Loading...
HPB-09-02-09 44 °A AGENDA p _ P;i4 HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD Meeting Date: September 2, 2009 Time: 6:00 P.M. Type of Meeting: Regular Meeting Location: City Commission Chambers The City shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service,program,or activity conducted by the City. Please contact Doug Smith at 243-7144 24 hours prior to the program or activity in order for the City to reasonably accommodate your request. Adaptive listening devices are available for meetings in the Commission Chambers. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Historic Preservation Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting or hearing,such persons will need a record of these proceedings,and for this purpose such persons may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. Such record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The City does not provide or prepare such record. Two or more City Commissioners may be in attendance. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Chair, Vice Chair, Second Vice Chair IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA V.MINUTES A. January 7, 2009 B. February 4, 2009 C. February 18, 2009 Note: The January 21, 2009 meeting was cancelled VI. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS A. Pineapple Grove, Ltd., Old School Square Historic District— Pineapple Grove, Ltd., Property Owner. Consideration of architectural drawings for a single-family residence and office building located along NE 1st Avenue associated with a Class IV Site Plan Modification and Certificate of Appropriateness (2009-078) approved at the HPB meeting of August 19, 2009. B. 137 NW 1st Avenue, Willow Laboratories, Old School Square Historic District— Certificate of Appropriateness (2009-175) for a free-standing sign on a contributing property. VII. DISCUSSION ITEMS Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Review guidebook and discuss revising current edition, last updated in 2003. VIII. REPORTS AND COMMENTS • Public Comments • Board Members • Staff IX. ADJOURN A my E. AUvare' Amy E. Alvarez Historic Preservation Planner Posted on: August 26, 2009 Planning & Zoning Department MEMORANDUM l,Py qve�Q TO: Historic Preservation Board Members FROM: Amy E. Alvarez, Historic Preservation Planner DATE: September 2, 2009 RE: Historic Preservation Guidebook The Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (also referred to as the "Guidebook") was last revised and updated in 2003 by Janus Research. Over the next few months, Staff will be updating the guidebook with the intent of providing additional historic information on each district, providing specific guidelines based on historic development patterns in each district, addressing the amendments to LDR Section 4.5.1 in 2008 which provided regulations for "Major Development" and "Minor Development", providing information and guidelines on newer building and construction materials, hurricane protection, resources, and any additional topics that the Board and Staff determine should be included. The guidebook's format, organization, and presentation should also be considered. If you do not have a hardcopy to use for this "project", you can print a copy from the City's website at http://www.mydelraybeach.com/Delray/Departments/Planning+and+Zoning/Historic+Preservati on/Historic+Preservation+Design+Guidelines.htm Please note that this link was previously provided, and can be resent via email if necessary. A general overview is anticipated for this meeting, with Public Hearings held each month through January 2010. A final draft version should be available for review by the Board no later than February 2010, where a recommendation will be made to the City Commission for final adoption no later than March 2010. 6��` °'� AGENDA -44y 84,7 HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD Meeting Date: September 2, 2009 Time: 6:00 P.M. Type of Meeting: Regular Meeting Location: City Commission Chambers The City shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service,program,or activity conducted by the City. Please contact Doug Smith at 243-7144 24 hours prior to the program or activity in order for the City to reasonably accommodate your request. Adaptive listening devices are available for meetings in the Commission Chambers. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Historic Preservation Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting or hearing,such persons will need a record of these proceedings,and for this purpose such persons may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. Such record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The City does not provide or prepare such record. Two or more City Commissioners may be in attendance. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Chair, Vice Chair, Second Vice Chair IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA V.MINUTES A. January 7, 2009 B. February 4, 2009 C. February 18, 2009 Note: The January 21, 2009 meeting was cancelled VI. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS A. Pineapple Grove, Ltd., Old School Square Historic District— Pineapple Grove, Ltd., Property Owner. Consideration of architectural drawings for a single-family residence and office building located along NE 1st Avenue associated with a Class IV Site Plan Modification and Certificate of Appropriateness (2009-078) approved at the HPB meeting of August 19, 2009. B. 137 NW 1st Avenue, Willow Laboratories, Old School Square Historic District— Certificate of Appropriateness (2009-175) for a free-standing sign on a contributing property. VII. DISCUSSION ITEMS Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Review guidebook and discuss revising current edition, last updated in 2003. VIII. REPORTS AND COMMENTS • Public Comments • Board Members • Staff IX. ADJOURN A wt y E. Ai/vat/re/6/ Amy E. Alvarez Historic Preservation Planner Posted on: August 26, 2009 DE�LRAYo u BEACH r All-America City 1 r 1993 2001 SIGN IN SHEET 2001 Regular Historic Preservation Board Meeting September 2, 2009 PRINT FULL NAME ADDRESS OR ITEM NO. ORGANIZATION e It / .I ��9 r b o r2-e- ry / Te,r / Planning & Zoning Department 4r HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEMBERS 2008 — 2010 NAME TELEPHONE/FAX/CELL/E-MAIL TERM EXPIRES Dan Sloan Office: (561)243-8755 8/31/11 106 SE 7th Avenue Fax: (561) 243-8755 Delray Beach, FL 33483 Home: (561) 272-7091 Cell: (561) 441-6149 e-mail: dsloansloanproperties.biz Rhonda Sexton Office: (561) 276-3660 8/31/11 416 SE 5th Street Fax: (561) 276-6277 Delray Beach, FL 33483 Home: (561) 499-2293 Cell: (561) 445-0660 e-mail: rhonda@sextonhouse.com Roger Cope Office: (561) 274-6706 8/31/11 Cope Architects, Inc. Fax: (562) 274-6707 80 NE 4th Ave Cell: (561) 789-3791 Delray Beach, FL 33483 Home: (561) 274-7188 e-mail: copearchitectsbellsouth.net • Not Yet Filled Pamela Reeder Office: (561) 8/31/11 18 NE 12th Street Home: (561) 276-3011 Delray Beach, FL 33444 Fax: (561) 278-5546 Cell: (561) 667-1240 e-mail: pbr99Cccomcase.net Thomas Stanley Office (561) 276-6363 8/31/10 725 Palm Trail #17 Home: Delray Beach, FL 33483 Cell: Fax: (561) 276-8881 e-mail tommacmillanstanlev.com Ms. Toni Del Fiandra Office: (561) 274-6227 8/31/10 MacMillan & Stanley Home: (561) 272-3766 29 NE 4th Avenue Fax: (561) 274-6279 Delray Beach, FL 33444 Cell: (561) 441-5527 e-mail: Delfiant(a�bellsouth.net delfiandratoni(a bellsouth.net. Amy Alvarez, Historic Preservation Planner 243-7284 Denise Valek, Executive Assistant 243-7041 (cell 302-1082) August 31,2009 )► f ; .( • 4614. . -___ gill . , : „t„, _. . ,,,, 1. ..._.ri-J- n al • - .. - '-', ii,i!il ' . . . II 1, .,. , . _._ . _ : 4 _, _._ ..,•,,,, ..„1,4, .. , _.....v 1 :_. , . ..-..itilti., .r.____......0 $_. 0.:", { 'g.... . I aro am r_:_) Laboratories __,_) wi i low ]r South J � 4-v J 137 48" / 41 ‘ Wi low 1 Laboratories South imp M 0 [69/46 137 ( 1 4x4 BUILT UP PT POSTS HDU TRIM 3/4" MDO PANELS SECURED TO POSTS WITH 1.5x1.5x.125 ALUMINUM ANGLES 1/4" SS BOLTS THRU PANELS #10x2" SS SCREWS INTO 4x4s BLUE COPY POSTS TO MATCH BLDG. COLOR SET IN CONCRETE 48 " Willow Laboratories South 4r- Zo nitt /2 J � 1 137 4NBLDG. ' SIGN 1' SET BACK 137 NW 3rd AVE 75' FRONTAGE <( CA Planning 85 Zoning Department � MEMORANDUM '4Y TO: Historic Preservation Board Members FROM: Amy E. Alvarez, Historic Preservation Planner DATE: September 2, 2009 RE: Historic Preservation Guidebook The Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (also referred to as the "Guidebook") was last revised and updated in 2003 by Janus Research. Over the next few months, Staff will be updating the guidebook with the intent of providing additional historic information on each district, providing specific guidelines based on historic development patterns in each district, addressing the amendments to LDR Section 4.5.1 in 2008 which provided regulations for "Major Development" and "Minor Development", providing information and guidelines on newer building and construction materials, hurricane protection, resources, and any additional topics that the Board and Staff determine should be included. The guidebook's format, organization, and presentation should also be considered. If you do not have a hardcopy to use for this "project", you can print a copy from the City's website at http://www.mydelraybeach.com/Delray/Departments/Planning+and+Zoninq/Historic+Preservati on/Historic+Preservation+Design+Guidelines.htm Please note that this link was previously provided, and can be resent via email if necessary. A general overview is anticipated for this meeting, with Public Hearings held each month through January 2010. A final draft version should be available for review by the Board no later than February 2010, where a recommendation will be made to the City Commission for final adoption no later than March 2010. ' r N` - -;4 .. :, f om-:::: - - _, a 411/. . 41:1N .- -. -:.*. HI i , .,. w.f Willow I37 iI -r► I illilillggllIll1/11/1111 0 ifi J I W a I i Willow Laboratories South 1 J ,..._ (*-- c,„wi,,,,, 72 1 137 r nr 1 48" wi now] Laboratorie(1117 South Q 1 r Q J � 10 [6k4 1 • 137 4x4 BUILT UP PT POSTS HDU TRIM 3/4" MDO PANELS SECURED TO POSTS WITH 1.5x1.5x.125 ALUMINUM ANGLES 1/4" SS BOLTS THRU PANELS #10x2" SS SCREWS INTO 4x4s BLUE COPY POSTS TO MATCH BLDG. COLOR SET IN CONCRETE 48 " Willow Laboratories South J L 137 ANBLDG. SIGN 1' SET BACK 137 NW 3rd AVE 75' FRONTAGE ___7` AGENDA 107. HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD Meeting Date: September 2, 2009 Time: 6:00 P.M. Type of Meeting: Regular Meeting Location: City Commission Chambers The City shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service,program,or activity conducted by the City. Please contact Doug Smith at 243-7144 24 hours prior to the program or activity in order for the City to reasonably accommodate your request. Adaptive listening devices are available for meetings in the Commission Chambers. