The URL can be used to link to this page

HPB 05-06-1992 r'w AMENDED AGENDA HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING WEDNESDAY, MAY 6, 1992 6 :00 PM FIRST FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL Please be advised that 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 proceeding is made, which 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 . 1. Roll Call 2 . COA 8-175A 310 N. Swinton Avenue, Dean Hoffman, Owner. Construction of a 6 ' high wood fence and gates in the front yard, OSS Historic District. 3 . COA 8-181 19 S. Swinton Ave, Gustavo Tames, Owner. Installation of metal door and window guards, OSS Historic District. 4 . COA 8-182 Java City Cafe, 44 E. Atlantic Avenue, Michael McLaughlin or Richard Siegel, Owners of the Business. A. Three advertising signs. B. Installation of awnings over entrance and window openings . C. Installation of roll-down shutters to replace glass in window openings . D. Approval of site plan for sidewalk seating. 5 . COA 8-104B 201 N.E. 1st Ave. , Anita Shannon, Owner Height and design of the front portion, from house to sidewalk, of a wood fence on the north property line. Relocation of a previously approved lattice fence. 6 . Approval of "Banker's Row" Basic Site Plan. M Historic Preservation Board Agenda, May 6, 1992 Page 2 7 . Make a recommendation to the Planning & Zoning Board regarding the proposed amendments to the Old School Square Historic Arts District (OSSHAD) . 8 . Discussion regarding the expansion of the Old School Historic Arts District. 9 . Reports from Historic Districts 10 . Unfinished Business 11 . New Business 12 . Approval of the April 15, 1992 Minutes 13 . Adjournment MINUTES OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD PUBLIC HEARING WEDNESDAY, MAY 6, 1992 LOCATION: FIRST FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM 100 N.W. 1ST AVENUE DELRAY BEACH, FL 33444 1 . ROLL CALL: The Chairman called the meeting to order at 6 : 00 P.M. Board Members : Christine Bull Present Wayne Campbell (Vice Chairman) Present Daniel Carter Present Sandy Jamison Present Pat Healy-Golembe Present Buck Miller Present Rose Sloan (Chairman) Present Staff Members Present: Diane Dominguez, Planing & Zoning Department Jeff Costello, Planning & Zoning Department Pat Cayce, Planning & Zoning Department Diana Mund, Planning & Zoning Department Janet Meeks, Planning & Zoning Department Stan Weedon, Planning & Zoning Department 2 . COA 8-175A: 310 N. Swinton Avenue. Dean Hoffman, Owner - Present. The Board approved COA 8-175A for construction of a 6 ' high stockade with dog eared top fence and gates painted white, with some landscaping in front, to cover the existing chain link fence in the front yard. Pat Healy-Golembe moved for approval of COA 8-175A, seconded by Christine Bull. The vote was as follows: Christine Bull - Yes; Wayne Campbell - Yes; Daniel Carter - Yes; Sandy Jamison - Yes; Pat Healy-Golembe - Yes; Buck Miller - Yes; Rose Sloan - Yes. Said motion passed 7-0. 3 . COA 8-181 : 19 S. Swinton Avenue. Gustavo Tames, Owner - Present. The Board approved COA 8-181 for installation of metal door and window guards with the following conditions: * That the aluminum on all windows visible from the street be painted white. * The aluminum storm awning on the front facade is to be removed. * Foundation plantings be installed in front of the gable. * A shade tree to be planted in the front yard. * The front yard is to be resodded. NOTE: The applicant has agreed to the landscape modifications . Sandy Jamison moved for approval of COA 8-181, seconded by Pat Healy-Golembe. The vote was as follows : Christine Bull - Yes; Wayne Campbell - Yes; Daniel Carter - Yes; Sandy Jamison - Yes; Pat Healy-Golembe - Yes; Buck Miller - Yes; Rose Sloan - Yes. Said motion passed 7-0 . Rose Sloan moved to amend the Agenda to hear Item #5 (COA 8-104B) before Item #4 (COA 8-182) as the applicant was not yet present. 5 . COA 8-104B: 201 N.E. 1st Avenue. Anita Shannon, Owner. Anita Shannon was not present but was represented by her husband Larry Siegel. The Board approved COA 8-104B for a shadowbox fence with a decorative cap on top of the 30 ' section to be located on the north property line. The fence height is to be as follows starting from the sidewalk: the first 10 ' section is to be 3 ' in height; the second 10 ' section is to be 5 ' in height; and the third 10 ' section is to be 7 ' in height. NOTE: Diane Dominguez questioned the sight line setback height from sidewalk on the east property line (alley) . Wayne Campbell moved for approval of COA 8-104B (shadowbox fence) , seconded by Sandy Jamison. The vote was as follows : Christine Bull - Yes; Wayne Campbell - Yes; Daniel Carter - Yes; Sandy Jamison - Yes; Pat Healy-Golembe - Yes; Buck Miller - Yes; Rose Sloan - Yes. Said motion passed 7-0 . The Board approved COA 8-104B (lattice fence) to relocate a previously approved interior yard lattice fence and gate to be painted white and installed between the main house and the guest house (see survey for location) . Daniel Carter moved for approval of COA 8-104B, seconded by Pat Healy-Golembe. The vote was as follows : Christine Bull - Yes; Wayne Campbell - Yes; Daniel Carter - Yes; Sandy Jamison - Yes; Pat Healy-Golembe - Yes; Buck Miller - Yes; Rose Sloan - Yes . Said motion passed 7-0 . - 2 - 5/6/92 At this time the Board returned to Item #4 (COA 8-182) as the applicant was now present. 4 . COA 8-182 : Java City Cafe, 44 E. Atlantic Avenue. Michael McLaughlin, Owner and Mark Little, Sign Contractor - Present. The Board approved COA 8-182 for the following: A. The advertising signs were approved as follows: * One 3 ' x 3 ' illuminated fixed projecting two sided cabinet sign mounted on the north side of the northeast corner of the building. Background is to be white with no text; logo only. * Two 8 ' x 2 ' non-illuminated wood flat wall signs. Background Iris Green (Porter Paint #14503-3) with gold lettering. Signs are to be mounted over the window openings on the north and east facades . Wayne Campbell moved for approval of COA 8-182 (signs) , seconded by Christine Bull. The vote was as follows : Christine Bull - Yes; Wayne Campbell - Yes; Daniel Carter - No; Sandy Jamison - Yes; Pat Healy-Golembe - No; Buck Miller - No; Rose Sloan - Yes . Said motion passed 4-3. B. The Board approved installation of awnings on the north and east facades and over the corner entrance. The awnings are to be dark green canvas with exposed pipe support and lacing. At a later date purple neon lighting will be installed as part of the the awning treatment. Wayne Campbell moved for approval of COA 8-182 (awnings) , seconded by Christine Bull. The vote was as follows: Christine Bull - Yes; Wayne Campbell - Yes; Daniel Carter - No; Sandy Jamison - Yes; Pat Healy-Golembe - No; Buck Miller - No; Rose Sloan - Yes . Said motion passed 4-3 . C. The Board approved the roll-down shutters as follows: * The applicant will remove the glass and guard grids from the north and east windows and replace it with white metal roll-down shutters . Weather permitting, the shutters will be rolled up and out of sight to create the atmosphere of an open air cafe. The box which contains the mechanism for the shutters, which is located at the top of the opening, is to be painted green to match the awnings . - 3 - 5/6/92 Wayne Campbell moved for approval of COA 8-182 (shutters) , seconded by Sandy Jamison. The vote was as follows: Christine Bull - Yes; Wayne Campbell - Yes; Daniel Carter - Yes; Sandy Jamison - Yes; Pat Healy-Golembe - Yes; Buck Miller - Yes; Rose Sloan - Yes. Said motion passed 7-0 . D. The Board approved of site plan for sidewalk seating as follows: * The seating is to consist of 3 tables and 6 chairs in front of the north side of the cafe and 2 tables and 4 chairs on the east side. The chairs and tables are to be placed next to the building to permit a clear 5 ' path for pedestrian travel. Daniel Carter moved for approval of COA 8-182 (sidewalk seating) , seconded by Pat Healy-Golembe. The vote was as follows: Christine Bull - Yes; Wayne Campbell - Yes; Daniel Carter - Yes; Sandy Jamison - Yes; Pat Healy-Golembe - Yes; Buck Miller - Yes; Rose Sloan - Yes . Said motion passed 7-0 . NOTE: This COA is approved contingent to the stipulation that the applicant provide the City with the following items : 1 . A hold harmless agreement acceptable to the City Attorney. 2 . Proof of insurance which is acceptable to the City. 3 . An approved right-of-way permit from the City Engineer. 4 . Signed and notarized approval from the building's owner for all exterior additions and modifications (Agent Authorization Form) . A Certificate of Appropriateness cannot be granted, or permits issued, until all the contingency items are in compliance. Pat Healy-Golembe had to leave at this time (7 :45 P.M. ) . 6 . BANKER' S ROW BASIC SITE PLAN: Two parking lot site plan ( "A" and "B" ) choices were submitted for Board approval. The Board approved Site Plan "B" with the following conditions: * A bike rack be added. * Sidewalk seating (benches) be added. * Trash receptacles added. * The landscaping will be up to staff with the pedestrian area shaded with shade trees. - 4 - 5/6/92 Daniel Carter moved for approval of the Banker's Row Basic Site Plan, seconded by Sandy Jamison. The vote was as follows : Christine Bull - Yes; Wayne Campbell - Yes; Daniel Carter - Yes; Sandy Jamison - Yes; Buck Miller - Yes; Rose Sloan - Yes . Said motion passed 6-0 . 7 . RECOMMENDATION TO PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RE: PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO OSSHAD: The Board approved the recommendation of the proposed amendments to OSSHAD to the Planning and Zoning Board as presented to them by Stan Weedon of the Planning and Zoning Department. Wayne Campbell moved for approval of the Proposed OSSHAD Amendments, seconded by Daniel Carter. The vote was as follows : Christine Bull - Yes; Wayne Campbell - Yes; Daniel Carter - Yes; Sandy Jamison - Yes; Buck Miller - Yes; Rose Sloan - Yes . Said motion passed 6-0. 8 . EXPANSION OF OSSHAD: This item will be considered at the June 3, 1992 meeting. 9 . REPORTS FROM HISTORIC DISTRICTS: None Rose Sloan had to leave at this time (8: 00 P.M. ) and the Chair was moved to Wayne Campbell. 10 . UNFINISHED BUSINESS: Pat Cayce presented the HPB recognition signs to the Board. The Board stated that they would also like some type of certificate to present to the winners . The Board stated that they would like to send a letter of appreciate to Mike Buckley of the Streets Department for the recognition signs . 11. NEW BUSINESS: The Board would like to set up guide lines as to regulating the mulching of yards. - 5 - 5/6/92 12 . APPROVAL OF MINUTES: April 15, 1992 Meeting Sandy Jamison moved for approval of the minutes for the April 15, 1992 meeting, seconded by Buck Miller. The vote was as follows: Christine Bull - Yes; Wayne Campbell - Yes; Daniel Carter - Yes; Sandy Jamison - Yes; Buck Miller - Yes . Said motion passed 5-0. 