Loading...
HPB-01-17-01 MEM 1 /17/01 iV <fo AGENDA HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING CITY OF DELRAY BEACH Meeting Date: January 17, 2001 Type of Meeting: Regular Meeting Location: First Floor Conference Room Time: 6:00 P.M. 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. Pursuant to F.S.286.0105. I. CALL TO ORDER II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES • December 20, 2000 III. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS A. Consider Making a Recommendation to the City Commission that Waterhouse, Located at 916 and 918 NE 5th Street be Designated Historic and Listed in the Local Register of Historic Places. Michelle Sterling, Owner. B. Variance-71 and COA-428: Patrick Lynch Residence, 226 South Ocean Boulevard, Nassau Park Historic District. Roger Cope, Architect and Authorized Agent. Consider Granting Variances from the Land Development Regulations Section 4.3.4(K) Pertaining to the Front and Side Interior Building Setback Requirements Associated with COA-428. C. Variance-72 and COA-430: Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage, Lots, 20, 21 and 22, Block 69, To Be Located on the West Side of SE 1st Avenue, Approximately 250 Feet South of East Atlantic Avenue, Old School Square Historic District. Michael Weiner, Authorized Agent. Consider Granting Variances from the Land Development Regulations Section 4.3.4(K) Pertaining to the Front and Rear Building Setback Requirements Associated with COA-430. HPB Meeting January 17, 2001 Page 2 IV. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS A. COA-429: Bertrand Residence, 310 N. Swinton Avenue, Contributing Single Family Residence, Old School Square Historic District. David Bertrand, Owner. Consider the Proposed Renovations Which Include Replacement of Windows, Doors and Roof. V. REPORTS AND COMMENTS A. Reports from Historic District Representatives B. Board Members C. Staff VI. ADJOURN Mich oyland, Pla ner POSTED ON: January 12, 2001 MINUTES OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA PUBLIC HEARING MEETING DATE: JANUARY 17, 2001 LOCATION: FIRST FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM I. ROLL CALL: The meeting was called to order by the Chairman at 6:00 P.M. Upon roll call it was determined that a quorum was present. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman Keller, Mary Lou Jamison, Gail-Lee McDermott (arrived 6:10), Shane Ames, Dave Bodker, Donnamarie Sloan, Rhonda Sexton STAFF PRESENT: Michelle Hoyland, Jeff Costello, Janet Meeks, Diana Mund, Assistant City Attorney Jay Jambeck II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: The Minutes for the Regular Meeting of December 20, 2000 were before the Board for consideration. Ms. Jamison moved to approve the Minutes as presented. The motion was seconded by Mr. Ames and passed 6-0. Ms. Hoyland requested that the Board amend the agenda to hear Item IV.A. prior to the Public Hearing Items. It was the consensus of the Board to do so. At this point in the meeting Ms. McDermott arrived at the meeting. IV. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS: A. COA 429: Bertrand Residence, 310 N. Swinton Avenue, Contributing Single Family Residence, Old School Square Historic District. David Bertrand, Owner. Item Before the Board: The action requested of the Board is that of considering renovations which include replacement of windows, doors, the roof, and a color change. It was moved by Mr. Ames, seconded by Ms. Jamison and passed 7-0 to approve COA 429 for the Design Elements based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.5.1(E), with the following conditions: 1. That the design for the skylight return to the Board; and, 2. That the front door be a single metal door with the design of the door to return to the Board. III. PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS: A. Consider Making a Recommendation to the City Commission that the Waterhouse, Located at 916 & 918 NE 5th Street, be Designated Historic & be Listed in the Local Register of Historic Places. Michelle Sterling, Owner. Chairman Keller stated that this was a Quasi-Judicial item Therefore, anyone wishing to speak on this item would have to be sworn in. Board Secretary Diana Mund asked that anyone wishing to speak raise their right hand and then administered the oath. Chairman Keller inquired if the Board had any ex-parte communication to declare. The Board had none to declare. Planner Michelle Hoyland presented the item to the Board through a review of the staff report. Chairman Keller declared the Public Hearing open. Tiffany Cant, 904 NE 4th Street, expressed concern with the run down condition of the property and its affect on the surrounding neighborhood. Andrew Ladner, 3 NE Fisher Lane, asked for clarification of the implications of the designation to the neighborhood. Steve Swank, 425 NE Palm Trail, asked for assurance that improvements will be made and that the property will be maintained. Thomas Ladner, 339 Palm Trail, inquired if the Board members had looked at the house. Susan Gleason, 502 NE Palm Trail, felt that the property was in need of improvements and inquired if the Board could require the property owner to make improvements. Jim Copley, 1112 Ocean Terrace #4-A, asked for clarification of the designation. Chairman Keller read a letter of opposition from Kate & Thomas Moore, 1 NE Fisher Lane, expressing the needed improvements to the property, and the possibility of a code enforcement violation relating to the use of the cottage. As there was no one else wishing to speak Chairman Keller closed the Public Hearing. -2- HPB Minutes 1/17/01 Ms. Hoyland stated that designation would give the applicant the ability to apply for the Historic Tax Abatement Program and should improvements be made to the property, approval from the Historic Preservation Board would be required. However, the City could not require the property owner to make improvements to the property as a result of the designation. Additionally, the individual designation of this property would not require other properties in the neighborhood to be under the same criteria as the designated. It was moved by Ms. Jamison, seconded by Mr. Ames and passed 7-0 to recommend to the City Commission that the Water House be listed by ordinance in the Local Register of Historic Places, based upon positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.5.1(B)(2)(d) and 4.5.1(B)(3)(a). B. Variance 71 & COA 428: Patrick Lynch Residence, 226 S. Ocean Boulevard, Nassau Park Historic District. Roger Cope, Architect/Authorized Agent. Item Before the Board: The action requested of the Board is that of considering a variance from LDR Section 4.3.4(K), pertaining to the front and side interior building setback requirements and associated COA. Chairman Keller stated that this was a Quasi-Judicial item. Therefore, anyone wishing to speak on this item would have to be sworn in. Board Secretary Diana Mund asked that anyone wishing to speak raise their right hand and then administered the oath. Ms. Hoyland presented the item to the Board through a review of the staff report. Chairman Keller inquired if the Board had any ex parte communication to declare. Ms. McDermott stated that Kevin Warner faxed her a letter from the Beach Property Owners' Association. Mr. Keller stated that Mr. Warner had called to inquire about procedural matters. Roger Cope, Authorized Agent/Architect, handed out a presentation report, which includes a rendering, photographs and a site plan and reviewed the report with the Board. He stated that they were in agreement with the conditions of approval. Chairman Keller declared the Public Hearing open. -3- HPB Minutes 1/17/01 Cathy Appleton, 1127 Nassau Street, submitted a petition in opposition, the August 17, 1994 Historic Preservation Board staff report regarding the Pat Lynch Cottage Minor Site Plan modification, the November 1, 2000 letter from Mr. Cope regarding the variance request and the December 15, 2000 letter from Mr. Cope regarding the internal adjustment request. She expressed concern with the size of the structures, the view being blocked by the wall, drainage onto other properties and the proposed improvements taking away from the historic value of the property. Donald Curl, Professor of Architectural History at FAU & Boca Raton Preservation Board Member (799 St. Albans Drive #1, Boca Raton), felt that the proposed elevations were too massive and out of character for the neighborhood. Bob Cateras, 1160 Nassau Street, stated that since 1994 the developer has claimed homestead exemption but has never lived on the property and was only supposed to be renting 3 units but has been renting 4. He passed out photographs of the parking area and stated that there has always been a parking problem here. Suzanne Barley, 1119 Nassau Street, stated that she has lived at her residence for 60 years and the garage has never been a living unit, she also express concern with the wall effecting visibility at the intersection of Nassau Street and Ocean Boulevard. Andy Katz, 220 S. Ocean Boulevard, submitted pictures of the inside and out side of the building with the supposed extra unit. He expressed concern with the lack of green and open space as well as fire safety. Sandra Norton, 1109 Nassau Street, stated that Mr. Lynch new that the property was in an historic district when he bought it but has never complied with the regulations for the district and should be required to do so. Nancy Stroud, attorney for residents (5871 Bertram Street #17, Boca Raton), felt that the applicant has not met the required criteria and asked the Board to deny the Variance and COA. Chairman Keller stated that the Board had received a letter of opposition from Kevin Warner, representing the Beach Property Owners' Association. As there was no one else wishing to speak Chairman Keller closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Cope stated that though Mr. Lynch has not been living at the Ocean Boulevard property he has signed an affidavit that this will be his primary residence and he will have no more than 3 units. The garage has always had maid quarters which includes a kitchenette and bathroom. The wall is within -4- HPB Minutes 1/17/01 the visibility triangle and meets the height restrictions. They have worked extensively with staff and feel they have met all of the requirements for developing property within an historic district. Mr. Ames expressed concern with the applicant not be required to provide a sidewalk along the west side of A-1-A and requested that staff look into the matter as he felt the lack of one was a dangerous situation due to the number of pedestrians along this area of the roadway. He also felt that the guest cottage was too high and the roof could be brought down to mitigate this problem. Ms. McDermott felt that the proposed changes were not in keeping with the district, the pool could be placed in a better location, there were parking problems with the design and the wall was a possible sight problem for the intersection. It was moved by Ms. Jamison, seconded by Mr. Bodker and passed 5-2 (Ames & McDermott dissenting) to approve Variance 71, based upon positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.5.1(J)(1) for the variances to Section 4.3.4(K) to reduce the required 25' front and 15' side building setbacks as described in the staff report. It was moved by Ms. Jamison, seconded by Mr. Bodker and passed 7-0 to approve an int I adjustment to LDR Section 4.6.2(B) to allow a reduction in the distance between residential buildings from the required 19'11" to 4'6", 19'2" to 9' and 16' to 12'6". It was moved by Ms. Jamison, seconded by Mr. Bodker and passed 5-2 (Ames & McDermott dissenting) to approve the Class II Site Plan Modification for COA 428, based upon positive findings with respect to the LDRs, subject to the following conditions: 1. That all Site Plan Technical Items are addressed and 3 copies of the revised site plan is submitted; 2. That prior to issuance of a building permit for the swimming pool and wall, a copy of the permit from the Department of Environmental Protection be provided; and, 3. That the applicant must return to the Board for approval of the spiral staircase on the west side of the structure. If the staircase is not to be installed, the applicant must remove the existing ladder on the west side of the building and repair the void in the parapet as described in the report. It was moved by Ms. Jamison, seconded by Mr. Bodker and passed 7-0 to approve the Landscape Plan for COA 428, based upon positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.6.16, with the following condition: -5- HPB Minutes 1/17/01 1. That additional trees be added to the courtyard between the buildings. It was moved by Ms. Jamison, seconded by Mr. Bodker and passed 5:1 (McDermott dissenting) to approve the Design Elements for COA 428, based upon positive findings with respect to LDR Sections 4.6.18 and 4.5.1. C. Variance 72 & COA 430: Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage, Lots 20, 21 & 22, Block 69, to be Located on the West Side of SE 1st Avenue, Approximately 250 Feet South of E. Atlantic Avenue, Old School Square Historic District. Michael Weiner, Authorized Agent. Item Before the Board: The action requested of the Board is that of considering a variance from LDR Section 4.3.4(K), pertaining to the front & side interior building setback requirements and associated COA. Chairman Keller stated that this was a Quasi-Judicial item. Therefore, anyone wishing to speak on this item would have to be sworn in. Board Secretary Diana Mund asked that anyone wishing to speak raises his or her right hand and then administered the oath. Chairman Keller inquired if the Board had any ex parte communication to declare. The Board had none to declare. Assistant City Attorney Jay Jambeck stated that Dharma Properties has been granted applicant status for this item. Senior Planner Janet Meeks presented the item to the Board through a review of the staff report. Principal Planner Jeff Costello presented a map of structures that have been demolished or moved to provide for surface parking lots and submitted the Pinder Troutman Consulting Firm's Block 76 Parking Update. Michael Weiner, attorney, submitted the resumes for their expert witnesses and a copy of the Order of the City Commission on Block 77 which states that the Block 69 Parking Garage must be built prior to building Worthing Place. Michael Covelli, architect, reviewed the original and revised elevations and site plan. Grant Thornbrough, landscape architect, reviewed the landscape plan. Richard Orman, planner, stated that he has reviewed the staff report and plans and concurs with staff on the variances and waiver. -6- HPB Minutes 1/17/01 Charles Siemon, Siemon & Larsen, stated that they are representing Dharma Properties, have filed a lawsuit on their behalf and thus felt the Board should not be acting on this item until such time as the lawsuit is settled. He asked the Board to deny the application and let the City Commission be the approving body. Todd Messenger, Siemon & Larsen, submitted a scaled model of the downtown and expressed his concern over the size and mass of the structures compared to the surrounding building. Chairman Keller declared the Public Hearing open. Jay Alperin, 3130 Lowson Boulevard, stated that he was the Mayor when the Parking Garage and Worthing Place came before the City Commission and has been involved in historic preservation for many years. He pointed out that this Board is a recommending body and that if they recommend denial to the City Commission they will not have a say in the design of the building. The board should only be dealing with the facts not emotions. Bill Wood, President of the Greater Delray Beach Chamber of Commerce, stated that the City has done several Visioning processes and they have looked at the needs of the downtown and the parking garage is a part of that process. He pointed out that the scaled model was missing several of the existing larger buildings downtown. Diane Dominguez, Executive Director of the Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA), stated that the parking garage came about as a result of the CRA's Request for Proposal (RFP) for this property which has an existing parking lot that will be lost once the property is developed. The garage will preserve and promote historic preservation by providing much needed parking for historic properties. Carolyn Patton, 1020 Tamarid Road, stated that she felt that there was a need for the parking garage and it is a better alternative than more surface parking lots. John Bennett, 137 Seabreeze Avenue, stated that he supported the waiver and variances as it will allow for a better design. However, he was not in support of the demolition of the 1949 house. Alieda Riley, 65 Palm Square, stated that the City was in need of a parking garage. Virginia Snyder, 38 S. Swinton Avenue, stated that she was opposed to the parking garage and felt that it should not be before the Board until the lawsuit was settled. -7- HPB Minutes 1/17/01 As there was no one else wishing to speak Chairman Keller closed the Public Hearing. Mr. Siemon, stated that after further review the parking garage and Worthing Place buildings on the scaled model were out of scale by approximately 18' high. He apologized to the Board for the error. Mr. Weiner stated that the scaled massing model was not a fair representation as it is not to scale and the garage would not be looked at from above. The applicant has agreed to move the 1949 home as opposed to demolishing it. The Board stated that they would have trouble approving the demolition of the 1949 home and were glad to hear the applicant agreed to move it. They did not feel the elevations and landscaping for the garage were appropriate but otherwise did not have a problem with the rest of the proposal. It was moved by Mr. Ames, seconded by Ms. McDermott and passed 7-0 to approve the Demolition of the structures located on Lot 20, however delay the demolition of the main structure for six months (July 17, 2001) in order to allow the applicant time to look for a site to relocate the structure, based upon positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.5.1(F)(1) (Evaluating Requests for Demolition). It was moved by Mr. Ames, seconded by Ms. McDermott and passed 7-0 to approve the variance to LDR Section 4.3.4(K) to allow a minimum of a 1' front setback, based upon positive findings with respect to LDR Sections 2.4.7(A)(5) and 4.5.1(J)(1). It was moved by Mr. Ames, seconded by Ms. McDermott and passed 7-0 to approve the variance to LDR Section 4.3.4(K) to allow a minimum of a 5'6" rear yard setback, based upon positive findings with respect to LDR Sections 2.4.7(A)(5) and 4.5.1(J)(1). It was moved by Mr. Ames, seconded by Ms. McDermott and passed 7-0 to recommend to the City Commission approval of a waiver to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(2) to reduce the required 10% open space to 8.3% open space, based upon positive findings with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(D)(5). It was moved by Mr. Ames, seconded by Ms. McDermott and passed 7-0 to approve COA 430 for the Class V Site Plan, based upon positive findings with respect to Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) (Findings of Compatibility) of the LDRs and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan, subject to the following conditions: 1. That a Unity of Title is recorded prior to issuance of a building permit; and, -8- HPB Minutes 1/17/01 2. That after the parking garage obtains a Certificate of Occupancy, that it be deeded to the City prior to the start of construction of the Worthing Place apartment complex. It was moved by Mr. Ames, seconded by Ms. McDermott and passed 7-0 to continue the Landscape Plan to the February 21, 2001 meeting. It was moved by Mr. Ames, seconded by Ms. McDermott and passed 7-0 to continue the Design Elements to the February 21, 2001 meeting. V. REPORTS AND COMMENTS: A. Reports from Historic District Representatives None B. Board Members The Board expressed concern with the length of the meeting and asked that staff check into having a time certain for ending the meetings. C. Staff Ms. Hoyland stated that John Johnson has volunteered to monitor the MacArthur Foundation meetings regarding the West Settlers Historic District and all other interests of historic properties. The Board was of the consensus that Mr. Johnson would be the Historic Preservation Board liaison to the MacArthur Grant for Downtown Business Area Plan. VII. ADJOURNMENT: There being no further business before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 12:15 A.M. The undersigned is the Secretary of the Historic Preservation Board and the information provided herein is the Minutes of the meeting of said body for January 17, 2001, which were formally adopted and approved by the Board on February 7, 2001. // Diana Mupd 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. -9- HPB Minutes 1/17/01 } 13 lit t 7n. ONSgQRD . =,.E: Project Name: Water House, 916 and 918 NE 5th Street. Project Location: The West 84.82 Feet of Lot 37, Las Palmas Subdivision. The action requested of the Board is that of conducting a Public Hearing on a proposal to have the Water House designated as a local historic site. Based on an analysis of the designation report and testimony presented at the meeting, the Board will consider making a recommendation to the City Commission to place the Water House on the Local Register of Historic Places. •TA F ' CfiQMME111TS1�%N�°ALYSIS .-.-. At the meeting of December 6, 2000, the Board reviewed the Water House designation report and determined that it contained all of the required information pursuant to LDR Sections 4.5.1(C) (3)(a),(b) & (c). The Board then set the date for the public hearing for January 17, 2001. Pursuant to Section 4.5.1(C) (6), after conducting the public hearing, if the Board finds that the nomination fulfills the proper designation criteria and all procedures have been followed correctly, it shall vote on the designation. A majority of the entire Board, present and voting, must act in the affirmation to transmit the nomination and the Board's findings to the City Commission. The City Commission shall consider the recommendation through its standard ordinance adoption procedures, except that at least three affirmative votes of the City Commission is necessary to make a designation. In the event that a directly affected property owner objects to the historic designation, the Commission approval shall require a super majority vote of four votes. The owner of the property, Michelle Sterling-Smith has requested the designation and prepared the designation report. To qualify as an historic site the property must fulfill one or more of the criteria set forth in Section 4.5.1(B)(2) or (3) of the LDRs (copy attached). Analysis of the designation report indicates that Water House fulfills two of the criteria as follows: Meeting Date: January 17, 2001 Agenda Item: Ill-A HPB Staff Report Water House Designation :.; Page.2 . Section 4.5.1(B)(2) (d) Exemplifies the historical, political, cultural, economic, or social trends of the community in history; and, Water House provides cultural significance as it exemplifies the historical, political, economic and social trends reflected in Delray Beach during the years of the Great Depression when the more ostentatious building styles of the Florida Boom years were considered inappropriate. Designated in a unique and unassuming cottage style Water House adapted to the socio-economic conditions of the nation and provides significant clues about the values, lifestyle and social consciousness of the City's winter visitors. Section 4.5.1(B)(3) (a) Portrays the environment in an era of history characterized by one or more distinctive architectural styles. Water House was constructed in the resort cottage style, which emerged in the City during the 1930's. The cottage style differs from the easily identified bungalow, vernacular or resort colonial in that the rooflines are generally lower pitched than in the bungalow, windows are more abundant than those found in the vernacular, and the front entrances lack the classical detailing of the resort colonial or minimal traditional styles. Many of these cottages were built near to the ocean and the Intracoastal Waterway; however, few remain with as many of the original features intact as those found at Water House. 