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Historic Preservation Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting or hearing,such persons will need a record of these proceedings,and for this purpose such persons may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. Such record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The City does not provide or prepare such record. Two or more City Commissioners may be in attendance. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL 09/2 /2oye' 7h 6/2 dig III. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Chair, Vice C air, Second Vice Chair IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA V.MINUTES A. January 7, 2009 B. February 4, 2009 C. February 18, 2009 Note: The January 21, 2009 meeting was cancelled VI. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS A. Pineapple Grove, Ltd., Old School Square Historic District— Pineapple Grove, Ltd., Property Owner. Consideration of architectural drawings for a single-family residence and office building located along NE 1st Avenue associated with a Class IV Site Plan Modification and Certificate of Appropriateness (2009-078) approved at the HPB meeting of August 19, 2009. B. 137 NW 1st Avenue, Willow Laboratories, Old School Square Historic District— Certificate of Appropriateness (2009-175) for a free-standing sign on a contributing property. VII. DISCUSSION ITEMS Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Review guidebook and discuss revising current edition, last updated in 2003. VIII. REPORTS AND COMMENTS • Public Comments • Board Members • Staff IX. ADJOURN Amy E. A INoure/i,/ Amy E. Alvarez Historic Preservation Planner Posted on: August 26, 2009 • 4,4 OA. AGENDA v � r HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD Meeting Date: September 2, 2009 Time: 6:00 P.M. Type of Meeting: Regular Meeting Location: City Commission Chambers The City shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service,program,or activity conducted by the City. Please contact Doug Smith at 243-7144 24 hours prior to the program or activity in order for the City to reasonably accommodate your request. Adaptive listening devices are available for meetings in the Commission Chambers. If a person decides to appeal any decision made by the Historic Preservation Board with respect to any matter considered at this meeting or hearing,such persons will need a record of these proceedings,and for this purpose such persons may need to ensure that a verbatim record of the proceedings is made. Such record includes the testimony and evidence upon which the appeal is to be based. The City does not provide or prepare such record. Two or more City Commissioners may be in attendance. I. CALL TO ORDER II. ROLL CALL III. ELECTION OF OFFICERS: Chair, Vice Chair, Second Vice Chair IV. APPROVAL OF AGENDA V.MINUTES A. January 7, 2009 B. February 4, 2009 C. February 18, 2009 Note: The January 21, 2009 meeting was cancelled VI. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS A. Pineapple Grove, Ltd., Old School Square Historic District— Pineapple Grove, Ltd., Property Owner. Consideration of architectural drawings for a single-family residence and office building located along NE 1st Avenue associated with a Class IV Site Plan Modification and Certificate of Appropriateness (2009-078) approved at the HPB meeting of August 19, 2009. B. 137 NW 1st Avenue, Willow Laboratories, Old School Square Historic District— Certificate of Appropriateness (2009-175) for a free-standing sign on a contributing property. VII. DISCUSSION ITEMS Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines Review guidebook and discuss revising current edition, last updated in 2003. VIII. REPORTS AND COMMENTS • Public Comments • Board Members • Staff IX. ADJOURN Amy E. AUva rer' Amy E. Alvarez Historic Preservation Planner Posted on: August 26, 2009 r , .,-„,*/,. : .... ' '-'',1.4•Vsi t.,J. 7 =,..-:'... 7 A„..•„4,41-,7.-, ..F.,),,,r,....4-- - .-...,., .%.,..i. ,..._ ...•,''.,,:- .:.= . ----3-.'-','T'!-'1--:al' l'P'---- -1.*i:,472-",..-;,_ - N_ -'''' _-_-:: =•••-: , , : • . ._ •••-i':LI:..1:......':.-, ,,,i*;-';*••"--* - '',-_,_ ''-=, ----1,-,:-.J,-_:.-.7_.;_:'-',',,,,,- - , - ,,. ..:=4 :.4..,e :.--. ' --• • -'r-f *.t- =: .;-Wt., '. .::;:-..-'7•5--..Airk-- _• - '-.., .N,..=-•- .1.4::"-..-_--r.4. -‘-_-.',',7,-=-.4,-.. NN. '-;Z4'i.-• • - •,,,;f1: '., •-• _ ,„ _ ,..,____,. N.,._____......_.• -: - _._,__ ,.,,.,,,,,.--:. i 6,:c 1-• ,-,,-. .,-„i = .---; _i-;---r-r...7-. . ---; ,.-.:'--'t ,_ - ------':*7-',;77;-'17;W4---- - "`;',-;--,•,......,..T-''''-,,'"t--- '---'- '-::e A 1 ,.. , - i - .A.., 1. . :ye01..71t.: -r• - -- ,,, ii ,,::,_:-_.r, 1 ----. - lii - ! ! .,4-•-- - 1 i .,.-;',.7-1 - - Ela" .... -. .-:-. ! ' ' 0 1,_ 7_7--7--, _=,-. m:-, -.---.:- . ----•,1‘-- ,4 5 i •...r,,-7.1 . ,, r-:77'• ,...-..,..-zo,F...,:..,-; .--7-'•'--,- '. -7,.:1-,.-"----,,----:-..,' - -".7ik--:';'7' thfli,-11-, ',• ..-44-zei).-- . 7:',;---------:-=' - -_I,i;;:- If.f.:q..:&:-4:--,-C:.-1,-.-','2. -•-•,--, '-.7--,--,- -.7- ..-,-..,.,.. .,42,,,,.., ,-,j•:-.- ,. - 4'-r,4r.t.1•1'1',I' -..% : 111111!! .:2--- .1_L 3•1}---1_ ..SP-• C,........ '.. ' •P''''' ...--''•-,,:i;il•31:--- - I ' -,:. .1%._ • '';'-tt 2-!',.: '= ''' "-- '...••-r•--7-.-.4..-:-..6 T. .:a..., -,, :.........,.. ----• - - ;""_. - . - .----. . - -- - -----• ' - ... -. ,._., — - . - ._,1-----'';'---- __-_,,..' ''''.• - -_- '----•.-----;',--" r_ ) _2-- r ---------) _ ---. r ) a_ - = - 1 CI W ] •,_:., rf.,-.,--,-;-• Laboratories South ... , :„....„. , . :. --.' 1 ) . __ .. . - __,.......„ „.......„...., if......„,...,; "..•---1,.,f•:f--Ft44 -z-..K-Z----LA--.--,s '.-..:•2-',1-1:--ii.-42.-4,7', „....,,,.....:,.....- --.=-..--,::-,,,,,...:,-,.. • --.7--;±1:--r--:,---:',----7-="--,-_,:- 48" Laboratories South 0 � J � • 1 2 , ( 1 ( 1 4x4 BUILT UP PT POSTS HDU TRIM 3/4" MDO PANELS SECURED TO POSTS WITH 1.5x1.5x.125 ALUMINUM ANGLES 1/4" SS BOLTS THRU PANELS #10x2" SS SCREWS INTO 4x4s BLUE COPY POSTS TO MATCH BLDG. COLOR SET IN CONCRETE 48 " (7.---------- .... I• LC) Cr) � Laboratories �, South ,ier J Mt CDIN\:,...\\:.\\:s...,\\__y zt ii. -'" A /2 j c\I ,iii, '\............" ..... 1 --- r 1 7 N BLDG. ' SIGN 1 SET BACK 137 NW 3rd AVE 75' FRONTAGE HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD September 2, 2009 MEETING COMMENCED: 6:05 p.m. V. Minutes VI. A. VI.B. Design Guidelines NAME ATTEND Pineapple Grove 137 NW 1st Ave Discussion 1/07/09 2/04/09 2/18/09 VOTE With Conditions With Conditions 6T00 6T00 6T00 6T00 6T00 ROGER COPE P MM MM MM MM MM P PAM REEDER P TOM STANLEY P T DEL FIANDRA 2ND 2ND 2ND 2ND 2ND P DAN SLOAN P RHONDA SEXTON Election of Officers: Chair: Dan Sloan, Vice Chair- Roger Cope, Second Vice Chair- Rhonda Sexton MEETING ADJOURNED 7:45 P.M. <4 OA • Planning & Zoning Department gy ;r�*. MEMORANDUM TO: Historic Preservation Board Members FROM: Amy E. Alvarez, Historic Preservation Planner DATE: September 2, 2009 RE: Historic Preservation Guidebook The Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines (also referred to as the "Guidebook") was last revised and updated in 2003 by Janus Research. Over the next few months, Staff will be updating the guidebook with the intent of providing additional historic information on each district, providing specific guidelines based on historic development patterns in each district, addressing the amendments to LDR Section 4.5.1 in 2008 which provided regulations for "Major Development" and "Minor Development", providing information and guidelines on newer building and construction materials, hurricane protection, resources, and any additional topics that the Board and Staff determine should be included. The guidebook's format, organization, and presentation should also be considered. If you do not have a hardcopy to use for this "project", you can print a copy from the City's website at http://www.mydelraybeach.com/Delray/Departments/Planninq+and+Zoninq/Historic+Preservati on/Historic+Preservation+Design+Guidelines.htm Please note that this link was previously provided, and can be resent via email if necessary. A general overview is anticipated for this meeting, with Public Hearings held each month through January 2010. A final draft version should be available for review by the Board no later than February 2010, where a recommendation will be made to the City Commission for final adoption no later than March 2010. A HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEMORANDUM STAFF REPORT Applicant: Willow Laboratories South Authorized Agent: MacLaren Sign Co. Project Location: 137 NW 1st Avenue, Old School Square Historic District HPB Meeting Date: September 2, 2009 File No.: 2009-175 ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The action before the Board is a Certificate of Appropriateness for the installation of a free-standing sign on a contributing property located at 137 NW 1st Avenue, Old School Square Historic District, pursuant to Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 2.4.6(H). BACKGROUND & PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject property consists of the south 1.5' of Lot 1 and Lot 2 less the south 3', Block 59, Town of Delray, and is located within the Old School Square Historic District. The circa 1921 contributing structure is zoned Old School Square Historic Arts District (OSSHAD). A Class V Site Plan Application was approved with conditions by the Board in 2003. The application consisted of converting the 824 sq. ft. one-story, contributing, single family home to an office, demolishing an 867 sq. ft. one-story, contributing cottage/garage, constructing a 1,526 sq. ft. addition on the contributing building, and other required site improvements. In 2007, an HPB Award was presented to the property owner and development team for these improvements. The current proposal is for a free-standing sign at the front of the property to be placed perpendicular to NW 1st Avenue. The pressure treated wood posts measure 7' in height, and contain two (2) sign panels measuring a combined 48" in width and 60" in height. Separated by approximately 3 1/2", both panels are of%" high density, urethane foam. The posts are proposed to match the color of the structure (light orange/peach), while the sign face will be white with blue letters. The upper panel will contain the business logo and state "Willow Laboratories South" while the lower panel will contain an additional logo and state "Lotus 12", with the street number noted below. A color sketch showing the sign specifications and location are attached. The COA for a sign is now before the Board for consideration. ANALYSIS LDR SECTION 4.6.7—SIGNS LDR Section 4.6.7(A) is noted below as it applies to the subject signage request(emphasis added). (A) Purpose: The purposes of these sign regulations are: to minimize the possible adverse affect of signs on nearby public and private property; to foster the integration of signage with architectural and landscape designs. 