .I �rI llesI _ _I pb :" "'s1-- ° m jNeis ET II p�II�IIlEIl �Y��IIlI� IflhIlr�{I --- ._ .. O ELEVATION:FROM ALLEY LOOKING WEST • IIIuIIIIII WI�IW IUuI� "III�d��iHI�!I SCALE:1/1E•.1'-0' -�- I ° "!III•II+11 'MC II II 11.1111.111,_1 11' 1 OSSHAD OSSHAD,PINEAPPLE GROVE,CBD I•'_ -- II '.II II I I I -I� a• O DUPLEX ELEVATION:NORTH WHIST p . ,"Ian" > ®dldu nlwllnds-r adlnunm umldmlIdnmdl 1111111WIa1�. El I t:.� r gpll Il 111i `a D ' . 1 I d f g ldddmllr r�.� �� I\ 11 Uk•Wiv'Ilc.lill 11 11 If 11416 11 11t1111 11,11�11'4.7a1ri 11,, IL '1_ III- : T 1 11111. I I I I I 11 b l :1 1 1 1 I IN`u f 1 .-1 n 1 I ,,ty+ pI*Ip.� !!�I +� - _=e —1: -r i tell. ZIaJ tlaf'l11f .e�lea•reAj idol Taff m Ipll ILJI� IIII�IIY'I 1 q u eu1.0 a u' 1 11)1,11 u`11uu uunull11prr uuu aD,`w11un111u1u �� 1 I Ill +^.:,,.. 4R — .: .... , 1 II ,1*r\�I I•' 'I ' ' I —r�e ! .I�. ,�am{, { ,..4..'S IL i' 1 I/ 11 t:11 11 11 ■ 1 1 I—- ' IN 1i-'. 1.111--.' -?►' �":11s a 111•<I11: _1: I11•n r 1:11'- IU U9 1 ' 4.'„^'•'.,.' 0 /n�+' I hQIII ll�l '' TI I IIIUi IIIIII li 1 IIIIII IIIIII I�III � _ + "" o --»» �Z 1�1 REVISIONS NE 1ST aTREET 11.111II1I III-' A ran C . ELEVATION:NE 1ST AVENUE W/GARDEN WALL — coma SCALE:1/16'.1,0' Juhy16,2006 , OELEVATION:FRONT GATE VARIATIONS A-•. SCALE:1/4•.I.-0• Dawn by:EB GLArONlaoAaa7rtaLbYDhad LaaVna.R11a•• '..,Tn,. , IDS 9/16/2005 I1.01 AN A..*lava*....YA.• • Jeffrey '1n AroNIM II . 111 N1 11111 0.1,010 U Tell III•III•1111 r4.1 III•1/1•/111 Will IIn11rN•111111111•II.111 RAIN. R.O.W. R0Y1 DEDICATION DEDICATION DEDICATION 2' / 2 5' / 05SHAD w"uv 16' , u•' OP/PINEAPPLE*ROVE I... r.I/ry ��v� e Mw IIM�O••Yn MFNivIN H M■ 117 M 4 1 NI• w0Y+1w■.m a nnllBlll„,�qiiiii�iilliiilggii"plulillllll�� IIIIIIIIIIIIiiiiiiiliigllflililIiii"•^r�,1iI1,;;r4,7 o Y 1�' 1 I •L .w II 1Q . Blml i11Y11111 ililli IIIII11111II111III�IIIII�IIIII11111lllullu II ��/ .w»wa + 11 I1g11111u1uuI1IIn1/1110111 l@@IIIIIIIVIIIIIIIIIIIIII11illlllipu!I!I eII IIIIIIISI• . a kt I `ll Y' 1 ,IIi 11 II PINEAPPLE GROVE,LTD. 1111 a e 11 I I 4v '11 11r''i,Y 1.11i.1IIlnB711111i „1 a ° T Tait' IR ',rI nlnl�®pa DELRAY BEACH Olga. — 1 F III IO.W. t IU I °e E ill t--0 11�� 1� 1�1_'�® � II 11 a f ,__ II II - — — mnllmgnmulo - LEGEND: + ,,,�, I 7 ° ;�11 �'II 11r 7U ''� II II �.-.�RI . 11 I = ,...... tOBTANDIN08EAM METAL ROOF SILVER W i'L`EYI�"'' m { 1 m I NE�AVENUE s�LOUVRESHUTTERB COLOR MUTE NE IST AVENUE E WOOD TRELLIS COLOR WHITE +FABRIC AWNING COLOR SUNBRELLA ROYAL BLUE 0 TRIANGULAR WOOD KNEE BRACER COLOR WHITE C..)ELEVATION:NE 1ST STREET /0EXPOSED RAFTER TAILS COLOR WHITE S INCH LAP SIDING COLOR WHITE *GALE:1l1e^.1'•0" OI0WOOD PICKET RAILING COLOR WIRE 0ST000O FINISH COLOR WHITE 0 WOOD FINISH COLUMNS COLOR WHITE 0 CLEAR IMPACT WINDOWS AND DOORS: FRAMES WHITE 0 BAHAMA SHUTTER AWNING•WHITE E WHITE PANEL HURRIOANE IMPACT Cal/FlNE'PLE*ROVE GARAGE DOOR•WHITE .