1. Based upon positive findings to LDR Section 4.5.1(B)(2)(d) and 4.5.1(B)(3)(a), Criteria for Designation, recommend to the City Commission that Water House be listed by ordinance in the Local Register of Historic Places. 2. Deny the recommendation, based on failure to make positive findings to LDR Section 4.5.1(B)(2)(d) and 4.5.1(B)(3)(a), . ., R`EC{) 11 ESNDATI:19:18.. Based upon positive findings to LDR Section 4.5.1(B)(2)(d) and 4.5.1(B)(3)(a), Criteria for Designation, recommend to the City Commission that Water House be listed by ordinance in the Local Register of Historic Places. CRITERIA FOR GRANTING'VARIANCES Pursuant to Section 4.5.1(B), the Historic Preservation Board must make the following findings for a property to qualify as a historic site: (B) Criteria for Designation of Historic Sites or Districts: (1) To qualify as a historic site, or historic district, or historic interior, individual properties, structures, sites, or buildings, or groups of properties, structures, sites, or buildings must have significant character, interest, or value as part of the historical, cultural, aesthetic, and architectural heritage of the city, state, or nation. To qualify as a historic site or historic district, the property or properties must fulfill one or more of the criteria set forth in division (2) or (3) below; to qualify as a historic interior the interior must fulfill one or more of the criteria set forth in division (2) and meet the criteria set forth in divisions (3)(b) and (3)(d). (2) A building, structure, site, interior, or district will be deemed to have historical or cultural significance if it meets one or more of the following criteria: (a) Is associated in a significant way with the life or activities of a major person important in city, state, or national history (for example, the homestead of a local founding family); (b) Is the site of a historic event with significant effect upon the city, state, or nation; (c) Is associated in a significant way with a major historic event, whether cultural, economic, social, military, or political; (d) Exemplifies the historical, political, cultural, economic, or social trends of the community in history; or, (e) Is associated in a significant way with a past or continuing institution which has contributed substantially to the life of the city. (3) A building, structure, site, or district is deemed to have architectural or aesthetic significance if it fulfills one or more of the following criteria; except that to qualify as a historic interior, the interior must meet the criteria contained within divisions (3)(b) and (3)(d): (a) Portrays the environment in an era of history characterized by one or more distinctive architectural styles; (b) Embodies those distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style, period, or method of construction; (c) Is a historic or outstanding work of a prominent architect, designer, landscape architect, or builder; or (d) Contains elements of design, detail, material, or craftsmanship of outstanding quality or which represented, in its time, a significant innovation or adaptation to the South Florida environment. (4) A building, structure, site, interior, or district will be deemed to have historic significance if, in addition to or in the place of the previously mentioned criteria, the building, structure, site, or zone meets historic development standards as defined by and listed in the regulations of and criteria for the National Register of Historic Places, as prepared by the United States Department of the interior under the Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended. A copy of these standards for the National Register is made part of this section as if fully set forth herein. DESIGNATION REPORT HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA WATERHOUSE 916 AND °1S NORTHEAST Elk 111 STREET DELR.Y BEACH, FLORIDA - ri � �. r , -c t,c�..'kx: - .. =.�a.As�fz --- _ ,,; t-c: iT..a_ - - - r. �. 4- _S-. - X , _.77` 7 _ �.- ems•"._ '�F t� _i _� �,. "V"-- ec�rl %,..5-=. 6 i "? '* a�,..�c-� r`_yT _1r . ^-ems - -- - ;s=..— -- s ,t?r,.- .---_..�_ �lt �f�'-� '- � '�_ 1 z...- s ,J - t �x _S: - r-____�"'-rs�-- _ r `arm - -•=, � + Mw� • ' .• ^ ?.. J`-mow~' K ill .• . : '. 4f4116cor;';...lc- --, :-_. - N • -�' h _ Y..A..-V. .r'. •.ram ti- . •74.7. 1r'CT >,•�•.�I'• 1= _ - i(a Y t• x f • may. -_ _,.`+ '� f Q�'� • w '. r % .yam _.� + _ �` ' i '� fs a`.S.7 . �•/.`r�-'fit r _ •-a. - r �4‘......,",. y" 1. :", -vim` ' 4.2. _: 'c..- 11, .V.:- • : yy:- '�F- 3- - C'. e1•-r._./ E r r I. -,•''am• +r , —r .1 . _- y, -yam~ J _ _ ..Y ys.+ .'1't1-eW �. ' _ _ • ,t }' :' ate. • ••. y .� ae_ '_ _ ... . _ ' - ;: '-ice r - •_ ��^" s•'¢t�C' .-fir_ _ • i. _ . -, \ , .e. .... .. - t ,...,,,,---.., _ . _ ...- •• - _ - `_� ` - _ram'- - L• T - - .. THE STORY OF WATERHOUSE THE TWO COTTAGES PREVIOUSLY KNOWN AS, "THE COCKLE SHELL"AND "SOO BIG..." TABLE OF CONTENTS I) General Information 2) Location Map 3) Historical and Cultural Significance 4) Statement of Sianificance 6) Sources . 7) Photography 8) 1924 plat map of subdivision 9) Palm Beach County Property Tax Dept.Diagram of Structures 10) Absh act from 1925—1987 This DesiomPtion Report was researched and prepared by Michelle "Micl ey" Sterling-Smith and Michael W. Sterling-Smith GENERAL INFORMATION LOCATION: 916 AND 918 NORTHEAST 5TH STREET DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA DATE OF CONSTRUCTION: 1937-1938 PRLNCIPAL ARCHITECT: UNKNOWN PRESENT OWNER: MICHELLE"MICIEY" STERLING-SMITH • PRESENT USE: RESIDENTIAL PRESENT ZONING: R1AA PALM BEACH COUNTY TAX FOLIO NUMBER.: 12-43-09 3 1-000-0371 • CURRENT T FGAL DESCRIPTION: The West 84.82 Feet of Lot 37,Las Palmas, Delray Beach, Florida, According to the Plat Thereo Recorded in the Office of the Clerk Of the Circuit Court,in and for Palm Beach County,Florida, in Plat Book 10,Page 68 CL_ASSlr4CATION FOR DESIGNATION: HISTORICAL, CULTURAL, AND ARCHITECTURAL 3 W WATERWAY NORTH CONDO IX rn / 00 w J INLET z a COVE CONDO GEORGE BUSH BOULEVARD , MARINA I I ST. VINCENT'S CHURCH DELRAY THE I N.E.` LANDINGS EDGE- CONDO '0 I I WOODc W �- N.E. CONDO j' 7TH ST. , • NM O ACURA CO Or Lv < M.S.A. DELRAYI TRACT M.S.A. TRACT III O BEACH allN.E. Z�6TH - alig MO '-- I 7f / q. // ...., rN.E. _____ ... .,.. ii --1 ! I ,r r ' ,�_ 5TH ST. _ LIANI DRIVE 1.11.1 I I = j WAL- , `GREENS�� _J ill z= ` ipmmomill C.E. ?TH • -� ST. �/1 1 MR C 1I !HDRIVE IN BlIllili __ __ U SEA SPRAY AVE. 1111 < � II•IIIIIIii� ��= I all WATERWAY LANE _ 6 Iii- 11111 I I 3RD �- ST. \ I I I I I L. i I I � w I I I I H� EN w L < AIM I •W I I r:_7z a Mc 1 ._� A MA Oh,/ 1 L_____A_______ I I i / I I 1 I II I <2 F I !I --ramm _ 916 & 918 N.E. 5TH STREET CITY O- DELRAY BEACH, FL (WEST 84.82 PEE 1 OF LOT 37, LAS PALMAS, DELRAY BEACH, FL) °LANNING S ZONING DE°ARTMEN i -- DISITA! BASE MAP SYSTEM -- MAD REF: LM48c • • • HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE Section 4.5.1(B) (2)of the City of Delray Beach LDRS outlines the criteria for determining the historical and cultural significance of a property. Listed below are the criteria,which relates to this property and justifies its designation. (A) "Is associated in a significant way with the life or activities of a major person, important in City, State or National history." Not only one,but also several such people owned WaterHouse, and the site it is on. Adolf Hofman,Frank Haller and Winthrop Winslow were important to Delray Beach, Gulfstream, and Palm Beach County. Each of these founding families helped shape our area as we know it today. (D)"Exemplifies the historical, political, cultural or social trends of the community in history." WaterHouse,with its two distinctive cottages exemplifies the historical, cultural, economic and social trend of the past eras in Delray Beach. The proximity to the fabled beach of Delray and the Intracoastal Waterway is reflected in the theme and naming of this property. The former name of the larger cottage is"The Cockle Shell". Conch shells formally set upon the front stoop, beneath the hand-lettered wooden sign proclaiming its name. At present,the new sign, painted over the original one, hangs proudly beneath the trellis at the front gate. Numerous Conch shells, once prolific in our area,but now gone from our waters forever, adorn the eaves and hang on the picket fence as a reminder of these by gone times. The use of these two cottages themselves as"Winter Cottages" from 1938 until they became year`round homes in 1968 is the epitome ofthe scene in Delray's Golden Age. The charming, modest cottages were used by Northerners,who flocked to our area during"The Season", offering a comfy place to stay while enjoying the many social attractions the area had to offer to those fortunate enough'to have the social"entree"to be a guest in such a cottage,instead of an impersonal hotel. In the following text I shall tell, as best I can... THE STORY OF WATERHOUSE The site itself is a small portion of the very land from which Delray Beach itself evolved. Earliest available records indicate that this property,tax folio 3V-- 12-43-09-31-000-0371,has been carved in stages from Model land Company Lot#7,(referred to as Lot� 8 by 11/15/24) Subdivision, Section 9, Township 46 South, Range 43 East, which was deed#1 of Dade County records, giving AdolfHoftman title to 60 acres on July 9, 1896. Hofman, a German immigrant and other German immigrants and workers of African descent farmed this land along with the Hofman family, includingMir.Hofman's nephew, Paul Drehr, who later went on to become Supervisor of West Palm Beach and for whom Drehr Park Zoo is now named. 5 • • The principal crop of the Hoffman's farm was pineapples; a crop for which this area is well known. Pineapple plantations played an important role in Delray's history. We continue to commemorate this facet of our past with the City's"Pineapple Grove" and other historic areas in Delray Beach. - By 1925 Cuba shipped 3-4 million crates of pineapples to the States. It still behooved Mr. Hofman to keep growing his pineapples! He also profited by growing bananas, oranges and grapefruit, which he sold directly to tourists. In settling this land,Hofman had to endure many hardships. There were labor difficulties, even with well-recommended fellow immigrants,who were homesick to the point of distraction from the hard,physical work of farming. *Another problem Mr.Hofman encountered was the lack of any bridge over the Intracoastal Waterway,which was referred to at the time as the"Florida East Coast Canal". In order to cross the water, a boat, called a"Lighter"was pulled from shore to shore using a rope. Adolf Hofman once came and found the rope wound around the post so he could not pull over and was obliged to remain in a small shack until 2:00 the next morning. At that time, State Road AlA as we know it today was but a narrow footpath cut through the brush to the beach. * *The above text was taken from, `Delray Beach Noted"by H. Sterling, 1935. By 1925 Adolf Hofman was caught up in the local land boom fever, however, he sold off his land judiciously, keeping in mind the financial penalty of Federal income taxes upon his sales. Another reason he may have decided to sell the land was the hard times of farming. In a letter to his brother,Fritz,in Germany dated 1/17/25,Mr.Hofinan describes the hardships of farming for the last four years, adding that at this time he was only planting 25% of his previous crops. Another factor in his decision to sell may have been that the Hofman children were not themselves interested in farming. They had pursued business education and entered the world of commerce,following a National trend,which took place after the industrial revolution. Mr. Hofinan,like so many-otherr parts of his generation,found he could no longer keep his children ""down on the farm".. Public records tell us that by 11/15/24,Adolf Hofman,with his wife, Anna Hofman, John W. Hall,Annie C.Hall,E.E.Hall,Mary Ethel Hall, L.E.Perkins and Bess Perkins,through John W. Hall,their attorney in Fact, caused the land,which we know today as Las Palmas Subdivision to be created;by surveying, and dividing plots and platted,that portion of tract of land known as the East portion of Lot 8,of Section 9, Township 46,Range 43 East in Palm Beach county. The land was subdivided into separate building lots, numbered 1-45. This plat was recorded 11/24/24. Mr.Hofman's partners in this joint adventure were the influential movers and shakers of that era. People critical to the formation ofDelray Beach as we'mow it today. Politically and socially, they guided the town through its infancy. According to the local newspaper of 8/10/23 the population of Delray Beach was 1,500. 6 Here is some information about Mr. Hofinan's partners that gives us some insight into their local importance during that time period. The fact that Mr.John W. Hall was the City Clerk rendered him a personage of such importance that the day's newspaper reported his home on Dade and Lowry Streets was completed and ready for occupancy. He also had a realty and insurance business at Atlantic and Dixie, which was one of the first in the City. Emmett Campbell Hall's marriage to Eleanor C.Hartman,W�th son with its o attendantJoh W. parties and fetes dominated the local newspaper on 9/18/25. Emmettf the Delray Theater. Friends included ll, a member of Hall Realty and Insurance Co. and manager y the B.F. Sandy family of Swinton Avenue;a founding family in town, for whom the Sundy House,restaurant and inn, are named. The earliest conveyance by warranty deed for the Las Palmas Subdivision, executed on 1/17/25, but not recorded into the County Records until 6/10/25 have John W. Hall, his wife Anne C. Hall, Adolf Hofman,his wife Anna Hof nan,E. C. Hall, his wife Mary Ethel Hall,E. C.Perkins, his wife Bessie B.Perkins selling lots 3, 13, 14, 31 and 37 to Frank Haller, with Deed restrictions so specific as to clearly suggest the grantors envisioned a luxurious subdivision to be built in the Spanish style of architecture. This style proliferated in the area at that time by such noted architects as Addison Mizner. The deed restrictions stipulated: "No building other than dwelling houses and private garages may be built upon this property, apartment garages being specifically prohibited;that no dwelling house shall be erected which shall cost less than$3,500 for materials and labor, that all structures,including private garages, shall be of stucco finish,that all roofs visible from the street shall be of tile or composition shingle,plain roll roofing being specifically prohibited except when concealed by parapet walls, and all roofs shall be of fireproof or fire resisting materials,that no commercial or industrial-enterprises of any nature shall be_conducted upon the property,that no cows,horses,poultiy.or other domestic animals or fowls shall be kept or maintained upon the property, dogs and cats excepted,that no structure shall be built'or placed nearer than 25'to the front street line of said property,that the property shall at all times be kept in a neat and attractive condition,and that this property shall never be sold or mortgaged to any persons of Oriental or African race.." - The new owners of the five lots-were themselves German immigrants like the Hofmans. Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections records show Frank and Maria Haller became naturalized citizens on 9/16/11. These important developers lived in Palm Beach County, on Athis Street in 1915, on Poinsettia Street in 1916, and at 819 Kanuga Street,West Palm Beach in 1946. By 1925 Mr_Haller was a man of such importance to the development in Delray Beach that the subdivision to the West of Las Palmas is named for him, as was "Haller Street",now called NE Fifth Street,upon which WaterHouse faces. It is interesting to note that when the original plat was recorded, Haller Street was the northern boundary of the Subdivision. Market Street, (now NE Fourth Street),was the Southern boundary, and that since Market Street was the Northern 7 • line of what were then the City of Delray Beach City Limits, the entire subdivision lay outside the town itself. During the years that the Hailers owned the property, Delray's "Golden Age" was born. Delray Beach became"The Ocean City". A chic resort which attracted artists, poets, movie stars, cartoonists, socialites and polo enthusiasts to partake of the sun, the sea and the ambiance of this coastal jewel of a town during the winter months. The Hailers owned this property from 1925 to 1931. Some of the institutions of that era to which people flocked were The Arcade Tap Room, The polo fields in Gulfstream, The Boosters' Club, The Masonic Lodge,The Gulfstream Golf Club and The City Marina. By 1934, 1,500 seasonal residents were on the scene,joining the 2,800 full time residents. The seasonal residents filled the eight Iocal hotels, (including The Colony, which still flourishes today), as well as the winter cottages, such as WaterHouse. • On 7/13/26 Frank Haller conveyed the property to his wife,Maria Haller. It is noted that Mr. Hailer deeded Lots 3, (12), 13, (25),31 and 37. No record of ownership exists for Lots 12 and 25. He excluded from the conveyance Lots 14 and 21,which were included in the deed of 1/17/25,by which he took title. On 5/29/36 both Frank and Maria Haller deeded Lot 37 to Palmer B. Beck and his wife, Virginia of Cuyahoga, Ohio. It is not known why both Frank and Maria Haller appear as Grantors, as Maria Hailer was the sole owner. The Becks caused the lot to be resurveyed and split into two smaller lots respectively,the East 100' of Lot 37 was sold to Sally E.Reitler and her husband on 3/18/38,then, the West 85' of Lot 37 was sold to M.Fisher Wright and his wife,Anna Lewis Wright, also on 3/18/38. The two cottages appear to have been built by the Becks between May of 1936 and March of 1938. It seems the Becks were Ohio residents,undoubtedly using the homes as their winter cottages. A deed-was executed in Cuyahoga, Ohio on 3/18/38. The Becks held a mortgage for the Wrights dated 3/31/38,:specifically requiring that the Wrights keep the houses insured "for both fire and windstorm in a sum of not than $900 respectively": The two separate promissory notes which appear-with the mortgage in the public records, each executed in the amounts of$450,as well as the above quoted verbiage in the mortgage instrument document the existence of these two structures at this time,but no records of the architect or the builder of the houses can be found. The mortgage was satisfied on 10/17/39, acknowledgement made in New Philadelphia, County of Tuscarawas, Ohio, suggesting that the Becks had continued to keep Ohio as their principal residence. The alley, which runs along the West Side of the property, "Fisher Lane", was undoubtedly • named for M. Fisher Wright. It is interesting to see the Wrights' emerging pattern of land acquisition with a view toward development. The Wrights first purchased the small, (approximately 84.82 x 49.65) part of Lot 37 with the two cottages as a"base" on 3/18/38. They then aggressively purchased more area properties as follows: On 9/25/41 Lots 42 and 43 in Las Palmas were purchased from David R. Lippencott, et. al. (who, in fact had, himself purchased these lots a little more than four months after the 1/17/25 transaction with Frank Haller, from Hall,Hofman, et. al.) The Wrights next purchased Lots 38, 39, 40 and 41 from Edward B. 8 • Andrews and Deborah W. Andrews on 9/27/41. Edward B. Andrews had received that property via warranty deed on 1/14/37 from Clayton L. Andrews and his wife. On 11/19/41 a quit claim deed to the Wrights was executed by Eula Moore.West, et. al. (widow of J. J. West), presumably to clear some cloud on the title to Lots 40 and 41. The Wrights next set out to clear a cloud on the title, as well as to have the previous deed restrictions lifted and released via a quit claim deed executed on 12/9/41 by Emmett C.Hall, et. al. for Lots 38, 39, 40, 41, 42 and 43. This is in addition to an affidavit to the public executed on 12/10/41. Further efforts were made to clarify title ambiguities to lots 38 and 39,via two separate quit claim deeds, one executed by Alice Bedell, a widow,on 11/18/41 then a quit claim deed and disclaimer executed by Beatrice Bedell Williams and Mignon Bedell, widow of Otto Bedell. On 5/1/25,the Wrights obtained a mortgage on Lots 38 and 39 from the Florida Bank and Trust _ Co. of West Palm Beach, in the amount of$3,500. The next recorded transaction reveals that by 4/2/46 Anna Lewis Wright was a widow. This indicates that M.Fisher Wright died between 5/1/45 and 4/2/46, undoubtedly cutting short the Wrights' dreams of development in the area. On 4/2/46 the widow, Anna Lewis Wright executes two separate warranty deeds. Records show that this took place from where she was at the time, in New Hampshire. Mrs. Wright sold the West 84.82' of Lot 37 to J.D. Sloan, Jr. and his wife,Evelyn Tillery Sloan of Delray Beach. Mrs.Wright sold Lots 38, 39, 40,41, 42 and 43 to Gordon Gibbs and his wife, of the world famous Katherine Gibbs School in New York City family. The mortgage held by Florida Bank and Trust Co. in West Palm Beach on Lots 38 and 39 is satisfied on 5/28/46, suggesting that Mrs.Wright needed the proceeds from the sales of the properties to pay her bills. Little is lmown about I D. Sloan,Jr. and his wife,Evelyn Tillery Sloan, except that they obtained a mortgage from the First National Bank of Delray Beach, on their property, first in the amount of$2,800 on 6/16/47. They satisfied that loan on 11/12/47. Again they encumbered the property with the same bank as Mortgagee,on 12/12/47,in the principal amount of$3,000, satisfying This-mortgage on 4/29/49 = The fact that no Voters Registration records'are found for the Sloans from the 61h Street address, in spite ofihefactthe deed of 4/2/46 lists them as being Delray Beach residents,suggests that WaterHouse was not their primary residence. In a discussion with local architect and historian, Roy Simon, he suggested that such leveraging of property was consistent with the common practice offarmers during that period of time to pay for their expenses, suggesting the Sloans' possible vocation. On 7/21/48 The Sloans sold the property to Mrs.Elizabeth H. Morris of Vista Del Mar Drive, Delray Beach,Fl. She assumes the balance of the$3,000 mortgage that the Sloans encumbered the property with on 12/12/47. The widow,Elizabeth FL Morris obtained another mortgage on the property from her neighbor, Mrs. Sally E. Reitler, owner of the East 100' of Lot 37, in the principal amount of S4,000, presumably to discharge the mortgage which Mrs. Morris had assumed to purchase the property, 9 among other expenses. Note that both the satisfaction of the assumed mortgage and the new mortgage; bear the same date of 4/29/49. No.Voters'Registration records were found for Mrs. Morris, suggesting that she may have been something of a socialite winter resident, and not a year round resident,which would be consistent with the prestigious Vista Del Mar address. The Delray Beach City Directory for 1953-1954 shows Mrs. Morris both owning and living on Vista Del Mar Drive, and the property at NE 5th Street, (the West 84.82' of Lot 37), as being owned and lived in by Mrs.Morris as well. The street address for the larger cottage at the time was 914. It is now 918. This suggests that Mrs.Morris may have maintained this cottage for her winter guests or household help. The same Directory lists 916 NE 5th Street, (the smaller cottage), as being occupied by"tourists", indicating that perhaps Mrs. Morris rented it out seasonally. The smaller cottage is still numbered 916. It was common practice to change house address numbers by either the City or fire officials. Mrs.Moms satisfied her$4,000 debt to her neighbor on 2/17/53. She