137 NW 1st Avenue COA 2009-175 NPB Meeting September 2 2009 Page 2 of 5 (2) Preservation of Community's Beauty: The City of Delray Beach which includes a beach resort community as well as major office and industrial parks relies heavily on its natural surroundings and beautification efforts to retain its economic advantage. This concern is reflected by actively regulating the appearance and design of signs. (3) Property Value Protection: Signs should not create a nuisance to the occupancy or use of other properties as a result of their size, height, brightness, or movement. They should be in harmony with buildings, the neighborhood, and other conforming signs in the area. Staff Analysis: The above noted LDR has been provided with particular emphasis placed on those components applicable to the subject proposal and should be taken into consideration upon review by the Board. Upon review by Staff, it does not appear that the proposed sign complies fully with the above noted purposes with respect to color and height as further explained on page 4, and revisions are recommended by Staff to result in a more compatible and appropriate solution. LDR Section 4.6.7(D) (2) (a)-(c) addresses "Aesthetic Qualifications" and states: The aesthetic quality of a building, or of an entire neighborhood, is materially affected by achieving visual harmony of the sign on or about a structure as it relates to the architecture or the building or the adjacent surroundings. The following aesthetic conditions must be met: (a) Garishness: The overall effect of the lettering, configuration or color of a sign shall not be garish. "Garish" signs are those that are too bright gaudy, showy, glaring, and/or cheaply brilliant or involving excessive ornamentation. Garish signs are not in harmony with and not compatible with the building or adjacent surroundings. (b) Scale and Conformity with Surroundings: The scale of the sign in terms of area, shall be consistent with the scale of the building on which it is to be placed or painted and the neighborhood or streetscape where it is to be located. Scale shall also be considered in terms of Subsection (F) (2) with respect to height and area. (c) Quality: All signs shall have a professional appearance that enhances the visual aesthetics of the area. Staff Analysis: The proposed sign is not considered to be garish as it is complimentary to the historic structure. However, its scale should be reduced to provide a compatible signage example for the subject property which contains a one-story structure. The recommended reduction is further explained below. As far as the quality, undoubtedly the sign will have a professional appearance. LDR Section 4.6.7(E)(7) contains signage regulations for all historic districts and the OSSHAD zoning district as follows: Type of Sign Quantity Area— Maximum Location Height Illumination Wall 30 Square Feet On Building Face N/A Allowed Projecting 2 per From Building or Maxax y 30 Square Feet Under Canopy N/A Allowed proFreestanding 30 Square Feet May be in Front N/A Allowed Yard Setback 137 NW 1st Avenue COA 2009-175 HPS Meeting September 2.2009 Page 3 of 5 In addition, LDR Section 4.6.7(E)(3)(c) applies to the proposed freestanding sign since it will be located one foot (1') from the front property line and therefore governs this proposal: (c) Allowed Totally in Standard Setback: When considered as a part of a site plan approval, or modification to a site plan, a sign may be located totally within the ten foot (10) setback area provided that: 1. The sign height is not greater than seven feet(7); 2. The sign area is less than twenty square feet(20 sq.ft.) Staff Analysis: The proposed sign complies with the subject regulation. The Visual Compatibility Standards of LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(8) are also applicable to the proposal, and revisions are suggested as conditions of approval below and in the Staff recommendation. LDR SECTION 4.5.1 — HISTORIC PRESERVATION SITES AND DISTRICTS Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(H)(5), prior to approval, a finding must be made that any Certificate of Appropriateness which is to be approved is consistent with Historic Preservation purposes pursuant to Objective A-4 of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan and specifically with provisions of Section 4.5.1, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. LDR Sections 4.5.1(E)(5) and 4.5.1(E)(8) provide guidelines in evaluating Certificates of Appropriateness for the alteration or addition of exterior architectural features. The applicable guidelines are as follows: (E)(5) Standards and Guidelines A historic site, building, structure, improvement, or appurtenance within a historic district shall only be altered, restored, preserved, repaired, relocated, demolished, or otherwise changed in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, and the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, as amended from time to time. (See applicable Standards and Guidelines below) (E)(8) Visual Compatibility Standards 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 facade proportion, proportion of openings (windows and doors), rhythm of solids to voids, rhythm of buildings on streets, rhythm of entrance and/or porch projections, relationship of materials, texture and color, roof shapes, walls of continuity, scale of a building, directional expression of front elevation, architectural style, and additions. Visual compatibility for minor and major development as referenced in Section 4.5.1(E)(2) shall be determined by utilizing criteria contained in (a)-(m). The following Visual Compatibility Standards apply: (a) Height: The height of proposed buildings or modifications shall be visually compatible in comparison or relation to the height of existing structures and buildings in a historic district for all major and minor development. (g) Relationship of Materials, Texture, and Color: The relationship of materials, texture, and color of the facade of a building and/or hardscaping shall be visually compatible with the predominant materials used in the historic buildings and structures within the subject historic district. 137 NW i sf Avenue COA 2009-175 HPB Meeting September 2.2009 Page 4 of 5 Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines The Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines suggest the following regarding signage: • Use materials and sign types that are based on historical precedent. • The scale of the signage should relate to the scale and detail of the historic building, and not overwhelm or call attention to the sign. • The material of the sign need not be identical, but should be compatible with the construction materials of the building. Staff Analysis: No direct reference is made to signage affecting historic structures, sites, or districts within the review criteria above; however, there is specific intent to project the importance of preserving "character- defining" and distinctive features, and discussing scale and compatibility with respect to new construction for historic structures and districts. Overall, the intent of the review criteria has been met as the proposed free-standing sign is appropriate with respect to the style of the one-story contributing structure located on the property. However, there is a concern that the freestanding sign will be out of character with the scale of the property and streetscape based upon its height. As such, it is recommended that the Board discuss the size and height design with the applicant and consider an overall height of four feet, six inches (4'6") [thereby reducing the overall height by two feet, six inches (2'6")]. These suggested revisions are in keeping with sizes of other previously Board approved freestanding signs. Another option the Board may want to consider is a hanging/projecting sign consisting of one post and located in the same proposed position. While not specified as a guideline, the colors of the sign should complement those of the structure. The posts will match the building; however, the white background may appear too stark, and should be revised to a shade in keeping with the structure's color scheme such as a light cream, similar to that of the walls. This recommended color revision intends to provide a visually compatible solution between the signage and the building. Based upon modifications to the proposed freestanding sign as discussed above, positive findings can be made with regard to the Land Development Regulations, Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Continue with direction. B. Move approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness (2009-175) for 137 NW 1st Avenue, Old School Square Historic District, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. C. Move denial of the Certificate of Appropriateness (2009-175) for 137 NW 1st Avenue, Old School Square Historic District, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not meet criteria set forth in the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. 