13. ADJOURNMENT: Daniel Carter moved for adjournment at 8:20 P.M. , seconded by Sandy Jamison. The vote was as follows: Christine Bull - Yes; Wayne Campbell - Yes; Daniel Carter - Yes; Sandy Jamison - Yes; Buck Miller - Yes. Said motion passed 5-0. The next meeting is scheduled for May 20, 1992 . 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 May 6, 1992, which were formally adopted and approved by the Board on ` , � `� , 1992 . /r Diana Mund 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. - 6 - 5/6/92 AGENDA ITEM 2 HPB MAY 6, 1992 COA 8-175A 310 N. Swinton Avenue, Dean Hoffman, Owner. Construction of a 6 ' high wood fence and gates in the front yard, OSS Historic District. The applicant, Dean Hoffman came before the HPB on March 18, 1992 for approval to allow a previously constructed, 6 ' high chain link fence and gates to remain in the front yard. The fence and gates were installed in February, 1992 without a building permit or COA approval. At this meeting the HPB voted for removal of the front portion of the fence and gates and approved the construction of a 4 ' tall wood fence and gates . Mr. Hoffman, appealed the HPB's March 18, 1992 decision to the City Commission. The Commission heard the appeal on April 14, 1992 . By a 3-2 vote the Commission denied the appeal to allow the front portion of the 6 ' chain link fence to remain as existing and directed the applicant to return to the HPB for design approval for a 6 ' wood fence. The backup material which went to the City Commission and the Commission minutes are attached. Mr. Hoffman plans to cover the chain link with wood. He has submitted photos, see attached Xerox, of two fence designs; shadow box, and stockade with dog eared top. Of the two styles, the dog eared stockade fence painted white, with some landscaping in front, would be the more appropriate choice for this c. 1929 frame vernacular building. RECOMMENDATION: Board' s discretion. ._ ,,,,,.;.. ..4;-. ..eawi,V.,..‹..4'..", : • . . -r• ..., . 4., 7:-.,-- e,-?i• ,.. .:....4„,.;,:,:.... , .- . -.4-/-4.3b4,-4~-,?.•`-V-lv, - . •iA4245 . i..-4.11;..A..- - .>?' .- ,.-1.-, .,, - • ---- .-- -• - - t:7,"•,'' .,,'',G4`,of'.'r.'.:'-k`..,Te .': . , ,:-... if,-•44,;:A.:_-,. ,, , ,f,-....4 .,k .,...2yt .1„; , --'- ' , 1' 'L.- '`..- ' '.; \1 lc,..',..A:,-...tz-f,..-,.....!2--4..:".'".1?-e:f.:...,,-,...-'N,,,, %.*:'•.• ...,::•.,,,-,f.„,-,--' --,` ' •- -'_ .,I' • , _ .-',,• „,e,i-k-giV7i.•,-••:3:- .1.--1:1.41 -",•11-kc,c",. •: ..:":":7:" , •-.."•1.- -J.: ''"' '-': • . 1/4• ."-,';;Azt' ,I,"•."=`- '•:. -•;c,',:--.•:` %;4‘.. It;r. ',,--'s:?:';',,• . -,; • ,.•- _,.-_:-','--":. - .C..s`•:t-t•-s•-_:-::', '' .• •--,' ." :1'' . : ' '..-:f:---::- -- - • - 4.0.*,..,-k,',.41:1"c, ;,,t,*:: ‘1,-;__.•t.4,.=:::_,.....,;.=_.:•;,, \` ,,,,•••1...-_,,:-.":,:.,:::,_ • , , ,,.,,,.-- -•-- .0::...-- - ,.,,;-7*-.,. Vir4.,11.4-',. .',..V;;‘,,_,:7144:;-i,-;:i1‘;';4;`,. .- ;. ---.1,.:•!'-- 7,`s,' -'',...:::`• :',., .,..,:---:---::1'-1..,001,V- ''.. ;,:. -' , -, 4„.i‘r.s..,V;i•._.`;nk,•?'1"..,....0.:-:,..,,,.1?-'41•‘-r-z.......,..,!.:,..!..4. -'-• - ,,,. A.,•.....:... .. _ -.. .- ......-? 1; iiiiiiia .., -„,....,,,,....._,,,....,.....,....:,,,z,,,.......i,,,-7,;,,:r.:...i..,...5.,),,..,t, •,,..).4'..... '...1.1,i ;.: .1111111-='..--."f_ i ?i..f.7A:;;1•X,';:.3-: .1!;:"-';:::,:i-:.,,,-,5-1'.,,Y:„`.., ILL:-'.::::.17...1-7-77 ...,"•',-.'- 11.': i...:::4;,:t.46i.2.3-,::-.-12-,,,,A1,-T,....,,,,,j,,,„ sji..;.,,;; ;... V„:,,:. ,_,'...1.; 1'; ,• .7.,. . 1 fli ' 11... :.;_t .. .., ...,:•:... . -..411 -..g,.%.,',F-,,v_.f•-.... 4,4,.,,,,,,,,,d:-J ;7,;:tz:.:w;. ,•-.-;i ....-,-. .,,,_ q. .'rk:. ., _i.:13 it ,., • ..,.-',.::.1..,.. -- • -. --,.....2 •,1,47.,...-.- ..,- ....,K ,,..i4::,...---,,,,,t-.. - , ‘. . Nilo,- • pli ...rex; d ,..!......., -_. ._ . i .7.,.A,-*-, ....z..;,,:. j-vi,,,,,:;:, : :.-.. A.... ... , ,, 1 it -4.•• ••• A . = . --4 .___..... ,...e;,:-...•,7ti.' =.:.•1.,' • ',1„„...„7.;:;,,,,,f4:-7.,'i r ,- ,i' —• .- • ,....,.:. ,..• .-.• .. . -....;...- ,".--'•-.7, .,.."," .,"-`,•. ...,.r -,-. - '.1 , --,•-..-- --- ••••••..v..:.. "-,7 r!-..- - - -'.% ;,".. -. , •.,e-tt,,.z...,',,4., " , ,,,„2,,_ ----.>4 -ks,- • -- itiatv - l"---. ,.'-,;"•,'..:1,•-" - ' '" •t-,- '.:::•••;"- ..- .:,'" ''',:i",..)'-',.-,-,_.-:i'll ,.- ..: , - =',,,,f.:..,„,- ....%,.,• ... . .,i. s:. ••,I, . . • . ..__.. . `,.:-_--. .;,:!,... -.- ;-,, --_,.. ,....--,,•--..,--.. ' -. .; • . ._ ',:—.•-• --,;..- ,--.....y-.-....----•;_.:. ,04.,:-:. ._ , rip-:---..._:1_.. .. —. . _ . _. .:. i...,-,.;,,,,- - ...;.: ,7-`.'''k- ,7.. `,..-. -. '.-. N:C.7-. '...: • . - -*-*•....' • .. • - - .........- - --= •- -- 4....A;•-•.......',r,..)'' = .0 ,' -'••••• s'-."..... ."- -- -.7 " . • • - .." • ..•-•-.•;_.• '"ef.:.• -":- - • -,•---'''':". '.. - - - _ __ -- ••••••-r....efinfflrl-- inl,C71.7;Wrs..":,-,..----";"- •'''--. • .... • . ' ' • - _-..r.:.,:- • "-P!` _ •- • ' - - . - •EXis 77NG ..-.,?..., t. . ,.. . . . ,„;....x.-.- -.., - .,-•--• . I . ..„„ - ---.. :,tr.:--..,,,...v. -.. •,-2 • 'pi, i . _ ... . . ._ :‘,7.....ar. r • • • -T, , ;.....}.% , -"11 i "•. -'''slif LI 1. 111: 1iI f . • E : • f ' • 7',- :' 4 3,.<rt- se• ,, _4,--- ; ., . •, p , ..- - -. _ ::%ille"-:::144t. 1 i i ..' -,,. - 1,,f , ,. , •+ . mi'• ' 1 i 7', J.:,.,.,V'.,•‘:,' :- ,i--.:'..'I Pi.! .-(. 11&' ' .-' i3%A T- i. ff‘V il.' 4 l-I0- • t 11... 1 1 ! -'''' '".•'-- ' ' f li I, -,, - • i I Ti!T.?. - •Tt 1 . ;it 11 11: • ''1, '' 1 II )1 I - .,,. • • r ' . if--V,:.0 '4 1 I P i 1 I : • . - : t • , . •;::e.,1 f Ittj--.1 !t:1 ..f:: .... I 1 . • • • . I i ' -A. , ; ' ' • .,•. : 01 'i..,;41, t . i . • .j!. ' . vim.. '' L - •":-'.'.`-`4":- %ri ' R.411; re.-0 1 ' 1 "'f'- . 1 "4..'.. . -' - I . . •I • I c,.-,,.,.....-.4 •-c '0,-. -.?Irv,vr..i.-i • . .glger.r- ..1 "v.. . -.qr.,- I it:*,,,e...... • t*-* - — ._ ......, ;Ve,1,;,....-a••24—;“ ti, , f.' e-,.,i- : .-ii.t 1. .- •.4 1-'4•.; ..f.i :.. -.." s:-...„.••:c.I.k.-rov• . . -,...orr.... .:, • , —.0_11. ..,-... . _. . rege?.: • . ..r... ., . ...i.e. ..-• ,. . 'ft- ' •• t4'. Je-- s ,--- k.:4f..,:le. *44111.;p..... "7. P , ." ,' :-..t.', -r.- ,W.- Aiky.<,,,•.•,'V.', .4C:7...S...•. ,' l',. -- - - ret.ti.k,\4 i',40.;4/P .1. 4 r.;:...1.![i`•:r.=. ..iSi....8:".7%ti7.74;t..,\-.V.'n Y ---.-• •-•: --..-t.P.," . .4...•':"V.'S-P!s•• .'s'..,....-'0. .. . • •. ..- •' -'1,...`i,i-.. ' ''.- _,.: .or . .,,A_IW.,...A 0.01,,,,o1:,,t••;..v-1 ' fl_l'i','.:.: .4t-,...^4. --.3 't,1 :--4.----e's •:•••••••:.:-.. .t II, " ..s..•••• --• -'4,2ilfr t•:: 4 s'eivt,c''Nf .. ','"e:vt.,i ;:- "...,,' •ett.---‘") e'-• '.:. .,t:'':,.`1- '`.'• ,`,, -, ,......A.,:i.-;.,7...'•,:t`...,"yr-,......,,,,,,.....,-,7....,$....,,,,..,:„..,... ..... -..4.- ...,,,,-.., ?lp.,;.--;-. -. t.,..:'-'" lirtpl-N:i.44-.1-A.....1.,..64:74;,.1....*„.:\‘0....,t,, ; • .. • ,...-: ;--,-,,,. ,...- r., .- - s,..!la,- ....,,,, .9:". . .---:.•- "-...' . -' ittIntv,..1."?*:.:T4V'nr."-` ‘.1i*I•4 :.7.'"tILV : I SY/A.00 ga gar ,S roceen DC- CITY COMMISSION DOCUMENTATION TO: DA D T. HARDEN, CITY MANAGER FROM: D VACS, DIRECTOR— DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND ZONING SUBJECT: MEETING OF APRIL 14, 1992 CONSIDERATION OF AN APPEAL OF HPB ACTION PERTAINING TO A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS IN THE OLD SCHOOL SQUARE HISTORIC DISTRICT ACTION REQUESTED OF THE COMMISSION: The action requested of the City Commission is that of reversal of the Historic Preservation Board's (HPB) decision to deny a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) to allow a six foot high chain link fence and driveway gates at a single family residence located at 310 N. Swinton Avenue, Old School Square Historic District. The appeal has been filed by the applicant, Dean Hoffman, owner of the property. BACKGROUND: In February of this year, a six foot high chain link fence and double chain link driveway gates were installed at this single family residence without a building permit and without COA approval (note: the fencing along the north property line existed previously; the illegal fencing runs parallel to Swinton) . (See an attached exhibit for the location of the fencing. ) The applicant was cited by Code Enforcement for construction without a permit. He then proceeded through the review process. Pursuant to our Design Guidelines (excerpt attached) , chain link are deemed "inappropriate for any historic site" . The design guidelines do allow for use of green stained chain link with complimentary hedging in rear yards, not visible from the streetscape" . This site has been designated as "contributing" (per OSSHAD Designation Report) . City Comm. ;ion Documentation • Appeal of HPB Action COA in the Old School Square Historic District Page 2 The applicant went before HPB at its meeting of March 18, 1992 . The alternative actions presented to the Board included: ( 1) Deny the application and require that the front fence and gates be removed (side fencing would remain since it was previously existing) , or (2) Approve the COA with the following modifications: (A) Cover the chain link front fence and gates with wood facing; (B) Paint the wood facing, color to be specified by HPB; (C) Require that appropriate landscaping be planted and maintained in front of the fence. The Board first had a motion to deny the COA and require that the fence be removed. The vote was 2-2 . A new motion called for allowing only a four foot high, wood fence, with gates parallel to Swinton. This motion passed on a 4-0 vote. BASIS OF APPEAL: The appeal letter (copy attached) cites the following reasons as a basis for the appeal: ( 1) A front fence six feet in height has been allowed in the Old School Square Historic District - reference Ann's Dog Grooming. (2) For security purposes a six foot high fence instead of a four foot high fence is needed. (3) The applicant is willing to provide wood facing for the fence and gates. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS: Apparently, at the HPB meeting there was discussion about the height of fencing. There is a proposal that fencing be limited to four feet high in front yards . In that the location of this fence is more than 60' from the street, it would not be considered as being a front yard fence. The fence at Ann's Dog Grooming is a wood fence (as opposed to chain link) . It is normally inappropriate to act on a Board created modification without the applicant' s consent to the modification. City Commissioi iocumentation Appeal of HPB Action COA in the Old School Square Historic District Page 3 ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS: ( 1) Overrule the HPB action (of denial of the request) and allow the chain link fence to remain as existing. (2) Uphold the HPB action of "non-approval" (thus, no COA is to be issued) and direct the applicant back to HPB if he desires to pursue alternative fencing. ( 3) After consultation with the applicant, determine if he wishes to modify the application to either of the following (or some other alternative) : (a) (Design Guideline Solution) : installation of wood facing on the front of the chain link fence and gates, with the following provisions : * that the wood facing is painted white to match the house, and * that appropriate landscaping be planted and maintained in front of the fence. (b) (New Material Solution) : removal of the chain link and install a 6 ' high wood fence, painted to match the house. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Commission discretion. Attachments : * Appeal Letter * Design Guideline Excerpt * Survey * Photographs TO: City of Delray Beach FROM: Dean A. Hoffman 310 North Swinton Ave. Delray Beach, Florida 33444 • SUBJECT: Appealing the decision of the Preservation Board of the O.S.S.H.A.D. , Refusing a permit to construct a 6 FT chain link fence. to an ng This fence that thes being southsideeaofd is my attached home. The fencelisimainlyc that for security along purposes , and a determent to neighborhood .crime . While attending the meeting, the boara was agreeable to this until,. a one person a Cecil (Sandy ) Jameson came up with a 6 it . fence would set preceaei,t is the future. Upon investigation I found that a 6 ft . fence nad been installed at 302 N.EEEBrc Stree , This is Place of bossiness that is called Ann' s Grooming. This :ence is �.� *� � te-'has a 6 ft. wooden gate installed on a chair, link gate, with the chain link lacing the outside of N .E. 1st Ave. All the board offered me was a 4 ft .wooden fence across the side of my home going north to the south corner post. The board agreed that the 6ft . chain link fence that I installed going from that corner post going west to the existing 6ft . chain link fence was approved by the board. I have agreed to cover the front with woou to Keep the appearance that the O.S.S .H.A.D. wants. The 4ft. fence that the board will approve would not provide me the security that 1 need. My house nas oroxen into twice , and I cannot keep nothing nice, like lawn chairs and other valuables in my pack yard . With this higher fence it would be a lot harder to throw things over the fence. The surveyors plans are with Pat t,ayce at City mail . Sincerely RECEIVED 3/8i/9a • Dean A. Hoffman CITY CLERK t ' :A� v^a,. Yy$fi a u- .,.,,yy,r+p� \fl \, S•,�.�,,,, t��", yy u{�ii'.. 'y; ��r�r+� : t�•u*T� �.�' ��:�S7C"?T}�iSh�i�r�t i�. 3 FENCES & WALLS a,�, .� `'��,.i. A %� -.„ White painted wooden picket fences have been the traditional o frame for Colonial Revival and Vernacular buildings for dec- '' h . t 1;, 1 t ades. They have always been an integral architectural land- ; . . p . ,' ; "-" 4 scaping element.Spanish style masonry walls are also preferred •4'. 9x zr. =• ,r, t ;;:• 'Y11*"' to enclose Mediterranean buildings. " s ` Y' `" ,. . • Maintaining original fences and walls is important. Unpainted Alk A AL, 0 4 At►. _.1►. ,� .,�. wood fences and chain link fences are inappropriate for any �• , y historic site. Green stained chain link with complimentary , ,,, -.., hedging height may be used in rear yards not visible from the • "'t' streetscape. All new fences should be compatible with the ` 0-.'.•..•''*� .,t ,�. : style, texture, and fabric of the street. 4 . ' : r Ornamental iron fences can be appropriate for certain period - 'r '. p{ j .t' ' 3', 1 .i��ytio}�'Sa ,f'...Yn 'w,�j' x,S,,'Yr iI�e de. . Creative fencing is encouraged to enhance the architectural • rr ,,, syti.,a,fj , r ;y�:� sit +fret.. , charm and character of the historic site. •� titlf!, �* ,�` a 4• I ,,4,, i < �3'« yet F 7{, 740 -. PARKING (,`,{°�: , • r w _.:0 r�Y� tt.,, � ,r 4•,1,/4f:N`lL t i vify�^'r t• f,v 1 1.1' The City of Delray Beach has adopted a Landscape Ordinance 1 r . �. • i;. r'' which establishes minimum standards for screening parking : �,` ' �' •and other vehicular use areas.Every attempt should be made to ! ' . . , obscure vehicular use areas from the pedestrian view.Fencing, iw walls, or landscape buffers can mitigate the negative visual • •• s. impact of automobiles. {i „e,i` i II '.fi ' A :4. Parking requirements are set forth in the Zoning Ordinances. + • . I . .' 'L ., Either destroying the building's appeal or inhibiting direct ` -,,,r'^` � ' i jn'�; ;\� ; pedestrian access should not be permitted. A'Ttlat\"tr•7� t', t s<• rI11f`'t' `hi', • e.: gti,+.ry/,< t J''.ft• j.!Iff^d_.1Z tt+, t 'rti' Previous Page vet;. *fit,t , . :+ii 'i.ar. ' :1i rA} :::14::',r lop: Wood fencing,low plantings,and natural brick walkway. 1 op: A glass block light, white painted brick, and sawn wood Center: Keep vegetation low for aesthetic and security. lattice contribute appropriate historic site elements. Bottom:A concrete/wood fence with potted seasonals creates a Bottom:A wood trellis with a waterfall of bouganvilla is supported sensitive landscape setting. by attractive irregular picket fencing. 46 JOHN R k.ITTON , PROFESSIONAL LAND SURVEYOR ` 118 N.E. 16TH COURT (407)276-7575 DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 t E—_ter v.s• Y 4HE0 • CLiie. C/�D • , pCNP R F~CL>C. YO N.O($.00 00~E. r �7 SJ ov Ca)dCM) ,,' •aiSeT I / �7.J v..c%.j IDO. �cnr I o., x.•• i' -0,_‘.91.o/5- Ao Po 35 b ,r y r S.[' e.� k Z I 1 AM. • FRAME Z ;i FrELNzy .-ZLCS Jy Lam- o s.v r i: b cd — 4....4 0% ., tu •NI a4 ^ 'V' Q 1-1 .4 i 2 J v- 7a_sQ i V- T2 °/Stn,• C L1C A lON ,fArc?/1 /f/61R£E O - 1i\1`l V�`_•'�^(��}�""77�`rr�, Co,.•.K" 1,1, `f/''''' A'•N.0 ��1\!��C r 1 - .i-/ /A-200? I- i D D: VI z FNo.P.K i-u'R. AP.R. NAIL $.O0.00.00 V\/• �Q I 127.98(M) 50.00-(h^)aCR) 1�6cuNC.�+/�y1 IOO.Of(M) �NoJ } I 1..z. I CAP 24 ASPHALT I nt �ne PAYM7 I h 2`• 2 I �"4.N _____(--_ I �. 1 SWINTON AVENU1 SCALE: I"-,td - SHEET e OF e SHEETS LEGEND: BENCHMARK REFERENCE: @ MANHOLE(M.H.) CI FIRE HYDRANT(F.H.) "D'33' AN •X• CUT IN CONC. Q CATCH BASIN (C.B.) 0 WATER METER(W.M.) S/W AT (—ANCHOR 8 GUY p CABLE T.V.(CAT.V.) OF THE INTERSECTION N. SON ON OF . O IRON ROD et CAP(I.R.BC.) ! N.E.2ND I TELEPHONE(TELE.) ELEVATION = 20.77 .0.WOOD POWER POLE(WD.P.P.1 4 CONCRETE POWER POLE.'CONC.P P.) • PERMANENT CONTROL POINT(P.:.P.) A 0 PERMANENT REFERENCE MONUMENT(P.R.M.) ELEVATIONS BASED ON N.G.V.D.AND SHOWN THUS Imo+ REVISIONS DATE BY CK'D FLOOD ELEVATION INFORMATION COMMUNITY No. 125/oZ DATE OF FIRM rlcm? BASE FLOOD ELEV. - FIRM ZONE "X" LOWEST FLOOR ELEV.2i.C5 PANEL No. ODO • AVG. SITE GRADE SUFFIX •'0- JOB NO. q2• oSy DATE: 'DRAWN BY: 1CHECKED BY: 'F.B./PO. FILE NO. 1Z-OS/ 2/2/42. )L OL 91-101� C2,43 9 . B. Appeal of an Historic Preservation Board Decision. The Commis- sion is to consider an appeal of an Historic Preservation Board decision to deny a Certificate of Appropriateness for a six-foot chain line fence at 310 N. Swinton Avenue . The City Manager commented that staff agrees with the appli- cant. Diane Dominguez , Planning Department, stated this is an appeal by Mr. Hoffman, the property owner, of a decision made by the Historic Preservation Board, denying a Certificate of Appropriateness for a chain link fence and gates that were installed without a permit. The owner was cited by Code Enforcement. The City' s design guidelines for Histor- ic Districts state that chain link fences are generally inappropriate , unless properly screened or not visible from the road. It was recom- mended that it be replaced with a four-foot wood fence and gates . Wayne Campbell, Vice-Chairman of the Historic Preservation Board, stated the City design guidelines were taken into consideration by the Board. The Board feels a wood fence is more appropriate with a height of four feet. Mr. Randolph expressed concern that, if this is allowed, it will appear that the City is sanctioning this type of action; however, he has concerns with the City Commission dictating to property owners what they can and can not do on their property. He also commented about the constant maintenance that will be required for a wood fence. Mr . Mouw moved to deny the appeal, direct the applicant to reapply for a permit for a six-foot wood fence and instruct the City to issue a permit without penalty, seconded by Mr. Andrews. Upon roll call the Commission voted as follows: Mr. Andrews - Yes; Mr. Randolph - No; • Mayor Lynch - Yes; Mr. Mouw - Yes; Dr. Alperin - No. Said motion passed with a 3 to 2 vote. Before roll call the following discussion was had: Dean Hoffman, applicant, stated he will be agreeable with anything the Board would like him to do. Dr. Alperin stated he feels the Commission should either accept or deny the appeal and send it back to the Board for a reasonable decision. At this point the roll was called to the motion. 9 .C. Appeal of an Historic Preservation Board Decision. The Commis- sion is to consider an appeal of an Historic Preservation Board decision to approve the site plan for the Patio Shoppes. Ms . Dominguez gave a brief explanation regarding the basic issues that prompted the appeal. • -8- 4/14/92 AGENDA ITEM 3 HPB MA,Y 6, 1992 COA 8-181 19 S. Swinton Ave, Gustavo Tames , Owner. Installation of metal door and window guards, OSS Historic District. This is a noncontributing house just south of Andre ' s Market parking- lot on the east side of S. Swinton Avenue. Several years ago the HPB approved the installation of a 6 ' wood fence on the sides and rear of the property. According to the applicant, the fence has not provided an effective deterrent to crime. Mr. Tames is requesting approval to install metal door and window grills on the exterior of the building. The attached plans indicate both door and window grilles will have the same decorative motif. All grilles are to be painted white. The house has no architectural significance, therefore the addition of grilles cannot be considered inconsistent to the style of the house. If grilles are approved, the closed aluminum awing under the front gable would be removed. Grills on all openings of the front facade may provide a more unified appearance to the building than what is existing. RECOMMENDATION: Approve with the following modification: * That the aluminum on all windows visible from the street be painted white. * The aluminum storm awning on the front facade is to be removed. * Foundation plantings be installed in front of the gable. * A shade tree to be planted in the front yard * The front yard is to be resodded. Funding for the three landscape items can be obtained through the City' s Boot Strap program. NOTE TO THE BOARD The HPB can only impose modifications , if the applicant agrees to the modifications. If the applicant does not agree you may approve without modification or deny. The front yard is in need of resodding or installation of acceptable ground cover and could be cited by code (City requirement and not HPB) , and you may point this out to the applicant. 