sold the property on 2/18/53 to Winthrop Winslow, of 7 Gulfstream Rd. Gulfstream, Fl. And of Covington, RI Much is known about Winthrop Winslow, his wife, Agnes Parks Winslow and their family. According to one of their daughters,Mrs. Walter(Beverly)Donohue,the family was very socially prominent,being among the earliest socialite families to settle in Gulfstream for the winters around 1940. They purchased their home and four lots from the Phipps family, a founding family in the Gulfstream and Palm beach area for whom a public park further North on State Road AIA is named. The Winslow's Gulfstream property bordered the socially all- important polo fields from which Mrs.Donohue recalled"watching the polo games every Sunday for free!" She remembered such great polo players and socially prominent citizens as the late William `Bill"Mayer and Stewart Iglehart. The family was in the insurance business, coming to the area from Rhode Island and staying at The Colony Hotel on East Atlantic in - Delray,prior to purchasing their winter home in Gulfstream • The Winslow family was social leaders here in the Delray Beach and Gulfstream area. They were active in and belonged to such social institutions as, The Gulfstream Golf Club, The Gulfstream Bath and Tennis Club, and The Delray Beach Yacht Club. The 4/4/66 Delray Beach News Journal reported that The Hibiscus Garden Club installed its officers during The April meeting of the Club at the Gulfstream home ofMrs.Winthrop Winslow. According to her daughter Beverly,Mrs.Winslow was"crazy about flowers!" Mr_Winslow died quite suddenly at the age of 67. Mrs. Winslow is now also deceased. The Wmslow's-two daughters are still Delray Beach winter residents. One daughter and her husband, Mr. and Mrs. Walter Donohue, were married in the Wiinslows' Gulfstream home. Mrs. Donohue recalls that the two winter cottages on 5th Street, (at that time,the lamer cotta ae was called, "The Cockle Shell" and the smaller one was-called, "Soo Big..."), were purchased at her mother's insistence. Mrs. Winslow felt that the cottages were" a good investment". They needed work, but Mrs.Winslow was determined that"they should be"fixed up and saved". She was obviously a preservationist, ahead of her time. 10 The cottages were used to house a steady stream of winter guests and family members. This is confirmed by Mr. Paul Harvin,who remembers an employee of the Winslows, who opened and closed the cottages each season "for the tourists from up North". Over the years, family members also occupied the cottages during"The Season". Another daughter of the Winslows', now Barbara Miller, lived at WaterHouse as did a Presbyterian Minister and his wife, who were an Aunt and Uncle to the Winslow sisters. The Minister is said to have claimed that"God gave us this home." This would seem to convey the sense of peace and serenity he felt there, and still abounds in the home today. The cottages were filled with northern visitors, eager to enjoy the social swirl Delray and Gulfstream had to offer. Mrs.Winslow, by then a widow, sold the property to Wilfred A. O'Brien and his wife, Magdalene S. O'Brien of Sag Harbor,NY on 4/2/68. The O'Brien are remembered by Mr.Paul Harvin, as being"very nice people, retirees" who appear to be the first owners of the property to have used it as their year round residence. Plans were made for the O'Brien' only son, of whom photos were prominently displayed around the home, to come for a visit from New York State around Christmas, 1986. These happy plans were never fulfilled because Mr. and Mrs. O'Brien were in a tragic automobile accident on NE 8th Street, (now George Bush Blvd.),just a few blocks from home. Mrs. O'Brien died on 7/23/86 and Mr. O'Brien, who never recovered from the injuries sustained in the accident, died the following year on 7/16/87. Their son sold the property to Robert V.Ruggiero of 126 Seabreeze Ave.Delray Beach, on 1/13/88. Mrs.Ruggiero had a very extensive art and antique business at NE 4'h Street and NE6th Avenue here in Delray Beach. Mr.Ruggiero set about to quickly remodel the cottages,with the intention of reselling them at a profit. TheRuggieros furnished the cottages with inventory from their antique store and housed out of town guests who were in the area to attend a family wedding. They later sold their borne on Seabreeze Ave. and moved to Lake Worth,where they were involved in the revitalization of the lovely, old hotel which overlooks Bryant Park and the Intercoastal Waterway and was later bought by the Holiday Inn Corp. I purchased the property on 6/1/88 from Mr.Ruggiero, emptying even my daughters' piggy banks to do so. I lived with my two daughters,in the larger cottage as my year round residence. We used the smaller cottage to house a succession of friends,who would barter their "handyman" skills in exchange for a place to stay, or to au pair girls who would help care for my daughters while I worked. We also had need of the space in the smaller cottage when, during my mother's last illness,we brought her home to stay with us. It was not until my marriage to Michael W. Smith, a fifth grade teacher here in Palm Beach County, in July 2000 that we began to use both cottages together as one home for our blended family. 11 In 1988, my youngest daughter named the property, "WaterHouse", (meaning, "house near the water", in the language of someone less than three years old). The name stuck. I have been immersed in raising my daughters and at working locally at, The Arcade Tap Room, The Gulfstream Golf Club, The old Gulfstream Bath and Tennis Club, The Little Club and The Delray Beach Club in my capacity as waitress to Delray Beach and Gulfstream society. 12 • ARCHITECTURAL SIGNIFICANCE The City of Delray Beach LDR Section 4.5.1 "Criteria for designation of historic sites" sets forth the following divisions, under which WaterHouse is well qualified for historic designation, as it meets this criteria. 4.5.1(3) (A) "Portrays the environment in an era in history characterized by one or more distinctive architectural styles." (B)`Embodies those distinguishing characteristics of an architectural style, period, or method of construction;" (D)"Contains elements of design, detail, material or craftsmanship of outstanding quality or which represented, in its time, a significant innovation or adaptation to the South Florida environment." • I shall explain the architectural significance, as it relates to the above criteria. WaterHouse is comprised of two separate cottages, located at 916 and 918 NE 5th Street,Delray Beach. A map of the location is in chapter 2. The larger cottage, 918 NE 5th Street,is designed in the Traditional Minimal Style, as defined in the National Register. This style evolved from Indigenous Architecture,found throughout the southeastern portion of the United States,but most especially in South Florida. The smaller cottage, 916 NE 5th Street, is of the Vernacular Architectural Style,which was influenced, in a simplified manner, by the earlier Victorian architecture. Both cottages share such original features as double hung wooden windows, some in the Prairie style in the larger cottage. The windows were placed to create cross ventilation throughout the • houses.-These windows slide open and closed,from the top and bottom sashes,permitting air for the blowing,Tropical storms). circulation while keeping outmost rain, (except • The original sections of the roof on the larger cottage are of a simple,Hip Roof Design, most typical of Minimal Traditional Architecture. The two later additions to the original structure have flat roofs. The entire roof of the smaller cottage is of the Cross-Gable Design, perfectly in keeping with its Vernacular Architecture. The exterior of both cottages is made of wooden lap siding, some of which is original, some of which has been replaced and some of which needs to be replaced,where the scourge of South Florida, namely damp rot and termites, have caused damage. Both the Minimal Traditional and Vernacular Styles of architecture lent themselves to and were prevalently utilized in Delray Beach for the"Winter Cottages"which played such an important 13 visual part in the streetscapes of Delray Beach during the 1920's-1940's. Each of these cottages is a near perfect example of what made"The Golden Age" of Delray Beach. Both of these simple"cottage"type of dwellings were unostentatious, and low profile, as befitting the national economic conditions of the tail end of great depression and prior to the post World War II economic boom times. During this period, affluent members of society, and, by extension, their guests and household help, escaped the harsh Northern winters to enjoy the beautiful weather, quiet beaches and stimulating society of Delray Beach. These small-scale structures were key to the proliferation of this social trend, this very lifestyle. In the Iarger cottage the attic crawl space reveals the original beams of Dade County Pine so hard, it is difficult to drive a nail into it. This wood is almost impervious to termites. The interior walls are covered with tongue&groove beadboard wainscoting, which extends from the floor, 1/2 way up the walls. Plastic laminate paneling,Marlite and sheets of drywall covered this when I purchased the property in 1988. As much of this was uncovered, coats of hardened trowel adhesive, then coats of pink, blue and green oil based paint had to be stripped off in order to refinish the beautiful wood beneath the mess. Most original chairrail was gone. As was some of the original beadboard. I replaced each with reproduction pieces,the new chairrail, admittedly, more ornate in design than its original predecessor. In the smaller cottage,the living room interior walls are covered with the original floor to ceiling Cypress wood tongue& groove plank paneling,wash-stained light green. This was a popular finish for Cypress wood during that era. It was low maintenance, and not the"mildew magnet" which the porous,paper composition wallboard of that era was. Cypress is also termite resistant. Each cottage has a brick chimneyed wood-burning fireplace surrounded by a simple yet sturdy wooden mantle piece,to take the occasional seasonal chill out of the air. The foundation of the larger cottage is raised upon corner stone pilings. The sub-floors are covered-with an Oak hardwood finishfloor in most of the a rooms: The smaller cottage is set upon a series of concrete slabs.These kinds of flooring were cool, comfortable and easy to care for. Since no finish flooring was apparent in the smaller cottage,the concrete floors have been covered with marble the. In the larger cottage, a porch was added at an unknown time, facing east,to the Intercoastal Waterway with exposure to breezes on three sides. It was enclosed in the 1960's with aluminum awning windows. I have replaced these on the North and East sides with more architecturally appropriate Pella Wooden casement windows in 1996, and the room is currently used as the master bedroom. Some of the original wooden window shutters remain, but need to be repainted, given new hardware and reinstalled. They provided protection from storms and vandalism during the long summer months when the cottages were in disuse. Some original door and window surround wooden casings remain in both cottages. They are modest in intricacy of design., but wide, sturdy and substantial. Unornamented, yet arresting in their very simplicity. 14 City of Delray Beach records show an addition of square footage between 1968 and 1969. There was also a utility shed added to the south side of the larger cottage although no records exist for when this occurred. We have attempted to readapt it for closet space, attempting to match the original lap siding as closely as possible. In the larger house the small kitchen, with its flat roof appears to have been an early addition to the original structure. However, with its double hung window, beadboard tongue& groove type wainscoting,wooden door and window surround moldings as well as built in cabinets, it appears to have been added no later than the early 1940's. With the type of electrical wiring used, the double hung window, as well as all the woodwork match that of the rest of the house, we must assume that this room was added soon after, if not at the same time, as the original construction, in spite of the flat roof which covers this area of the house. The larger cottage has original solid wooden upper cabinetry with a hand painted floral design. It is not known when this decorative work was done. The smaller cottage has original wooden and glass fronted upper cabinetry. The kitchen in the smaller cottage is now used as a laundry room. No original lower kitchen cabinetry in either house exists. The kitchen sinks in both cottages are the large, rectangular, porcelain-clad kind, which have the faucets coming out of the wall above the sinks. These are thought to be original. In the smaller cottage's bathroom,the original toilet and sink remain. The original look of the shower stall is not Imown, (or it is possible that an original small bathtub was subsequently replaced with a shower stall). When I purchased the house, 1960's ceramic tiles covered this. It was recovered in marble tiles in 1996. During the course of this work, it was noted that the wall beneath the shower enclosure was covered with the same lap siding that is used on the exterior of the cottage,leading to the question of whether the bathroom itself was an early"add on". The exterior west wall of the bathroom is of concrete construction,unlike the rest of the cottage. However,,much like the kitchen next door in the larger cottage,the double hung window and wooden door and window surround moldings are consistent with the vintage of the original construction,'leading to the conclusion that if,indeed,the room was added subsequently, it was not much later. In the bathroom of the larger cottage, a door leading from the living room area was added. This was necessary for the use of a modern family for whom the sole existing egress to the bathroom being accessible only from inside a bedroom caused an unacceptable traffic pattern. This added door,recycled from a county "crack house: which awaited the wrecker's ball is architecturally appropriate. In restoring the bathroom,I discovered the original tongue and groove beadboard wainscoting extending from the floor one-half way up the wall beneath 1950's Marlite wall covering, I shipped, stained and polyurethaned it. The original baseboards were missing,but I replaced these with wood of the same wide width and thickness as the original door and window surrounded moldings which remained, although many layers of paint had to be stripped from these as well, prior to refinishing them. As was true in the living and dining areas of the cottage, 15 the original chairrail from the top of the wainscoting was missing. I replaced this with a style which was undoubtedly more ornate than its original predecessor. During the course of this project,I found an original snip of the floral-patterned wallpaper border. While this original pattern is no longer available, I have endeavored to replace it as closely as possible on the upper portion of the walls, ceiling and border in between with a complimentary floral pattern and colors, which evoke the original look and feel. The original 1930's flush-mounted bathtub with its Iower, molded, fluted design remained, but 1960's squat-style fixtures had replaced the original sink and toilet fixtures. In replacing the inappropriate toilet,the unanticipated difference between 10" and 12" ruffs proved to be problematic and dictated compromise in the use of a modern Kohler reproduction styled toilet, as opposed to a salvaged fixture of appropriate vintage. The reproduction fixtures echo the fluted base design of the remaining bathtub, as does the edge of the matching reproduction pedestal sink,with which I replaced the '60's. Water damage to the flooring and sub-flooring necessitated replacement,which was revealed by the removal of the 1970's rolled vinyl floor covering. The original floor covering is unknown. The new sub-flooring is now covered with marble tiles. To avoid destruction of the walls above the bathtub due to modern shower usage, the marble tiles were continued from the floor to achieve a shower wall. Some extensive changes have been done, most particularly to the smaller cottage via the city of Defray Beach's Bootstrap Program about three years ago. In replacement of the original front French-style doors, as well as some interior wooden door surround moldings, the contractor advised me that the replacement of these features with identical items would not meet current code requirements, so these are lost to us. A photograph of the original living room front door is on display at Delray Beach City Hall, on a presentation exhibit of historic fences displayed in the Building Department. The original picket fence pictured in the displayed photograph had to be replaced due to damage from various storms,the "last s[iaw" being the unnamed storm which swept through Delray Beach soon after Hurricane Andrew. Much work remains to be done in order to restore the two cottages as closely as possible to their on rnal condition,while adapting where necessary to meet the needs of a modern family_ 16 • STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE • The significance of WaterHouse can best be summed up, as stated by John P. Johnson in his 1987 Historic Sites Survey, "The appeal of Delray Beach as a winter resort can be attributed to the dozens of modest wood frame cottages". WaterHouse exemplifies the architectural, historical, cultural and social trend of Delray Beach's "Golden Age", as defined by Clemmer Mahew, m, in his "Design Guidelines For Historic Places", published by the City of Delray Beach in 1990, as well as by Dorothy Patterson's "The Delray Style", from the 1999 Delray Beach Historical Society Antique Show and Sale Magazine. WaterHouse's two separate cottages,the larger being constructed in the Minimal Traditional Style, and the smaller cottage, constructed in the Vernacular Style, meet the criteria for (2) ( ) (d) and 4.5.1 (3) (a), (b) and (d). The designation as defined by LDRS Sections: 4.5.1 a , specifics are elaborated upon in this text in Chapter 4, Architectural Significance, and in Chapter 3,Historical and Cultural Significance. By the official recognition provided with historic designation of this property,we can protect and preserve the original character of these charming cottages,while keeping the established characteristics of the surrounding neighborhood intact through the continued restoration, preservation and much needed upkeep of the premises. This will result in improved area property values, while preserving the rich architectural textures,which comprise the neighborhood's visible heritage. Without this designation, any natural disasters or other causes of damage to the structures, or change in ownership will almost certainly result in the loss of this architectural, cultural and historical window on Delray Beach's past, due to the fact that this lot is nonconforming to current City Code, which hinders important improvements and necessary preservation efforts. Why designate this property? Section 4.5.1 (A) of the City LDRS outlines the purposes proposed designation. I shall list both this section as well as the reasons,which relate to this property. Section 4.5.1 (A): This Section is created in order to provide for the identification, preservation, protection, enhancement, perpetuation and the use of the sites, buildings, structures, improvements that are reminders of past eras, events and persons important in local, state and national history;that provide significant examples of architectural styles of the past;that are unique and irreplaceable assets to the city and its neighborhoods; or that provide this and future generations with examples of physical surroundings in which past generations lived. Let WaterHouse be so identified! 17 This property needs the preservation, protection, enhancement and perpetuation in order to continue to be used as a home that serves as a reminder of past eras. Some of the former owners of this site and these structures are important in local history. WaterHouse, with its two distinctively representative examples of both Minimal Traditional and Vernacular Architecture, certainly provide fine examples of each integral piece of Delray's historic social trend of winter cottges unique to this area. The features and craftsmanship, as well as scale and styles, are unique and irreplaceable to the City and neighborhood as examples of the winter cottages that played an important part in the history of the social and cultural trends which shaped Delray Beach as we know it today 18 -- _• SOURCES • 1) Palm Beach County Circuit Court Records,Palm Beach county Courthouse, West Palm Beach, FL 2) Palm Beach County Supervisor of Elections, West Palm Beach, FL 3) Building Permits, City Hall, City of Delray Beach, FL 4) Delray Beach Historic Sites Survey by John P. Johnson,Published by the Palm Beach county Preservation board,Palm Beach County,FL 5) Copy of letter written by Adolf Hofman on 1/18/25, The Archives Room, Old School Square 6) Copy of Delray Beach Notes,by H. Sterling, in January, 1935, The Archives Room, Old School Square 7) Delray Beach City directory(1953-1954), Vol. IIl; Published by Southern Directory Co. Publishers, Asheville,NC 8) Palm Beach County Tax Collector, West Palm Beach, FL 9) The Art of Architecture,Published by the Delray Beach Historical Society, Delray Beach 10) The Delray Beach News Journal,various back issues, as listed individually when quoted in this text,Delray Beach Library,Delray Beach,FL 11) Architectural Photography by Pat Golembe,Delray Beach,FL (Why should anyone else ever be allowed to photograph architecture?) 12) Oral interview with Roy Simon,Architect and Local Historian(and a great guy, who belongs to the old school, taking time out of a work day to talk to follu about our town), Delray Beach,FL August, 2000 13) Dorothy W Patterson, Archivist,Delray Beach Historical society, Delray Beach, FL 9/19/00 (A wonderful lady, who happens to know where lost artifacts are kept) 14) Oral interview with Paul Harvin, Defray Beach,EL 9/18/00,Local Historian and Professional Gardner to the Neighborhood, extrordenare 19 15) Telephone conversation 9/19/00 with'Mrs. William Mayer of Gulfstream, FL, who kindly provided a missing link between past and present, by putting me in contact with the descendant of a previous owner of the property. 16) Telephone interview with Mrs. Walter Donahue of Rhode Island and Delray Beach, FL, 9/19/00, who graciously took time to reminisce about her family, her life, and Delray Beach at the time her family owned the subject property. 17) Thanks to Larry Hall and Jeanne Slizyk for support, editorial and technical assistance 20 ! - ' .a�Y` i' . 4 ,ice .-td., . ,� ,�y �/ ti:�„ 4A a ��• "s'• / I rail L. . I - r .—; . s • ,,- _ - _. _..__ ' •#� -tom - 1. Z. • I"...Jr 11 I.::1 I I„il •,t1.-,t1 i-0 r , .. I 7r. i , t: i • p .:-14 it : ' - ' . •_..,. 1 - 111.r.:•,.1 :.. ,I1, .1,, r . .tti-r,ii::.1.,i.i . 11,ii 1,, 0.,,i:n-:I.A-" •- - i i".k--: it i 1 1.._,I, .....:!,..,11,....., 1:ir.iiiii,,... 1 .:.4:1 ,i! .;!! •:iifi --.•)-; Iiidv lil -.!,-,,14,1 il 11 :� _-? - -tom. 'i. ' i::>" -:,"...�. c` _ • A �- GJ-PJ1v X i -Q-Q- C 2- c o�J I Q Yv � }, A i - .-.-- . ,r • f �t� _11 k • '4 s . _ _ t . i tom- '+ • �- ; - .mot �•� • •r,. e m. u•. -Sr,: • = x • • -v �4Sa�" - -is^ • "`t4+S-Ag4t7•i s .r.�yR M�C'i s 1. • • • �h.I�- ? ,�. ni. �_ _ - - }_ Jy iiii s i ' i •'e•ti1=+r - =^• a.'::�..•-.- srrn_•w�,. '"cz-„., -_. -_'".s•- a'°'fi s'-F-�"; �..r-� ' ,�,--4 ,':r c-,N..,,,\-.,!:,...:.„,_,..: ....••.`:..•,.,.'.:7--,-.,-.1.-,L,.--:;:-f•:-;;_.-._!-.--7.•.;,.:,.'..--,,-...•.'f-,..--„, -.,:..,--..•%:--„-•-:77,_-..-:e, •.'�'^ „ £`"- 4''... -ram^ - ^w_ ►. ••.� x:i - a - +.w.; N• 1.."-..,-..:.,.--.I-;.-:..cr.-._,- _ �t• •t•; ';.-,.-•.7.r,-.-...:T _ •`•c rX`7'r t- •.i w •`- : :,17,.,, •-• .a-Y.5�� ..'...•i 3.4t..:.r.es,r.•,•::..-t.,e,,-.%.f•Yf,:. U� n! cam °. jt _ =.rr {a. .ram y .S fi r i._. +•ram . -,��s --- y-0fy+.