137 Null'let Avenue COA 2009-175 HPB Meeting September 2,2009 Page 5 of 5 - RECOMMENDATION Approve the Certificate of Appropriateness (2009-175) for 137 NW 1st Avenue, Old School Square Historic District, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation subject to the following conditions: 1. That either the sign background is revised from white to a color complimentary to the building; and, 2. That the total height of the sign not exceed 4'6". Staff Report Prepared by:Amy E.Alvarez, Historic Preservation Planner Attachments: •Site Plan •Sign Details •Photographs .1 HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEMORANDUM STAFF REPORT Applicant: Willow Laboratories South Authorized Agent: MacLaren Sign Co. Project Location: 137 NW 1st Avenue, Old School Square Historic District HPB Meeting Date: September 2, 2009 File No.: 2009-175 ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The action before the Board is a Certificate of Appropriateness for the installation of a free-standing sign on a contributing property located at 137 NW 1st Avenue, Old School Square Historic District, pursuant to Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 2.4.6(H). BACKGROUND & PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject property consists of the south 1.5' of Lot 1 and Lot 2 less the south 3', Block 59, Town of Delray, and is located within the Old School Square Historic District. The circa 1921 contributing structure is zoned Old School Square Historic Arts District (OSSHAD). A Class V Site Plan Application was approved with conditions by the Board in 2003. The application consisted of converting the 824 sq. ft. one-story, contributing, single family home to an office, demolishing an 867 sq. ft. one-story, contributing cottage/garage, constructing a 1,526 sq. ft. addition on the contributing building, and other required site improvements. In 2007, an HPB Award was presented to the property owner and development team for these improvements. The current proposal is for a free-standing sign at the front of the property to be placed perpendicular to NW 1st Avenue. The pressure treated wood posts measure 7' in height, and contain two (2) sign panels measuring a combined 48" in width and 60" in height. Separated by approximately 3 '/2", both panels are of 3/4" high density, urethane foam. The posts are proposed to match the color of the structure (light orange/peach), while the sign face will be white with blue letters. The upper panel will contain the business logo and state "Willow Laboratories South" while the lower panel will contain an additional logo and state "Lotus 12", with the street number noted below. A color sketch showing the sign specifications and location are attached. The COA for a sign is now before the Board for consideration. ANALYSIS LDR SECTION 4.6.7—SIGNS LDR Section 4.6.7(A) is noted below as it applies to the subject signage request(emphasis added). (A) Purpose: The purposes of these sign regulations are: to minimize the possible adverse affect of signs on nearby public and private property; to foster the integration of signage with architectural and landscape designs. 137 NW 1st Avenue COA 2009-175 HPB Meeting September 2,2009 Page 2 of 5 (2) Preservation of Community's Beauty: The City of Delray Beach which includes a beach resort community as well as major office and industrial parks relies heavily on its natural surroundings and beautification efforts to retain its economic advantage. This concern is reflected by actively regulating the appearance and design of signs. (3) Property Value Protection: Signs should not create a nuisance to the occupancy or use of other properties as a result of their size, height, brightness, or movement. They should be in harmony with buildings, the neighborhood, and other conforming signs in the area. Staff Analysis: The above noted LDR has been provided with particular emphasis placed on those components applicable to the subject proposal and should be taken into consideration upon review by the Board. Upon review by Staff, it does not appear that the proposed sign complies fully with the above noted purposes with respect to color and height as further explained on page 4, and revisions are recommended by Staff to result in a more compatible and appropriate solution. LDR Section 4.6.7(D) (2) (a)-(c) addresses "Aesthetic Qualifications" and states: The aesthetic quality of a building, or of an entire neighborhood, is materially affected by achieving visual harmony of the sign on or about a structure as it relates to the architecture or the building or the adjacent surroundings. The following aesthetic conditions must be met: (a) Garishness: The overall effect of the lettering, configuration or color of a sign shall not be garish. "Garish" signs are those that are too bright gaudy, showy, glaring, and/or cheaply brilliant or involving excessive ornamentation. Garish signs are not in harmony with and not compatible with the building or adjacent surroundings. (b) Scale and Conformity with Surroundings: The scale of the sign in terms of area, shall be consistent with the scale of the building on which it is to be placed or painted and the neighborhood or streetscape where it is to be located. Scale shall also be considered in terms of Subsection (F) (2) with respect to height and area. (c) Quality: All signs shall have a professional appearance that enhances the visual aesthetics of the area. Staff Analysis: The proposed sign is not considered to be garish as it is complimentary to the historic structure. However, its scale should be reduced to provide a compatible signage example for the subject property which contains a one-story structure. The recommended reduction is further explained below. As far as the quality, undoubtedly the sign will have a professional appearance. LDR Section 4.6.7(E)(7) contains signage regulations for all historic districts and the OSSHAD zoning district as follows: Type of Sign Quantity Area— Maximum Location Height Illumination Wall 30 Square Feet On Building Face N/A Allowed Projecting From Building or 2 perperty 30 Square Feet Under Canopy N/A Allowed pro Freestanding 30 Square Feet May be in Front N/A Allowed Yard Setback 137 NW 1st Avenue COA 2009-175 HPB Meeting September 2,2009 Page 3 at 5 In addition, LDR Section 4.6.7(E)(3)(c) applies to the proposed freestanding sign since it will be located one foot (1') from the front property line and therefore governs this proposal: (c) Allowed Totally in Standard Setback: When considered as a part of a site plan approval, or modification to a site plan, a sign may be located totally within the ten foot (10) setback area provided that: 1. The sign height is not greater than seven feet(7); 2. The sign area is less than twenty square feet(20 sq.ft.) Staff Analysis: The proposed sign complies with the subject regulation. The Visual Compatibility Standards of LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(8) are also applicable to the proposal, and revisions are suggested as conditions of approval below and in the Staff recommendation. LDR SECTION 4.5.1 — HISTORIC PRESERVATION SITES AND DISTRICTS Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(H)(5), prior to approval, a finding must be made that any Certificate of Appropriateness which is to be approved is consistent with Historic Preservation purposes pursuant to Objective A-4 of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan and specifically with provisions of Section 4.5.1, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. LDR Sections 4.5.1(E)(5) and 4.5.1(E)(8) provide guidelines in evaluating Certificates of Appropriateness for the alteration or addition of exterior architectural features. The applicable guidelines are as follows: (E)(5) Standards and Guidelines A historic site, building, structure, improvement, or appurtenance within a historic district shall only be altered, restored, preserved, repaired, relocated, demolished, or otherwise changed in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, and the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, as amended from time to time. (See applicable Standards and Guidelines below) (E)(8) Visual Compatibility Standards 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 proportion, proportion of openings (windows and doors), rhythm of solids to voids, rhythm of buildings on streets, rhythm of entrance and/or porch projections, relationship of materials, texture and color, roof shapes, walls of continuity, scale of a building, directional expression of front elevation, architectural style, and additions. Visual compatibility for minor and major development as referenced in Section 4.5.1(E)(2) shall be determined by utilizing criteria contained in (a)-(m). The following Visual Compatibility Standards apply: (a) Height: The height of proposed buildings or modifications shall be visually compatible in comparison or relation to the height of existing structures and buildings in a historic district for all major and minor development. (g) Relationship of Materials, Texture, and Color: The relationship of materials, texture, and color of the facade of a building and/or hardscaping shall be visually compatible with the predominant materials used in the historic buildings and structures within the subject historic district. 137 NW 1st Avenue COA 2009-175 I-IPB Mee'inq September 2.2009 Page 4 of 5 Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines The Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines suggest the following regarding signage: • Use materials and sign types that are based on historical precedent. • The scale of the signage should relate to the scale and detail of the historic building, and not overwhelm or call attention to the sign. • The material of the sign need not be identical, but should be compatible with the construction materials of the building. Staff Analysis: No direct reference is made to signage affecting historic structures, sites, or districts within the review criteria above; however, there is specific intent to project the importance of preserving "character- defining" and distinctive features, and discussing scale and compatibility with respect to new construction for historic structures and districts. Overall, the intent of the review criteria has been met as the proposed free-standing sign is appropriate with respect to the style of the one-story contributing structure located on the property. However, there is a concern that the freestanding sign will be out of character with the scale of the property and streetscape based upon its height. As such, it is recommended that the Board discuss the size and height design with the applicant and consider an overall height of four feet, six inches (4'6") [thereby reducing the overall height by two feet, six inches (2'6")]. These suggested revisions are in keeping with sizes of other previously Board approved freestanding signs. Another option the Board may want to consider is a hanging/projecting sign consisting of one post and located in the same proposed position. While not specified as a guideline, the colors of the sign should complement those of the structure. The posts will match the building; however, the white background may appear too stark, and should be revised to a shade in keeping with the structure's color scheme such as a light cream, similar to that of the walls. This recommended color revision intends to provide a visually compatible solution between the signage and the building. Based upon modifications to the proposed freestanding sign as discussed above, positive findings can be made with regard to the Land Development Regulations, Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Continue with direction. B. Move approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness (2009-175) for 137 NW 1st Avenue, Old School Square Historic District, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. C. Move denial of the Certificate of Appropriateness (2009-175) for 137 NW 1st Avenue, Old School Square Historic District, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not meet criteria set forth in the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. 