4 / (---• (--\ APPLICATION FOR A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 100 N.W. 1ST AVENUE DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 33444 The Historic Preservation Board meets on the first and third Wednesday of each month. This application must be filed 15 days prior to the next available meeting. 6-7, ,9 g-- /97 Address of Property /9 �iNr A/ 4v� Affix One Clear Picture Y 4 F _- ,. x- k am,-i➢l' s:, la.t^4 ` . -' - Jo- S t 1 1. 4 +t k' ti �.e<,�.^ �.r.._ iti. a.'S _ ��+[ -ti. yi ku rl •r} _�: .c._„"V. lt*'"4. il , P 5L + a ` -� r _ t J1i wi • , 4, f -. \-^.. �'b. y." S tf' S.f r" • ;:a i'' 2 --i .. — ._L.- - .Y- _... - ' _ _.-_ __--�_ _.-___. 4.1 • : - ---Th . G _ ., 1 :, L. , ,.i . <>6 X> <> I[ <>4 <> ---"7.--- ----' 1 P:1. t.3 NA7-_____ 1 i r• ‘, _ ________ _ :i - - Q9 - • 0,...-..) f ' . 7----. - i k. . 1...,,, -L. ....,*----• _... G-Th .. j - = --=a=1-1Z-L.- -.-.,., �. .r_.:::-c'ct..-: ...i+.�-.. - . a:----5.P: ;-mow-Yr --7. - S k • - - '' a k _ reed that this reviev��for . __ -`) -- .. ' It is understood agreed. _ p- - ----E ,OPLIANCE of this pl•an•is subject to_ .. ywane with � _ ° y .. — the builder's and/or owner comp bin electrical, mechanical, Q • - . __ .____._-- all building, Plum g, - -' - ---' -- .-zoning, and all other applicable ordinances 4f of Delray Beach: The undersigrt�_--__.-.__ _ . Q the O�ty a rees to observe and enforce atl ' -speacally 9 __ fet . ulations as specifiedAn OSHA SA orEi.. g sa Yre,9 TY AND'HEALTH 11EGULATIO�dS forge CFR 1 Industry Standards _.. - structin , 1261�g10;.These plans must be on the job at `` .. . ._._..._ __ . LttJnes for all inspections. • DATE . PERMIT No.• ..- — - — - - - - - DATE • — _. _ - . ... CONTRACTOR or OWNER . • • ;& ; .' I • • . I / ••Cr ' if /..../ ••t• i .... . ;..____ • e'/ F;;4:,.'2- /C /I ____•__________________...__ ,, I • - • ' 7/2? left 4/1-• t _ t • • ,•., •-.----, •,... . ...............r . . • , . I I / .0 (...r.; 0 . . • ill .."..... .. . . k) !.: (r) 0 111 1 I 1 ; e Or ! j‘..... •11.1mIlim..-11•1.........2% AN/1•••••••••.•••• ..... .. ••••••••••••• • . I .•••••••• ••••.••••••••.• •••••••••.... .1- . ---- A j" \ID I I 74/,--/- / // aoit/ 4/e2 . ..., ..../ • I , I . , . 1 . , I I I . 1 . . r . . i . 1. . t I • 1 1 . I .• , . 1 . • 1 . \ . E . . f,.< 6- i •/e.. t7( (1 ) 1 i " f 7 �f/:(/i/ r..fc. - ((q j ( %) ' ' ,,,,'i ,v•/✓/G,/ s°,rich 1 .. II 1 ; J t r36. + l :!r Id ._......_--..."._..; ---.----.,0 (30, $-. s'G-.• .s/. 36 /x �; . i ! I - i ;3. ! I-Tr-- I ! . i Ci -i, , f i ' ' 1 ' • f , 1. ' ; •CS; 0 (3... I : Z:11 ..,,51 Q j % :.------______ S16 . , ; • . .i 1 !I . I p , , i i I1 I C\ ! . * (). : , i I1 0 0 I t; 3 IJ. • 1 • .+ _ J , ; + i /W--jaHV iz" Z_ i�1��1/SC�/2&Gi-1(Z145T -SWE, -I� • s', 6� �/.f/(!1/ ✓3pve— /�Gl 7- 4, , 3� z - --i--- ' •_ : 1 i • ' 4�f CT/�Ov� �r!/ 7-00� o �l 7t-iiis�/y � f y �t . • I.\., i . ) I I : i !Yi r o f ,,Y7 ,✓ �/3G//F/ '� ee- 0/ c7Y Grii J//I U T /f/'' I I , �ll� W D Not 6 3 Z j�c 5 a, •I I �-aG of x/e- I I-:0: • -, - . 6 aii‘,2//r ' 4 /,'/ee-- 6//5'''/0 4'(r - /11e71-f,417/cr7r75 /17V/4- 72W A 1/x h re L.,,,-- it7 ....a:•re,--7:j. ACM,* --•-iWOONG•———-. ---. - iOle td ., .,. .. ...I,.i I NJ 17:77:14.. —II ifir."*.,Cad:VP -,. 3; FOE Arimis 'kuist hult,.CI) _ c .... 4-1 zoll& 1 134' Z 1 4te. : / [ 4,0 • -- .! BATI4g1i0-‘7 .'malty L 3-0" AVNING 1, .134"(3. 0 . ri . . v.. .26NE 4 1 t Roma w A WININ6 •--, .1 ROOM . ) X I:I -- i go's" 101yE" 7 Po Au ,L A'S OM 3 .. k.. w 410titt•I 6 liglIG &O AX a I t .' 2 •- r - 1 o'6"x !2.'4” .) 1 ' __.._. • . 34 . • satiNk . _.t ti-- • ___i tuft id. 1 ! L r - OF. I— n os OLE. c i A/C t Zama-4 -— Aaraitt4.--li 0 ------- • '2.04,e 3 DitC — . .f...i 2 oar. 5- Nli BEPRoom z ..., KITCHEN ROOM • - 9'4— , v AWNING i 1 , 11- 2C. 24" r/:%1 • ., _ A \r--. . •, •th .- ,.. 71e ,i,.- 6, Crle;11 ...r... '!Ile .:-Pi771•Ch.,2.- ' cul,fisill ' CLOSET c ......., 0pd 0‘. I , el-11/it . 4 AlkittUtifr , • LIVING ROOM , 82A0,(T141 ‘,. 26,416 4 . . 1, MI.Vtu.. r1 714 ist Ate -r _ . lenc 2 • ". Illoininuatramozriaumma S ' MASTER •• " 1 " . — F BD ROOM • OFFICE It' t " r ogr7o,u0;r;i itA,fr17ive......4e.• / • CLOT .•• oh let.7. .1 'W11111114 G wAC -4 S/•lr • • i ,J t a I--1 2 __ 7777 . I117771. _.____ , :.Z. , ' AN item . f I-4/Ai*• Awit•Iiii f A , 2) 'lila-A upe • Flifrr ..-- y GP/VO,ies; Vgf .(. X • I4'n" ./ Zs. OPEN PoRCH "1 , •. • .. . --/ . AGENDA ITEM 4 HPB MAY 6, 1992 COA 8-182 Java City Cafe, 44 E. Atlantic Avenue, Michael McLaughlin or Richard Siegel, Owners of the Business. A. Three advertising signs . B. Installation of awnings over entrance and window openings . C. Installation of roll-down shutters to replace glass in window openings. D. Approval of site plan for sidewalk seating. Item A The sign staff has not yet reviewed the proposed signs. If staff recommendation and comments are not received by May 6th the sign portion of the COA will not be heard. Item B The awnings are to be dark green canvas with exposed pipe support and lacing. Purpt-e—neon • a `^ of—t-he awning treatment. See attached plan. ' "Y\ \ Item C The applicant proposes to remove the glass from the north and east windows . The glass will be replaced with roll-down shutters . Weather permitting, the shutters will rolled up and out of sight to create the atmosphere of an open air cafe. Sample of the shutter material will be available at the meeting. o- \*„ _\>L Item D Location of the outdoor seating is indicated on the attached site plan. Some time ago I suggested to a representative of the Masonic Lodge (owners of the building) that the 1960 's faux brick facade slip cover be removed and replaced with stucco, which was original to the building. The suggestion was rejected, not so much for cost but rather they like the brick finish. When the preliminary plan for Java City came in for discussion I suggested painting the bricks white. Both the business owners and the architect rejected the suggestion. They,too, like the brick finish. . 1 r (-- APPLICATION FOR A STAFF APPROVED CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA 100 N.W. 1st Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 407-243-7284 G'D/9" - /9Z. Address of Property 4 • ,,inn.k c� At� 'r . COA-S Affix one clear picture fit --' .� - -" ' rr.•,•:Par• • /':- ,• :7-_-_:-,-,_,.:.-_-...: • _ - • , :, 4 a -_ - .° cF = - I-- - -FY ,mil-- 7 .-. — T r TJ o. APR DELRAY IS INCORPORATED f .. r ,:::....,, ,,..,:::,.--.,,-..., ,. ... .... ...... .. . :. ,,....,, ...„_...... , 1 ,..,. ,. ,. ,,. ., . . ,... 1 4- - -1-4 :. vt- -... 3._ z� ��•: .. .. ..: • '� "'tom�.r r t . .t. ' t s•-}'- •a 4�4a 0,, t -K• I f 76 3, :j yr. 1y f /..r.yj.�.: I •,,,:.. , .. � C '' �• ..'."�. ••f.+•1�1.i..:•.H�.�^t�.IL�.••.•:.l•l"..^:t.'i:•J,•a'I•:•�.. a . . . Atlantic Ave.looking west--street lined with early autos - — n September 4, 1911, a meeting was J.S. Sundy was elected Mayor and William o (called at the Town Hall for the purpose Blackmer, clerk. Five Aldermen, J.W.Acton,T.M. ; ' IF of discussing incorporation. On McRae, J.R. Cason, J.S. Wuepper, and H.J. Monday,October 9,at 7 PM,57 qualified Wackerman, were also elected. electors met and voted to incorporate as the Town Blacks were among the 57 qualified electors of Delray. The votes were cast as follows: who voted to incorporate that day. George H. Number of votes cast: 57; Green,a black man,came in seventh,out of the ten In favor of incorporation: 56; men nominated for the positions of Aldermen. Against incorporation: 0; In 1923,the land east of the Intracoastal canal Votes abstaining: 1. was incorporated as Delray Beach and in 1927 A two-inch round seal reading "Town of Delray Beach and the Town of Delray merged to Delray, Incorporated 1911" was selected and form the City of Delray Beach. nominations were accepted for officers. . . .zi„, — - “:" Aret, _` i c' ��., . i 1. (1. .. ;1:::(,: . ii , ti . __Uri. , n• � f a . Ia• I 2:. %t ti y. yl - :: iir c•I ' di l I n Iii L____ ti t- : 414111 \ • ,1, r .. II ) i - nr�. . ..-.►.-...:r•....•.t •w7t4:.:+t.ca:r't:: .:c• _ •s..ra._�'—�••"�. £+a.+.. r�cr:-.. ... . :..a'.. .. Masonic Building(artist's rendering) 1st Ave.6z Atlantic S.E..Marquee marks post office building. r FINDINGS OF FACT HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING MAY 6, 1992 COA 8-182 Java City Cafe, 44 E. Atlantic Avenue, Michael McLaughlin or Richard Siegel, Owners of the Business . A. Three advertising signs. B. Installation of awnings over entrance and window openings. C. Installation of roll-down shutters to replace glass in window openings. D. Approval of site plan for sidewalk seating. Michael McLaughlin and Mark Little, Bright Image Signs were present at the meeting. Item A The advertising signs were approved as follows: One 3 ' x 3 ' illuminated fixed projecting two sided cabinet sign mounted on the north side of the northeast corner of the building. Background is to be white with no text; logo only. Two 8 ' x 2 ' non-illuminated wood flat wall signs. Background Iris Green (Porter Paint #14503-3) with gold lettering. Signs are to be mounted over the window openings on the north and east facades . 4-3 Item B Approved awnings as follows: Awnings are to be dark green canvas with exposed pipe support and lacing. See plans for the awning style. Awnings to be installed on north and east facades and over the corner entrance. At a later date purple neon lighting will be installed as part of the awning treatment. 4-3 Item C Installation of roll down shutters was approved as follows: The existing glass and guard grids will be removed from the north and east windows. The glass will be replaced with white metal roll-down shutters. The box which contains the mechanism for the shutters, which is located at the top of the opening, is to be painted green to match the awnings. 7-0 Finding of Fact Java City Cafe Page 2 Item D Approval of site plan for outdoor seating was approved as follows : The seating is to consist of 3 tables and 6 chairs in front of the north side of the cafe and 2 tables and 4 chairs on the east side. The chairs and tables are to be placed next to the building to permit a clear 5 ' path for pedestrian travel. 7-0 PLEASE NOTE This COA was approved contingent to the stipulation that the applicant provide the City with the following items : 1 . A hold harmless agreement acceptable to the City Attorney. 2 . Proof of insurance which is acceptable to the City. 3 . An approved Right-of-Way permit from the City Engineer. 