-G.f .:r,7.• i_ _ i - rj �- ` .T a'!t3" 'S=iC, n..._ S " . 's:'-„4_ - . ter= ' .I �A, --Fe _ .. _ - :` , :: -p7.,,.;---7•,- L r --� \ ; - _1 ---'�,-�,"�ix -1 �."tX.-".: t �. a v` "ri, ue-•r a yam^ T "' -'�' - -_ - _ - •� '`a s x - �1!• • \ -� ` •,-` "`.ter' vr' J -4"ter...-�%'`. l� _ .S - l• ;ix.--- j -. _ --�. o -T,.. ..;. ram. -.r 2._v�. 7r.�,_-:3`^.- . a..- Tw,Y'!3✓ r .w x-_ y" 3 "- rr_ s.4.. �" ,E - } r"^.••. ..a'•-.• t7: 3y� titer ,... -.` — . r +.:�l` r ♦ .cy or- +•+d ^+' r .r•.'•..s r• .. 1_ .•y�- "r R-c _ ri ?s--^-'..-•'.+. ts' .r'-J re-kg /7 s a �-' t^S,t - "r•. �''. -,. -�„ >-� .. -•w ;�•C � " `�T <. �= •N J F"',ham �J, {,.w.�+'' `•' • .a•=.'0 s +�� ,.r- Y+li- ti �:d c Y.T . " - '•-.. 2 � .-$T�-�ter.. ..._ -'�_. I .r _ -�..�'-•.c ma ' -.= ..,r ._- i— • ;.f:t . -= ' -_ - - t __ • I' _ ,f '- 1-' - am'� ,,.,, _3 z* =.:r. . w �.w.-� - ram - -- ,"" -s' Ewe s-', -,t_ t _ f. - _ -_- a z --� r•C _,.,.ir- -` _ .'r._ ram. ,;•�'''''- T . f-4� __�:..____.L= -_�...m, ___ ' • . _• E• '7-' .F-. `, ` :ie mo t..'••„,4 t _ ��' " "' + x — - L • ce:s•l — S ay_ "^'^ } _` ij\ ; • • am --,:_ - R > ,;'-';:tiy: ^ s•eX r=+`-s`- �., +i--,-+,�-e.+ 1• •• • "ii tr I. _ •`«„ �+Yssw �^-' ��Z Y--:,".:.v!.-.k.,rr+P•'-�3f"•�iyA•• __ a � • r s: 1 a �� j i '�� - 1 9 . ti • - t - - .� • r „= . sz - } - _ i _' am • •/g .`" $••"-,t-"y,r- Y"Ar ,ice--'Z.. _ ii ; :._- ."_'..""`e..`sue+ .. ----"`.' > -5. - 'i•' a +..,�' _ �`."'�=r`�:.,�s•'--�—ter r�.�••� � -�,Cr� - �s"w,= 'iF•S�,Cr --��•`1�w.�-�' `r...rZa ;,r. Y--" �;o� �' +-.s...:_.:- _.Tv--- �.7.� ,.. .. �o- "'.tom•- "•-x. - _ may'.-e.a 4�"mac � rxti.:. }. may. fl' .y.:••?:*-r"G- '�•+ ,- '- � sty •:-- -•"'�� -5,'.._ ,� - .,. "� 0 Fy�ip --4:: . x .,e � _ •r..-- "ram • - 'i 4-sue".{ �T.z rse s + ^J�',�•"�•cs vh` -e .w.t-= ..r _ �` l ^ .i4,prT a;'mo ^—.• . .a _ „w � R • �� 7"7 ,�� T em1. '.L - Ya '= - _.- 9' 1'`. -� ' _ - -x. u • — -.- i 1=- _ - '"'-. -'-r - T '• • - -- '- .-"- fir. : - ``i � • ` ry} ) , " i t 1 !...t0 .1v� 1 � {''���y - •� F • tit ,1,.,.r> .- r.s% r , • ' �:��a t ^' I�✓ • S..- -•'f�':^� 1{ar '',1 _ y w ' _ . __ S''. Fu .Y F +- _ _ _ - j-; - _ r y }a yam¢` ~jam- n ,i ; -- -. 4-- :4.4 i _ .tip ..•, '?��� + ram^ •? i ^"'�• `"m'�` - •; E- ` - -- - i.- a E r . f"C + �,-sx r.�r'fi .M _ �.+.a_a-',4.r.y.-.s. s-. Via. .--- s-T.< -- Fr "'�"` y '?t' „• ---"---t _ Ir` S''*.. , �+ ms �r(-...s.c::fs,-.r - s�s'_�-t+ -r^. _. �1..; r.yt �- w _s ue .-."-'•- �.,Z_ {e's3--s' '-" .. ...=- s.�, ..- .z.s..` ..,ti3}�,• T r=c. -+v r. -a, ..-r:L .�.-ti".� :c''�. ..,..1-� � -- �_ �. ,7.�-'-"S.,,�'.v 3. L�-�, -�'��.y.�i C� 4 a ' . -Wit' ` 1.�,--°^•• ,,.-"v7 '":1�`^-2 -•+-r3'"3y�. ,ti"--c,�^`" y.,T—,,=q'." j" -:' •- --•-'`'' y . .-.-v = 7 �"' s K'rC`'€.=., `t-...2."�." .v.`.ry -���•, rs'^'"`' Yam• r_ } . • • ," v.r-: ,- = .y ^:5�,5 -sf nc.'•- � y` ✓r 1,.=::s •'�,s,.17r-1:a • '- s v __ `} r Jam. =•t; �•-^��Z •... - "may,. .Ziuv • -... ,}i. _ _- a�'� k._.;?,": -' _ • -c t r .�. .- J 14 ♦_ ',_ -..-, , lam, ' I t t -. :".7..i--i...'.....'.."._.",....-0.,7..7,::.1,..7,,..7_,,--?:—„--..--.,Z.:..U„-A..7•'---;---,. tea- - - _.. T --- r �. - y=t Gam- zr � 7 ..'.r%.::. c_ ._-.Z'„_3:1 v . - .: • ...s..,.-... 7—..... ....-i_ i '-r 1 k -+�J•-sue. _ _ • _ _. -` -,.'.„.t"ti �-?;T • r w l r;�` < t� ro��^... k - _ os -- -�.a.. ., its " - ,r-- ¢ .: —'.- -c^-"ram-'„ ---Rs.„ �"-"^ _.•�_ . • 3 �y `a.-.- <t=.�.J .c- S ^_ � '._ - -- h am{ '.--- :'' '''' --= . i...I•V • I •F—,• ••/ I V V V•i.ri ✓/ I♦. r v• ♦. • .r...r•- • 2/ ..‘;.t`.,..t:,,•r,. ..tL:GLr • ,66' ,.,• .., _, f1'fr'L I op cSTR£E T LcL'FII7ati i ..'„ n i.- ,. - :. I : PH) Pr,.,; 4.S,en„a.e,Cr:at Czar /bvl,a.� Or tar fmnrYdl,O,Jtrr,av ,V,,t/11. r d . 1 a a.ro' Facrr-u'.i i1dl,S vrur. Y..o,+at faarr•-7h zt/1j/eeftr. P, v • 11 ::h i B T fLc/r Gov rI; 0,41U4 _.IIN I • 1 /1 I if, .l, .. ... ... 44 ik 16 i DIY;'LiI/%L)/Y • I I ,sun a.Sc,..,. 3 r z, Cowl} eY fhb, Bent, I / j7 ,n,r C/rn,1,f tna/�rit.y/<r.ii,c/Biro ri liinFiMreenii Aar H/6r//. I I /ley it,/a///Aur al/ernr na Ihr •. 1 f Olultit It A. < ,..,.(• • arr<r(. Naf pa n«r✓wre as 'I I ,'1 I I j • .... ___ .. _ 15c...n Ae..", B r;r Cmte...L/„ •r l.!ni,f/dl,.r J.t n•,n:v /)I•/i.•e• I) Ja ,1•n /e•,y• /Ir1,1 "re h•rr,. ..,,a rl...G.,.+C:,.. t>S • ..t r .._I I )li.hn, .57,2 Y,n M.',Alto•h �/W/ i . ____.. c1141( e z+ I i/ 92 I AC,t%1'O))'LCOGf+> /YT r/list ' - .elo,r a rer,or, . I filmy(H FWn,Her<, I z /1 11 I. ..tea n'.n,/, f, Brh-e m./•e„•".ar 5 c,.,,,A,.,rrltiri Bane Ar nr; • 1 f 1 ,,,C//r/, t d t6/, Arne QNr/ a,r,/Ara/ Y L C/+` + rya Bess f,. ,b.rlrc,.1 ,,A.^rr ..nY♦,.nw 1 Nnn.rm..y, n'at w,• a 11,n,e, I i,n Ara 4,,,,,, Ay,e A Ar Ct• 4 - ((''��, ry.„•r,<.N,e.". ,,e.«r ,• ",r nrr..•...Y•rA..r,. 1 a /f p Ir tX, �y , C y .I 1 l0 e i for. � ' j—gin" , y . I `�f7l� .. .L'I..r-_ _t...------ —--- - UI f/Yv/N/.GSS cC.P7%FiYP,9TE I / ,.n.t,..,.. • n.,f ,....r ,,r 1.,. ',. ,.i','.i.,.7,r l,0o°,4i1/ri.in .N A.r'"...en%l.,!...n n r n ...trfr.e.�d*1��,'-1Iµ1I Y wire l O.`aL llt Z`-4, 4 4' /p�� fir. 44: L7 / GS _Liu 4Su4vty Ou, inc. :5(Ae. 6140 N.W.11th Street • Sunrise.Florida 33313 PREPARED FOR: A47//er Si` (fl/af) NE S'5 Sf(,rie/d/ Michelle I. Sterling L� �� Howard A. Morrill ILL - 3G IPI p SCALE: 1" = 20' o. ' ADDRESS: 916 - 918 k 0 � .1.iik:si N.E. 5th St. ' - , 3B N ` L � Delray Beach FL% • 3.5 e , '� S O o Z- L D!' t 7/DA/ S/"(A7C�f = r� • (/v7_c e. 5 rh ST cc 3' Mnod ,0icke/ fencr y w'O/d -. :•- u• I ► —6--- I i—PVI __ ,0771- �S. h o t, O h ti t: ti e --. '. '� 0.5 V . . a • �ti o �enrc a .1, 2/O • 4 a E l T cieoc "\+ i.' 9.2' k 1 44 z,` zz o i2 7' 732' �l a h `k II 'o` ti ii. ' f✓000'fizyin� �2.G" 7 S5' h h • `�.1 r o �� d oQ. j o7?-- o 0 n • cs • LEGAL DESCRIPTION. ( As Per Deed of Record ) - The West 84_82 feet of Lot 37, IAS PALMAS, Delay Beach, Florida, according to the plat thereof, recorded in the' Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County, Florida, in Plat Book 10, Page 6B_ SAID LANDS LYING AND BEING IN THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, BROWARD COUNTY, FL. DRAWN 1 CND. FB DATE BY Rod BY JAL I l ci_0- _ R1 MayRR I HEREBY MRTIFY•THAT THE ATTACHED BOUNDARY SURVEY OF THE HEREON DESCRIBED PROPERTY IS TRUE AND CORRECT DATE REVISIONS I F.B. I BY ( CHb. TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEF AS RECENTLY T I SURVEYED UNDER MY DIRECTION AND SUPERVISION. I FURTHER CcR1FY THAT THIS SURVEY MEETS THE MINIMUM _ I I TECHNICAL STANDARDS FOR LAND SURVEYING IN THE STATE( ( OF FLORIDA(CHAPTER 21 HH-6 F.A.C.) PUR.`.;UANT TO SECTION 472D7, FLORIDA STATUES. lig • THS DRANNG IS NOT WLID UNLESS IT BEARS ((' J r `� r�S • ' V JOHN A. LI DSTEDT, PRES. 5 EMBX.SED SEAL OF APPLICABLE SlitvEY62. ? SURVEY WAS NOT ABSTRACTED FOR EASEMENTS STGIETERED LAND SURV2YCR OR RGHTS-OF-WAY OF RECORD BY BASE LINE. STATE OF FLOR IDA #2409 5 ,'FROM : Kate B Moore FAX NO. : 13149973605 Jan. 17 2001 11:11AM P1 DATE: JANUARY 17, 2001 TO: MICHELE HOYLAND and DIANA MUND, FAX: (561) 243 7221 FROM: KATE AND THOMAS M. MOORE, (1 FISHER LANE) PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN A 500' RADIUS OF THE WATER HOUSE, 916 AND 918 NE 5th STREET Dear Historic Preservation Board Members: Thank you for your letter, dated January 4, 2001, notifying us of the public hearing to be held tonight proposing to add the Water House to the Local Register of Historic PLACES. As strong advocates of historic preservation, and as concerned neighbors, we feel that the Water House is worthy of placement in the Local Register of Historic Places ONLY IF CERTAIN CONDITIONS ARE MET. As the house now stands, it is an eyesore and embarrassment to the otherwise historic, and well-kept, neighborhood. It is cluttered with giant conchshells stuck on each spoke of a surrounding picket fence (great for a fish restaurant, but not for an historic structure). In addition, the fence between the Water house and our property, at 1 Fisher Lane, is falling down. Often junk furniture is scattered in the rather public front yard of the Water house. All this lessens the integrity of an otherwise historic place. Our final hesitation is that if such an honor is bestowed upon this house and garage/cottage, all laws should be kept. For years, as well as at the present time, a renter has leased the garage/cottage, while the owner has also occupied the premises. This is a direct violation of the single family city code. If the above negative issues can, and will be rectified, we are in favor of placing this property on the Local Historic Register. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, c, 6. 1=&%1. — 14 Fordyce Tane, St. Louis, Mo. 63124 �� 1-‘)�� .,___, HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ---STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE: January 17, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: III.B. ITEM: Consideration of COA-428 and Variance-71 Which Incorporates a Class II Site Plan Modification, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations and Variances for Patrick Lynch Residence, Located at 226 South Ocean Boulevard J C W c SPANISH Wa RIV--R I o DELRAY BEACH Q ' RESORT I < MARRIOTT AVENUE GENERAL DATA: I III.111UI,'111111.HMIci �'wa2 _.__..—.� Owner/Applicant Patrick W. Lynch - �•g ate. Agent -- 9 Roger Cope, Architect �_"v = Q Location 226 South Ocean Boulevard 7 o uiRAMAR STREET Property Size 0.41 Acre ®— uture Land Use Map Medium Density Residential 5- II IN DO I RI HOUSE CONDO 12 units/acre r OCEAN PLACE Current Zoning RM (Multiple Family CONDO e Residential-Medium Density) I COC' I UT ROI I Adjacent Zoning North: RM IhCrZ d.AY NFNU. East: OS (Open Space) — �_I I R I JARDIN DEL MAR South: RM J CONDO I OCE�r. ON West R-1-A (Single Family — r� RA I 11, ., Residential) , IIIII J I I I I I Existing Land Use Single Family House located N A S S A LI I I IS T. I on the south side of the pg I I 1 I I WINDECONDO OUSE,_ L property, apartment unit on the I 'BAY ) STREET northwest corner and guest I house on the north side of the LANIKAI property. LANCER VILLAS CONDO WAY .\1 Proposed Land Use Construction of a 2nd floor __ I ,`' addition on the guest house, a ; i 1 one story addition on the main I I I .� cASUARINA RpA, house, pool and deck on the ;I I • east side of the property, a 4'- • I 1 1 S 3 high masonry wall on the south and east sides and , BUCIDA RC installation of associated • landscaping. Ater Service Existing on site. I `� Sewer Service Existing on site. N I Cq/ 7�R0 III.B. H`1 S O R1'tC~ P R SSE R1/A TI O`N" B Agent: Roger Cope, AIA Project Name: Pat Lynch Residence Project Location: 226 South Ocean Boulevard TAM¢` BEFORE , T.� E BOARD The action before the Board is that of COA-428, which incorporates the following aspects of the development proposal for the Pat Lynch Residence, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(1)(b): ❑ Class II Site Plan Modification; ❑ Landscape Plan; and ❑ Architectural Elevations. ❑ Variances to the following requirement: LDR Section 4.3.4(K) — A request to reduce the front and side setbacks (described in further detail in the Variance Analysis section of this report). The subject property is located at the northwest corner of Nassau Street and S. Ocean Boulevard, within the Nassau Park Historic District. B.A The subject property encompasses the south 21.65' of Lot 1, all of Lot 2 and the east 35' of Lot 3, Nassau Park subdivision and consists of 0.41 acres. The main house, located on the south side of the property, was constructed in 1936. The construction date of the apartment unit (located in the northwest corner of the property) is unknown, however City records indicate that it was constructed prior to 1949. Both structures were built in the Resort Cottage style of the 1930's and are contributing from a historical perspective. The house was a winter residence for Mr. and Mrs. John G. Cherry of Cedar Rapids, Iowa, and was one of the first houses in the Nassau Park subdivision. In 1963, a guest house was constructed on the north side of the property. The structure is designed in the Florida Resort style, which was popular in the City during the 1960s and 70s. In June 1994, the Historic Preservation Board approved a Certificate of Appropriateness and an associated site plan modification for the conversion of the garage/utility room to HPB Staff Report Pat Lynch Residence—Class II Site Plan Modification Page 2 a one bedroom apartment unit (3 units) and for the installation of a 5-space pea rock parking area. Currently there is an active Code Enforcement violation pending on the subject property. The violation is of the Code of Ordinances Section 7.1.3(A)(104.1.1 + 105.4) which states: That any owner, authorized agent, or contractor who desires to construct, enlarge, alter, repair, move, demolish or change the occupancy of a building or structure, or to erect shall first make application to the building official and obtain the required permit for the work. After obtaining a permit, it is required that inspections be made by the building department. Pursuant to the above described code section, a building permit and inspections are required for any interior renovations to a dwelling unit. The North building at 226 S. Ocean Boulevard has been converted from a single family dwelling to a duplex, without obtaining proper City permits or approvals. The owner has been instructed to obtain permits or cease use as a duplex. However, in order to accommodate the conversion from single family to duplex, additional parking must be provided. Pursuant to HPB's approval of the COA and associated site plan in 1994, only three units can exist on the property. This is due to the parking deficiency. The existing 5-space pea rock parking area is inadequate, as the three units require seven parking spaces. This is a legally established, non-conforming situation that cannot be modified without the approval of the Historic Preservation Board. DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL' The development proposal consists of the following: • Construction of a 2'd floor addition on the guest house (north building) and conversion of the structure from an illegally converted duplex to a single family dwelling. • Construction of a one story addition on the main house (south building). • Construction of a pool and deck on the east side of the property. • Construction of a 4'-3' high masonry wall on the south and east sides of the property. • Installation of associated landscaping. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(1)(b), a Class II site plan modification is a modification to a site plan (other than Class I applications) which requires no review of the Performance Standards found in LDR Section 3.1.1, but which requires action by a Board. HPB Staff Report Pat Lynch Residence—Class II Site Plan Modification Page 3 LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(5) (Findings): Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(G)(5), formal findings are not required for a Class I or II modification. SITE PLAN MODIFICATION ANALYSIS„ COMPLIANCE WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall be specifically addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development proposal. The following table indicates that the proposal complies with LDR Section 4.3.4(K) as it pertains to the RM zoning district: Required Provided Building Height (max.) 35' 32' Building Setbacks (min.) - Front (Structures) 25' 30'-35'6"' Front (Pool)* 25' 10'6" Side (Interior)* 15' 10' Side (Street)t 25' 19'6"-66' Reart 25' 9'-54' Open Space 25% 52.4% *See Variance Analysis tExisting Non-Conformity Variance Analysis: Setbacks: The development proposal includes two variance requests from LDR Section 4.3.4(K) to reduce the following setbacks: Variance to the Front Setback: The front setback requirement is twenty-five feet (25'). The variance request is to reduce the front setback to ten feet six inches (10'6") to allow a 16' x 34' swimming pool to be constructed. With the existing 5-space pea-rock parking area located in the rear of the property, the pool is proposed to be constructed within the front yard. if the parking area were relocated to the front of the property the pool could be located in the rear of the property, which would not require a variance. However, this configuration would detract HPB Staff Report Pat Lynch Residence—Class II Site Plan Modification Page 4 from the historical character of the existing main house. The in-ground pool will not detract from the elevation of the existing structures, on the contrary it will enhance the existing open space while also providing added amenities to the existing multiple family development. Variance to the Side Setback: The side setback requirement is fifteen feet (15'). The variance request is to reduce the side setback to ten feet (10') to allow a two story addition for the use of a 1st floor covered porch and 2nd floor balcony to be constructed on the east side of the existing one story guest house (north side of the property). The existing one story guest house, which is located on the north side of the property, is nonconforming with respect to the side setback. It is currently set back from the north property line 10' where 15' is required. The variance would allow the construction of a two story addition on the east side of the this structure and will encroach into the setback for a distance of 12' in length. The requested variances meet the required basis provided in Section 4.5.1(J), regarding the preservation of historic character and the adaptive reuse of the property (See attached Appendix C). LDR Chapter 4.6 Supplemental District Regulations: Parking: There are three legally established units located on the property: A two bedroom single family residence (southern building), a two bedroom guest house (northern building) and a one bedroom apartment (building at the northwest corner of the site). The one bedroom apartment was originally a garage/utility room that had been utilized as an apartment, this use was legally established in 1994 through the HPB's approval of the COA and associated site plan. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(2)(c), a two bedroom dwelling unit requires 2.0 parking spaces plus .5 spaces for guest parking and a one bedroom unit requires 1.5 parking spaces plus .5 spaces for guest parking. Therefore, a total of 7 parking spaces are required. With the 1994 approval a 5-space pea rock parking area was installed and was considered a reduction of an existing non-conforming parking situation as only two spaces existed on-site prior to such approval. Additionally, pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(8)(a), parking lots and spaces on historic sites and within historic districts may be improved with a surface material other than pavement, where there are 12 or fewer parking spaces, subject to approval by the Historic Preservation Board. The Board approved the use of the pea rock surface for the 5-space parking area. With the current site plan modification no additional parking spaces are required as the number of bedrooms within the three units are not being increased. HPB Staff Report Pat Lynch Residence—Class II Site Plan Modification Page 5 Distance Between Residential Buildings: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.2(B) [Distance Between Residential Buildings], a 19'11" and 19'2" building separation is required between the new addition on the main house (southern building) and the guest house (northern building) and only 4'6" and 9' is proposed. Additionally, the new porch and balcony addition on the south side of the northern building is proposed to be 12'6" from the apartment unit (western building) where 16' is required. The purpose for the separation requirement is to provide for adequate distance to allow for light, air, and open space. The separation also provides for an aesthetically pleasing design relationship among buildings. The applicant has submitted a request for an internal adjustment to reduce the required building separation. Internal Adjustment Analysis: The Board must find that the adjustment does not diminish the practical application of the separation requirement and that a superior product will result via the approval. The reduction of the building separation essentially allows additional square footage on the main house (southern building) and a two story addition for the use of a 1st floor covered porch and 2nd floor balcony on the guest house (northern building). The applicant has requested to reduce the required building separation and has provided the following justification: Our professional opinion is that we are not compromising in any way the amount of"light, air, nor open space"between these minor sections of the two structures and in fact are enhancing the aesthetic relationship and dynamics of the overall property by developing a 5' wide passageway leading from the public front yard area of the site to the more private courtyard area to its west from which all three structures internally relate. This dynamic enhances the inherent "cottage" like setting that we are ultimately trying to promote. The added area of approximately 351 sq. ft. to the Historic Residence is imperative to the equation in that it converts an otherwise simple two bedroom, one bath home with a single Living area into a more usable two bedroom, two bath home with a choice now of Living and Family areas. This is an expected commodity in today's way of life for such a home that offers an Atlantic Ocean view. Furthermore, (the) enclosed addition shall occur on what is now an existing outdoor open-air concrete patio that gets almost no use as is. Reducing the building separation will not diminish the practical application of the separation requirement and will allow for additional living area while improving the quality of the units located on this property. As stated in the applicants justification the addition to the main house (southern building) will occur on an open air porch which currently has 8' high concrete walls with single hung windows on the north and east HPB Staff Report Pat Lynch Residence—Class II Site Plan Modification Page 6 sides. The area, which the building separation applies on the guest house (northern building), is for a short distance between the addition and the existing apartment unit (3'6"). The 2-story addition is for a 1st floor porch and 2nd floor balcony. Additionally, the architectural style of the additions is consistent and complimentary with the that of the existing structures. Thus, as the intent of the code is being met, it is appropriate to grant an adjustment to this requirement. Other Items: Coastal Construction Line: The proposed swimming pool and wall will be constructed east of the coastal construction line. In order to construct the pool at this location, a permit must be obtained from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). The applicant has submitted an application to DEP and no problems are anticipated. A condition of approval is that prior to issuance of a permit for the swimming pool and wall the DEP permit must be provided. Technical Items: While the revised site plan has accommodated most of the staff concerns the following items remain outstanding, and will need--to be addressed prior to building permit submittal. 