137 NW 1st Avenue COA 2009-175 HPB Meeting September 2,2009 Page 5 of 5 RECOMMENDATION Approve the Certificate of Appropriateness (2009-175) for 137 NW 1st Avenue, Old School Square Historic District, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation subject to the following conditions: 1. That either the sign background is revised from white to a color complimentary o the building; and, 2. That the total height of the sign not exceed 9 - ./ Staff Report Prepared by:Amy E.Alvarez, Historic Preservation Planner Attachments: •Site Plan / •Sign Details •Photographs !/ HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD September 2, 2009 MEETING COMMENCED: 6:0 p.m. V. Minutes VI. A. VI.B. Design Guidelines NAME ATTEND Pineapple Grove 137 NW 1st Ave Discussion 1/07/09 2/04/09 2/18/09 VOTE 0 ROGER COPE /2 , y / // in PAM REEDER TOM STANLEY T DEL FIANDRA ,RMut ,A 2 /, .?//11. 2? -/-eL DAN SLOAN RHONDA SEXTON MEETING ADJOURNED P.M. t t TO AMY - DRAFT 3-15-2011 MINUTES OF THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD PUBLIC HEARING/REGULAR MEETING CITY OF DELRAY BEACH DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA MEETING DATE: September 2, 2009 LOCATION: CITY CQMMISSION CHAMBERS MEMBERS PRESENT: Roger Cope, Dan Sloan, Tom anley, Rhonda Sexton, Pam Reeder, and Toni Del Fiandra. MEMBERS ABSENT: STAFF PRESENT: Amy Alvarez, Brian Shutt, Scott Pape, and Denise Valek I. CALL TO ORDER The meeting was called to order by Vice Chairman Cope at 6:00 p.m. No one from the Public addressed the Board on non-agenda items. Vice Chairman Cope read a summary of the Quasi-Judicial Hearing procedures. The Notary swore in individuals for testimony. II. ROLL CALL Upon roll call it was determined that a quorum was present 1111. ELECTION OF OFFICERS Motion made by Ms. DelFiandra, seconded by Mr. Cope, and approved 6 to 0 to nominate Mr. Sloan as Chair. Motion made by Mr. Stanley, seconded by Ms. Sexton, and approved 6 to 0 to nominate Mr. Cope as Vice Chair. Motion made by Mr. Cope, seconded by Mr. Stanley, and approved 6 to 0 to nominate Ms. Sexton as Second Vice-Chair. IV. Approval of Agenda: Motion made and approved 6 to 0 to consider VI.B. prior to VI.A. V. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Motion made by Mr. Cope, seconded by Ms. DelFiandra, and approved 6 to 0 to approve the Minutes of January 7, 2009, February 4, 2009, and February 18, 2009 as written. VI. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS Minutes - Historic Preservation Board Meeting —September 2, 2009 A. Pineapple Grove, Ltd., Old School Square Historic District - Pineapple Grove, Ltc Owner Consideration of the installation of a free-standing sign on a contributing property log 17 NW 1st Avenue. r Ex-Parte Communications - Mr. Sloan spoke with Pineapple Grove members. Mr. Pape entered project file no. 2009-078 into the record. At its meeting of August 19, 2009, the Historic Preservation Board approved the Class IV site plan modification and landscape plan for a mixed-use project consisting of 119 hotel rooms, 2,322 square feet of retail, 4,356 square feet of restaurant, 33,350 square feet of office and a single family residence. However, the Board postponed the building elevations with the direction that the office building be redesigned to transfer the required upper level floor reduction to the northwest portion of the building and the single family residence be redesigned to be visually compatible with the neighborhood. Further, the Board noted that the north facade of the hotel needed to be redesigned to provide additional architectural treatment for the two blank planes. The applicant has revised the building elevations for the office building and the single family residence and is now before the Board for consideration. The third floor of the office building has been redesigned to relocate a substantial portion of the required 30% reduction to the northwest corner of the building. This redesign has resulted in a third floor building setback of 42 feet from NE 1st Avenue at the northwest corner of the building. This redesign will substantially improve the compatibility with the historic neighborhood in terms of scale and massing. The French Renaissance architectural interpretation of the single family residence has been changed to British Colonial. The setbacks of the building remain the same; the change has only been cosmetic to the exterior of the building. The roof material is a white flat concrete tile. The ground floor will be painted Wind's Breath (light beige) and the upper floor will have a cementitious siding painted Antique Yellow (dark beige). The house will have fluted columns with a natural stone finish. The decorative metal railings will be painted black. The applicant has provided floor plans of this house per the direction of the Board. While British Colonial is not an architectural style that is found in the historic neighborhood, it is not the harsh contrast that the previous French Renaissance interpretation presented. If the Board finds the current design acceptable, it may want to address the two ground floor windows on the east and west sides of the home. These windows serve three restrooms and a bedroom. These windows are not in proportion to the space they occupy in the exterior wall plane. A condition of approval is attached that the size of these windows are increased to achieve proportionality with the exterior wall plane. Applicant: Mr. Paul Slattery, advised that staff has covered all the items. Mr. Slattery advised we are bringing back two issues for review: 1) setbacks on the third floor of the office building, and 2) details on the residential units that we submitted roof plans and floor plans. We are here to answer any questions. Mr. Sloan inquired about the ground floor plan for the windows of the bathrooms. Mr. Sloan advised if they changed them to obscure glass you could make them a little bigger. Public Comments: None 2 Minutes - Historic Preservation Board Meeting —September 2, 2009 Board Discussion Ms. Sexton inquired about the change in the setback of the office building. Mr. Pape advised they extended the northwest corner all the way out. There are three step backs, and you have a large veranda and patio area. Mr. Slattery advised the north step back is 10 feet and an additional 27 feet, the planes are the same, there is a metal roof, and a railing for the deck, and roof top terrace. There is a 27 foot and ten foot setback from the street and 45 foot to 50 foot setback from the from property line. Mr. Cope inquired if they have been given any mechanical equipment to justify the 6 feet height. Mr. Pape advised it is what you see on the plans. Mr. Cope inquired if they were exceeding the height. Mr. Pape advised the maximum is 6 feet but you can go above that by screening the mechanical equipment. Mr. Cope inquired if the top is limited in height above the first, and is there an absolute. Mr. Pape advised code states 6 feet. Ms. Sexton inquired if the total height of the building was within the norm. Mr. Pape advised it meets code and we have a provision that talks about parapet heights. Mr. Sloan inquired if that could be approved by staff administratively. Ms. Sexton advised she did,pot remember saying that staff would take care of the vertical and horizontal o9 QikA'..M4?... • that we asked for on the hotel. I thought it was going to come back to us. Mr. Slattery advised he asked and everyone concurred. Mr. Slattery advised they will duplicate the muntin detail on the windows. Board discussion ensued relative to the bathroom windows, the two small windows on the first floor, and the arched window. Mr. Slattery advised he would go back to the large arched windows. Mr. Cope advised maybe the color could be toned down a bit and closer to the terracotta color and have staff approve it. LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(8)(a)-(I), Visual Compatibility Standards: I. Visual Compatibility Standards (a) Height-Yes (b) Front Façade Proportion - Yes (c) Proportion of Openings (Windows and Doors) -Yes (d) Rhythm of Solids to Voids - Yes (e) Rhythm of Buildings on Streets -Yes (f) Rhythm of Entrance and/or Porch Projections - Yes (g) Relationship of Materials, Texture, and Color-Yes (h) Roof Shapes - Yes (i) Walls of Continuity -Yes (j) Scale of Building - Yes (k) Directional Expression of Front Elevation -Yes (I) Architectural Style -Yes Motions Motion made by Mr. Cope, seconded by Ms. Sexton, and approved 5 to 0 to Move approval of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL-4, design elements for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 4.6.18(E) and Section 4.5.1(E)(8) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, the Delray Beach Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, subject to the following conditions of approval: 3 Minutes - Historic Preservation Board Meeting —September 2, 2009 1. That vertical and horizontal architectural treatments are provided for the two bla, on the north side of the hotel, no less than four recessed panels be provided in tlrn, 2. That the Hadley Red is replaced with the same color tone and one shadk consistent with the Floribbean standard to be approved by staff. 3. That the details of the rooftop equipment within the hotel tower are provid6a and watermarked on the building elevations that justify the increased parapet height. 4. That the size of the two windows on the east and west elevations of the single family residence are increased to achieve proportionality with the exterior wall plane, and be consistent with the windows as presented. B. 137 NW 1st Avenue, Old School Square Historic District, Authorized Agent: MacLaren Sign Company Consideration of a Certificate of Appropriateness (2009-085) for an addition on a contributing structure. Ex-Parte Communications: Ms. Sexton drove by the project. Ms. Alvarez entered Project File No. 2009-085 into the record. Applicant Mr. Don MacLaren advised that changing the background is OK; however, reducing the height to 4' 6" is an issue. The color is Porter paint No. 61-51-1 Public Comments: None Board Discussion: Mr. Cope inquired if there was common ground we can reach regarding the height. Ms. Alvarez advised the last one that was proposed was 7 feet, and the Board left it at that. It is consistent with the one on Swinton. It is similar to the attorney's sign on the corner. Mr. Stanley inquired if it can be reduced to 6 feet. Mr. MacLaren advised he can move it further back. Mr. Sloan inquired how far back it was from the building. Mr. Cope advised it can go to 6 feet if one foot off the sidewalk. The Board agreed that they are OK with 6 feet. I. Visual Compatibility Standards (a) Height - Yes (g) Relationship of Materials, Texture, and Color-Yes Motion made by Mr. Cope, seconded by Ms. DelFiandra, and approved 6 to 0 to approve the Certificate of Appropriateness (2009-175) for 137 NW 1st Avenue, Old School Square Historic District by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, subject to the following conditions. 