4 . Signed and notarized approval from the building's owner for all exterior additions and modifications. (Agent Authorization Form) . A Certificate of Appropriateness cannot be granted, or permits issued, until all the contingency items are in compliance. Pat Cayce 0/ May 12, 192 AGENDA ITEM 5 HPB MEETING MAY 6, 1992 Item A Height and design of the front portion, from house to sidewalk, of a wood fence on the north property line. The applicant came for a staff approved COA to install a 7 ' high wood shadow box fence along the north and east property lines . Fence to be painted white. The portion of the fence from the north west corner of the house to the alley and along the south (alley) boundary was approved. For the portion of the fence from the north west corner of the house to the sidewalk approval was given to install only the fence posts . This house and cottage are located at the entrance to Banker' s Row. I felt that the section of the fence in question was too tall and too visible from the street, even though 7 ' side fences are allowed by code. Recommendation: With the applicant's approval modify the COA: Lower the front section of the side fence to 4 ' . Install a decorative cap on top of this section. Add decorative finials on the cap at the fence post locations, or Allow the 7 ' fence to continue from house to sidewalk. ACTION: Board' s discretion ************************************* Item B Relocation of a previously approved interior yard lattice fence. The fence and gate will be installed between main house and guest house. See attached survey for approved location and new location. Recommend approval. , -1 A • i' __ ♦5 lli i . �.y , 4 WPt� I ILi .. a} y�" 'J! —Y 7 iI—Y.. X,a -.inn $ _',9 a 4 ►j? #1 VERTICAL SHADOWBOX �-r.•;•, ..._< l..c G'' Cr O44 COliC26T'6 t)PriJ -)' L. /V (."C.ac-4%u•cE TrurATE•) .t l&M l r 20:0u.0-co 1 R » Eo Plod CYO44 full 91"Thick Slats x 4"x 6' 04 4" +c V' CtiP4L' 6v.12A C614diE 1 , n - : . . *r . . ,, . . r ' . • : : • -1---- ............ .•l4• - ,Sri a - - - r ... 1 _ : - - �, - 1 �_ - � - 10001 - - r-' - ' . 3 - • � r _ . : 3 : .. : 0 ........ ........4 \ii.....0....".. ! ...NO.n.".°. • 00:0e+e 8ta ..•------ 2 K"!Space 8etwaen Slats .4.., Att Board On Beard - !!'MLA ppt F T �- PO D A ANGLE All Sections Asurmbled With fiat TVr Duo f ast• GaNanlzed Potycoated Staples el? t5e Qj (K.t. s( / • NE. /ST: A • II�V` ° I ' ' I 5 ,� I I Co �9.70'ti1 MAC N a e . I ...1 • M • I dJr '. .. I a 1 I /r I JJo. I J♦ I it ( 1. I Ir A lr I lr I n• T A r J' Pit/.E. /s'4VENt/E (so'21(A.I (t7L PC-Ar.•) + rAarc7 2•f'PAVm/G - Z.fo /o'ewe. ° psi J ,yEADER ±. 0 s'o O Crt N N ® Ba0 / o • . . ,. b S con/c'. Wol+e KCUT „ O 3 Q 0,j - 1aL ` F,va, i.PeA/ b Ropy.. v �� v yE`, ems:. /'c 30. N • 4 "el1 /47 II L 1?] 1 JFCrCE Non.-s-.' �` .po/ E : Cc?v7-?L Gib ( 24/ oNC. =C avG/L�TZ°. �� s•/ ' BCk,•DCoCic.. . NI i )4 =1 l M O. i/.d i 3Zi.o' - iPR —P- : Pt) 'EP L1NJE . `I `�V ,e A Ail Come. C, N.T.S. c ueT 1 O SwiCC rk4- ks v. • t N- 3 �rf m. \ O t; . 1. ' Cya qua , z� oo 0_S/1/�Da_��,�rD� �""\ r o �jl• 8_ _ ` •�•°�/lo.4LLEY/7AV sat-free/li 1 e z5 0• 1;ikt.rie----=-:-_,;•q - ,)A, (PE,P PL11 T J a r��°/°iC'oU�=O.Gg7/<< �_-- k 5a). D� �a� -] f� f�PoS-'D .(f3/T/G✓_ LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOT 12, BLOCK 74,A SUBDIVISION OF BLOCK 74 DELRAY, FLORIDA, ACCORDING TO THE PLAT THEREOF ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF THE CIRCUIT COURT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA, RECORDED IN PLAT BOOK 11 ,PAGE 12. SUBJECT TO ALL RESTRICTIONS, RESERVATIONS, EASEMENTS AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY OF RECORD. PLAT OF SURVEY AND BOUNDARY SURVEY: PREPARED FOR AND CERTIFIED ONLY TO: ROBERT SIEGEL & RUTH SIEGEL, HIS WIFE. FIRST UNION NATIONAL BANK OF FLORIDA. DELRAY TITLE & ABSTRACT COMPANY. STEWART TITLE GUARANTY COMPANY. PROPERTY ADDRESS: #201 N.E. 1ST. AVENUE, DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA. THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED IN FI.OoD ?ONE " X " . PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEMORANDUM STAFF REPORT MAY 1, 1992, DRAFT STAFF REPORT FOR HPB AND CRA CONSIDERATION MEETING OF: ??, 1992 AGENDA ITEM: III .A. OSSHAD Text Amendment Review ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD: The item before the Planning and Zoning Board is the consideration of several proposed amendments to the Old School Square Historic Arts District, and the making of a recommendation(s) to the city Commission. BACKGROUND: The proposed amendments are the result of several meetings of the Historic Districts Zoning Review Committee, which was established by the Advanced Planning Division in late October 1991. Representation on the Committee was comprised of citizens from historic districts and members of the Historic Preservation Board. The Committee reviewed items suggested by the participants as well as Planning Department staff. The recommendations from the Committee include specific recommendations for amendment of the OSSHAD as well as general amendments addressing the City's Historic Districts. This report addresses both. The first section of the staff report contains an analysis and discussion of the proposed amendments which are specific to the OSSHAD. The second section addresses the general recommendations as they relate to the OSSHAD. The item numbers referenced herein, are also utilized as a key, to identify the proposed amendments on the relevant code sections, which are attached hereto. ANALYSIS: OSSHAD SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS: There are five recommendations from the Committee which are relevant only to the OSSHAD. 1. Limitation of uses in a mixed use zoning district. During the State's review of Amendment 91-1, the State advised that mixed use zoning districts should contain a limitation on the percentage or amount of uses. Such limitations would assure that no single use or group of uses would eventually dominate the district. S yz P&Z Staff Report OSSHAD Text Amendment Review Page 2 The Committee recommended that the residential component of the OSSHAD not be less than 25% as expressed by the principal use of the lots in the District. There are presently 197 ownerships (including 21 condominium units) within the OSSHAD, 157 (80.7%) of which are residential. Given the high percentage of residential use in the District today, it is unlikely that utilizing individual parcels to determine the percentage or amount of residential use in the District will be problematic in the foreseeable future. 2 . Remove the "single purpose" stipulation on retail sales in permitted use (B) (3) . Item (B) (3) currently reads: (3) Retail sales through specialty shops (single purpose businesses) such as: bath shops, book stores, gift shops, florists, hobby shops, kitchen shops, boutiques, bicycle shops. The removal of the single purpose stipulation represents a change of the intent of the Historic Preservation Board as expressed by the Board when the OSSHAD was established. The establishment of specialty shops was represented at that time as projecting the image the Board wished to establish in the District. Given the size of the residential and nonresidential structures in the district this restriction is not inappropriate. A comment which has been made is that the single purpose stipulation is keeping businesses out of the District. There has been no specific evidence presented to indicate such. It is likely that current economic conditions have prevented some individuals from realizing their wishes or dreams to move into the OSSHAD District. This situation is not justification for a change in direction if the Board feels its original intent is appropriate. To change intent to meet current economic conditions may, if successful, preclude the establishment of the types of businesses the City desired when the economy improves. Will the deletion of the single purpose stipulation adversely affect the image of the district via an influx of questionable businesses? It is unlikely that the proposed change will adversely affect the District. The relevant question is; "What type of image does the City desire for the district"? Presently specialty shops are permitted in the District. If the specialty shop stipulation is removed, then the district would be like any other commercial area, except that the businesses would be located in residential and nonresidential structures within an historic district. P&Z Staff Report OSSHAD Text Amendment Review Page 3 3. Add outdoor dining to permitted use (B) (7) similar to that allowed in the Central Business District. (7) Restaurants, e.g. cafe, snack shops, full service dining, outdoor dining, but excluding drive-ins and drive-throughs. The only difference in the restaurant uses allowed in the CBD is that outdoor dining is specifically stipulated as a permitted use. The Boards intent was that outdoor cafes, or outdoor dining areas were included in the stipulation of cafes. Therefore, the addition of the phrase "outdoor dining" would be consistent with the Boards initial intent. Are there any adverse effects from allowing the establishment of outdoor dining as a permitted use in a district which also allows single family residences as a permitted use? The potential exists for negative effects, (light, noise, odors) , upon a residence if an outdoor cafe is permitted on the adjacent property. Given this potential, restrictions on the hours of operation and/or the provision of an intervening buffering wall may be appropriate. It may also be appropriate to categorize the use as a conditional use in the OSSHAD so that the public hearing process could be utilized to inform neighbors of proposed outdoor cafes. In this situation, it may be appropriate to specify a maximum allowable separation, such as a six foot wall, but permit the adjacent property owners to determine an appropriate buffer where existing hedges, walls, or fences exist. It would not be appropriate to allow a reduced setback as proposed in item #5, below for an outdoor cafe. Alternatively, outdoor cafes could be permitted only where the use did not abut an existing residential use, directly or via exclusion of an intervening right-of-way (road) . 4 . Remove the stipulation in Accessory Use and Structures Permitted, item (C) (2) requiring that an owner_, proprietors, or employee occupy a single family residence which is either separate or within a structure housing a non-residential use. (2) a single family residence, either separate or within a structure housing a non-residential use ttebbi¢lAd OW 016 t0A1A0A00 LA sW14310v1 St 016 00AAti ttAttlAtAtAi At AVOIS O Of A $401 0AA 0AtOttti$4 06AdiOtOd Sri 016 P&Z Staff Report OSSHAD Text Amendment Review Page 4 This item has been discussed several times by the Board. The issue appears to be whether the presence of an owner guarantees that a property will be appropriately maintained. Conversely, does the presence of an absentee owner guarantee that a property will be poorly maintained. Are there any assurances in either situation? The City requires landlords to register their units with the City. Therefore there is some control over tenant occupied/ absentee owner properties. Both owner and tenant occupied properties are subject to code enforcement efforts, which includes the ability of the City to clean up a property and place a lien for the value of the work on the subject property. Therefore, there appears to be no clear advantage of one situation over the other in principal. Is this true in practice? Experience seems to be that small absentee owner, tenant occupied properties have a higher propensity for being poorly maintained. 