1. That Nassau Street rather than Nassau Boulevard be indicated on the plans and the survey; 2. That the parking calculation table be revised to include the correct calculations; and, 3. That the location of the refuse container area and details regarding the type of enclosure be indicated on the site plan and landscape plan. . LANDCA.PE ,PLANµ ANALYSIS The proposed landscaping is primarily associated with the proposed pool and perimeter wall. Along the south side of the property two Coconut Palm trees are proposed to flank the pedestrian access to the main house. One Gumbo Limbo tree is proposed on the east side of the drive aisle and one Pigeon Plum tree is proposed near the southeast corner of the property. Within the northeast corner of the property three Coconut Palm trees with Buttonwood hedges, Dune Sunflower and Crinum Lily accent plantings are proposed. Green Island Ficus will be planted adjacent to the 4' high pool fence on the south and west sides of the pool. Along the east and south side of the property a Silver Buttonwood hedge is proposed on the right-of-way side of the proposed concrete perimeter wail. The proposed landscaping complies with the requirements of LDR Section 4.6.16. HPB Staff Report Pat Lynch Residence—Class II Site Plan Modification Page 7 `,. bES'1G;N E EME;NTS ANALYSIS As previously stated in the report the existing architectural style of the main house and the apartment unit is of the Resort Cottage style which was popular in the 1930's. The style of the guest house is of the Florida Resort style popular to the 1960's and 1970's. The main house and apartment are contributing structures from a historical perspective, while the guest house is not. The main house was one of the original houses constructed in the Nassau Park subdivision. The proposed addition on the north side of the main house is to be constructed on an existing open air porch. The porch has 8' high free standing concrete walls on the east and north sides with single hung windows. A portion of the wall is curved and contains a porthole style window. The proposed roof material is a gray asphalt shingle roof which will match the existing roofing material and hardiplank siding will be utilized on the east and west sides of the new gable roof. New multi-pane single hung aluminum windows with impact resistant glass are proposed on the east and west sides of the addition. The pink painted stucco finish will match the existing house. The Design Guidelines for Historic Places states that new additions to historic buildings should be differentiated so that the addition and the existing (structure) are clearly of two different times, yet complimentary. This unique open air porch is part of the original historic structure. Therefore, enclosure of the porch will not negatively impact the historic character of the main house or the surrounding residential uses. The proposed addition to the existing one story guest house is for a new 2nd story. The addition will accommodate additional floor area, porches and balconies. The proposed style will be complimentary to the existing style of the historic main house, while also allowing for architectural differentiation. New 1st floor porches and 2nd floor balconies are proposed on the east and south sides of the existing structure. By locating the porches and balconies on the east and south sides of the property, the surrounding residential uses will not be negatively impacted. The proposed gray asphalt roof will match that of the existing structures. The existing bay windows on the east side of the structure will be removed and three sets of white, multi-pane, aluminum French doors will be installed. The porch on the east side of the structure will have paver bricks and white painted wood columns. White hardiplank siding is proposed on all elevations of the 2"d floor addition. The 2"d floor balcony on the east elevation will feature the same French doors as those on the 1st floor and white wood balcony railing with white support columns. A dormer window is proposed on the east elevation within the roof of the 2"d floor. The south and west elevations boast the most change as the 2nd story addition features a new 1st floor porch and 2nd floor balcony similar to those proposed on the east elevation. A new pink painted, stucco finish chimney is also planned for this elevation. The windows will be multi-paned, single hung white aluminum with impact resistant glass. There are two doors proposed on this elevation which will serve as the main entrance to the structure. The applicant has indicated that the eastern most French HPB Staff Report Pat Lynch Residence—Class I I Site Plan Modification Page 8 door is to be eliminated from the proposal and replaced with a window. Staff concurs with this modification as two entrance doors are unnecessary on this elevation. Porthole windows will adorn the south, west and north elevations and are an original fenestration to the structure. Parapet: The flat roof portion of the main structure (south building) is concealed by a decorative parapet of clapboard to match the gables. A portion of the parapet on the west elevation has been cut away to serve as an access to the flat roof. There is a ladder, which is attached to the structure to allow vertical access to the flat roof. Originally a spiral staircase was proposed to serve as the access to the flat roof. However, the necessary approvals were not obtained for the installation of the spiral staircase nor the ladder. If the applicant intends to install the staircase, a drawing of the west elevation must be submitted which depicts the staircase and its relation to the existing window below the parapet cut. The staircase must be reviewed by the Board. If the staircase is not be installed, the applicant must remove the existing ladder and repair the void in the parapet with the siding to match the existing. This item has been attached as a condition of approval. Wall: A 4' concrete wall is proposed east and south sides of the property. Within the required 40' visibility triangle the wall will be stepped down to 3' in height. The wall will be similar to that of the existing except that it will be higher and setback further on the property. A Silver Buttonwood hedge will be planted on the right-of-way side of the wall. REVIEW BTY OTHERS_ The development proposal is not located in an area, which requires review by the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) or the DDA (Downtown Development Authority). Courtesy Notices: Special courtesy notices were provided to the following homeowners and civic associations: o Nassau Historic District o Beach Properties Association o Via Marina o President's Council o Progressive Residents of Delray o Jardin Del Mar Association HPB Staff Report Pat Lynch Residence—Class II Site Plan Modification Page 9 A petition of objection has been received and a copy has been attached. Additional letters of support and objection, if any, will be presented at the SPRAB meeting. ASSESSMENT AND CONCL°USION The proposed improvements to the site will not only improve the appearance of the property but will also help to resolve the existing code enforcement violation, as the duplex will be converted back to a single family residence. The additional square footage will provide an improved product while the proposed pool will allow for additional amenities to the residents. Positive findings can be made with respect to the requested variances and internal adjustment. ?...ALTERNATIVEx`AC7TfIONS A. Continue with direction. B. Approve COA-428 and the associated Class II site plan modification, landscape plan, and design elements for the Pat Lynch Residence, subject to conditions. C. Deny COA-428 and the associated Class II site plan modification, landscape plan, design elements for the Pat Lynch Residence, with the basis stated. RECOIV[M-EN:DAT1.r3N y By Separate Motions: Variances Based upon positive findings to LDR Section 4.5.1(J)(1) grant the variances to LDR Section 4.3.4(K) to reduce the required 25' front and 15' side building setbacks as described in the report. Internal Adjustment: Approve an internal adjustment to LDR Section 4.6.2(B) to allow a reduction in the distance between residential buildings from the required 19'11" to 4'6"; 19'2" to 9'; and 16' to 12'6". Site Plan: Approve the Class II site plan modification for the Pat Lynch Residence, based upon positive findings with respect to the Land Development Regulations subject to the following conditions: HPB Staff Report Pat Lynch Residence — Class II Site Plan Modification Page 10 1. Address all Site Plan Technical Items and submit three (3) copies of the revised plans; 2. That prior to issuance of a building permit for the swimming pool and wall, a copy of the permit from Department of Environmental Protection be provided; 3. That the applicant must return to the Board for approval of the spiral staircase on the west side of the structure. If the staircase is not to be installed, the applicant must remove the existing ladder on the west side of the building and repair the void in the parapet as described in the report. Landscape Plan: Approve the landscape plan for the Pat Lynch Residence, based upon positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.6.16. -icky , i ;k)\ Design Elements: Approve the elevations for the Pat Lynch Residence, based upon positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.6.18 and 4.5.1. Attachments: • Appendix A • Petition of Objection • Site Plan • Landscape Plan • Elevations a. t =CRITERIA FOR GRANTIN G VRJAN ACES 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. (b) The variance would not significantly diminish the historic character of the Historic District or Site (c) That the variance requested is the minimum necessary to effect the adaptive reuse of an existing structure or site. (3) The Board shall otherwise follow procedures and impose conditions as required of the Board of Adjustments. MEMORANDUM DATE: January 9, 2001 TO: Michelle Hoyland, Planner Planning and Zoning Department City of Delray Beach Historic Preservation Board: Tony Keller, Chair Mary Lou Jamison, Vice Chair Gail Lee McDermott, Second Vice Chair Shane Ames, Board Member Dave J. Bodker, Board Member Rhonda P. Sexton, Board Member Donnamarie M. Sloan, Board Member FROM: The Residents of Nassau Park District, surrounding neighbors, and community at large. SUBJECT: Site Development Plan for 226 S.Ocean Blvd. and Public Hearing of the Historic Preservation Board Meeting of January 17, 2001. Attached please find a copy of a "Petition in Progress" to you concerning the Site Development Plan for 226 S.Ocean Blvd.submitted to the Planning and Zoning Department and scheduled for public hearing on January 17, 2001. According to Michelle Hoyland,we the petitioners need to submit this petition no later than today. Due to this deadline, please be advised that the petition is "in progress" and at the Historic Preservation Board meeting on January 17, 2001, we will again present this petition with the most recent signature version. PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT CITY COMMISSIONERS We, the residents of Nassau Park Historic District, surrounding neighbors, and community at large object to: 1. the lack of code enforcement on the illegal fourth apartment constructed and operated at 226 S. Ocean Blvd, Delray Beach Florida, 2. expansion (site development) of 226 S. Ocean Blvd. Delray Beach, Florida due to incompatibility with the historic neighborhood and to the existing serious parking deficiency. We, the residents of Nassau Park Historic District, surrounding neighbors, and community at large request that: 1. the property owner of 226 S. Ocean Blvd. Delray Beach Florida be required to comply with the City code and that the codes continue to be enforced after the property owner brings the property into compliance, 2. any further expansion of 226 S. Ocean Blvd. Delray Beach, Florida be denied. PETITIONERS Name /� Address 1. • /�G Gcdet,1 ,/l Cr II?? /Kt z,c 3. Ji Aiply:ice.__ ,�....�.� rya i9sSA�t mcrei 5. - , , ; ., .• fO Z3 /7 a. X914.a zd,e,_ 7. '•tom-✓ E1 a i 7-/9 ,61-44.-a#,..-) PET4-04.4(4.4x. TION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH (continued) 8.A ///c)-1 CeeAL„,. `''' L 9. A + lC&eds-rc.77Z2A.42.k it 1 . lil A.;: . /0 0/ t c,.%;, /ehcC- 11. i_ �!� • _/_ /1) i41�p / / _ �� iS 12. L�.� i - ✓71 2. C r a ''� 13. WORI&I 1 ( 12.. D e Q� i- li *,, 14. 4-4-- /6„m(/a 554 ct ,r- 15. . ..-c V T4 I l 10 1 a.1 V SS a►..) S 37‘.5)...SZ,� 16. 7/4* Y At,4-sra,/ J _ 17 d // 2' A/ 455,4 u IT. 18 I // Z c,4-g-«- F2AA 6.c-c( wi 19. 'V. _ /r1Z 0ceac.tIeitR-cze,� 19' 20. • L— /O/O NR5s7v 5T. 21. ' 25 ? op_._ SC- 22. pi.„..,.....e....,) D�>23. 1 - / rea(P C (i iL93.- ket,A.R 24.,(4/' ar/rer-A;--r—) (7'.j 50,c,Th. ala K 25r 112 v. i a a3 4u,Mt002-friL-- , 26. -: ' 7,,t5" ” ' _.., , ' 27. dY i‘ ' 4 -, ii& , talk --) as' I "/ .. .. PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH(continued) 28.Z---Z--z---/-:?,4-a-p-rA-v------- ,;4.cp c 29T2-) (..--(..-Z..-__.7 ____ i1ld 7,714/11x)c----)A.. 14-Pi: 30- V11(.4.,7 ,' 4, /C--)CD' 7 3.-/ig-er---kt..„-,Cc---,7:frt .1,6f....c_ _A______ 31. '' ---) i Q-0 L- )0_6 MA- 002il 32. ,/(1.4e1 /6 i 6 33. 34. )4..4 flOo 36. 37. _.! 3 . o'....7.0 39. C 6e/ 01 3 t Ve fri ef i,L; ,6E- ,t) ,- 15 (lee/A LP ill d //lipt Z-7 41. a hot-7 'We-44 c-44-4. 42. il S T. ia /),SN-l4P0 --. 43. e.,.. (gra -- / D3 4 . -7 ,, 4. 15-441.-- f / 45. Artr g or_e...... . ,-,,--- 46. 70&0 4111111L-4. - 40-, - , k...../ 47. ,g5.6 cE, ciev,i, eavzi. —, 8 d(a . ,2.5v\S.' .L7aail g-ei.d• 3 PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH(continued) 7497.- e'c-(""-i _ O3d 5-0-71-:t-d.„ ' / 3� 51. ` ' 4 4M. 1"Q / D -S. U �„,.. /1/4-`i 52. ,, e, eik k `X_C s r 53. (..141,., L- iJ4L -L /1 S- L/ c 3 3 3 54. l ol7 60a3 griCe_k_'? 55. v. I0i &JAl, OtiOti- 3 56. (�; /�, G o 1i_l St- 57. &J -1 . ' ���� r /� ,,-(00 v ` A-,.. ,,-1„ , ,__.c .-f. 58. rf-- Z S-Z7 S 0( auti 33(. 59. ___A a.....-) gie-.‘ /D6L-g d/. .. :3 y13 60. Vajj9g,L , ci7o 0 S. o PqV 61. r : ��J� 6 / .1-d 3101 r 63.A ,64.(___ PZ-)0 S 0 33 7 e 64. 4,___.-ez_/\_ J rh l-Mc ,e/ .c o'3 65- N 14116-7 - 9 0 nr0 ,('i)c,G2.01 i cil ae_4 66. -1 ,G 67. - /4 . i/Z__.--- ) 0/5 -.5-e-c&-K-E5cS,jD) 68. ""re A \\�-,/ R(, mac,Fo Am-,,,, �. ,�c- Jc 4 PETITIO TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH(continued) 69. d)„v/ ,4 , ye ,- . / 70. 4.4 210 S. occssr► g L.�L . 71. Zoe:, S , . ,Gout �eL;JI �OZ Ic- 72. r..� % 7 0 .) S G e Ep AIP4 4/, # d 73. 20- c t /2eA-Ak ,0 s, Dcesz4,_ t?e t/ /Y L 74. 9-Gr,� zL.L, cO s &,..,...._ f /a / 75. a -GGcaI. Q2.7‘6,77: aov S: oc�,,2' nL!/o 42/ /0 `J 76. / -& S. 0 ,Li / . 424 77. Z . b6:j e)(' ��_9Zo ` (lj-``--- - -)6 ‘Z) 78. (2Del S ti--C'-i_e-OS/cps 79. " /Gvr'----- i--)7_2-71Le ;Lv 0 Cr' d3c.e r‘-•,-- , ',L 6 3 0 80:\ e0 S. dCe."FA./ A-140 039 81. i s Cc / RM ( I 6 9j 82. D D 44 (i Or) 83. if-//14-4e .P36 cif Ocezt "Z g /f/7 v, 84. a� a ,206 S Oe1- .154.` ( / r) 85. Jaz-e-jde a:, 2.0,C,p a c3D c.tI ce/cd & id) *// 2. 801A (2,/ 0 S. Cie ece./j' 1vc .:Ii ( Q 7 87. e i 01�_ ,fece6, a-d I oGe_Q-4 //�X�/� - �O s 88. N VAL aAG S. 'trim 6 id . 5 PETITION TO THE CITY OF DEL Y BEACH contin e �y O� 1 awe.- ) 11N 89. - RF l /0 /hi 7 90. -oo Place_ V J t G 3s 91. ivi' 2 3O ,.�- vc...,..c, 92. ,eAgg"` ai�0 do. DGei4isiBLYW 1L67 P44407 93.----CLA ,,.,_ i- 10 LI- /U,A5.S.4 V g 3 $ 94. 5 &DaiLeti 100c1 P sak,t 3* 33c83 Jo tCI Y1ac-4-4-4 - 4. 9 . - '3oE0\61/5-ib 97. ,, - i c ,,.. _ 98. r //! c� L5C) /c / BC le? 1-7/ a-r 99.A. ; - di 7i __ ,e/ t_ 100. Sam ci• -1 :j s . o - ea 354.1s) 101. ' • -L2 -!A, 3-zo s , 0„, � 102. Re _11 /«�� c,7O S �Z'' 103. iLP - .6 G, 3 . .3 f g'S v O� � 104. ��'-1-.. .3z 0 .f 9 ,.3 fz173 3 c, - o c K w-i 334$3 106. . X.i9 s, U e , „6` 1 3 2- 107. . ; // .--._ .2.50 s. Off_8 -d, . 3 / 108. 303 Cv (-cq 5 a-v, 4- 33 y $S 6 PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH(continued) 109. 'Lit-CL 30 3 4/.0,> --.1--. /-.lpcir / fiZ no. nil 3\---4Fi to't FL 111. ,373 ��� /-4v ----(-- i?:ner?"41.F6, 112. N 3 C 4 .< ,el 5>< DQIN U f 113. 2?2O /3rlc4A/' i A4f 114. QAi3/fi6y_,c.,-., 44 - xl 115. — 2,t5Z S. OZ-er,ar, ft). / 116. e 4 s 117. 17.- A4241 3#5101 7,Ti1/ ecici4 4 .71/YZ 118. r� it/-).o 360 . 57C�r.-Cavt 1DIVJ 119. op' ,LeraveN. geili N'z4 3d v S . D C`A•11J / '1 a 120. ow Ai-?'ei - c) c) S. cc j 44 I V . 1 . t-2 t 3 o e S C r , ".GP U- 122. Ci/ktAzi D R /-1 1-1 3 oo a C C n 6l vc1 -rcn- / 1 . �"=�� - �.. 3 c3 5 . ,.,.( . 124. e1 .,,, ;'l,!/ fi L 1 I o o S . f( ,12. . 125. `° �• 126. k, 1 a c, 'J e S. 0 G Qo it) 13 1✓p .06 • c 127. 3 3ro S` (k(2_11AAW11 D f..) 126. 3-2b S eneD_ , 111.0 7 PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH(continued) 127 2 C>.2 !Pss o.? 128. / !ilyiALet_e_4_,i___) it 11 1240.I e. (ii ... •1 130.4,eirt -, 131. 4 ' 1LQ es4w C /5114132. S 'iZ 9gt41.4.4.5"Vj 4 Y � 133. .Y .1"-e-As„7 ) kb 4 134. O- c.,e-pid-- /G7-5— �r. 5 f- 135. , 73_,j jDIJ �F'i 136. 4(�/i, ..� / , :./I1` f. 137. v' 'anirentio + '-► `a / 138. /Oii .�G/�41d. #// 140. - Jo-IS Zo-i?i,c4At A o'e. 141. Cutse4 i 2Yf�, 142. A 7-t.�Z4ZIC At 7C /r 4/CVi9/:/r I/45' 143. (it1,(;_///_.�.__. (711?-4 145. MIICAA,AgalP i` - `` 146. �.1. 1_. Li= .a ' n1�'_ V tiltAk.u. /971e._--- 147. •• iii..r N4ibirti4e.yr/ Sc. i w PETITION TO THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH(continued) 148. //a6r/f- ,Ce- � 149 150. erYI a-tC2 )/d D 151. 152. 153. 154. 155. 156. 157. 158. 159. 160. 161. 162. 163. 164. 165. 166. 167. •• . . e e . / 4 / •I /•• i• /i / . . 1 • II.,1 t I • 8ITE DATA. / / 1 rr.Nt• ....,./VO v I,e••. otagyj.4./. ...Pe Ca./....•0.6 r•14.,...2•,11.•61.1.‘,..../ 7arm 4.4.4• .••-.01.68.PT.41•16./An An•tri Ig1,•:%Ur 0.412.1..1..a. 'I leAC•Tar. V:„1,`!,„,'?'7.4:. ::,,,4;11::g: ,...,•,0441-.••••,•IS ar!..1,12•1141, ISL9t1,••1•41MNOT/F-trFtoe....e3 .X.I.el 144T,SIO•W.0:14 Vti•ZiOn=al PT.N ur,P•C.2..1.0 FMK.% SR SeAr.ill • -1'..11.. -1 4!,..-,-441-11 . Tfr.,41,..oceakri,..,...• SI le,T. / 91.3/1„p11•11. pATA,_ _.. _ _ _ i 11.1,2•••<tooLG Me>WM .=.cr="feeg:;. •:...1.aa 11.2 1..;• .2.11L611•41/.0.1..•...1,11.1.T / I i ILI TO::::=4":•71:r.""". --.41 I ..-.... - I I I a co.,.............“. -.”;:4,1;!! :...4,...-: :-.:•,,,,,,,,.,.m-,:-`1:;,--.,. -..TV:rf LI; • I ' ,...._....._ ......,..• ...7.4.7a f.a vr I I .?..!,...;,•,'-'"=tittrgi• 4..13-3;NI.r,.: \ • '- -—I-----/' ,..• :' t'...... . • 2,1..TON.• 114,. L-g7,e,:nar?.`t12' .. L-274:1::: • I \ Prc" \\/ 1./ '' '' 1 , in rrts4A-rm• T t 3 ':,` !!: ____J !..15'!1-12) •r4'4 "F'-`-'1 \ -1-41,,, ri * I 1 •el"-I I) e i MI 111.1 0* (.15)c't v• 1 La 1 I // ////, / ,4,/ / / I \ i\ • ! • f....) z z f.:44100ft .fer-u4.m.c-014f,44w-f-- t=.14 ' r--: ---rt/ ._. ... I :.. . . u., . cif-x.0m+r••• i,--L-fgE..)-04. 0. V)et w -Ts,rr-41.40-4 i wmt.1.e.cOi-n.:1.771. .------ _l_--:-__________,—— ,- I 1 \ (1-'40----"r1=11.4r-r"''''11`1'.1 :.----".-Ir-k.-er7rse...7=..Hc'u4E" i . .• 1,i j! klm.J‘s..c#2. gig -lin 1 ,...10,c,=i-I text4,1-iNi!=.kli-ii-tla c.,,r-rT...ri. 14 ! I iltli At:Ohreci,j .. Aleill•fait f.)Lry..1 Mei.- C..)5'.' i2 " ' NL-14 12 Hi e9 r-4- i, 0 1 I ' II t,.1.1Git'111,45 FkM-05411.14 LA 11 -\- •\/ . li —.--- . .\.. ..---,.... . • - .c-1- ---- I .44‘h I•95t.1- 1.1-4•••t : 1 0 .Q"' • ! I'1 o!, I I ...• i- ! . r 71. • el ,,, ii.I.,r if! ---fil -111 l'i 0 I 194.11=r--- 1 Li Z 4 rr:IA-. IC4..- i 1 41111 , i il :. ki• / -.. . ,,.,4 A I 111 I!: ,...-. _____ _ 1 ,!i--- •-/<1.../111.1•=.P...,fri•Kes ----r----..-- 181-117 - - - -,..-- •-$1,,sij... . ,..tiu .1. i--! -,f, 1, -e- . uu., Ili 1 ,-.- d --'t 1.):: 1 i. ----__J- L=.-.. II./. / I/ i fif , 0 1 I II Vi -ill III I 1;1 ' - "• -ii ,,,..4,17,• I if i \1 1 / ... 1•• /I i 1 i :-:...- I •••,41,..TC:,.. e,:sr_..f.t-re. --i_ii--*-----i•--- 1------------,'L I ,T,',,7•;',;774T4IXT,7,-;,', ,.: -0-- ti.)14__________, ' / I • 1 ' ,r,:14,11,i(.4•:?:,?,;;:t•v:afiKe.::::'V:1:„-i.,Pij,:t sfy:i.''.1 _,,, _____.f.e.._..... .. ... z.,_. .,....E,,,___I.,_;_•._•__:‘,. ........r4sti.-.-._........ __.; I frof,-,,,,,mc. 4....L.4= t444.41'Ar . .. NSW Spe.I.S.-- -tli Ph-0,01i- *SO, -.1.2mv/s--11. .) t71.rim.i.Jeenm .'..1 •,-,1-1r--e-r,44.-.... / C.e•A 1446.ejerAL/HilA., >-- (44-1r14,84.---r‘...f4T-11,„,..,) LIA:::::.:'CI:or.:;DI:,.0 1: :• . A 1 CONCIMIL SITE PLAN Ce con 44.....el,c-s.AC.NO .!717.:•!.....7:-...'.'".Tr..' i I , 1 I 1 I. 1g tq- • 1rt III 'uq t.6 ottIr^gic1 Q1FA 1 ;1,�tA i4aggikan�'F1 Ik01111 0Lllla r� F�a r ur_ 1 7J cTtF.{Ufz. P_1F i a• Ili �"' . ^� 9 F kOAVS, ,41 - ..-11".• it ,1. A. GRANT 444 r I .- ,fir ID I TNORN©ROUGH ' :-a aubr .{.M[>+ r— - }rC 7l i F�'(T`t!0„(ij� AND ASSOCIATES , ('. ,-44 _ r� to-uJln 11:-`,IJ_ .. ,.,..n.t....., c 4 1 if' .. i9r'2 : reLL rL'1J[E T-u P{.t-M I,) MI r. "r..,...,re., -- I, st .�-- r .r a f-rt. 51.o..11 ry 1..[,u.rc Pna.TIM t inl Gfnl 4�^y y1�1 '. ... 1_ 11 it M {I�fl tilllF i M�`rr.l,.`r .....er w P.O WO n.wrAs f � 1 r.r., nr ayV+.r,.- e. I w.•.f,.�w,t 11N,�..wt..`R L... M1 l x I -• __. • .. t• r` , I�;,, I II _.ti �a v • Nores l>..,rn.uho � • � III I I I.113,G1 lr! Ti ,a —sa�q - — rr:3 r}r4 ; -�� ----- -- --- --- -- -.�e--...-JJJ- f \ .��' ur b'a.T1lrr.lbn.ntb. 1E 1�. kdbbMPy.wtbr•.v..u.be.....g.,y a nsinnw IF NI, li u•r.rr u ° ExILTI.r[. FElLutlr l•% 1c-'A V Ptwml.t s.bw�,,,..en t.•...y..a..,.,,t..y.t..Mr ..g sa..dww.t. y r� r� l yi -- 1-� t tocvNuT " ( fI•�'i bs„+«e...AS •ram�r .n.,..., la —..rr"''C"�tF�pisu •mot ........I...y(li_. .1c.v..1. L-� I -� Bepvclrrct,rrc•�.,mad.M NO Id Nb,.,.w.r.w+a.n P (-1 CS I ...sr _ j PI.4Irte'�'Mr W Pf..PatY:.4lf: dh�..MW..M1.p Mr NAM IM ado.. &xi turn ' r`n ON.to..xv.tiaq yylta... •Mv (-�, I /` r `.,I w Gore.:..C'""44 Id Ss niNN of ��.7rp..n.a hrr•'+ w --- j_ ._ kf. r ba.un,g•t�i`.. wvm.tH h LcSaNt ' —. — t / vA L. l7/ __..—'".�' rtm wry Y 'Iruvten .C.o...wua .e. ..1.1.W.W.hLd tevr Nl{.a Pdw.. V• I—--1L I t2 L Soo a IN stssed s .44.o os wdd.tsas"uu�. w . �__.—.—_._ —_ ..� I- ✓ _ : I ron t .yC,.�a'bnr,tYt.f.M.N...trot,* arttlow---IT i ` I • M q 11. .d t.r. wrctw.rf PM 41 w' 1ryW Yu rw..9 lV= ,gIr-.l L[.vt r- .... l=xlS IIJ[- _ .—.. __._. m�N,w�1 r1 .a�t �, T r---. 1 �1 �; �v �� ,., ,. wMY.1VW..1.a0•4tYWIn . r.�;..,..n.�I�, . � •—S'�h— ._-.-. __ - �� I�i t.sf ud.r.l.q.rr.I..bn..a.•� ir. .__, --' Si� nom rnam¢u tw.I.t 1. t r+n n SNes y • i- .. r Gu:1WTYdWt7 Ec151 Ia IG [7,...', —1 {) r-..'Or co,trtnpkv- q r.'.«b F.irr"<.1"'r ...tei:rw 1:1g' 4'°� /�- 1 ' �\M7N fV-11(J11 (b) ."'"'Mus•irrwugrig.e.b.,e.rna.ta.d n�r.w�pwp..�wwu —' rrr uy,: i 11 Pc<C.I73 erCr LIOewnui 1. .roogy�woe.'me�.:N«`.r..0 M 1"w... [ A 11- - ej �s.r.1 ._ -J.:. 4_ [ C f L L �yg�wt r°�:' ±�.wau ww eww.a•wu....•YYNrbe,rd uq'iIf r r di l� r' .. .d.. rmrw�r:r�ab �.° .. <i` ) ;,_____ \..,`,..,,,,:\ x\ \,,,,‘,..„ \-\\., L ;‘.. ,...1 ill eww..) w.u[...plot I[�1.�r.w'aN e'n...uarr.r..v.yn J toI IK I...vMbtet lM'O ....b MI b flu e nM Pd �'Ir11 �4'llr no,mite V rr '1, w�.rrzr .pl.P.b..�v.c.Mi.o+.+..r to lr..,w re.Port ��{I / t(� a.g rnr..ba ..er..G.w.fi...1e l..M ..d.u.Per•NN jl (r :iAr{"Fl�KL.pi, C'ICJ a l•.tnihwr \` 1 k<< y r� ,\ • <• _8, . ,./.,,,,c„.r.,„ , ,.... •S �I �) / ' 7 fY.l lt. S / ' C✓r •1 f If,1.7 l D 1 / / ' s, • I•; • s NLjI._,-3i- .—% 1 �� C .1 i-¢.'ffr.�a';,.a' Pwacr LN IVS<A 1114 .. / Ex�j 1 f. •Gcn Oiler a ��rra� �`8 ur°•_ (r<•�) L�1dGH eC h�Fl [ . • • 7 • • ��[n,.-,Hr. /l rmr a r P _r 77 r d n<>1 Cr �` r r' c.as.v,[t,- nrJn:._J,,,:rt .i Io.:L JH --'♦ma's,T! df•FP nill/Nt, NEV. rter L-I P • + I .t I 4 r, o I 7 , .i , 9III , .. 1N -ilrn RPF I ttiw µpy Y6YC�+fi, yyis•,ttYT)+!, 4(14r. 44. ;. 4 ot f , i. t+7 p 'i ii ' �,t t l ',tin.,JL Arty'4- 1. 4 ,II" ti Ir 1?Ifi r Ik 'ffi�j�p 9 qir S i Nifl , �I war..t f �; . - 6 h.1... i_i FYM �I Li. :_. ; t� h r a , j, .1 -.1 t r 1 I, Ill rtr i f.5 ,�' !' \ f SI I r ' I 3 1 r I N I ° I , r I r+ 1 • 1 „ 11 +V I )Irt I'ti lilk +,'' ,:, •I r ", GHII'I +cdP t--t I �,;, I ,, ii,s ' , A 1 M1j�ly If I ,; '� ' '.i: 'rH I 1 1�l'y�^ FIli. r:nl:F . ,j'';1t#t st1(;.Aa G ' •i I -!- ll. 9 V-- w 2 . ilAri4V��yt U O • Y) 0F44.0irr.�h44 uIMNa.-to _ f/I w I uti rr` Ivrwc• _ t�rntr-sr.esso w copr�PJMs+ `` z • f1s:iJ eSc tiles • _I- r_�" �.-.-1I —l�bcoca.N-w ci. Z a r D I �\ 5,,. _, — ` !e+-UMINlk1)esomt Pri PfeN�H cca�.�• J a . Li } _ —ii—jC_1� Y—i 1F A N — — —T_�IN, _ _ ___ 1 l Ak j ill • iii i i ii■i IIII - _ • a� z Ili 1 I_ its i I •,. -lam Y ni ■■ � — • II ■■ IF)L . - ■■ ■� L��' ■� /� F _ _ _ AIN ' `e'er` r-',,.� t��:11�r / IA =II ^II j 1 N5iJ Mr; y li 4 x++'iM ... t•9;"kw> rltrrl : �, 41. uu; s �_. FRII yfl oa 9•ce a P�8 e • • • . MI fl r+J0 41Nm.L4 fiUNa. U r I O _ 4J�d f4arc_ 4'Ir.F1F•dNH-re)) 11-794,= DcIsVNad.�xlNa.4r e•Nv.1q.l.I e-f►J-flroct��-iu / A` ' l $Pit WN • / 14ei I lc fichl fi f Fsi=hl �`�1 RJc. / 1 a I• 99034.00 ,. . ,:N Ira Na i1.0.DWG • Al CON=—AL ENTRY ELEVATION A2.O'A 1/4- p_D• . I J I ., I I , . ti I cOV(MOYrIn;.,c..t909 ..............._ ..., of T. T I. 1 I 'J • .1 I . I O I ( • H I •I , III I 1' 1'l 1.1 la r y dtl.` 1'1'1 n, r k 4i I v,t�j�lf{v i• t'`�d1•��,. 11'! 1�de+�� �yy,•� I 11 d' 1 I A E' iJ�t� }.l.vl �+ ,��? dF� dI11�j f'r'ctlk},/ T'"t.j+t .t + • <' 3 r} iF 1�,�1 i:� >•,. tir tl l �. �ri,�h,i3 St'Y+ q21 .lr ..1 • I. r�4r (.?•;4t�M1 1'.ij"',�a(!iii�uyM y2Ldti�c z. f 4IS.t'•• 9J'3i„ i' x,-1•,,,k,, p 1''eRr,i 2::: �rt 4 ,.tl i{ii C ." 