1. That either the sign background is revised from off white to a color complimentary to the building; and 4 1 � Minutes - Historic Preservation Board Meeting —September 2, 2009 2. That the total height of the sign not exceed 6' as measured from the top of the finial. VII. DISCUSSION ITEMS Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines We are revising the guidelines and making them consistent with the Land Development Regulations (LDRs). I would like to look at other issues and expand each district. Let's discuss any other suggestions you may have. My intention is the first meeting of each month through December we will look at all the different sections and update them as we go along, then we will have a final draft to look at in February. Public Hearings are held each month through January 2010. A final draft version should be available for review by the Board no later than February 2010, where. a recommendation will be made to the City Commission for final adoption no later than March 2010. Mr. Sloan advised that materials (windows and doors) are a big item. Ms. Alvarez advised it does not specify Hardiplank, and it is not appropriate on a contributing property. Ms. Sexton inquired if the houses were in Delray Beach. Ms. Alvarez advised they may be in Delray Beach but not in the historic districts. We have to expand upon the ad valorem and show properties that have been taken advantage of and do a before and after in the book. I want to be as true as possible so this can stand alone. Ms. Sexton inquired if this would be on line. Ms. Alvarez advised we will expand on the windows and doors so that no certain ones go with certain styles. Mr. Stanley inquired average replacements process that is on a case- by-case basis, more streamlined, or a hot sheet. Ms. Alvarez advised as we were looking at specific manufacturers it would be referenced in this and we could have that list on the web site also. Ms. DelFiandra advised there have been so many good improvements in the window products that have come out in the last couple of years. We can raise the minimum standard. Ms. Sexton advised we could have a check list if one is planning on doing a renovation, items such as windows, doors, awnings, pavers, and brick sidewalks. Signage could use some attention as well. Ms. Alvarez advised if they are going to do new signage they have to come through the Board. There are examples that we can put in that are appropriate and not appropriate. Ms. Sexton advised she has not seen anything regarding fences and walls, but we have seen some benches on Swinton that are 6 feet high. Mr. Sloan advised we can use green design and construction principles. Ms. Sexton inquired if there was anything in there that talks about the benefits of being in the historic district and requesting waivers. That might encourage people to be happy living in a historic district. Ms. Alvarez advised there are different tax incentives. Ms. Sexton advised we could add the Preserve America logo. Ms. Reeder advised when individuals are trying to go in for an incentive I do not see anything regarding how long they have to incorporate their work before the clock starts on the incentive. Ms. Alvarez advised you can apply for the ad valorem tax exemption within 18 months of receiving their Certificate of Occupancy. Mr. Cope inquired what was the advantage of the applicant walking in at the beginning of the approval process. Ms. Alvarez advised if you do part one of the application we do it free, otherwise we do the appropriate review. I have reviewed the chart of how much the homes have changed over the years and we can include that information. You have to be contributing when the application is reviewed by City Commission. You can go through and do the improvements. Mr. Sloan inquired of the Board if they had any other ideas. Ms. Reeder inquired if anyone had a chance to look at the West Palm Beach book. They also have a plaque program. Ms. Reeder advised the last time she saw a survey of the Historic District there were quite a few errors in the data. Is it possible to correct that information? Ms. Alvarez advised if there are 5 Minutes - Historic Preservation Board Meeting —September 2, 2009 corrections you have to let me know and I will go check the files and maps. Ms. Reeder asked if it would behoove the Board to include the Board on what percentage of properties need to be historic to get a designation. Ms. Alvarez advised we can add that if someone was going to be in the Historic District. Mr. Cope inquired if the information could be in color. Mr. Cope advised we should highlight historic sites. Ms. Alvarez advised she wants to expand the sections about each district. Specifically what is appropriate for the district? We should also include the different architectural styles. We also have to think about going green. VIII. REPORTS AND COMMENTS Public Comments None Board Members None IX. ADJOURN There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting adjourned at 7:45 p.m. The undersigned is the Acting Secretary of the Historic Preservation Board and the information provided herein is the Minutes of the meeting of said body for September 2, 2009 which were formally adopted and approved by the Board on Executive Assistant 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 r HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEMORANDUM STAFF REPORT Property Owner: Pineapple Grove Limited Project Location: Old School Square Historic District HPB Meeting Date: September 2, 2009 COA: 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The item before the Board is consideration of the building elevations for the Pineapple Grove Limited project located in the Old School Square Historic District pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.1(E) and Section 4.6.18. BACKGROUND/PROJECT DESCRIPTION The development proposal consists of the south 38.25 feet of Lot 5, 6, 7, 8, the south 34.75 feet of Lot 13, 14, 15, and 16 of Block 75 of the Town of Linton Plat and contains 1.658 acres. The eastern half of the development (Lots 13 through 16) is located in the CBD (Central Business District) zoning district. The western half of the development (Lots 5 through 8) is located in the OSSHAD (Old School Square Historic Arts District) and was (in-part) the former site of Neil's Market. It is noted that the south 34.75 feet of Lot 6 and all of Lots 7 and 8 are subject to the permitted uses and development regulations of the CBD zoning district as it overlays this portion of the OSSHAD. At its meeting of August 19, 2009, the Historic Preservation Board approved the Class IV site plan modification and landscape plan for a mixed-use project consisting of 119 hotel rooms, 2,322 square feet of retail, 4,356 square feet of restaurant, 33,350 square feet of office and a single family residence. However, the Board postponed the building elevations with the direction that the office building be redesigned to transfer the required upper level floor reduction to the northwest portion of the building and the single family residence be redesigned to be visually compatible with the neighborhood. Further, the Board noted that the north facade of the hotel needed to be redesigned to provide additional architectural treatment for the two blank planes. The applicant has revised the building elevations for the office building and the single family residence and is now before the Board for consideration. ANALYSIS Development Standards The single family residence is considered major development and the office building is considered minor development [Per LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(2)]. Visual compatibility with the surrounding historic neighborhood for new construction in the OSSHAD is based upon criteria in the LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(8)(a)-(I), Visual Compatibility Standards. Because this section of the historic district is included within the CBD overlay, LDR Section 4.6.18(E) also applies to the review of the elevations. • The elevations for the hotel/restaurant are reviewed exclusively under LDR•Section 4.6.18(E) because this eastern half of the project is not in the historic district. Pineapple Grove Limited Building Elevations COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 HPB Meeting September 2,2009 LDR Section 4.6.18(E), Criteria for Board Action: The following specific criteria are noted: a) The plan or the proposed structure is in conformity with good taste, good design, and in general, contributes to the image of the City as a place of beauty, spaciousness, harmony, taste, fitness, broad vistas, and high quality. b) The proposed structure, or project, is in its exterior design and appearance of quality such as not to cause the nature of the local environment or evolving environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value. c) The proposed structure, or project, is in harmony with the proposed developments in the general area, with the Comprehensive Plan, and with the supplemental criteria which may be set forth for the Board from time to time. LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(8)(a)-(I), Visual Compatibility Standards: The following Standards apply, in part, to the office building and single family residence: (a) Height: The height of proposed buildings or modifications shall be visually compatible in comparison or relation to the height of existing structures and buildings in a historic district for all major and minor development. (b) Front Facade Proportion: The front facade of each building or structure shall be visually compatible with and be in direct relationship to the width of the building and to the height of the front elevation of other existing structures and buildings within the subject historic district. (c) Proportion of Openings (Windows and Doors): The openings of any building within a historic district shall be visually compatible with the openings exemplified by prevailing historic architectural styles of similar buildings within the district. The relationship of the width of windows and doors to the height of windows and doors among buildings shall be visually compatible within the subject historic district. (d) Rhythm of Solids to Voids: The relationship of solids to voids of a building or structure shall be visually compatible with existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district for all development, with particular attention paid