5 . Amend the interior side yard setbacks in the OSSHAD to 31 ' where there is no need for a fire separation or fire rating. (amendment to the Development Standards Matrix - Nonresidential Zoning Districts, p. 4345 of the LDR's) The current side yard setback in the OSSHAD is 71 ' . This request represents a decrease of four feet in this requirement. The smallest interior side yard setback for detached residential development is 7i ' in the MH (Mobile Home) , PRD (Planned Residential District) , and the R-1A and R-1AB (Single Family Residential District) . The smallest interior side yard setback for detached nonresidential development is 7i ' in the OSSHAD. Other than the OSSHAD, the next smallest side interior setback for detached nonresidential development is 10 ' in the POC (Planned Office Center) , The evidence of variance requests within the OSSHAD does not suggest that there is a problem with the current setback requirement. There are several structures in the District which do not meet the current setback requirement. Neither the Board, nor the City have required the demolition of any sound or repairable structure, in the District, because it violates the required minimum setback. The fire rating for a wall on a home which meets our normal setbacks is 0 hours, or unrated. At a 0 - 3 foot setback, the fire rating for the abutting wall is 1 hour with no openings (windows, doors, ventilation) . Since this requirement only applies to the wall adjacent to the property line, the cost differential in walls is not excessive. P&Z Staff Report OSSHAD Text Amendment Review Page 5 Given the evidence, it is not necessary to make this adjustment based upon need. The Board could determine that the reduction in the interior side yard setback would encourage development or redevelopment in the District. If so, then the Board should support this request. ent of Deve amendment andards Matrixccomplished via- Nonresidential Zoning Districts, Development on page 4345 of the LDR's. GENERAL AMENDMENTS: The parking and fence amendments recommended below will be added to Section (G) , Supplemental District Regulations of the OSSHAD District if it is determined that they apply only to the Old School Square Historic Arts District. If it is determined that they should be applicable to other historic districts, or be applied citywide, then the amendment would be made to the applicable code section (parking or fences) . PARKING: 6 . Calculate parking requirements for restaurants on the net service area rather than gross square footage. Section 4 .6 .9(C) (3) (d) Off-street Parking Regulations stipulates the parking requirements for restaurants: (d) Restaurants: Inclusive of drive-ins, drive-thru, snack shops, night clubs, lounges shall provide 12 spaces per 1,000 square feet of floor area up to 6,000 sq. ft. and then 15 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of floor area over the initial 6,0000 sq. ft. Many municipalities assess parking for restaurants based upon net square footage, or service area. The general definition of net square footage or service area excludes food preparation and storage areas, and restrooms. Therefore parking is based upon the net square footage of actual customer use, and may be assessed by the number of seats in the restaurant, and/or stools in the bar, and/or the floor area of a stand-up service area such as in a bar or on a deck. It is very expensive to change preparation areas to customer service area. Generally, a restaurant will attempt to add service area through building expansion rather than conversion of existing service area. It is recommended by staff that the parking requirement for restaurants within the OSSHAD and CBD Zoning Districts be amended to apply to the net customer service area rather than gross square footage, but that the number of spaces per thousand square feet remain as presently stipulated. The net effect of P&Z Staff Report OSSHAD Text Amendment Review Page 6 • this amendment would be to not assess parking for food preparation and storage areas, but rather for true customer service area. This amendment would be accommodated via the addition of the new parking requirement as a supplemental district regulation in the OSSHAD and the CBD District. 7 . Allow credit for on-street parking adjacent to a use in an historic district. Supplement with adoption of a standard street cross section which includes on-street parking. The issue here is to determine if credit should be given for adjacent on-street parking. If so, then the question of a standard cross section for streets with on-street parking will be addressed by the Traffic Engineer. Credit for on-street parking, where it is present, should not replace or preclude the provision of on-site parking where it can be reasonably provided and not jeopardize the integrity of a given sites, historic significance or nature. Adjacent on-street parking is conveniently located to the use, is not allocated to the use and may be used by others with business in the general area, therefore encouraging pedestrian activity. The Historic Preservation Board currently has the authority to grant variances for off-street parking regulations, however they do not have the authority to grant a credit for on-street parking where it may exist. To accommodate this proposal, a new supplemental district regulation would be added to Section (G) of the OSSHAD zoning district, worded as follows: Paved on-street parking, adjacent and fully contiguous to a use in the OSSHAD, may be credited to the adjacent use, provided that the subject spaces are not identified as being specifically associated with the adjacent use, and subject to the approval of the City Engineer. FENCES The first two items pertain to fence type in the OSSHAD. There are no restrictions on fence types in the code, except barbed wire, which is not relevant to these deliberations. It is unlikely that the changes in fence requirements recommended below will have an effect upon crime, although the perceived privacy of the homeowner or resident may be reduced. It may be that the recommended changes would result in increased property values, since they encourage imagination and style in fencing and an openness which may be hard to maintain with the current fence regulations. P&Z Staff Report OSSHAD Text Amendment Review Page 7 8 . Chain link fences in front yard and side front yards (front of house forward to the street/sidewalk) should not be allowed (should be prohibited) . This is primarily a question of style and aesthetics. There are no apparent, overriding substantial negative or positive effects of such a restriction. The only affect of the restriction of the type of barriers allowed is that some individuals perceive that chain link fences are more appropriate than wooden picket fences in containing pets. This is generally not true, in that a wooden fence can be built with a spacing appropriate to containing said pets, and pets have been known to dig under chain link fences. The only problem is that a wooden fence is less durable to the teeth and claws of a dog than is chain link. This situation could be overcome by appropriate training, the use of a wall instead of a wooden fence, or the placement of chain link adjacent to the interior of the wooden fence. Thus, if the Board supports this restriction, the provision that chain link may be used adjacent to the interior of a wooden fence, for the containment of pets, may be considered. 9 . Fences linking the front of a house to a side yard fence may be chain link but must be screened with plants or a decorative wooden facade. Gates associated therewith may be chain, but must also be screened via a wooden facade. As with the issue above, this is primarily a question of style and aesthetics. There are no apparent, overriding substantial negative or positive effects of such a restriction. 10. The maximum fence/wall height for front and front side yard solid fences with a level/horizontal top shall be four (4) feet. This and the next item pertain to fence height in the OSSHAD. The provisions of Section 4 .6 .5(C) of the Land Development Regulations governs wall, fence and hedge height. • Section 4 .6 .5 Walls, Fences, and Hedges, reads: (C) Height Restrictions: Any wall, fence, or hedge located in a required front yard shall not exceed six feet (6 ' ) in height. Any wall, fence, or hedge located in a required interior side or rear yard shall not exceed eight feet (8' ) in height. . . . P&Z Staff Report OSSHAD Text Amendment Review Page 8 As with the issue above, this is primarily a question of style and aesthetics . There are no apparent, overriding substantial negative or positive effects of such a restriction. This proposal represents a two foot decrease in the maximum allowable fence height in the front and front side yards. The Committee felt that the purpose of establishing an historic district presumes that those driving and walking the streets in said district should be able to share in the experience via observing the architecture of the structures therein. If a predominance of the properties were to build six foot fences or walls, the the resources within the district would effectively become invisible and the very character which established the district would cease to exist. 