10 .• r I1 M2,]��yy}} {V, r 1,,,! I f it (}Lyre 1 .i ,^ Idlf _I} c Te 2.s''2i,.�44. YC, I • I w!� Y4 f, r a 1 f f � r! rxr'zau'dtiptill..'b`.�• T .. 'lr Tiaxn.�.tt^ ..,�.i.*x�"''" I,• .-?'n'• •! ! 1 i;r r{ ,., t 1Vj 9.. i •,:.,,,. I ',..-:1-,� 1 !• r I ''f��',a�{}t 1'I �,t,t ' L-"-� t3�,.trI 'I {l�I�+�j' stsarl _ � !. tr•,r+ pc� 4"Ygt{ r$^,-,- !t 4r: .#: 1 �tl Nter Il, , .,..+' .sm: .aa �� •.• r� WtVSItxto t7gr!�7tti� �� 1 t. 1. 7----- t •7"......>"..7-. IZ r` 1 " � t w a .1 r taI i tc:AirN�r dw • w?{ 0 ; 1 I� I `F`\{--col tt. corvty F'tf�+an b• Z ' a jJ = - _ _Fit: i i*---"=-- - S 1�t boo tcwMN caP1tt+- J p / ("1 = Ili.. �r:. G' S cPcN AR-h+d�o11r w z r. —all i i u I i rtir. t�•.ly�Nr Wks o ! fr rtc.1-•-tr. �v i — _ t '�1 I.i Wow t�s t coI t�{yyut lr> a u • — • ` I __ ut.rA .1400.65,. ••.� gig I ,1 t5ox�{o NIcH[' y,i�c FmP tx i�F`WI>J�W��uy kk — .._. mu.,PAIJM aMw�-HIJt�.d t11• t I — - ...... ...... 'en+6tnrri4N•—! WINoo— 10 1'S H CKI+jIN� I1C� U ' 4 _ .. Oilt-« rn w.}a cos•tss N AN,' ►W,s e t'v raf•os{•le' � Rct-awl- 4 l ! ' t. ....ss.......' • FINIel-{ s4• 4'• _.. s e m s�e!iiiir.mmms:mail i iismeee:ineti_:e:.9s_iliii..__.... rI gG` I , • IRK• 99041.00rl CW Ma. n. A2.O.DWG Al CONCEPTUAL SOUTH ELEVATION A3.0 ` ,�,•e p_p• - tp_cat.AeNmrn.••cceoeo 7 I — _ • • I / I I I 4 I .. r II r 7 I N I 9 1 III I II 1 19 I 1.5 I 14 1 1 i 4, qqy ■4 1 • W e1 J w :;; 1."' � "----r— p— �� � F fl u` N}y , ,� as al��1�/1• �� a-,U • n crzyJ bt +ssl rr 2 0,1 I ilk f �" z L"1. ...I 1�Y-yrLL:ca F9JIaF{ ,r,i,rl _'_L.E__Ct .... ._ %�`� I/t• t •. 11ti ryslrty 91tYco 1;e-4er I ._ h y` 1 i,e, 1 rtiNte rl era x t mr?11i7Pi1. n,' U F Ri I. I +:kl'r:' L•t•,.1.4}:I,, ...;•� r '•:.. ." ";. '.,...,.. 3i:::igIllitlilt:.,.. O < yy I U ell u , w I r a..n 9904K 9904 l.0 .. 1.GG I 3 t3 Ore trot. A1.0.0MG 0.1. on.try rlw Al CONCH L WEST ELEVATION ' 1 I 7 1 I 1 r I r I ® W.[wao.mf,NC^IOW —I [ ti :. E. S c I' I (; . . 1 A I 1 11 I / 1 A 1 ,1 1 II) I II 1 19 1 1:3 . I.._. 14 I • f. 1 f • 1. i'4 i. • • - w F w -- ter• ran _If Z a ... leg J U • �J iiii rL IIf S^� s -1Titi.1[- �kijW{. _ r teP/G` ,rt.i FNKh'1 /[C?'i 60. 1 ♦'?'46 4 4'p- '95.4.b f}y 'PI ;.E•? Enid FMIuI er�oc Y I- 2 I' , ,. I(( . . Ae.. 1 •K 99041.00 uE)MA.MA.&0.0 owc Mr r..),y w Al CONCEPTUAL NORTH ELEVATION ` A3.B 1 .1 1 I _ 1 A FROM NR PHONE NO. : 561 266 7369 Jan. 17 2001 02:04PM P1 BEACH PROPERTY OWNERS' ASSOCIATION, INC. P.O. BOX 375 DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33447 Date: January 15, 2001 • To: Delray Beach Historic Preservation Board Re: Patrick Lynch property, 226 South Ocean Boulevard The Beach Property Owners Association is proud that the Nassau Street Historic District was created in our midst. Residents of this District recognize,as we do,that Nassau Street is part of the historic, esthetic, and architectural heritage of Delray Beach and needs to be preserved and • protected. We also believe that the virtues of the District are enlarged because of its proximity to the beach,since the beach is such a strong magnet to residents,tourists, and visitors of all types to the City. The B.P.O.A. is also a strong supporter of the Historic Preservation Board and its successes over the years in preserving and enhancing the historical assets of Delray Beach_ One can appreciate you and your predecessors' efforts daily by experiencing the pleasure and artistic wonder that comes from spending time with the wide variety of historic properties and districts in town. We do oppose,however, and strongly,the changes Mr. Lynch would like to make at his property in the Nassau Street Historic District. We hope that this letter will help the Board focus its attention on various points that we do not believe were discussed adequately or logically in the Planning&Zoning staff report submitted to you. The staff report appears to us to have serious shortcomings in the way that conclusive statements are made without ample justification. INTERNAL ADJUSTMENT The applicant has requested a reduction in the required building separation specified in Sec 4.6.2, a portion of the LDRs intended "_..to allow for light,air, and open space." At the bottom of page 5,the staff report states that"Reducing the building separation will_...allow for additional living area while improving the quality of the units located on this property." Since the property is not currently in need of repair or fixing; we conclude that this reference to "improving the quality" of the units has to do with the financial value of the property. This approach does not belong in staff analysis in order to justify the internal adjustment. At the top of page 6, staff leaps to this conclusion: "Thus,as the intent of the code is being met, it is appropriate to grant an adjustment to this requirement" Once again,in the absence of specific justification for making this conclusive judgment,we believe that staffs analysis is faulty. r.. t. '". _- • A CORPORATION NOT FOR PROFIT FROM : NR PHONE NO. : 561 266 7369 Jan. 17 2001 02:04PM P2 Further, in "Assessment and Conclusion" on page 9,staff notes that the "additional square footage will provide an improved product..." and therefore "Positive findings can be made with respect to the requested variances and internal adjustment" Again, without providing specific argument for reaching this conclusion,how does staff come up with this conclusion? VARIANCE Sec 2.4.7 (A)states that a variance is "...a relaxation of the terms of these LDRs where such variance will not be contrary to the public interest..."and where enforcement "...would result in unnecessary and undue hardship." Sec 2.4.7(A)(5)(a)further notes that "The matter of economic hardship shall not constitute a basis for the granting of a variance." Unnecessary and Undue Hardship This is not identified specifically to any degree in the staff report The only mention made in the staff report is the following weak statement on page 4, at the end of the Variance Analysis section: "The requested variances meet the required basis provided in Section 4.5 (J),regarding the preservation of historic character and the adaptive reuse of the property." Where is the detailed justification for making this conclusion? Moreover,since Mr.Lynch currently has a viable use of his property(a functioning, profitable rental property), and since he was aware at the time he purchased the property of the existence of the Historic Preservation District and its development limitations,we find it hard to understand any suggestion that he is suffering any hardship related to his ownership of the property. Contrary to the Public Interest To begin with the specific,the Nassau Street Historic District does not support this application, as evidenced by the petition in your possession that has been signed by a significant majority of the residents of the District Secondly, credible and objective testimony that will be presented at the Historic Preservation Board meeting January 17 will suggest that the proposed changes to this property are not compatible with the historic sensitivities of the property or the District. From a broader public interest perspective, consider that the property lies on the end of Nassau Street adjacent to Delray Beach's prime asset-the beach-and as such, is the gateway to the Nassau Historic District as well as the transition point for visual and pedestrian movement from the beach into this residential.community. The east elevation of the property presents the look of a dreary, crowded, compound-like area which is totally inconsistent with what is there now. We are puy7led by this look, in particular since the goal of the project, as stated by its architect in his December 15 letter to Planning&Zoning planner Michelle Hoyland,is the"cottage like setting that we are ultimately trying to promote." Cottage like ?--- not quite. And more broadly,to reference the Historic Preservation Board's mission of protecting and enhancing historic assets,what is it about this project that protects and enhances? The only FROM NR PHONE NO. : 561 266 7369 Jan. 17 2001 02:05PM P3 references appearing in the staff report that purport to protecting and enhancing are loaded with financial overtones: "provide an improved product"(page 9); "improve the quality of the units" (page 5); and quoting a portion of the architect's December 15 letter that likens the property to an "expected commodity in today's way of life..." The above convinces us that nothing is being protected and enhanced by this project except Mr. Lynch's financial interests. In sum,the above argues to us that the proposal is definitely not in the public interest,but solely in the financial interest of Mr. Lynch. "Improved product" and"commodity in today's way of life" should not be concepts germane to considering the merits of preserving and enhancing the historic assets of Delray Beach. MR.LYNCH The LDRs state that a variance is "...a relaxation of the terms of these LDRs..." We believe that granting a "relaxation" is the same as granting him relief from certain obligations; doing him a favor,so to speak. Conceptually this may be advisable if one receives something positive in return. We find nothing in the staff report describing any benefits to the Historic District or to the City if this project proceeds as proposed. Members of the Historic District see no benefits; Mr.Lynch's neighbors see no benefits. The only benefits that we see arising from this proposal are financial gains that would accrue to Mr. Lynch. And so this begs the question of why does the staff report recommend doing a favor for Mr. Lynch? Please consider the following: Soon after purchasing the property in 1994,Mr.Lynch performed extensive renovations without obtaining appropriate building permits or Certificate of Appropriateness approval. This work included replacing the original double hung wood windows with vinyl clad aluminum. The work also created a parking deficit that your 1994 predecessor Historic Preservation Board acquiesced to after the fact by recognizing it as a non-conforming use(see staff report,page 2). We are astounded by the possibility that this type behavior might be rewarded with an opportunity for further selfish financial gain at the expense of a proud and wonderful Historic District Moreover,we fear that a positive ruling by the Historic Preservation Board on this proposal will provide further evidence for those in town who argue that the trend of late has been for a reduced vigilance when it comes to preserving,protecting, and enhancing the historic assets of Delray Beach. Sincerely Kevin Warner,Member Board of Trustees am 4H-1=STORte., PRES E-RVATI O N BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ---STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE: January 17, 2001 AGENDA ITEM: lll.C. ITEM: Consideration of COA-430 and Variance-72 Which Incorporates a Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Architectural Elevations, and Variances Associated with Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage, Located on the West Side of S.E. 1st Avenue, Approximately 250 Feet South of East Atlantic Avenue. f i 1---- 1 i 1 -1---- I---- .WI N.w 7ND S?. N.-. 2NC St_ a I E II i ► o I " -I r.1 GENERAL DATA: "1 �� ,.,,II "i I z r , N.w. 1S7 Si.D N.E 15I SI Owner/Applicant Block 77 Development Group, L.C. Zi 1 r Agent Michael Weiner, Esquire 3 I 1� -jI I i;� ME West side of S.E. 1st Avenue, `I �I< I I 1F I I Location I I I`.— j! approximately 250 feet south of I o'c I I i.. East Atlantic Avenue 11 SCrroo_ 1 , ; 1 1 q- 1 I 1 Property Size 0.45 Acre - I i I , SQUARE 1 ' 1 i I 1 i Other Mixed Use ATLANTIC AVENUE Future Land Use Map i I ,� � I 1 1 i, Current Zoning OSSHAD (Old School Square ,� 1 II I , , '1 I 1 i Historic Arts District) 7 I TT Hli---1, ' ,---i I • Adjacent Zonin North: OSSHAD I I I 1 9 �iEast: OSSHAD i I RO �` - South: OSSHAD I Illi J - MI West: CBD (Central Business District) s.w.157 57. 5.E. 1ST S7. Single familyresidence and vacant F I R-72 J I • Existino Lann Use 9 � 1 eI parcels :r— II i�i inn f I I ill i I Proposed Land Use Construction of a 207-space H r, parking garage with associated 1 I_ 1 landscaping.Water �I II �+ 1 1 Service n/a. I I `J Ni I i I , 1 - Sewer Service nia. :.1i I 'r__I'—�I ' 1 i I ; �' I i . l , r— 1 ' I I , Ii--- j 11-1, t_ i + I w r-, !NL 11 it E��I ' I --, I I ._i I 1 v.. 3F.c - 34J 1'� t k - ' y�� �� �1I 1S v r1H I l 1 1 I i I I I � � i I it1 I I I I i I I'' ; IFt 1 1 1 1 1 ! LJ I i i 1 , iii.C. ::• -. _ t,•;R i �.t�, r .P 1 t• �1-r �� � r;. �r� sue, xr� The action before the Board is approval of COA-430, which incorporates the following aspe of the development proposal for Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(F): ❑ Site Plan; ❑ Landscape Plan; and ❑ Architectural Elevations. ❑ Demolition of two contributing structures; and, ❑ Variance to the following requirement: LDR Section 4.3.4(K) —A request to reduce the front yard setback from 10' to a minimum of 1'; and the rear yard setback from 10' to a minimum of 5'-6". • Waiver to the following requirement: LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(2) —A request to reduce the required open space requirement from 10% to 8.3%. The subject property is located on the west side of SE 1st Avenue, approximately 225' north of SE 1st Street. The .41 acre site consists of Lots 20, 21 and 22, a Subdivision of Block 69, al— is located within the Old School Square Historic Arts District, which is subject to the regulations as outlined in the CBD (Central Business District) zone district. Lot 20 contains a one story single family dwelling and accessory structure and Lots 21 and 22 are vacant. The structures are to be demolished as part of this development proposal. At its meeting of August 30, 1999, the City Commission and CRA held a joint work session with respect to the contracts for the development proposal known as Worthing Place. During the meeting there were numerous concerns raised with regard to the improvements to Worthing Park, the project density, and the time frame for construction. There were also discussions regarding the developers proposal to potentially increase the number of units up to 236 due to the construction costs with the subgrade public parking. Subsequent to the work session, various changes were made to the plan which included construction of a parking garage (this proposal) to replace parking spaces for the GRIP Building, public surface parking spaces, and the elimination of most of the sub-grade parking that was associated with Worthing Place. All of the units that were to be located on this property were transferred to Block 77 east side of SE 1st Avenue. The public parking and the GRIP parking spaces that are to be eliminated with the Worthing Place development are to be replaced .by a 202-space parking garage on Block 69 (subject property). The garage will be constructed by the Block 77 Group and deeded over to the City. The draft agreements were modified accordingly, and included a clause that construction the Block 77 development could not occur until a Certificate of Occupancy is issued for the parking garage on Block 69 and the garage is deeded to the City. The 202 space parking garage will provide 95 parking spaces for the GRIP building, which are 45 spaces more than HPB Staff Report Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage—Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations and COA-430 Page 2 are currently in the GRIP parking lot. The garage will also contain 107 public parking spaces that will be available 24 hours a day. In addition, 40 of the GRIP spaces will be available for public use from 6:01 p.m. through 7:59 a.m. Monday through Friday and 12:01 p.m. Saturdays through 7:59 a.m. on Mondays. It is noted with the current proposal that 207 parking spaces are proposed to be consistent with the final contract agreement. In October 1999, conditional use applications were submitted to allow the residential units to exceed 30 units per acre (219 units) and to allow a building height up to 60'. In conjunction with the conditional use applications, a text amendment to the OSSHAD (Old School Square Historic Arts District) zoning district regulations-was processed to include Lots 19-24, Block 69, Town of Linton, as properties that could be developed per the CBD zoning district regulations. The purpose of the LDR amendment was to accommodate the GRIP/public parking structure. On November 2, 1999, the City Commission approved the sales contract and associated agreements to allow the proposal to go through the development review process. At a pre-application meeting on February 2, 2000, the Historic Preservation Board reviewed the development proposal. They noted concerns with the "fortress-like" appearance of the structure, and indicated that they would support variances to the front and rear property lines if the facades could be varied and offset to provide a better overall design of the building. On May 24, 2000, the Site Plan Review and Appearance Board approved the residential structure on Block 77 and its associated parking garage. The municipal parking garage to be located on Block 69 within the OSSHAD zone district is the action now before the Board. The development proposal incorporates the following: ❑ Demolition of the contributing 1949 dwelling and accessory structure; ❑ Construction of a five level parking garage containing 207 parking spaces; ❑ Reconstruction of a 5' wide sidewalk within SE 1st Avenue right-of-way along with the installation of decorative street lights; ❑ Installation of a bike rack within the garage; and ❑ Installation of associated landscaping around the perimeter of the site. 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: As stated in the background section of this report, the subject property is zoned OSSHAD zoning district, however is located in a geographical. area that:canbedeveloped under thei i HPB Staff Report Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage—Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations and COA-430 Page 3 IIII CBD zoning. The following table indicates that the proposal complies with LDR Secticfll 4.3.4(K) as it pertains to the CBD zoning district: „i tCW< 7Y S� -�� N >e r ° . Y7 . ,si,, andard { Proposed' I Na3:r_ur" Bilaiiiiigti ` 48' 38' 1 MiiiiirldThMth din` Setbacks See Variance Analysis Below I ro I �`"„- ` 10' 1' r . *ati x' ,$ ;.A_.' 10' 6-611 ;Side error �`t33a 0 ; 0' 0' e a° * " Y. r xtllimmum .,pen acery .` ` See Waiver Analysis Below I 10% 8 3% Variance Analysis: Building Setbacks: While the parking garage structure complies with the side interior setback of 0', the front and rear setbacks of 10' has not been maintained and a variance from LDR Section 4.3.4(K) has been requested. The variance request includes a reduction in the front yard setback from 10' to 1' and 10' to 5'-6" for the rear yard setback. 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, 1.). $. 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); ( That literal-.interpretation of the..regulations would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed byother properties subject to the same Zoning; (C) That the special conditions and circumstances have not resulted from actions of 4 k the applicant;'= S (D) That granting the variance will not confer onto 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. The applicant has provided a justification statement as follows: HPB Staff Report Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage—Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations and COA-430 Page 4 "Special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to this land and are not generally applicable to other lands'subject to the same zoning. This land is subject to a final-order of the City_.Commission of the City of Delray Beach approved January 6, 2000;,which:among other things states that the public parking and parking for the GRIP Building-that currently exists on Block 77 shall be replaced in the proposed Block 69 parking garage pursuant to the terms and conditions of the CRA/Block 77 Development group-Contract:. No other property in the Old School Square Historic Arts District is subject to such a final order, which makes the property unique. The literal--interpretation of the regulations would deprive the applicant of what is commonly enjoyed by other properties subject to the same zoning. The CRA/Block 77 Development Group Contract which is referenced in the Final Order calls for the completion of 207 parking spaces, the majority. of which are to be dedicated to the public as part of a municipal parking garage. The zoning for this particular property allows for the building of such garage in such size and capacity. To be able to build in accordance with appropriate zoning standards is a right commonly enjoyed by other property owners. The literal interpretation of the setback regulations would deprive this owner of being able to build in that manner. This is a right commonly recognized by the Historic Preservation Board. For example, other setback variances have been given in order to allow a building envelope, which would have otherwise been allowed under the zoning standards but would have resulted in less than aesthetically pleasing structures. The special conditions and circumstances that make this particular variance necessary have not resulted from the actions of the applicant. The conditions of the Final Order passed by the City were debated at a great number of public hearings and imposed by • the City's Order. Obviously, the applicant would prefer to build a smaller garage or no • garage at all but is now subject to this Final Order. The granting of this variance will not confer onto the applicant any special privileges that are denied to others in the same zoning. As stated before, setback variances have been granted to others in similar • zoning districts. A relief from setback is not a,privilege, which is out of the ordinary. Anyone in similar circumstances would be viewed in a similar way. The applicant and petition has set forth a number of different reasons for granting the variance. To summarize first at a Historical Board meeting of February 2, 2000, in a workshop, certain suggestions on elevations and architecture were made to the applicant by both the board and the Planning and Zoning Department. Based upon their expertise, they made requests for vertically variegated surfaces, architectural relief to the sides of the building and interesting and varied design features. These comments were made based upon a belief that this would be the most appropriate way for a building of this nature to fit into the OSSHAD. This is the most important reason for granting the variance. In addition, the variance allows the use of the structure to be disguised. It enhances the interaction of pedestrians with the structure. It is in a more compatible design with the urban design principles for a downtown habitat. The property sits in a transitional area between a great number of structures without any setbacks whatsoever, and therefore is an appropriate compromise given its location. The granting of the variance will be in harmony with the general purpose and intent of the existing regulations. The granting of the variance will not be injurious to the HPB Staff Report Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage—Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations and COA-430 Page 5 neighborhood or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. To the contrary, for all of the reasons stated above, this will actually enhance the neighborhood in that it will be improving the interface between the pedestrian and the use of the building, providing for off-street parking, effectively screened for view and will generally promote additional renovations and harmonious construction within the area. Pursuant to Section 4.5.1(J), in acting on 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 preserves 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. The applicant has provided a justification statement indicating they met these standards for the following reasons: (a) The variances are not contrary to the public interest, safety, or welfare. The parking garage has been considered a necessity for the downtown area for a number of years. In testimony given before various Boards and the City Commission, which approved this particular use, there was an agreement that a parking garage was in the public interest. Safety would be promoted by relieving the streets of parking congestion and the general welfare would be promoted in that additional parking would be available to the downtown businesses. The variances requested only relate to the façade of the building and to the use of street nodes for traffic calming. Neither of these issues in any way impedes the public interest, safety, or welfare. To the contrary, traffic-calming techniques enhance safety. (b) There are certain special conditions and circumstances, which relate to the historical setting of this particular building which are not applicable to other lands, which make these variance requests a necessity. The applicant and the City have gone to great lengths to disguise the ultimate use of the structure as a parking garage so that it will fit with the nature of the historic district. Flat walls would only create a box-like feeling for the structure. By granting a variance with respect to setbacks and therefore allowing a stepped-back façade, there can be much more creativity with respect to the elevations, further disguising the structure. With respect to the traffic calming nodes, a wide street HPB Staff Report Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage—Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations and COA-430 Page 6 and straight sidewalk would inhibit a pedestrian feel for this particular structure. By requesting a reduction in pervious area allowing for pedestrian oriented enhancements, you would be giving the structure the appropriate relation it needs to the streetscape. (c) A literal interpretation of the provisions of the existing ordinances, not granting the variances, would result in the alteration of the historic character of the historic district. Without these variances, you would be left with a box-like structure, strait and narrow sidewalks, and a wider street. All of this runs contrary to the downtown look and feel, which includes varied facades, pedestrian friendly environments, and slow and deliberate traffic patterns for vehicles. (d) The variances requested are the minimum necessary to preserve the historic character. The variances do not in any way materially increase the size of the building. The variances requested are for the purposes of fitting a use into the environment in such a manner that it is almost undetectable and has no impact except for its intended benefits of removing parked cars from the street, allowing visitors to arrive, put their automobiles in a central location, and become part of the pedestrian orientation of the downtown. Open Space Waiver Analysis: As stated previously, the subject property is zoned OSSHAD (Old School Square Historic Arts District), and is located within a geographical area that is subject to the CBD (Central Business District) zone district development standards. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(2), within the CBD zone district the minimum open space requirement is 10% and only 8.3% open space has been provided. The applicant has requested a waiver from this requirement, which can only be granted by the City Commission. However, it is appropriate with the approval of the site plan that the Historic Preservation Board makes a recommendation on the request, which will be forwarded to the City Commission. 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. The applicant has provided a justification statement, which indicates that: "It has long been considered an important goal to provide additional parking to the downtown area. In doing so, every effort is being made to build the parking structure in a manner, which allows it to be compatible with the surrounding downtown commercial area. Certain building features have been added to the elevations, including but limited to a variegated façade and certain.other architectural features. In doing so, it has been necessary to decrease the arriount of open space.. Therefore, increasing the HPB Staff Report Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage—Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations and COA-430 Page 7 compatibility of the structure with the surrounding area is the justification for granting this waiver". The request involves an open space requirement, and does not affect the provision of public facilities. The waiver would be granted in other similar situations where the City would require the installation of façade features. Therefore the granting of the waiver will not result in the grant of a special privilege. It is further noted that reductions in open space are allowed in other zoning districts such as the AC (Automotive Commercial) and PCC (Planned Commerce Center). While effecting the neighboring area, the reduction in open space results in a façade that is more compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. It is also noted that the same amount of landscaping can be provided in the reduced setback to buffer the building as would have been provided in the 10' as the balance of the area would most likely have been sodded. Based on the above, staff supports the waiver request. OTHER ISSUES: LDR Section 6.1.3 (Sidewalks): Pursuant to LDR Section 6.1.3(B)(1), a 5' wide sidewalk is required within the right-of-way adjacent to the property. A 5' sidewalk exists along SE 1st Avenue, however that sidewalk is to be modified and placed totally within SE 1st Avenue right-of-way. LDR Section 5.3.1 Reduction in Right-of-Way Width: Per LDR Section 5.3.1 right-of-way dedications to meet minimum standards must be made with all developments, unless a waiver is granted. Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1(D)(2), the required right-of-way width for SE 1ST Avenue is 60' and 40' currently exists. For existing streets where the right-of-way does not meet the minimums, reductions may be granted by the City Engineer upon a favorable recommendation from the Development Management Services Group (DSMG). The City Engineer and DSMG have reviewed the request for a reduction in right-of-way width with the Worthing Place development proposal and at that time determined that the existing right-of-way width of 40' is sufficient for SE 1st Avenue. Unity of Title: The development proposal includes separately platted lots. As the site is to be a unified development, a Unity-of-Title for the property is appropriate. Submission of a recorded Unity- of-Title is included as a condition of approval. �.:� �a���`���-� ��..fit 33'S��-� �E��,.14��► ��`5,���._., Along SE 1st Avenue, the vertical elements include Sabal Palms, Glaucous Cassia, Pigeon Plum, Winin Palm and Pigmy Date Palms. Ground covers include Green Shell Ginger Cocoplum, Philodendron, Zanadu, Croton, and Bougainvillea. This same palette of plan materials is to be provided along the west elevation. In order to maximize Xeriscape principals, no sod is proposed for this development and therefore meets the intent of the landscape ordinance. HPB Staff Report Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage—Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations and COA-430 Page 8 The house was constructed in the Minimal Traditional style in 1949 and is therefore contributing to the historic inventory of the Old School Square Historic District. The house is a prefabricated or often called "factory built'. Most probably the house was built by Coastal Homes of West Palm Beach a distributor of Flury & Crouch, a manufacturer of factory built homes. There were a number of these factory built houses constructed in the City shortly after VVWII. One of the few still existing is the Stahl office building located at 138 N. Swinton Avenue. The small structure to the rear of the lot was moved to the site from the southwest corner of E.Atlantic Avenue and SE 7th Avenue in 1959. The age of the building is not known however it is shown on the 1922 Sanborn map. It is also a contributing structure to the OSS built inventory. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.1(F)(1), The HPB shall consider the following guidelines in evaluating applications for a COA for demolition of historic buildings; (a) Whether the structure is of such interest or quality that it would reasonably fulfill the criteria for designation for listing on the National Register. (b) Whether the structure is of such design, craftsmanship, or material that it could be reproduced only with great difficulty or economically nonviable expense. (c) Whether the structure is one of the last remaining examples of its kind in the designated historic district within the city. (d) Whether retaining the structure would promote the general welfare of the city by providing an opportunity to study local history, architecture, and design, or by developing an understanding of the importance and value of a particular culture and heritage. (e) Whether there are definite plans for immediate reuse of the property if the proposed demolition is carried out, and what effect those plans will have on the character of the surrounding area. The structures would not fulfill the criteria for individual listing in the National Register, nor do they represent a level or design or craftsmanship in order to request the structures to be saved. However, they are contributing structures to the Old School Square built inventory. It is therefore recommended that the main house be relocated and the cost of the demolition be applied to the relocation cost of the structure, and the small structure demolished. The front facade is asymmetric in form. Two squared towers in the center of the façade house the stairwell. The towers flank the pedestrian entrance, which is accented with two short columns that support a wooden pergola. The prominent cornice squared towers, substantial columns and wood pergola lend an Italian Renaissance element to the overall design. The columns between the front center towers are too short and dwarfed by the towers and diminish the pedestrian entrance and should therefore be modified. The score lines under the parapet and on the tower are to be tile. The cartouches on the center of the stair towers are stucco. Canvass awnings are to be provided over the window openings and decorative aluminum railing is to be provided in some of the openings. Raised stucco banding is to be HPB Staff Report Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage—Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations and COA-430 Page 9 provided in the center of the building, which is similar to the detail at the top of the building. The proposed colors of the building are to be a combination of peach and white walls with blue awnings. Scale of Building: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(7), the construction of new buildings or structures shall be generally compatible with the form, proportion, mass, configuration, building material, texture, color and location of adjoining sites. The property to the north is under utilized. Development standards would allow a maximum height of 48', which could result in a structure equal to or greater in proportion and mass then this proposal. Located in the immediate vicinity of the subject property is the 48' high GRIP building, the 32' high Masonic Lodge building, and the approved height of 58' for Block 77. The parking garage will have a height of 38' with the towers extending to 48' which is either similar or lessor scale and massing than surrounding buildings. This structure while greater in mass and size than the adjacent uses to the south and west, will act as a transition between structures to the north and east. As discussed in other sections of the report, the applicant has gone too great lengths to provide varied building materials and textures to enhance compatibility with adjacent properties. This is achieved by a façade, which is unique for a parking structure. Visual Compatibility: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(8), all improvements to buildings, structures, and appurtenances within a designated historic district shall be visually compatible. Visual compatibility shall be determined in terms of height, front façade proportions, window openings, rhythm of solids to voids, rhythm of buildings on streets, rhythm of entrance and porch projections, materials, texture, color, roof shapes, walls of continuity, scale of building. As discussed throughout this report and above, in order to increase the visual compatibility of the building, great strides have been made to create a building design that is compatibility with its surrounding environment. The architectural design of the garage with Italian Renaissance elements, different forms (projections in stair wells and flat walls), textures (stucco walls and wood pergola), different materials (stucco, tile, canvass awnings, aluminum railings), and varied roof heights all help to increase the continuity with the existing and proposed structures in the area. Based on the above a positive finding can be made to LDR Section 4.5.1(E). RE°QUIRE FlND;1NG 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. Theses findings relate to the following areas: HPB Staff Report Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage—Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations and COA-430 Page 10 Section 3.1.1 (A) - Future Land Use Map: The subject property has a Future Land Use Map designation of OMU (Other Mixed Use) and is zoned OSSHAD (Old School Square Historic Arts District). The OSSHAD zone district is consistent with the OMU Future Land Use Map designation. The proposed municipal parking garage is allowed as a permitted use in this geographical area of the OSSHAD zone district [ref: 4.4.13 (B)(3)]. Based upon the above, it is appropriate to make a positive finding with respect to consistency with the Future Land Use Map designation. Section 3.1.1 (B) -Concurrency: The development proposal involves a parking garage and does not involve concurrency issues. However the traffic circulation in the area will change as a result of the Worthing Place project and the associated municipal parking garage. This item was discussed in the Worthing Place staff report and summary of the changes in traffic circulation patterns are discussed below. Although the Worthing Place development is neither subject to traffic concurrency nor limited by conventional level of service thresholds as it is located in the TCEA, off-site impacts are expected to the intersections of Swinton, 1st, and 2nd Avenues and Atlantic Avenue. The AM peak period characteristics of the residential use (7 AM — 9 AM) are of minimal concern, as it will not conflict with the peak AM hour for Atlantic Avenue, which occurs between 11:30 AM - 12:30 PM). The project's greatest traffic impact will occur during its PM peak period (4 PM — 6 PM) which overlaps with the downtown's PM peak of 3:30 PM to 4:30 PM. The increased congestion was anticipated and accepted with the adoption of the TCEA designation for the downtown area. Section 3.1.1 (C) - Consistency (Standards for Site Plan Actions): As described in Appendix A, a positive finding of consistency can be made as it relates to Standards for Site Plan Actions. 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, when all outstanding items attached as conditions of approval are addressed. 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 on the north, south and west sides by OSSHAD zoning and CBD on the east. The adjacent land uses include: to the north an office, to the south single family residence; to the west by an alley, single residences, and hair salon; and to the east a municipal parking lot, which is the future site of Worthing Place Apartment building. } HPB Staff Report Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage—Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations and COA-430 Page 11 Compatibility with the surrounding uses is a concern given the proposed height of the building. The proposed height of the building to the top of the 4th level will be 38' at the north end and 32' at the south end. The height of the building will be compatible with the 48' high GRIP building, the 32' high Masonic Lodge building which fronts along Atlantic Avenue, and the future 58' proposed Worthing Place development to be located across SE 1st Avenue. To the west, across the alley are single story buildings including single family residences and a hair and nail salon.-The single family dwellings are buffered by a 6' wood shadow box fence and the parking for the salon backs-out onto the alley. Immediately to the north is a single story office building (conversion from a single-family residence) that also contains a vacant lot. This property is under utilized and will most likely be redeveloped in the future with a more intense use. The existing zoning allows a maximum height of 48'. Along the south property line, the garage contains a zero setback with a solid wall. This wall has been scored to give the parking garage facade an appearance of windows and the height of the building has been lowed from 38' to 32'. This helps to provide some relief to the façade and an overall feeling of less mass to the building. It is also noted that a site plan was processed for the conversion of this single family dwelling to a commercial use which has since expired. It can therefore be concluded, that this property is also under utilized and will undergo a conversion to a more intense use in the future. The municipal parking garage is a much-needed use in the downtown area and will help to elevate the unsightly surface parking areas located to the east. Allowing the parking garage t- be built on the subject property will allow for the construction of a private/public parkin' garage in a location that will help satisfy the parking demands of the adjacent 4-story office building, Old School Square, nearby restaurants, and various other commercial establishments in the area. The garage is an important component of the Worthing Place project, a mixed-use development that will help fulfill the need for year-round residents in the downtown area. In this regard, the parking garage will help to fulfill Comprehensive Plan Policies that are described below. Based upon the above, a finding of compatibility can be made that the garage will not have a detrimental effect on the adjacent and nearby properties. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES: A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following applicable objectives and policies have been identified. Future Land Use Element: Objective A-I: - 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 is partially developed and contains a single-family dwelling and accessorr structure, which is to be demolished as part of this development proposal. There are now special physical or environmental characteristics of the land that would be negatively impacted by the proposed municipal parking garage. Further, the intensityis appropriate noted under the Compatibility section of the report. The development will complimentary with the surrounding commercial developments and residential uses as it will eliminate many HPB Staff Report Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage—Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations and COA-430 Page 12 of the existing blighted surface parking lots and provide organized parking in one location. In terms of fulfilling remaining land use needs, as discussed below, the Future Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan states that the City shall be the lead agency in pursuing the construction and operation of tiered paring structures with mixed uses in the CBD. Policy C-4.1: The Central Business District (CBD) zoning District regulations shall facilitate and encourage rehabilitation and revitalization and shall at the minimum, address the following: Accommodating parking needs through innovative actions. Policy C-4.3: The City shall be the lead agency in pursuing the construction and operation of tiered parking structures with mixed uses in the CBD. Locations of parking facilities shall follow the CBD Development Plan required through Policy C-4.2. In order to construct the Worthing Place mixed use project, it is necessary to eliminate existing municipal surface parking lots and parking that is associated with the GRIP office building. The parking garage is a result of a public/private partnership and meets the intent of this policy relating to accommodating parking needs through innovative actions. The CBD plan as required through Policy C-4.2 has not been written to date. While Block 69 is located in OSSHAD zone district, it is one of the properties that can be developed per the CBD zoning district regulations. Based on the above, the intent of these policies have been met. 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 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 first block of the downtown, which is largely commercial in nature. There is a residential structure located to the south and west of the property located across the alley, however, these areas are zoned for mixed or commercial uses, and several conversions from residential to commercial use have occurred or have been proposed in recent years. The nearest predominantly residential neighborhood is located south of SE 2nd Street. The parking garage in itself does not generate trips, therefore the impact will be negligible and will not affect the stability of any residential neighborhood (see discussion under Concurrency Page 6 of this report). The project will generate odors and noise associated with motor vehicles. In a downtown setting this generally is not a concern and will be consistent with that which occurs in the surrounding area on a regular basis. It is noted, that the structure may in fact block some of the noise that is generated by downtown outdoor entertainment venues from being heard by residents to the west. HPB Staff Report Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage—Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations and COA-430 Page 13 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 parking garage just south of the main entrance. Therefore this policy has been addressed. �z'��;Fm"� .s'������4.n1Y'> � � -*T -F y ., >a�n.u_Y+'S .., ._,. �4tn Y� Community Redevelopment Agency: At its meeting of October 26, 2000, the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) recommended approval of the development proposal. Downtown Development Authority: While the project it not located within the DDA boundaries, the project was provided to the DDA for a courtesy review. At its meeting of October 18, 2000, the DDA recommended approval of the development proposal. Public Notices: Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 500' radius of the subject property. Courtesy Notices: Courtesy Notices were provided to the following homeowner and civic associations: • PROD (Progressive Residents of Delray) • Presidents Council • Chamber of Commerce • Osceola park • Community Redevelopment Agency Letters of objection and support, if any, will be presented at the HPB meeting. The development proposal is to demolish the existing single family dwelling and accessory structure and to construct a 207-space municipal parking garage. The proposal is consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan. While the proposal involves a variance fror- setback requirements and a waiver to the open space requirement, relief from the Lan— Development Regulations is necessary to accommodate a municipal parking garage in the— most efficient manner and provide the maximum number of parking spaces as well as a varied building façade. Consistency with Chapter 3 and Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations will be achieved provided the conditions of approval are addressed. HPB Staff Report Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage—Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations and COA-430 Page 15 2. That after the parking garage obtains a Certificate of Occupancy, that it be deeded to the City prior to the start of construction of the Worthing Place apartment complex. Landscape Plan: Approve COA-430 and the associated landscape plan for Biock 69 Municipal Parking Garage, based on positive findings with respect to Section 4.6.16 of the Land Development Regulations. Design Elements: Approve COA-430 and the associated design elements for Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.6.18 and Section 4.5.1(E), subject to the condition that the columns in front of the building be modified to be more in keeping with the balance of the building. Attachments: • Appendix A, Appendix B • Survey, Site Plan, Floor Plans, Landscape Plan, Building Elevations HPB Staff Report Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage—Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations and COA-430 Page 14 A. Continue with direction. B. Approve COA-430 and the associated Class V site plan, landscape plan and design elements for Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage, based on positive findings with respect to Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) (Finding of Compatibility) of the Land Development Regulations, and the policies of the Comprehensive Plan subject to conditions. C. Deny COA-417 and the associated Class V site plan, landscape plan, and design elements for Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage, based upon a failure to make positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.3.4(K) (Setbacks) and Section 4.4.13(F)(2) Open Space. By Separate Motions: Demolition Based upon the guidelines of LDR Section 4.5.1(F)(1) for evaluating requests for demolitic approve the demolition of the structures located on Lot 20, however delay the demolition — the main structure for six months (July 17, 2000) in order to allow the applicant time to look for a site to relocate the structure. Variance 1. Based upon positive findings to LDR Section 2.4.7(A)(5) and LDR Section 4.5.1(J)(1) grant a variance to LDR Section 4.3.4(K) to allow a minimum of 1' front yard setback. 