to the front facades. (e) Rhythm of Buildings on Streets: The relationship of buildings to open space between them and adjoining buildings shall be visually compatible with the relationship between existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district. (f) Rhythm of Entrance and/or Porch Projections: The relationship of entrances and porch projections to the sidewalks of a building shall be visually compatible with existing architectural styles of entrances and porch projections on existing historic buildings and structures within the subject historic district for all development. (g) Relationship of Materials, Texture, and Color: The relationship of materials, texture, and color of the facade of a building and/or hardscaping 2/4 Pineapple Grove Limited Building Elevations COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 HPB Meeting September 2,2009 shall be visually compatible with the predominant materials used in the historic buildings and structures within the subject historic district. (h) Roof Shapes: The roof shape, including type and slope, of a building or structure shall be visually compatible with the roof shape of existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district. The roof shape shall be consistent with the architectural style of the building. (i) Walls of Continuity: Walls, fences, evergreen landscape masses, or building facades, shall form cohesive walls of enclosure along a street to ensure visual compatibility with historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district and the structure to which it is visually related. (j) Scale of a Building: The size of a building and the building mass in relation to open spaces, windows, door openings, balconies, porches, and lot size shall be visually compatible with the building size and mass of historic buildings and structures within a historic district for all development. (k) Directional Expression of Front Elevation: A building shall be visually compatible with the buildings, structures, and sites within a historic district for all development with regard to its directional character, whether vertical or horizontal. (I) Architectural Style: All major and minor development shall consist of only one (1) architectural style per structure or property and not introduce elements definitive of another style. Office Building: The third floor of the office building has been redesigned to relocate a substantial portion of the required 30% reduction to the northwest corner of the building. This redesign has resulted in a third floor building setback of 42 feet from NE 1st Avenue at the northwest corner of the building. This redesign will substantially improve the compatibility with the historic neighborhood in terms of scale and massing. Single Family Residence: The French Renaissance architectural interpretation of the single family residence has been changed to British Colonial. The setbacks of the building remain the same, the change has only been cosmetic to the exterior of the building. The roof material is a white flat concrete tile. The ground floor will be painted Wind's Breath (light beige) and the upper floor will have a cementitious siding painted Antique Yellow (dark beige). The house will have fluted columns with a natural stone finish. The decorative metal railings will be painted black. The applicant has provided floor plans of this house per the direction of the Board. While British Colonial is not an architectural style that is found in the historic neighborhood, it is not the harsh contrast that the previous French Renaissance interpretation presented. If the Board finds the current design acceptable, it may want to address the two ground floor windows on the east and west sides of the home. These windows serve three restrooms and a bedroom. These windows are not in proportion to the space they occupy in the exterior wall plane. A condition of approval is attached that the size of these windows are increased to achieve proportionality with the exterior wall plane. 3/4 Pineapple Grove Limited Building Elevations COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 HPB Meeting September 2,2009 Hotel: With respect to the hotel, these elevations have not been revised to address the conditions with respect to the color selection, equipment details, or architectural treatments for the north façade. Therefore, these conditions have been brought forward and are also attached. Based on the above, positive findings can be made based on the noted LDRs, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines provided the conditions of approval are addressed. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Postpone with direction. B. Move approval of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL-4, design elements for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 4.6.18(E) and Section 4.5.1(E)(8) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, the Delray Beach Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, subject to conditions of approval. C. Move denial of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL-4, design elements for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, does not meet criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 4.6.18(E) and Section 4.5.1(E)(8) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, the Delray Beach Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. RECOMMENDATION Move approval of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL-4, design elements for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 4.6.18(E) and Section 4.5.1(E)(8) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, the Delray Beach Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. That vertical and horizontal architectural treatments are provided for the two blank planes on the north side of the hotel. 2. That the Hadley Red is replaced with a vibrant color consistent with the Floribbean standard. 3. That details of the rooftop equipment within the hotel tower are provided and watermarked on the building elevations that justify the increased parapet height. 4. That the size of the two windows on the east and west elevations of the single family residence are increased to achieve proportionality with the exterior wall plane. Report Prepared by: Scott Pape, AICP, Senior Planner Attachment: Revised Building Elevations and Floor Plans Staff Report Date August 19, 2009 4/4 T It u yl I 7il o a o o m o a rp m o m m -: , m o Dam noon , N 1 F II 1 Il' `. ,o.a �� I __ nn urr�i�ni i i E i--m{R■■I miloom i _mpaiw_ _ ti�l l l�l'\ L`I L __ I -- MATERIAL LEGEND: _imp_ -- ,. 1116ppllllpllll��llpollgpl@pll4lplptlp'+xr• rpgtlllnnnggPlPl101pgglltl��AIIPIA m inW Ifl_11 11 11.-11 -- -- 11 IG 11 11 1111�IlllnimlulliuminoiluluuullimllominpPIETAS .v a. i f i i� �i -� �i ; —� do CONCRETE OVE.x.x4„UCCO/WWI E.�:.- 1 �1,11 11 11 1. 11�1 11 11 1� ,1 �1 1� 1. 11 �� 11 „ 1. 11 1�111111 11 1111 sMDmxsrvico .��ti °"�� i. ..c. ulu illmluimii ■■.. olo mmolim' ___ N A limmim�omllni .. lu uu �:- �■' ":►i �� ;�- i -Gp nOOTIS STUCC i���M■ ' ' n ►1 ,.1 IM t\.I• Mimic �� I Irccos.xo�xc �.1 '7� '�■� n tl-N, �---I p r. ri 4n�- ; n'n --.;I im,.n ,n .n .�� ,�„ ,.11.�71 ,1 �, 1 o A. NUMIRAKIMPACTWINMY . .■.■ �1 .. �111 111 �.... �111An 1• BBORMI. MIR NW .o ... - .�. m ' mug.�. ..E.l.��.11���11 ,.{�Illl�n , .� a AEEl VM,NBMFR WPM i-rrr a a a a a a a a a a a �� �^°'° a Oa 0 o m a m a i] D ARCHITECTSp �� >IO 'NM. "1„RWN DNa R.a AIN.MING a I APPLIED M L B R PLANNERS 8 METAL TEARS 0000WLVIIOCARATONBLLU. ESIGHTING Ftt111RE O CANVAS AWMNGI BOCA RAIN.EL 31.11 OWEST ELEVATION O SOUTH ELEVATION p D METAL RRAEREt wA TEL:fAI.,D:.,SCALE:1/16'•1'-0- 2 SCALE:1/16'•1'-Er E MATE A rAx i°>TIN: O A MIN WALL•ROOF SONNET.EWOI!NAMT RISATRAEAE[LEID[UNEA I❑1 DECORATIVE STUCCOS/MIN o DECORATIVEGRAIE 0 & p gl 1 a m O a m m W � � 1 i -o 5 - --a -E 1_-.E>-_1 Et- Iwi` - �� � Gr II i ii lT7T Flro h CeW _ - _- _ � 1 .I I Jli II II 11 n `1 ; . �'3 n m IN m m i i ii d R,., B• 1�..� >,, a I j AE= 'N:�} a a�¢ a 0 a m a J IF SgigUbt O EAST ELEVATION O NORTH ELEVATION SCALE:1/16-•1'•f SCALE:1/16'"i'•VBUILDING ELEVATION NOTES: I EIffi1uMT o AAx 11 AT1AAi-Aill , i' '3 , noWUx6a v uMe 'ROW. •� '• Zxi.RTi.lo� eno la P. AU STOREFRONT•GSM ARM ANNIMIL TIC a 08.16.10A REDUCTION OF NO MORE TIM PO, ca i =:::1 vi lA i�rrOr rRArsw'ssux w 012 U AEDBETOETOMO OLMM / 4!' ..._ I. . o A03.3 AUG 2 6 2009 woo. 14 m non o DM m n P n To n l r w ew $- �1 l- y I.P.ecw ti�Ll 1 1 1 & i II' U G11 II Er - i ii' _ U V 1 11I ! 1111 :JIII ... ... ME RV i + ,,5- �9111 tl111111111t_111N - 1111111 JIIIIIIIIIQII fIIIIII IIIMIIIIIIU IIIIII _lid►illll $s�PP,x x,. '.::r'...ill >t� o MI. .,, .1 1j,T lOr �. 1111 P w 11 . .fIU7 OCl i- .1 r 011 I� 1'TI — I II03 1111 ® I7 �I' , _I i'Iii!,iiuj1 t .-. �n �I L PP n.A xcw1 �' ��l Il}I.l\ 7I r l� I PP,PAxGw n�� m n o o a n n m m n O 13 ,.m E {1 El m a 0 a m 0 9.p,,RROAD PLANNERS O WEST ELEVATION O NORTH ELEVATION x NUUaxRAION UL\U. olse: SCALE:1/B••1'-0• SCALE:1/8•-1'-0- OOCA RAHW,,L 13411 ln:xl,a:.lw, FAX: M.: a El m m m n m a 0 I. a IA U IP�x„n. I i Ili —_.._ i u' a _�. 1.1. � oG E �. �GNO Wg wx , _i _ c, a. r uTr xsN ru cTwwx or Row ii..W:.h ..a«a4i...!i..:.a.u1:L41. .O '': ,.w..LL L. , +�rro�a�xP - z EAST ELEVATION O SOUTH ELEVATION a. O SCALE:1/9••1'-0• SCALE:1/6-1'0- MATERIAL LEGEND: �I RAT COMCAO,TURCO, 2 OPRECAST rcoN.xn/uxni, - o 000ill MOM WOOD° 0 DOOR o /40.ON u I D * [ E� 43 M!All,.A.AnE T DRl�nAilt®>U OuuKTUKw w ID N.V. S CODA oALUMINUM RAuxG oSTVEEP,w1P Z El MD.xDOOR KEY PLAN Kellak .•IQ '❑I OVERHEAD W000G44GE00C83 CO ID.II '❑' cc.uxmlous saw Lu ,,,, o GLGP.w.RCHOU LL T o PRIWTT IREPcavx •.1 L A I AUlaW 2009 TT b wr j m.v fro' \\ •` .�/ I' Y• •+ Slaiie'I•v& r U U U a Ma1aa« =r —r �� d® ___.1.'_;:,_i,::: 3 II ,,,,r orlx nwcL N+ , F24. o ... .. —~ •riff •�4 7 °^ ro ci ` t" -..BEM a I _--_-� _ _ __- _ III 1 -__�_ Toil --L— ----- II ARCHITECTS t ` — 'I PLANNERS I, a.. Imloo. ~_ �• I ...—_.______._.__._...___...._.___.-_._._._._.._ ...__.._._—__.__....... i R TOM NN'OLx'A 0.Ai,IN 11L\D. — .__ ..._ _._.. _. ICI yI1 EMI 2 0[om,w MEOW ImIOW I -- -. .. I 1 BOCA RATON.EL"AI TEL:Se1,19.1Hr IAX,e149:Su1. I N ISM IMILAITISITAIMIXTRMII uNa - - —__ aTII W.LL 15 —old — —y— —---- SECOND FLOOR PLAN dn ROOF PLAN ,j Ci - :.x,1 Sr ,CALL.I,I.[ ,L.,[:I,r•EC .J W tg:g 7i1111 WX �2 —\ LoV,Tr.x1 ; ,u,< WI o r-- • li • I— I a. I� 1 I .� .. 111 Z o f Y • •likCOVE • p. J 6ii ��� zNIL .�I Ir�rn I �l ; IProt I.SLATTERY Err O O • I I. EMMETT TO EC cur Z. (OR uuo[xuelnaA.[xma surwmu LLEUTY MD owmxca i,...., .... �11 kkk fff p...",��/ GROUND FLOOR PLAN ,LAM I Orr A02.6 • A G 2 6 2009 itvr.• if } 1` , I I,,wrr.M�$ I { f rr„rtW }- E E ,1 } '' ''-`""n. ; } I W=r. _ 1 I �= �t { I F r 1 L c ,4R�. v -- 1 1- +,. .,.n1 , �.n:a ,r� , win II [0 -$ a r.w�. 