11. The maximum fence/wall height for a front or front side yard with a non-level/non-horizontal top (ie. a fence with undulations or other vertical relief) shall be six (6) feet but ma not exceed an maximum average of five (5) feet in height. Gates and wall elements associated therewith, including architectural framing within two (2) feet of said gate, are excluded from the maximum hei ht limit and calculations for average fence height. This proposal expands upon those in items 3, 4 and 5 above in that it encourages, or gives an incentive for, the use of imagination in the construction of fences and walls in the District. In discussing these items with the Chief Building Official, Mr. Jerry Sanzone, it was suggested that the average height should be equal to the maximum height so that the implementation of the restrictions is equitable to both situations . Staff concurs with this recommendation. Therefore, it would be advisable to either increase the maximum height to five (5) feet or reduce the average height to four (4) feet. Another recommendation from Mr. Sanzone is that the height of the gate and wall elements referenced in this proposal not be considered in the calculations of the average fence/wall height. Staff concurs with this recommendation and has incorporated same into the amendment language proposed. BANKER'S ROW MASTER PLAN: In addition to the work of the Historic Districts Zoning Committee, the development and approval of the Banker's Row Master Plan necessitates amendments to the Old School Square Historic Arts Zoning District. The amendments to the OSSHAD, comprise referencing the Banker's Row Master Plan, design guidelines, and site plan as supplemental development and district regulations for the area affected by the Banker's Row P&Z Staff Report OSSHAD Text Amendment Review Page 9 Master Plan. These changes are accommodated via amendment of Section 4 .4 .24 by the addition of the following statements to the noted subsections: (F) (2) Banker's Row, wherein the Banker's Row Master Develo ment Plan, the development guidelineSplofn the fhe Banker's Row Master Plan, and the approved Banker's Row shall apply. (Item 12 in attached draft OSSHAD) (G) (2) Banker's Row, wherein the Banker's Row Master Development Plan, the development guidelines of the Banker's Row Master Plan(Item and the a roved site lan 13 in attached draft OSSHAD) for Banker's Row shall apply. SUPPLEMENTAL STAFF AMENDMENT ITEMS: The Current Planning Division staff met in early April and made the following recommendations pertaining to the items noted. These recommendations have been incorporated into the draft OSSHAD attached hereto. A. Fence restrictions (Items 8 - 11, above) should be expanded to apply to street side yards in addition to front yards. B. The fence height regulations (Item 11) should be reworded to provide that design elements may exceed the 4 ' maximum height to a maximum height of 6 ' provided such element does not comprise more than 40% of the length of the fence affected by the design element. As initially proposed above, item #11 results in a maximum fence height of 5' because of the averaging of fence height. C. Where a proposed outdoor dining area (Item 3, above) would abut a residential use either directly or via an intervening right-of-way, such use should be a conditional use. (Item 15 in attached draft OSSHAD) D. The perimeter landscaping requirement, Section 4.6 . 16(H) (3) (e) , should not apply to the OSSHAD district because the planting of the number of trees required defeats the historic residential character of the District. (Item 14 in attached draft OSSHAD) This Section reads: (8) Where any commercial or industrial areas abut a residential zoning district or properties in residential use, in addition to requirements established for district boundary line separators in the zoning code, one (1) tree shall be planted for every twenty-five (25) feet to form a solid tree line. P&Z Staff Report OSSHAD Text Amendment Review Page 10 Note: The district boundary line separator (Sec. 4.6.4) requirements do not apply within the OSSHAD as OSSHAD is a mixed use district allowing different uses to coexist without intervening zoning lines. CONSIDERATION BY THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY: At their meeting of April 2, 1992, the CRA reviewed a draft of the amendments proposed by the Historic Districts Zoning Review Committee and made the following recommendations: That if an outdoor dining area abuts a residential use, the dining area should be a conditional use, and The parking ratio of 12/1,000 should still apply to the net square footage, thereby reducing the overall parking requirement. The CRA objected to the proposed reduction of the interior side yard setback (Item #5) to 3.5 feet. The CRA recommended that the code be written such that additions to structures with existing nonconforming setbacks be allowed to violate the setback, consistent with the existing nonconformity, but not less than 3.5 feet. New structures, however, must comply with the existing setbacks. The CRA took no position on Items 10 and 11 (fence height) as these are aesthetic issues best left to the Historic Preservation Board. Except for these recommendations and objection, the CRA recommended approval of the proposed amendments. RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: By motion, approve the amendments recommended herein. Attachments: Report prepared by: Reviewed by DJK on: ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD: C:\data\dw4v2\OSSHADAM.DOC 5/5/92 Section 4 .4 .24 Old School Square Historic Arts District (HAD) (A) Purpose and Intent: The Old School Square Historic Arts District (OSSHAD) is a mixed use district which is intended to: * Provide for mixed uses of residential, office, and arts related commercial activities that will encourage the restoration or preservation of historic structures and maintain the historic and pedestrian scale of the Old School Square Historic District; * Stimulate greater awareness and pride in the City's architectural heritage, and create an atmosphere and feeling of "Old Delray Beach"; * Improve the environmental quality and overall liveability of this Historic District and stabilize and improve property value therein, and; * Allow uses which promote preservation. (B) Principal Use and Structures : The following types of use are allowed within the OSSHAD as a permitted use: ( 1) Residential uses of single family detached dwellings and duplexes, not to be less than 25% of the uses in the 1 District as expressed as a percentage of the total parcels within the District. (2) Business, Professional, and Governmental Offices. (3) Retail sales 0110110 gt0¢1z(XItt (oXt to tuittseo $xtirioit1 such as: bath shops, book stores, gift shops, 2 florists, hobby shops, kitchen shops, boutiques, bicycle shops. (4) The preparation of specialty gourmet foods and their sale either through catering or direct sales e.g. , a cafe. (5) Arts related businesses such as craft shops, galleries, and studios within which is conducted the preparation of, display of, and/or sale of art products such as antiques, collectibles, custom apparel, jewelry, paintings, photography, picture framing, pottery, sculpture, stained glass . (6) Educational facilities including training, vocational, or craft schools, colleges, seminaries, universities, arts and personal development institutions; and libraries, museums, and social and philanthropic institutions. 1 (7 ) Restaurants, e.g. cafe, snack shops, full service dining, outdoor dining where not adjacent to a residential use, 3 but excluding drive-ins and drive-throughs . (8) Providing of personal services such as barbershops, beauty shops, salons, cosmetologists . (9) Bed and Breakfast Inns (10) Within the following described areas, the uses allowed as permitted uses in Section 4 .4 . 18(B) pursuant to the base district and special provisions of the Central Business District regulations shall also be allowed in the OSSHAD: (a) Lots 13-16, Block 60 (b) Lots 1- 4, Block 61 (c) Lots 1- 7, Block 69 (d) Lots 7- 8, Block 75 (e) Lots 1- 6, Block 76 (C) Accessory Use and Structures Permitted: The following uses are allowed when a part of, or accessory to, the principal use: ( 1) Uses and structures normally associated with residences such as : bird aviaries, dog houses and dog runs, garages, greenhouses, guest cottages, playhouses, pool houses and covers/enclosures, pump houses, slat houses, storage sheds, workshops, swimming pools, and home occupations. (2) a single family residence, either separate or within a structure housing a non-residential use �td)b4A0A 01At 4 tx0 tOOfd0A¢0 10 00011pi0¢1 tit 010 QOAOti ttOttf0tOti st oillguy44 $;E A )5iiigiii000 071tOt5tf00 0071¢140t0d $ii th0 ttOtOtti. (3) Family Day Care (4) Parking lots and refuse storage areas. (D) Conditional Uses and Structures Allowed: The following uses are allowed as conditional uses within the OSSHAD: (1) Residential units within a structure containing permitted nonresidential use(s) provided that the residential use does not exceed 50% of the gross floor area of the structure within which they are located. (2) Adult congregate living facilities, Alcohol and Drug Abuse treatment facilities, Child Care, Adult Day Care, Continuing Care, Convalescent Homes, and Nursing Homes. (3) Parking lots not associated with a use. • (4 ) Outdoor dining where adjacent to a residential use, 1 5 including those separated by an intervening right-of-way. (E) Review and Approval Process : ( 1) All principal uses and accessory uses thereto, which do not require a permit for external modifications shall be allowed upon application to, and approval by, the Chief Building Official. (2) Structures which require a building permit for external work must receive approval from the Historic Preservation Board through the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness . (3) For new development, approval must be granted from the Historic Preservation Board pursuant to Sections 2 .4 .5 (E) , (G) , and (H) . (4) Conditional uses must be approved pursuant to Section 2 .4 .5(F) . Prior to action by the Planning and Zoning Board, the use request must be reviewed by the Historic Preservation Board with a recommendation forwarded by them. (F) Development Standards : The development standards as set forth in Section 4 .3.4 apply, except for: ( 1) Those areas identified in Subsection (B) (10) which shall be subject to the standards of the CBD Zone District, and (2) Banker's Row, wherein the Banker's Row Master Development Plan, the development guidelines of the Banker's Row 12 Master Plan, and the approved site plan for Banker' s Row shall apply. (G) Supplemental District Regulations: Supplemental district regulations as set forth in Article 4 .6, except as modified herein, apply: ( 1) Business and professional offices shall provide one parking space per 300 sq. ft. of total floor area. This requirement may be reduced to one parking space per 400 sq. ft. of total floor area, or by at least one space, where there is a mix of residential and office use in the same structure. (2) All parking, except for single family homes and duplexes, shall be located in the side or rear yard or adjacent to a rear alley. No such parking shall be located in the area between any street and the building or structure. Where there are existing buildings or structures, however, the Historic Preservation Board may waive this requirement during the site plan review process, provided that it is determined that compliance 3 is not feasible and that the residential character of the area will be maintained. If approved, such parking shall be substantially screened from off-premises view by a hedge, at least, four feet in height. (3) Within the area designated by Subsection (B) ( 10) , the above exceptions shall not apply. (4) Within the OSSHAD, the following fence regulations shall take precedent over those specified in Section 4 . 