2. Based upon positive findings to LDR Section 2.4.7(A)(5) and LDR Section 4.5.1(J)(1) grant a variance to LDR Section 4.3.4(K) to allow a minimum of a 5'-6" rear yard setback. Waiver Recommend to the City Commission approval of a waiver to LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(2) to reduce the required 10% open space to 8.3% open space based upon positive findings pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(D)(5). Site Plan: Approve COA-430 and the associated the Class V site plan for Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage, based on positive findings with respect to Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) (Finding Compatibility) of the Land Development Regulations, and the policies of the Comprehensi — Plan subject to the following conditions: 1. That a Unity of Title is recorded prior to issuance of a building permit. ..�,.s.i:J. .�L«...a.L--..n....�lf.....n_s..++..rim....�...�«.�.�.t.._.����. f.—....a..—...._.�._�-..�-. .-. .... _.....«. _. _ 5�......,.._. ...... .. .. _ _. _.._ HPB Staff Report Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage—Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations and COA-430 Page 16 • a# @ 4 , '-� 3 .ri f4 -,`�cti ?E��' rr . ieA 4. u! +X10.1 y! .'i4 ';f .p* " .._ 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. Appropriate separation of travelways is made for vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians in a manner consistent with objective D-1 of the Traffic Element. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent C. Open Space enhancements described in Open Space and Recreation Objective B-1, are appropriately addressed. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent D. That any street widening associated with the development shall not be detrimental upon desired character and cohesiveness of affected residential areas. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard 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 X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent HPB Staff Report Block 69 Municipal Parking Garage—Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, Elevations and COA-430 Page 17 F. Vacant property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use anti 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 G. In order to provide for more balance demographic mix, the development of "large scale adult oriented communities" on the remaining vacant land is discouraged. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard 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 modifies 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 > ! • t 'J / SSD, D 'v,/cr /r;'di Er LEGEND: _______,_,,,________2 S ✓��! SJ' I. �� �, $,%' _P_ 5," — \ ' �1 " = cEti 'EIl6Il1E OF main. OF DAY /.i Jd.<'. -- 11 :vlt 'CONC." = CONCRETE aiC P41 r, bl+, / l I 16.>r' V�/ - - - - - too DEW!?iiiTION: _ �/ LOTS zoo 1, INu suuulvlSIOU OF lIl.00 oo, / !�/ / / r I - T ' -../-../ / --/", i i; ACCORDING 10 IIL PLAT THEREOF', RECORDED IN PLAT / '-' j ' i• /-! /i -/ / / ✓- t BOOK '' PAGE I:I OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM IIIACII COUNTY, FLORIDA. / i • / •\\ / T'Lli fl()CJ1VU.II?"r'SURVEY \ /f/'' 'i f.fTT \ ' 7 tag,/ ti t, :422 L C v 1 i ic:'.1 l/ L./,/9 C n 4/% ./,‘,',.,., V S.s ' • a \t.=✓c+sa O=,C/ 7/. ✓J. ✓ ;f° ,�Ga;t' 4 �.9' — -- • rs./ q • i'✓.✓ / s!c'r'i % �)TTJ.1.l':�1`�' Y:'!L::. •.✓. 4"..e.L Lid.=•-. F-!/:I/? /,(/C ..i k6 , I I III'iLEur t:EIlI11If Mat III I. •u, u' „u 61,01 ..odor „r tor.pwt.lh1u all .i•1 /(J.d,e9[9 I t V\ V 7-Cl/b"/,iv;✓ slut lots the nlnlmu.n,tu 1111i=aI Sten;lu,t as sot lot In br tit. rlcr Q IA 4\ Q - / Board of t`colosslott.I Ir St.,.rorn IIt nhtpl.r 61011•6, I'Iur Id. , /C//rYC'A✓ 00 Q 3 '� I l .Q/9 A//:/ti,,li" Adt„htl,tt,tIv. Coda, purst„rttto Sant Ion 112.021, n,orino St stall .1'L,g3a53 l^. lY/ ill.e/F,'lul 5 J, w'�tl I — — `t\ I///f t 6. tj / Ibls h .,Ind of �J' —li — nl id „I l laatIL p — ��el \ 567 L';E'di THOMAS E.ADAMS PROFESSIONAL SURVEYOR&MAPPER o CU/Gc'vc'.-6�' .� 5 ` �T // //` n FLORIDA CERTIFICATE I10.3489 •:1 1 „ 21� 1 G / /`/ C /VL/G iFJ'.i�!�:>'7J,=. /,/✓/ 1 - - - ------ - O'DIlIEN SUITE!! & O'DHIEN INC. '.,. ENGINEERS, SURVEYORS, LAND PLANNERS :;',I • �/ / 2E01 NORTH FEDERAL. HIGHWAY, OELRAY REACH, FLORIDA •.�,1• ------.— — pall; IIIYIGOnk tC4L• ///^ •�.., ..1 /V✓t/4, /'9r/ ':::t ([1 COPY R/CIII ION QY O'RRIEN, SIIIIIit.I 00R:EI0,INC ''- "'' .',-./.0.i.:... ..s,(i' .%:J ///ii) is io2o.: r.Et a.______2 __IU 3�I, i c/ p ` J I'` Ni f M � �a .. GRAPH aCAIL .....lil Iy I ill I "I�_ AnPHUAf+raow1.Iin1 1 NORTH 9n lIU IAU110N/ .a tb-»I .( 151 • RAbIG!SITE IIECU ATIONS no — _-----------_--.--fOQ II p IIL ° II . _/ _ir—Ir1— r .__— I ^ ( I Z • tl x.. _--�-_- O • h 01 �- l� I IM IUR. Id �, il •1.m.u.oL I�jM F. LLl_L4 vF O r il F I , // � IOT.u.IAna RIM ARA . YTA J/ - 5 LEVEL 6 R t r -rt 11 i0 g8 • PARKING GARAGEII � � (� w°M ' v:a 9� � •+ --- — — 3 SEE AAa•EEluxu PLANS Ii c "'cam'_ r $OETO&I K PAAlO1IG ULtli • ri ZZ_ rt • R001 Y - Sl oi•iD CC__ In &�U i' rT foam)O•.MIL WA.. Q DE7 IIOG tot 1/ -- -- ------'--- [1 ItT i/ CO*CI. t.1• U _ ,Y 'III co.racI R Ir 1 u. • .u..a Y Ma a [ lea tr. Wm R RK r II.Y[. IK+LI MI 1�D \ ,; T((�11��1((� �Ol 7////!H!,fI O'� II O TYPICAL PARKING SPACES Au• t��l Y1 -•�. .YYf rt�[Y.M.(9 W GL/!i[�LJ -_-- --.— n W ILL M0�M 1[IN Y 1KIt.�M.aY21fYL ,o .,.._.. Mr.... II �:.�,.........,�.,... lJ5. ix• a 0 a i' d c) POOZ qM1CO 2 x.Ar or, Q X •.. I] IlC r —� r Z EL ▪ til L III III—L y _-.-1I,.. il - �^ J Q on II111 u n ... -4, •- __._. _ ..II ill..—=—'— -^ __ T • --_— --•07 •D14 1r.�, • ' . —J L - �I I- !I $Itll IL ..r..WOO..Kat r•0•W.IA Omani f_— W •::‘,:, / 1'ooKA[R.K[ A N O7Km' !'oxxr[•AVI /�j TYPICAL STREET lK)IT STANDARDS.... (/)= O I S. E. 1st AVENUE y I ttlii7rr.: ;••F I ors.on.•r-ry # I f M Y A.RY.1/WDYT —r— — — — - - I - —€ - - - ¢ yy - I — — i- I II 4. .5, ,..,...„ :‘, ...,,,,,%.,....., .„., .2, _I . . 1 1 r RAKIIl Z J iii � Z iiil _ iLci_J__•. 1 NNE ii _ , 1 JUutnwc LINE TIOROIWO PLACE ULM*YI STRE T® 15616 I I —1---1 , e--1—r p SP-1 6 I SETTS' i • \ If'ALLEY tat-C \ t t ,r.:.aa I.I.a•u OP I �{ I. -.- 1 Y •a•Y l�{r y O i •au a6N u �a Y+� .&as ra. y 1 NI _A 1 I y 1 1 '\ Yrr 11(1 '- M /////A i wru-f•r • 1 i YV•r{t-1 u111 i r+W w 1 1 1 ! 0 Q " © o 0 0 i ©0 011011 0.o I v1a1 01,1111 m loaacoia anOa[ROW anyV Usti + /ay an ma •' a O kik + O K D1, Oo i o + I41.41 I•W II--00O1�� / w�onma 1 //////�1i fl0.. ' !-._Y1:Y© O ISMsLacx ff U !t =I11` �u u&n ��1Q Q .a ra WW1 • © 0 Iiiil IM:.r.la= LOT IS BLO 2 II � -1 LOT:aa`O z O 1• 1 0 �` © 1 a�ya�w,l LY © 1 W yw[ H F t p U o 0 o iWalt �. +i4 000 0o w o 0 0o 211 .0 4 0-1 limi _____ . , F. d •a-ur ;111111. ', fau ' Illl'II L_ j 1 Magi: ;aw SI-Il' 'l ll�■ a 111 a ip IC7 bra \�'I ►r i K-, 1 r..' l enr l rt 1 14-.' I r.. •�12 \ t�MMEAMMn C2.110 I d-•- 1— -I—_L-Y�► a-S i Y-r I ��'�g • a•..0 art -.•i BASEMENT LEVEL -I - - -1 - SECOND LEVEL �. oa IN•r.! SE Id MO& LI ,'r GROUND LEVEL 0; beMI Roc.Y 4W inol . sou 1143— O•1 l i. Y I Wr1r-r•1M ! Y ! .r.rY.f•1Y1 Y _._._.—._.�. .—._. .—.— ..—.—.— V0 ,'• o 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 —._._•—.—• —�..11rcr.1Ytaulr._--• .-.-.-.-. 1 1 1 1 1 0 0l 1 1 -- - ©p © ©p © M. ------------- .---.-- ---.—•—.--- Oa ,'�y al ;y0 Kr1• Wall :Y© as an .11.r .—.}u 11api�1 — ,ir.r b..jt —'— • 9 r—:A'1aYNia+YfwC On'=: aPi.R1R3iYO1CR{4':=:'Yr11R11(xoQmrlcal� .0.1 M.•1 _ _ _ _ —ryy�. _ +art ,,4 o o ,.—.—...—.— _.—.—. •—.—.-._---.- uga4ao -lit , i 0 --------- — —. u,... ::„1 ; rr,Y-f}1N 1 O —.—.—.—.—.—. .—.—.— .—.—.—.__.—._ DUI: .i� •an r ::lllll'� ❑ ❑ •ei1L''1:j14•••" •a'u,Niinill. ❑ ❑ ,Cil'NAh•a,.r r� —---- — ---a 0-- — — =- he 1 ;''� THIRD LEVEL SITE DATA FOURTH LEVEL r FRAMING PLAN •1' O 4 rR.Y Ili NON .1�1 MOW YA. .I IMP .I I.Y. 11 :W oo:L N . :� U1M Y.I. •IRO MY U. WILL w ra•YM. Y Mal 4rV. .M eulo.l wr r R Na 111r r yq al ""' • ..'.r M-W. 4,4144 1:mix I1ra11 rlr 1e Iowa..1 Ir a i-I.M 0 WP6i �. �� iK ltt - - ';1'l1 mum Y41. r Nal WOO V. 11 IAMI +.1 arM MO al SAWA■Y•IDO (1 II l Woo WtM NW I Y'{9 V V 4M M4 I.IWMG I.aY 1 Wel• M'1N •111a 1 aI OWES ■1r£1. •.L WU: 1rW1 m' — .,...y vacs l Ilr y. DETAIL -;4Ian"iii— . , I 1`1' r NM ONO NMI, IL Ai ars WON INN MOM ar ��� ■ nr---- .• rr t_ wDa 1 .... ..„_,,....... _•,. .. . ,....,_. .rn"ram. ._/- �J. I, > , �III,,� I� cnr lra �rrlua �,I I 7 'urn vt. L I _ A ''. I — ra.wa MI w+rA.igP+J!I. rrmg� U @ • • r Irma wr Noel raa NM INN ww.l rq 1 •ri NIL O n" ill • IN r.a we 4...1 Mr leak ELEVATION (�Wyni ELEVATION H ®InW�J+:•r V1 r 1 .. .. . ......- ..-...,.,rrr s • al l4 CO VD D U 0a sr eq spy CD Jair �._ „ „t�' 11 oa r-1 -. ..•: ir"----MI.1.6°"11L."1".1 �� •�. - t > �=1 1, X� � • Ntooel o o �� BDC -_--_f- 1 W141 unb '1 usaixe g DC O 'Z NORTN ELEVATION WST ATI �,1 hl oL1J��-�--- Ml iE4�1�ELEV--ON—_ n O�1 lob No: 41 100D1 tl -_. L A-2 • t;. i rt al'Ir List • - "4.. r,' (9rt r L.nl,t A rr',ID ECPIcdIIGt I.tUSt t.,: r rtrs AJID TALI 13 '-'-- - - r.,, _ - II 9000 W 5000 1 rn a i<r .I l n,tl,,l r a er 1g r••.rl, t •�` \ : Is� ~t �,T \ \ > ^t T__ISO 1 - TIIOfl1 F • 7 eon a i«.eh(CII a tole) -p- -� 1\ J ? 't \ -- i _ — AND AS • rn, 7 °ir ,Ir I it-i.,d1 Ir,a•y retr rnl,t \ e�.3' � ' - / �'- -- — - - " °J 1 il��J/ .: • 0'14..full ��/'\ _ �-Y �� j `- _A•f z' _�/ I)i�i�j I()I luu . f. Iv a rs <'.�In„nr(n n+ec!•I,'nI•ft•n"<Ier'e rnh,l �� "e\Ll�- �1.45 v C4r1 �i�jL1� �J 1e el :', In.u'Ilt.lm.t ,� o<.�;?th a / I ��(.4.'J �44F/n .00,: ^el•nl r•n h,{ln r^ntnl f•e.,1 I I, l N`� < [ UAL. 1• c l'el gg9i,-e11.'e .!n pion /_��//�� .ur Vr \/]j'4 _.— 0 It,..r,[.�,`.. .,u 7 - V It Jan['•n�,n101, t41 t _ le le s,Jr•uns.rr>culDCOv[r:s MD ACCEt1t5 Il I . -- -- _-- -.—_. __ U r—_—_—._ Al.v f. AIr15Ia,eel,.t'vnr,ra,in'(v,•I.ynlnd E4.,11 0.g2,) .__.___.- C\ II �-� O I—� o [—t __—_._ 24'I•t,7n'e1,r,loll r C u f, 1•,.` AI.? 7 A,pi•a.n t.,"13>l(C1",".e.,11(n.,1.r) U �' a'14,n Apr,roll S.. e!a1 a V. hnm•11in, r•trl,'(t.n.ga„',men vu,n torn) ,Ia l t� 1 � ----- 8 0'I1-!olio n tie rl,le.J011 - _ 7 () •- t i cml 2 c,lnd<L,n •nrdnh.Ia n.nl-._toy.tcdeu,to•,onc�u) 7/ / ._-------- + It - eIn[ (-2 Cl, ,-,-nl•,v,Ic4C3(Cc«I•Iy.) '/!////�� �!-• 24' 4,i+•ep..nu,•non r nn,n get IJ O ' • i Clr it pemdr.,J,.n goed•nenulun•51e•bmel' ,,.. ... _.._-'-__ U 1 S'It,J'II-,tict,tun own nu. CCD nil CMI.1,e,vn,Ng,atu.'sl.erry reinter'(C,rlc51 24'In,In'op,,roll Acr CD er,'.L lr •; cr6, A let,..gle I•nd.l Caeenrlr•n,'e fFAd-,'Nnrl C. 'in,9 e[r' •d•.<,ntte,h to u•nIl ---'--- - _. (1 ' : JAI., lie ;r•••,•,...r.I,F4,<It's..int..I,,,, II ,.r _-— 1{': IA'Id,le•trr,24'cc,1£Ili. 1 till In 1,11•eneve dn<ty,e!dn(r,L,i.,telre&nt.) 1 � El 7 dirt,7a'.I..,IUII,A'ec. ._ e _ --- U .V I Al r 1413r1 24'.4.'Yana dd(0'e4•1 0101cdnndreJ ://—%%!�I e / lc'Ie,In'frr,loll,+C'on. /-%/-./Z/1�'J 1 r^•1 \ n1I 1: id V l o o o c= (l Y tY N.t 1•q.u�11ennn.tti.'e.,n > —_.__._—___ R�1 __-_-__._____—__--_-____� U CE'..:' .t .r.rmlH,e ilwMt..d 'h.t.rr.'v.ntN.ly r, II —_ p OrIA,H.11ppW wl.v!rdhlMFF;rw Mrn.sMor ___ ___ ,1 aW 4n.yn4..4�.4 M$2.525„M•M1 dd.,N^•.,,r•rh l,�l.•.. /•1 _ 5411,01 era NWlaY !/•/• 1 rt.un ur Y..e'.r.v +.e ,.•re.122.50.0 �t�,,.e r Nde..,.rq G/./11_/_�1� \ �1 �_, ___ ____— / �'-` • rM�.,1� �,,4.1:�4yrw `�:4;.��.."r.NN /F^T iii'�1•/� L `L t,MAN:nowt..M,....=wan z'!•n CHt.w, --- ��(.1 2� ItIr,55WN`”5.. IM.r{'w.N"A".."rr,t,,,-.....N (If 1[\10.\ icy,,\\\ 1 �4'_1 --_—__� dN. .tial: w,.N ll /^6� �: 1\ j -- - ��� fj �i T .Ia Y.2e e..,...q„d �E3 t � r_ t I ,�a�sM 2'.116,.•irr$V., tI ,bpv»d r. (;,(2 _ flieW _' � ,, .11111111\\ ' ---iI - - i 1 � Y (t' � a i"ire r.,1•fi: .. F' P. �_"4 iC — �i3 — — — _._4S'•% �y 4` _ t _.----T,� `5 I rv"rarim� i[p.,,hl»w.rn.�.�„dar rl.. ,255:1 nr 1 j' + ' (tor xl.:f• l �r'�:._ .I — — jrN { . r4V7,:,vtrAl•e•ERfb!M1NItY6 7:L..filri,1..•"II!.... l' I W !'2C"fr2 a tilttiltPA N'Mbn,�.62.hv W..w,,..dlf.tkof yr.{ -__.._.__._ • Y ».IYiI».,,«rH.9� Im,ngeCM,.r r.. , -------------------------------------------- amu.Iw1.A.uI,..,R » "1 I,e ATt,...:11 S. E. 1 s t A V E lI U E --- I IWRruuY r : �:�':" NeI»':'�;nANwC2.nC,rG...�h,.,x,.. I uiour:wa: gN.i.„,y'ai,,,,,:(°n Mtl„t....4' I (.o'rnrI II-cr.'n,r) . m, µtt .<.,,. n BLC yI.Ibhn 4N tlrr NCn4.nsNw i:r.r. •tedf llaVr....r.$.t..»-r..11.»r.s•',"r'd�:.�.:"I.1� 1---- - ------r�._ ._ -__ ___t, o.on.. YGY.'IAN�nnaerM MMMrltd a.4rd.Rrd!}}C 1 _________ (' _. d...µ ••Wlr evy+•11.»'tn..,M .l,tits"1,-t M1 r ELRAI'BEA; +Nl,..•.abIA4lr.ertodral•..-a'n..N1.irI..r�6 LANDSCAPE CALGULA7ICNS iry o,_ r'�"" 1�•''ro 10 / LAID SCArE • •!'\�d..�'nVi.V•ccO��` ......�� ^- •C,LL ne Illot AKA 'f1 n ` C a.[•C!•.4ie1 w•O Ot•IC V.'.r,•->r.tC •„• r yll t;�,1 .mot es C['ni6f$.00.041i [r• 242 �1 . 0/^,�1 • •[ y�, t,:41"�f! t wi,[. [,.�C�r•.c.Tt�e ..Tto ••[' 42 r U_IC[h '(,{, �'Ir S�/ -....... -' ,f. C!� � ....�.-:_ . u..R.. twr:�..[. .,. _ vr,[r_ .' >�J •'tm— ill., ,• wne[H-a • _- u. , . ..-._... '>•y74') ''ui� (�'y 1dµt.,: �� ..�- ��/—......__. ,u ••t..e„•..ce,.ref - -r- .,• •we. _ • I.'•-1 ±r� ... f 1--.__I/ .t~ 1 _ r.. tt .,,'a rrt,�<+,.,n,[�cvtr.n-..r.�.,-. ,.. _. SJ • I, ,l'l IMF ! . Il 4t... I .^_.. r �1�j.1,w ......_ ..........._..._. .t Tt,C•r r ._. •.. 'AR!l�it�l ....._.... ._• r' a 111— .... 1•I{il'{,II� 4!�(........... n i'^� t f 4 STAFF REPORT HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD Project Name: COA-429 David Bertrand Project Location: 310 North Swinton Avenue, Old School Square Historic District ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The action requested of the Board is that of approval for the design elements associated with the renovation of a single family residence, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(J). BACKGROUND The house was constructed in the Bungalow style in 1924. It is of wood frame construction set on a concrete slab foundation. The original windows have been replaced with awning and jalousie aluminum windows. The structure has wood siding and the roof is a combination of hip and gable which are finished with composition shingles. PROJECT DESCRIPTION / ANALYSIS The renovation proposal is as follows: i• Replace the asphalt shingle roof with a 5-V crimp, mill finish (silver) metal roof. 2• installation of two 2' x 2' curb mounted sky lights on the enclosed front porch. -• Replacement of all 12 jalousie and awning style windows with painted white aluminum single hung Colonial style windows. -/• Replacement of the existing south side door with a single wood French door, which is to be painted white. • Replacement of the main entry door (jalousie in style) located on the east elevation with a double 6ft. white finish metal French door with muttons. l; • Removal of the single entry door located on the northwest corner of the house and re-frame and re-side the door opening. • Replace an existing window on the west side of the house with a double white finish metal French door. Meeting Date: January 17, 2001 Agenda Item: } HPB Staff Report COA-429 Page 2 • Installation of Colonial metal hurricane shutters, which will be painted forest green, on all windows on the east, west and south elevations. Installation of removable hurricane panels on all doors and windows along the north side of the house. • Line the perimeter of the existing loose gravel driveway with Chicago brick and renew the gravel driveway with new loose gravel. • Construct a Chicago brick walkway on the east side of the property from the driveway to the east entry. Additional walkways constructed of Chicago brick are also proposed along the south side of the house and the west side of the house. • Replace rotten wood siding with Cedar tongue and grove clapboard siding to match the original siding. 12_• Replace rotten fascia and trim to match existing as necessary. 1 ?,• Paint the exterior of the house pale yellow; paint the trim, doors, corner-boards, windows and window returns white; and paint the hurricane shutters on the east, south and west elevations forest green. / • The property is adequately landscaped, however the applicant will install accent plantings on the east side of the property adjacent to the front of the house and the driveway. Additionally, two native 8'. tall Oak trees are proposed along the northern edge of the existing driveway. The proposed metal roof is not original to the Bungalow style structure, rather a shingle roof was the original material. However, metal roofs were utilized on Bungalow style structures during the time period in which this home was constructed. The Board has previously approved the use of a metal roof where composition shingles were original to structures. Additionally, the double metal door proposed for the east entry should be a wood frame door similar to the single wood door proposed on the south elevation. It is noted that the entry on the east elevation serves as the main entrance to the structure. Therefore, use of wood doors would be more appropriate on the east elevation as this elevation is most visible from the street and serves as the main entry. The proposal also includes the installation of two 2' x 2' skylights within the roof of the porch on the east elevation. As skylights were not original to the structure and were not a common feature utilized in the time period which the house was constructed, it is not appropriate to install them. The balance of the proposed modifications will be an enhancement and will provide for a much needed improvement to an existing contributing structure within the Old School Square Historic District. HPB Staff Report COA-429 Page 3 ALTERNATIVE,. .kCTIONS 1. Continue with direction. 2. Deny, with reasons stated. 3. Approve as presented, with the condition that the double door on the east elevation be a double wood door rather than metal and that the skylights be eliminated from the proposal. R-E:COMM`EN;DAT`ION Based on positive findings to LDR Section 4.5.1(E), approve the design elements associated with COA-429 with the conditions that the proposed double metal French door on the east elevation be a double wood French door and that the skylights be eliminated from the proposal. 4: • ( ' ( ' 1 ") LEGAL DESCRIPTION CONE. REMAINDER OF BLOCK 5/ O.JS'E NOT SURVEYED • • FIPI/Y B/C IIITI/2' rB/w I L.LI THE NORTH 50.00 FEET OF THE SOUTH 152.70 FEET OF THE EAST CMG NO 1D 5.15E ti GHf IO- I' 0.15E 135.00 FEET OF BLOCK 57 OF THE TOWN OF DELRAY BEACH, FORMERLY 6'95s 01ew T.ns U 2. ,L O,JpE,D.ue'N z N 88'68 09 E. 35.01 \�`•--25OW—•— TOWN OF UNION ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF AS RECORDED IN —_ I LLl PLAT BOOK 1, PAGE 3, OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS OF PALM BEACH mil-4 � 73. 1 19,10' ';,I 2+.10' 1 925• F/C n56 • o I Q COUNTY, FLORIDA, 0.1'++ 0 62.1'w �' 0.15•N O 9.05X10.0• I • I y 1 Z CERTIFIED TO: ALUMINUM_./ ONE STORY 3 n °�'. II NORTH 50.00 FEET OF r1IE SOWN 152.70 FEET OF ME EAST WONDERLAND MANAGEMENT, LLC A FLORIDA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY Y NO ONG I °2/i N RESIDENCE 135.00 FEET OF BLOCK 57 • a I O SUNBELT TITLE AGENCY LJ ca i X.2 E ti 1— AMERICAN PIONEER TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY } ----- w 7 (D j I 1--. 15.80' n 1 7.70' �=F 9.15' _.—__I7.61' '` .1.2 o N Z No • '1 I^ 0 __ CONE In I ( / PROPERTY ADDRESS " I In o /` OPEN 9'°0 I C17° e 310 N SWINTON AVENUE o !'� PATIO ��0. 10.00, • DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444 • I o s.(:f, d5,• •1 o I -L_ / U. O16.J_ CONE DONE p 2.9•N DIRT • f • RECORD SURVEYEt o I I.�, z1.0''_-I — — -- ---- �,—I• O corvc. INVOICE # 12082 FILE # 21-1112BDC-A D•1'� -. - 500- SURVEY DATE 12 os oo o.cre F/L� S.88'58'09"W. 135.01' / / �.w FIRS6.S D.J'N FIRS/8- I:��O/^ I z FLOOD ZONE X NO 0.12'5,0.16'1Y 0.1 F O.OJ'E MAP DATE 01/05/89 REMAINDER OF BLOCK 57 MAP NUMBER 126102 0002 D NOT SURVEYED I �I THIS SURVEY IDS DUN ORDERED AND PREPARED • FOR THE EXCLUSBE USE OF OBTAINING TITLE INSURANCE, NO OILIER WARRANTEES ARE HEREBY EXTENDED. I 20 0 20 40 80 Scale 'I " = 20' =END —--li----—CENTERLINE / /////CONCRETE BLOCK WALL \, L ,w o A CENTRAL ANGLE --1_I—OVERHEAD WIRES a —X—X—METAL FENCE -0 0 CONCRETE FENCE ' I Q CONE./CILATI BRICK PAV RS —// /f-WOOD FENCE O ABBREVIATIONS(SEE ONCE OF IN15 PAGE) vl 111EREDY CERTIFY MAT THE SURVEY REPRESENTED HEREON MEETS THEMWIUUU TECHNICALo STANDARDS FOR LNO SURVEYS AS SET FORTH IN[RAPIER 61017-6 Of'DIE FLORIDA MMINISIRAIO'E Z i CODE FOR THE BOUM OF PROFESSIONAL SURVEYORS AND CLAPPERS PURSUANT 10 SECTION 472.027 I OF HlE FLORIOA STATUTES. I a)'MT VALID YITHOUI TINE SIGTLAIURE AND THEORICIAL RAISEDEN SEAL OF A FLORIDA LICENSED SURVEYORill BY SLIPPER.BY .—Z, Q f -.., 12/05/00 PJS PAIR.J.STOWELL PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR FLORIDA CERTIFICATION N0.5241 / I I.O1515 Of BEARINGS AS INDICATED ON SKEILI I, //I `/;^ NORIII VW LINE III LACK 2.ICGA!OE5 SILO ON PRO.1D[D BY CUCNT. RC-�1 T/L.I.A./ �, CORNER�I J.111E ANUS SI TOWN HEREON WERE NOT ABSTRACTED 11Y HUS OFFICE IOR EASEMENTS,RIGHT-OF-wA15, 'I OWNERSHIP OR OTHER INSTRUMENTS OF won°. - A.UNDERGROUND OR INTERIOR PORTIONS OF FOOTINGS.FOUNDATIONS,WAILS OR OILIER 1401+-NSIOLE,IMPROVEMENTS WERE NOT LOCATED. SURVEYING,ING INC. BASED 5.ELEVATIONS ME ON IRE HAIIOIRAL GEODETIC VERTICAL DA1UL OF 1929 UNLESS OIIIERwISE SHOWN. 7 1' 6.FENCE TIES ME TO NIE CENTERLINE 1I FENCE,WALL TIES ARE GE THE FACE OF WALL. LB NO. 6495 I •(Al, 3I LL• STR EE nI 7.IN SOME INSTANCES GRAPHIC REPRESENTATIONS ILAIE OVEN CXAGGE2l1EU TO MORE LL EARLY ILL US11U IE THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PHYSICAL 11.1P0OVEMENTS AND/OR LOT LINES. IN ALL CASES DIMENSIONS SI TALL CONTROL THE LOCATION OF III ENrs OVER SCALED POSITIONS. 5615 S. UNIVERSITY OfVIE (951)252-525-1 I E. IIIE DIMENSIONS D DIRECTION t11C011 ME IN SU0STANTLAL AGREEMENT WIN1 HECORO VALUES INJN • AN \• UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. DAVIE, FLORIDA 3,3.125 CA (561)10B-1162B3 I 9.PARTY WALLS ARE CENTERED 01 —LINE UNLESS OTHERWISE TIDIER. FAX (9' .35E1 f' * - / ©19Sp AIIAHIC COASI SIONE1RIG INC. I\ Z, f. tzz -fr, - - -7J rfRy•«a . Y yF•..tl•_ Z�f�'{k. i • .101,--c-40„..,._... -..,__.........„...—, :f. „,.......„ . .„. A, -.._.. - _ 4 _____ . ....,g,„,L...... .,.:-. 4.4._ _ __. .., --� of a _ fir`