\ 4a: E3 SOLID WOOD DOOR COLOR 8UNSRELLA ROYAL BLUE E DECORATIVE WOOD GRILL•WHITE 1 wra � a a ...... .....sr4ijpll�ulllOLLgln�I�I�llalli1Ill rilliiNAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIM IIR::II• 'll''.I�G�llllll°nllll IIII.•Ia ■ 41111111■fllllillll .IIei I IIII Si gg11IIICWIIIII1111111111W1.,...1111111 ingl pIII1n IImnI,�ulNplllBlul■I,nln_� wIm uIIIIIIQIIIIIIIIU nnIII10Umgldl@Ilgl„_ ^ III . .. a '\1r11 "11'IIU1.14,,,"+ ,1�1 111,11111111116 11 1 1111. 11' 111111111pa ilrlr' II+Ill 11II IIrAl,,1 r° ,Itll I I w p_ ; Sys 1 ,HI I' I i 11 n tip I1,,I I I I II 11 '� -. I I I I III II II I!I III II II m II II ;till II II A"II II II: II I I '1nsy 11 Ilr 15„Ill r t � gr° o 1 ^yt,'t,._ LI n l,co„ 1, o �r�, ...„ hi LI 1 _..cri . II 1� 1,1 m e' 11' 'll. II TNT I II II t11 U :It' El I 1 lin -. ii HI ® 0 II t .. ' 1 'I I m II .,,,31 .. I I . a II I. _ 1� Ilir�lIII11121.1IIIIIIII . et III IIIIII0 I NM $111211+IIIII �1 pI lII`IIIIIIIIIIIIIIVII 0L w.II..I II, II I 4 116.L I...II_II 1_ 1_liI II II_III I IIIIYCII_II_J _.I i_ 1 ..,•:. - NEISTSTREET l"'I REVISIONS OELEVATION:NE 2ND AVENUE til 1TAFT 0611696 SCALE:vle^-r-0' oouaNn July 16,2005 1 OEIwn by:TDSIEB 0141.51ghS1IProI/Obkractd us.\OHO Provo' •."'• • • no //R/6000 1144 rN A.7-A•I-Il,.tbn■q.0 Jeffrey Silberstein Architect 4 AIIod14l,Ina, SI.Na Sn4 111111 011111 aII.A Violin T111 III•ITS•ISSS III, Ill•ITS•051/ 1.1,11 111Wn1N141111.11111 lN .ate w�/ 1. 10.•••47. ,..rN. a f41. :rw t. WIth 1yylwl o1g11a11a It111Yaa 0 0 0 0 11 0 wN wt4,/11w11sw11•WiW 111g°...nsI 11 r II M1UIpIWU14111111111UU""'" IIz"III1111111111111111111111NIIIIIIIIIIDu i_i� UIIIIIIIIIII111111111111swimll lltli��I�II�"INu1tiliuullluiiii2 " CI--r II Il a' ,IWL 11"1111 II IIIIu I/11 11 N11,it L11411111,11 III II;II II'I1 II;II.I► I7 =1 PINEAPPLE GROVE,LTD, • ',- hI I I II ' 3d II I.I• I _ I ° b] ii II II 4 i. 4 II• n 1 eti 11 it ,it ii n II ;II II II 1I I• I�,Iu_CILJ !+mow DELRAY BEACH �,�::•t41.1 - P I I�I� 11 ._ Ili I I II I — - I ... _ Ifi it iI iI iI�;I ii Im 1 CI II .II,Iiw 61t •I.I II II it II ii3 o a mil i : p, .m m Q m ° �-�] /xT1. LEGEND; ICI IA.111 .