6 .5. : a. Chain link fences are not allowed in front, 8 side front yards ( front of house forward to the street/sidewalk) or street side yards b. Chain link fences connecting the front of a 9 house to a side yard fence must be screened with plants or a decorative wooden facade. Chain link gates associated therewith shall be screened with a wooden facade. c. The maximum height for a fence or wall in the 1 0 front, front side yard or street side yard, with a level/horizontal top shall be four (4) feet. d. Fence or wall design elements may exceed the 1 1 4 ' maximum fence height to a maximum height of 6 feet provided such elements do not comprise more than 40% of the length of the fence length affected by the design element. (5) Banker's Row, wherein the Banker's Row Master Development Plan, the development 'guidelines of the Banker's Row 13 Master Plan, and the approved site plan for Banker's Row shall apply. (6) The parking requirement for restaurants permitted within the OSSHAD District shall be twelve (12) spaces per 1,000 square feet of net service area up to 6,000 sq. ft. and then 15 6 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of floor area over the initial 6,000 square feet. Net service area excludes interior food preparation, storage, maintenance, and cleanup (dishwashing) areas. (7) Paved on-street parking, which is adjacent and 7 fully contiguous to a use in the OSSHAD, may be credited to the adjacent use, provided that the subject parking space{s) are not identified as being specifically associated with the adjacent use, and subject to the approval of the City Engineer. (8) The perimeter landscape requirements of Section 1 4 4 .6 . 16(H) (3) (e) shall not apply within the OSSHAD district. T:OSSHAD.doc 4 AGENDA ITEMS' HPB MEETING MAY 6, 1992 Discussion regarding the expansion of the the Old School Square Historic District. The areas in question are; the east side of S.W. 1st Avenue and the west side of S.E. 1st Avenue from Atlantic Avenue to S.W and S.E. 2nd Street. This is an initial discussion. Additional information will be available at the meeting. NOTES FROM THE MEETING OF WEDNESDAY, APRIL 15, 1992 OLD SCHOOL SQUARE COMMUNITY ROOM SUBJECT Discussion regarding a proposed bus tour of Delray Beach sponsored by the National Trust for Historic Preservation, Saturday, October 10, 1992 . PRESENT AT THE MEETING Frances Bourque, Old School Square Pat Healy-Golembe, Historic Preservation Board Dottie Patterson, Historical Society John Johnson, Historic Palm Beach County Preservation Board Chris Brown, Community Redevelopment Agency Linda Fleetwood, Community Redevelopment Agency Pat Cayce, City of Delray Beach BACKGROUND The National Trust for Historic Preservation will hold its annual meeting in Miami on October 7-11, 1992. The theme of this year' s conference is "MULTI-CULTURALISM" . Because of Delray's unique cultural mix, Frances Bourque submitted a preliminary proposal to the Trust requesting that Delray be included on one of its official "area" bus tours. The proposal was accepted and the Trust allows several weeks for a community to formalize the tour agreement. The bus tour would be scheduled for Saturday, October 10, 1992. The Trust anticipates 40 participants would take the tour and the length of time spent in Delray would be 2 hours, arriving at 2:00 PM and departing at 4 :00 PM. PURPOSE OF THE MEETING The purpose of this meeting was to determine if those present felt that a tour of such short duration could accurately present the City's historic resources and cultural diversity. Though it is indeed an honor to be included in the Trust's program, would the time spent in organization produce the hoped for exposure of our Community' s multi-cultural heritage? If the committee agrees that Delray should accept the invitation and proceed with the tour, what should be presented and how? SUMMARY Rather than plan a two hour visit to benefit only the participants of the Trust's tour, John Johnson suggested • Page 2 that the community acknowledge its own multi-cultural heritage with a series of planned events during the month of October. The Trust' s tour would then become a part of the month' s celebration. This suggestion was enthusiastically endorsed as it would provide an excellent opportunity to showcase the success of our historic preservation effort and our cultural heritage. The theme, "A Community Responds to Its Heritage and Cultural Diversity", or some variation of the wording, was suggested. It was agreed that the event be co-chaired. Clay Wideman and Michael Weiner were suggested as co-chairman, Chris Brown will contact them. It was felt that each cultural group should have a sub-chairman to select and organize activities . The "Multi-Culture" of Delray is comprised of: Early Settlers 1895 -1920 Blacks from the southern states Whites from the mid-west Seminole Indians Bahamians Japanese 1920 - 1990 Jewish Winter visitors from US and abroad (influence of tourism) Jamaicans Haitians Suggested events and activities for the October celebration: Old School Square 1913 Building: Special exhibits and events, activities on the lawn. Gym: Concerts, singers, speakers 1926 Building: Information about the future theatre, including suggestions from the public regarding types of productions to be scheduled. Cason Cottage Special exhibit, activities on the lawn Peach Umbrella Scheduled to be completed by October, visit shops and ethnic restaurants Page 3 Banker's Row Landscaping and parking lot will be completed by October. The rehabilitation of this block demonstrates what can be accomplished when public and private interests pool their efforts Pineapple Grove Way Landscaping and sculptures will be in place. Street entertainers, music St. Matthew Episcopal Church ( 1926) Affordable Housing Tours and explanation Black Heritage Trail Visit to points of interest in Delray Historic Five Site Marker Walking tours in Historic Districts Old School Square Del-Ida Park Marina District Haitian Singers Mount Olive Baptist Church Choir Performances by local dance groups Japanese exhibit from the Morikami Museum Suggested itinerary for National Trust bus tour: Old School Square Cason Cottage Peach Umbrella Banker's Row Affordable Housing Pineapple Way Five Site Marker Sundy House (refreshments) Make plans for a speaker(s) to be on the bus from Miami to Delray and return General suggestions: Develop a poster competition for the celebration. Design a graph depicting our cultural diversity. r Page 4 Gain the support of the City Commission and present preliminary plans as soon as possible. Solicit corporate sponsors. Invite a student(s) intern from FAU's Public History program to assist the CRA staff. Contact Sandy Norman or Don Curl, FAU. People to be invited to future meetings: Clay Wideman Michael Weiner Nancy Earnhart Spencer Pompey Sandy Simon Press : Representatives of the Post; News; Sentinel: at a later date Miami Herald THE NEXT MEETING WILL BE HELD ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 6, 1992 AT 4 :00 PM IN THE COMMUNITY ROOM AT OLD SCHOOL SQUARE, 1913 BUILDING. Please make comments and additional suggestions and bring these notes to the May 6th meeting. Pat Cayce April 22, 1992 NATIONAL PRESERVATION :WEEK MAY 10-16, 1992 NAME THE BUILDING CONTEST SPONSORED BY: HISTORIC PALM BEACH COUNTY o.. , �a rat r _t 1 1 . kk ; ' ' . ,.tr .1.. i t- I : , 1 ;. , • il, . , ... i .. , ,r. , I.., ,.. , 1 , ..,-, s ,4 @ • t ^ l ' sir Psi• ....t „.: -' { �. CI 1 u4 f An ti '\ r • lietrail 11 • ' ... - a El /R01)1,'''':' . . fit,,A ,M $ „yy) g{ x di.tt goer AiniA art i A. .� '� 11' 11 51• ■ • < �� a rl. $ { M , qAl Al ' .,fin. 1 . 1 A r as rzs e ,, +�t «.9 v t ,. F 7. - ,fi_ y£ lid 4 - r �� ` t "? � t 77LLL.-'' ^� if— l''.7;111‘,1" I r. ,,, , ,,,, \ 1 . ,, r;., ,-„,i , .. ,. ------ „-__.... i, .,, „, ....,,,,,, , .. . ,k,„-..i. -„- i ti ' •„,..„, .2.1.,it 1 .t,r, .1,,,,, ',, . ,,,,,,,, sue$ 7'- ^ - i •+ s k:?a;, f 7 v..i-,t».,,„FM ^"" men Y i. E a.d ` A ,1 '}, I. 1st Prize:$50.00 cash and$50.00 Gift Certificate,Office Depot 2nd Prize:$25.00 Gift Certificate,liberties Bookstore,Mimer Park 3rd Prize:Family Membership,foxahatchee Museum,Jupiter 4th Prize:Palm Beach County by Dr.Donald Curl Name Phone Address State Zip • City 1. 2. 3 4 5 d` • 7. 8. 9 10. 11. 12 Fill in the name of the historic building and mail to:Historic Palm Beach County,P.O.Box 1494,Boca Raton,Florida 33429. Contest Rules:1.No purchase necessary.2.Entrants must be age 18 or older.3.Original entry blank required.No copies or facsimiles wll be accepted.4.Only one entry per personaccepted.5.Empioyeesofcontestsponsorsandtheir«spectiveagerxaesandrelatedconantdorsarenoteligtbktoeater.6.WinnesswllbedtoeeabyrandomdaWingon ' May 29,1992 and will be notified by phone. 7.Judges decision wll be final. P?!!! !!? THE LOXAHATCHEE HISTORICAL SOCIETY AND MUSEUM 805 North U.S. Highway One Jupiter, Florida 33477 407-747-6639 PRESS RELEASE "Alligators: Dragons in Paradise,' Tuesday, May 5, 1992 - Sunday, July 19, 1992 The Loxahatchee Historical Society and Museum announces the forthcoming temporary exhibit from the Museum of Florida History Traveling Exhibits Program, Tallahassee. The exhibit is a potpourri of fact and fancy which explores man' s enduring fascination with the alligator and its symbolic and sociological role in Florida history. It is a multi-faceted exhibit which includes artifacts such as alligator bags, shoes, and purses; reproductions of the skulls of an alligator and a crocodile; and a variety of other alligator souvenirs and memorabilia. A simulated nest, complete with eggs and an alligator growth chart trace the development of an alligator from birth to maturity. HOURS OF OPERATION: Tuesday - Friday 10: 00 AM - 4: 00 PM Saturday 1: 00 PM - 4 : 00 PM Sunday 1: 00 PM - 4: 00 PM Monday CLOSED FOR MORE INFORMATION CALL THE MUSEUM AT 407-747-6639 NOTICE OF CANCELLATION THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING SCHEDULED FOR WEDNESDAY MAY 20, 1992 AT 6 :00 PM IN THE FIRST FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM HAS BEEN CANCELLED. The next meeting of the Historic Preservation Board will be held on Wednesday June 3, 1992 at 6 :00 PM in the First Floor Conference Room. .f Patricia Cayce i' Historic Preservation Planner AGENDA HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING WEDNESDAY, MAY 20, 1992 6 :00 PM FIRST FLOOR CONFERENCE ROOM, CITY HALL Please be advised that 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 proceeding is made, which 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. 1 . Roll Call 2 . COA 8-176 334 N.E. 1st Avenue, Tony Keller, Owner. New construction of a two car garage with an apartment above. Old School Square Historic District. 3. COA 8-139C Old School Square Cultural Arts Center, 51 N. Swinton Avenue, Joe Gillie, Director. Donor identification signs for the Old School Square buildings. 4 . Reports from Historic Districts. 5. Unfinished Business. 6 . New Business. 7 . Approval of the May 6, 1992 meeting. 8. Adjournment.