«...1 �r i �p �' '"^ ^"""'7 1 m I l l_1 NU teTsrN2Er. 1n STANDING BEAM METAL ROOF SILVER p LOUVRE SHUTTERS COLOR WHITE , ED WOOD TRELUS COLOR WHITE 0 FABRIO AWNING COLOR SUNBRELLA ROYAL BLUE O ELEVATION:ALLEY LOOKING EAST I' IITRLWGULAR WOOD KNEE BRACES COLOR WHITE 1 SCALE:1/18'.1'•0' E EXPOSED RAFTER TAILS COLOR WHITE CI S INCH LAP SIDING COLOR WHITE O WOOD PICKET RAILING COLOR WHITE E1 STUCCO FINISH COLOR WHITE to WOOD FINISH COLUMNS COLOR WHITE 11 CLEAR IMPACT WIN0OW8D DOORS: FRAMES WHITE ROY N R.01N. BAHAMA SHUTTER AWNING•WHITE DEDICATION ON DEDICATION 2. DEDICATION to WHITE PANEL HURRICANE IMPACT CCD/pINEAppLC GROVE \, 15' 055HAD 5' GARAGE DOOR•WHITE Ej SOU(WOOD DOOR COLOR y —, •^„_, SUNBRELLA ROYAL BLUE 1 ��"` El DECORATIVE WOOD GRILL-WHITE SOLO I ° II II 1 _ _ a�a y1y, l .n°� U�II�� Il�n I II II I ` 0,111111 W U � tr „11111114ppoill1111.I IIII11111111111111111111111i.111111111111111111lIlt IW I I I I ° 1 ° �Ediliiii00 IN + . §iiiiiiiiiiii�Liiiiiiiiiiuiilll11IIIIIIII11n _ r.,.- „,„.„,,, •.X.4 I� Q 11 II °`IIII II II =1111 I� 1 u u u ; " • 1 u n a° '.-,-d_-=a1I -.I,l i.. I__L I=I ° = 1 1 f NITNO AVENUE I II .i. iT 9 I� NEST AVENUE REVISIONS (1)FELEVATION:NORTH AONAVENTI IMO Ofintll SCALE.1/IS'.1'-0' July 15,2005 A-8.0 Drawnby.:.TDS/EB 3 W rNedaNlProlx44dsd UObInS20i a0V1,,w 0,10M.Lthap TN .9/1I/2003 AK Al A-74•S.41.v.11anI.d.S Jeffre AMAI.a In I Ara+.a ha • 114 N1• I.>_•I OIIlI/11 111 TIII 111•171•1/1I ..71 III•171•01.1 1•.1111 1111111111119111NI111,111 ROA RAYI. RA.W, DEDICATION DEDICATION DEDICATION 2, rr 2 p CDD/PINEAPPLE GROVE \,,, It' /, 0554A0 T M1MI A•�. • •a..4�yr�•Ip.Na A/L UNITE-SCREEISD DY MANSARD RDOfS .Vv7 7 4 F Yd1A 9 s Tn4 I.I NyI4I��wy•la��rI�N�.rotY •v. TttILAL ~F I.m.47.41.71 'WLE+ I 1 11 1I a a •.w 1~ia MNVA1~IMMela11 ..J;b +� nlunu • mlln� p�� II�II�IlllllllllBmwll 1 a ^' I. 1 �..,• ,.,„Irammm�nmm�nalmnmm�aae2 �I ��141_`IIIIIIIIIII II I _ 1111 ,w III � 'u Imulu11i11l1IlulmnlnlunlmIIIIIl � ��'Ij I � VR 1, — PINEAPPLE GROVE,LTD. 3.—lea �,�iilnnylla al••d II ll" tl DELRAYBEACH • I 1 II . I I III .... o ! � ylf "• 11 II 1e II 6 a POOL I ��®..mom:- 3 i1 1' I'1ii1 III I II a .'Il:a mal n il �o—Illl .l�m a LEGEND: I I f�M4RGIM. �F I II a II. = 0STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF SILVER I... II el ill a1—L1l rl`aR,,I ..._._ a LOUVRE SHUTTERS COLOR WHITE NE 2ND AVENUE Kr I �11E'IP 1 1�WOOD TRELLIS COLOR WHITE �w•.t,' e... �. ^�•. I I ENE IBT AVENUE } 1]FABRIC AWNING COLOR BUNBRELLA ROYAL BLUE El TRIANGULAR WOOD KNEE BRACES OSECTION: 4 COLOR WHITE SCALE:1/iS'•1'-0" OEXPOSED RAFTER TAILS COLOR WHITE Es INCH LAP SIDING COLORWHITE E WOOD PICKET RAILING COLOR WHITE CD STUCCO FINISH COLOR WHITE 1D WOOD FINISH COLUMNS COLOR WHITE 0 CLEAR IMPACT WINDOWS AND DOORS: FRAMES WHITE [3 BAHAMA SHUTTER AWNING"WHITE E WHITE PANEL HURRICANE IMPACT GARAGE DOOR•WHITE u SOUD WOOD DOOR COLOR SUNBRELLA ROYAL EWE to I DECORATIVE WOOD GRILL•WHITE REVISIONS6 um WIO.1 WINS July 15,2005 A-9.0 Dgxn by;TDSIEB GMIcIU.cTsAProl,de4nbed ueebllwpII.prmrdxpVddA•1.02 TDS 9/16/C005 1.46 AN A•7•A•9•.I.V1ekn.q./