1 r I ,,; ` � �; 14111W it r�� 6 21 G N. $ Very , }.q, $:�:. ..,.w t,.�.<_.�. ....�_� .u.. ro ,.....,..L.: ,.....,.w.,, :.L..w .ww..,:Z,;;_ .. ..,J. rom ... I, ��..1 w�,,..ro.. Mk/VP O SECTION 1-1 ARCHITECTS PLANNERS SCALE:1/16'•1'-0' :OW NW AiuN utln. 1 IIMA RAt.N.FL1H11 r..,.mmmur �,•wro°m.. r.•wr-m.° I I 1 FAX: Sw. - maw>•narrmlanca ........,..f. - a i ro � I � i . . _.. _.. L. _J..I L. UIL.I- a .. m � I -,-yw --` ,w.rww..$ I : 1' nt-H �..� ..1 J, 1..i ' :: — — iI_1. IF. $. r ,,1 ,w _ _ _ _ .. rm, ::::: , 1 ro- rr_ ..,,... } w x g J c O ••SECTION 2-2 p SCALE:1/16'•1'-0' Q, } 12ziy Ll.! .. a ii1ZI t I ,# ` 43 Z� a. Iwr � Itilt-- .r. � - 1 mow.. �. r----- i II �711 I E . $j + L Wr ^ --_M ,- .m a I 1 r. W•$1__._ —_1__ i f n o f I I 1j -_= I e;�el II , :i mmmmom PT PP m PFF= R , I� F : O !� ; .....7........ — — — — 1 III ,•.� i. ��� I .,,.< _ .. ornaI O SECTON 3-3 KEY PLAN%.,/ . -'/' ,, Al" SCALE:1/16-•1,0' A04.1 1.11JU 2 6 2009 1 1 .,n..wl d CZ b R Minced m T -------------------------- _ ----I..'.--- le T, .tl tel N'n.awe following Mamrnb-d. I , American ,ron,walwn w..lb,mn 1 •.A.'..' D 'or o �j�w hwe«I MN,meth.: adopted w la, lnee __ I T _ - - _ _ _: hint»I.nlpmnd.nU.w�nbtlmmme.,n..»..m-n»w klwml� n.mntN,m Mttpli«w+nl.corn/worimmannklhameLnbdnwH4rtlglunbNNn Om h rnwrh,e.e.»twM an m.kmnenm y ; " r-" qpr �• `'��.-.,p r rem rl.nl or �n.wneFr<ewm«normo; w,n.l enh T I I aJ-_� !, `• Iiirli 11 b I I top://-».an,..r„nlworwe.nlML.o.RS:dnNhrbtivembE.M•MNrmq<t I I I I IE- I ' ' • �� 1 .^ ■r - 4. Tne In miawn e eppla,oheanon.b enxp://.+w..ntncorn/wrnw.n,ml.npmw,dmlo-rbnx.wao-xu«•nIf-'°°' -RI III5. 1 ■; ; ; n.+ : , S. Ihmteneu,wh�ntneih:'nre»..nt r atom/o- nl<n r p:u. .N m/wmwe.mda..p.m.b.nnn.r.bkn.mgE 3.p�,,t is miMhille.�S.RalIMw,np„.m,wn ehmr.h..I e e ' I� BItI, • I •htNt/iwnw .comes e. b,.mm�kldm4 Id xOng• n.n r,einem ha.and yewolt,I -- � aM' I1 ,I ,n I i rt. IIll 1 I� IC-ll3, 1, • I�, �I�—• rsI I ...ter arm,enntl.n al'co w•hmu-...n.remrw.»ne.nm,.np.RMdnm4ruh nmwmeme & ` ".—n I I .o-ao. ], 51�f_1 , ng program•moat/Irew..n.rmmnOMMee/IW.grmnkdntnerbonmm]n].. •!IL�II�I` ��e �, lJp I sw.ohp.lil."M:o.readF,r.mrorn.:.mmnm.n gyp' >•�1 II I ; IS AR,grill �1� ! ] ■_� 4 m.n.mmrw . agRnkdM4rmn.Mo-x. Iwdlnnwermthuw,h.nen.,. elyMMErw g1'yn I Nwwntr.mmennapw.aeb p<igl� '' Pr— .i�—fir I n colleryvnn•hq:IMrvaM.rem/Wwrw..nMltnp.RnbdMH4rbllumlo-]<afe•Itlelmyllum ..4��r p�a t • r �1 r and cox office g.rprrodwn•htq:l/m-mienl..c.m/Wog.r../,Inkl.ry.RMbemMertlhltemlbl.PoE•MN]0,m more ��w,'.II►N' ' ® I I i ;+ '''>�`i•.1',.+'tk;-'•t•'•,09,�• 'O. �l l/.I .�§O'V I Controls m Hannro Mean In meeting mem'end n beg N home where pos... ;.� f g fa are ...stem n1 holm and n h light" ��'wges��e'q��t h • tmdw maces physical , W.he l` I' s 1i�.fi ! s7f l:iii mkmprogram m is N.nt<'tanVnm meeting house when min r n ngd. ■IBC 1Si•- I I — L ls,� r ,.I —a it Ifit' /��E rr;'rNv ars.cf•:::.+"'. - m.r, , me of coin.,.rvesmwwmmwmm.Nn,za F.1 1 -- ----------------------- - .r. e. rw sermon .»nnnoen =.m,, H , I i - I I �I. — DH..]Nrol ,.tt,et following m.thd.mm.wrNNestesONm]mw,rewDIAd,rmxNn ..-..-..-..-..-..- .-.-..-..- , II�IO ,`R �y[ 4 _ "•.h I I wee.Efficient nmmM/linen In Efficiency Tope.OCT..MN NM Me•I]Sg.,m,,.Rush qp ion L r o — ► ll �/�. ,-() Waterless orprnvArt.Nanr:n•1avm wene:t�" n PLANNERS ' 1 i' ZIa��Zi I AI On, >I.nu num. Sg...permnmekrrow.. . ARCHITECTS I Ip . '}r..-..., gnElh4wrl«.cEwbm.n.n,w«NN.t.wbm.wt-n r«gl].an N<tm.mamw I l- E;��t•;ro --i4n1 �� I I:I E. Iw.gvnelbnt nnr.wnw i I I I '•i°■■■ilis.,c. , ■ G ,CI] w,.EI44 ]�I�glom rdI W . d Mr• •!UI 1 I ■ ■Cg fur NN'n0[A PATON DLNI. I I. . +-Natal ■ lJ , %=ito.nnno- .e Implement Opera...rnagw n ».N..;N lm ore h.ena epin planed!i� E ` _ -1-1 ,r, .w.n.h.t..e.MMroe.,...... Mw.c.,.w.nhtann.rn..nnww.M_.n I •It�g�--� ■S::.I,� }+�__.-`7��--. Yal���` view p;lMes oodles onnnn,lro.enwamwnte d eta. ptm sM.we Mur..anmmM.nmm.wa.. SUITE d noon RAx,N,pawl -C--__ 111 yrl� Tuc moomdnnbaw,dl prop.r witIndun mw.n'nhnnrots'heed,m.rmnw..INN,hewrn.dn rm ' I b ; I Imo' • ' n.n L� ,lr/,1 ■i r�� I /r .I. ,Nm.x,epl.n erwtd-n Swnwe nad�M/mwueYm.p.m,,IYMM N.,r.M.rv.waw.amrtkV. xR:fdtIf:.]NI ■ p11i _ I Vermeer,png.,b:nnwevwM Practices EEL:361 -.1'11"';'ii� I I .� •:•:•' %yS sin(q�p[ ' • min,:�Wmmm3 iv,itMrtlnhmn.leeImre.wedmn.tlentb.of...eh.Aeldryryy..nemlMeMn ]d=s^- i - - :-5.:�: - " 1 'T. :ny� �p I • •.Dwn lnn min lR urrhle r.eh tRITEA,IROACRI1iIIRCAI I I MINIM !. nm11,wlWn.l,Idm for nwn.dow.,..n+.nRI.I,.M'bmm,w.hwmlAtknt,otN4,MrN pkn pyauw I I •:::EE —1-- .. e ndr nw.resl.�.� .� 1:.... _J NNW 5 1 —I—I corn . �..�=� �a6��i L.__ E I I_!_ r�, l >M N • I Y.P - \rtir I I I 14d ,: x.-1 I I MOT,DETAIL SlatIUR FOR RTMCMER.E1 I. a I I '�\,•. I I r C•C`{,•/ ▪`'' — A...mot L435ND POST mri ' r/• TDwlcxxmcGb, �, I I .I lix- ■:••y'' 1;�:•�a:. .. �LNi,C. �,liI_ `-b I rG„lG a o Pr D C DG�S • an wad. Lalai I Pt i i R 1 ' 114. 12- I �1�}j .CrC����>>iirrs.]▪ r�--i-- .•----` t�] _ , / � 0/I N Q=Q I I I f�..pyy N yl'>-{ • ,rl--I m;��Ir-., •• /� ce = W Q 11I . ..,_. I ' ' I I , III 1 ■ lo ■ ■� %� F JXo� I i I .g 1 °I _ I �r i I �' r,R..w.gn. I - I I i.I� ILI. .—l--I --_i►/.M a — IF I a — l-r7P i, NOT Cl. %� - 11-11 l I ma;; C o :II ana ding ,;�� III INEIIIIIIIII I I ' IIi 6,IIP� - ° 1 ;`� a ; / IMO., I -t_-I l'.I_•_�I Cg mu. FOOT MowN w ' nw. .1 1 t{. gy{j1.,E _ 'R' r r �,1 7L '.` Yd I. ',rattail� ow CAI MIL pm mime ' ; i I �, ■i1■ ■�I �: ■ui■_..'... ' MAI EDG•LASS •- PRI11M m.nw — • • ' ._. ._._. I` �1112 1: A TO GLASS TER scPr« ,v V. r I I w� .•, gtXGt f5 w . µHk� -- r �pwrnM� _• FINISHEDI r ".. .�. > H imeneAltele WRLuI SECOND FLOOR PLAN ,CAtn,/,.•I ,if. '' • .STnK CONCRETE T] ap wmm.•es...,.t..r OFFICE BUILDING SECOND BOOR PLAN NOTES: HOTEL SECOND FLOOR PLAN NOTE: SECOND ROOK CROSS AREA MA.S.E. 1. SECOND 11000.G0.055 ARIA M.nIST. Z. EGRESS STAIRS PI h P],ELEVATOR LIMIT•LIR MILD I. IACN OWING POOH CONTAIN,M1OOR AMADWE IM INMAN REWIRED // I. EGRESS°MCINITAREAR1IIIR 3.5.F.. MR,fA.11DRfa0...IJ.IAIND a GLASS RAILING SYSTEM D, OL a Cl.� ..m .. Orllc[MR AREA 13,lxpf.F. ]. [LPCSS STAIRS PI h1i,[l[VATORLIAET•bIR WED xo.. ] N. CGRE55 CORRIDOR.1NR MLA 'ill 1:'; A02.2 AUG 2 6 2009 N --------------- ;.; I..r y we a. I •._. ._. .-. __ Li 1 yam. ttY b±=4YJ-Y n.�Y:-;Y.. I. I u n ,rf -yy R , I � � I AR I^ e Y n A 1 p u Y i A u R 11 A 4 I SI I 1 cg '01.1.1 I 1 VJ ■�■ II ■ ■ =: l! I - - ` ( pqp 1 I ,1I---` ; T//�I)---- I i I ' Po- :J a�� err.) �� APE, II 1 >.'0.----1 SkIn \ l\ F 1 ,....,,.Ra I I I- I _Ilbrjahr 11�1 1 . I L I 3 A. ' mornnA l 1 � I I i I I I I IIIII:1 !III !milli �.I■ [ :P . I - 'Hi •■ F IFr N, tit: a .-I MI '" I ME"..iii i . ------------------------- +1- I _....-- - Lunn �,L\ :1 h; nr ns rca0 F,•" I I I - . . ■ ■I I■,,,■ e I I Mik.Ill 1l'\ • - - s- •• ` 1 I • illl�t - ` ARCHITECTS s� l�I y �I �� PLANNERS �svea• m 4.. ...t.. -- -. ...�. ,-.-_�I I E ■ I�/�' I•• `/, ■ I I 33330NW UI:CA.AIONOL\D. w , SLODO I j y ; I , I ._. ■,.t. t�■PLUG. l� : '�I3 oOln RnlaN.iulal III �] [T 1 1 3.344.433 - .._y "'tl1181ntll1 I I. ti. A[R\. 1 tg I �IRIAiIHL•llml..tSCpl I I I I <ili _! ,Ili I- ■ ,,■u I 4. - 1 • 4 11 1 MIMI 9 11 ' �I i\w .,, I I I 1 ,ill �ul ■- _ _I• ' } I I > III I III ■ �i 1 .�I i > III 1 I ' E� ona 1 I ! ■� �I I 0 o N I I" n� ■ I ' C7 a 1 i �._' 1'I■It■ W O liIIWIt .III • a1 ' '; ■ W x W I e/ eA..ro.e.. I I I I I®EI! V 'I'IJ.U,r'ut.424303 ' I a' ' i f/9/' y u 1 I — mit. IV 1 1. --L i .. I- I I DI!11131 Lill I I t.l Its _ `N • - NM I iLc� -1 'cyjx�: _ i� '�' � d l I 1I■R' .. r, 1 . 1 8, , ! ■i 1 A. • pre SL' waera rion.re it • iR Auew Non.. TaR` MLEIQ114200.4.41o0.1 THIRD FLOOR PLAN IEALBNIA.Id OFFICE BUILDING THIRD FLOOR PLAN NOGG: HOTEL THIRD FLOOR PLAN NOES: I. THIRD ROOA GROSS ROOM AREA IS I1.443 S.F.Iw.w;1OR ALLOWR I. THIRD ROOK ARIA IS 10.130 S.F.ILR'.IOE ALLDNW .fQ GROUND FLOOR BUILDING FOOTPRINT AS PEA LEA SEC.N.AIIIINANMI, GROUND ROOK WILDING FOOTPRINT AS PLR LTD YL 4.4.1310NA3101II 1. ALLONID WILDING FOOTPRINT MISS S.F.D00.,LOA SEC.4.4.I140AN00I 1. MEWED WILDING FOOTPRINT 31,503 S.F.(1003)1OR SEC.4.Y111RNMAND PROVIDED BRIDING FOOTPRINT IP..S.F. PROVIDED WILDING FOOTPAD?VARS., 1. THIRD FLOORKT MICE AREA 10.500 S.F. S. MN SILO.ROOM CONTAINS FLREQUIREDO AREA AD.THEAORARIN REQUIRED `•" 4. EGRESS STAIRS AI Y A I.ELEVATOR LIAR•204010 Of 01 S.F.O W SEC.4.I.I.INN11 S. EGRESS CORRIDOR INN IQTED. 4. EGRESS STAIRS FL I I I,ELEVATOR LNR•DIARATW S. EGRESS Como.•INA RAM. A02.3 n ku262009 • rests.' sr SA Is s i . i . i I /1ii, 1 1 i .cy, I0_0 I�I�. -. �I.'I�I,- ill li�-'(Q i 1 1 j I 1 II e�.6 IIJ WE j6. -MIMI I� - ' 1 IR1 3 7 • , 1 Ij 1 ! ' I i ., , H 1I • I'11 333 ICI i �� _. j 1HITECTS �1 �' " _ {1 ' _� j la°' I ;::• -_u € •� �!I ■` PLANNERS di till • ' I ,��. i 1 LII I r I • _ I1 v. I jRUIBt ,.. ;� I ,.t�rr•-�I ��:�� �, Da' L N nsml 1MI- MOM _ I I Mww 1 I I 1, nr 'I J I 1LL3 ]ut v V-- ;� ■�L ' I yI FAX:3 S^r e I I IIIIIIIII�� I 11i • 1 8 mTUTTm�.�nml I IIJHLI i r'y■,.e n I A . I j I '' I IIII _� �� I �:---- ; - •.PE 1 s Q j ; I �j III ,� ,�_ __, r �. ol��„ ��! I I' 1 , �I' oil i 17 Rn. R ...R j 1II • j Q -- 1 I n j I I'I �.-6-�ii.'i till: ,ss..n�' 1 W M W o I l j ! IIII -�-I,t �gAitj_II 1 p ,m a ELI I I 3'milll Ilk ' .1, Ii i. ■ ! W W o IC I ..^v ��� �--n-;11 IN I I Cl— `L °CL' ■� =- T I I M'll�lll ^f�!- �!�U'YIIW'i1t• ' Q LiJ I Vail_ �' 1, 'w 1=1 ^® i Z I - 1 • I 1 '•'• • b 1y L_ _____________—__ ------..i _i__________________ ___,,___ i ROOF&FOURTH FLOOR PLAN SCALD �• ,�Rm.A-EA® NOTE HOTEL FOURTH FLOOR CLAN NOTES: TOR OFFICE BUILDING ROOF MOTE SEE DICER AOE.S I. FOURTH ROOK AREA IS WOOS.F.16E•:101.TIN[ALLOWED GROUND ROOK AREA 1. EACH SLEETING ROOM CONTAINS FLOOR AM AMR THE MINIMUM REQUIRED M 12S S.F.ILDR SEC...LLIMxl1 S. EGRESS STAIRS RI fi R R,ELEVATOR stun•ENR RATED R. EGRESS CORRIDOR•IHR RATED. te tl // / ..,• A02.4 AUG 2 6 2009 HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ---STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE: August 19, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: IV.D. ITEM: Consideration of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Which Incorporates The Class IV Site Plan Modification, Landscape Plan, And Architectural Elevations For Pineapple Grove Limited, Located On The North Side Of NE 1st Street and Extends From Pineapple Grove Way To NE 1st Avenue. ty: v j- I K/- N.E 3RD -St - GENERAL DATA: - - - ' Owner/Applicant Pineapple Grove Ltd. — — Location Located on the north side of NE 1st _ _ c i'l Street and extends From Pineapple _ Grove Way To NE 1st 1 Avenue ( — ii Property Size 1.658 acres N,E. 2ND T. j Future Land Use Map CC (Commercial Core) & OMU I I_ 1 F — — (Other Mixed Use) t� w Current Zoning CBD (Central Business District) I= U= & _� & OSSHAD (Old School _; Square Historic Arts District) < — ►= �v Adjacent Zoning....North: OSSHAD & CBD L� _I — I East: CBD T. N.E 1S ,J South: CBD & OSSHAD ` I r West: OSSHAD _ -' Existing Land Use Vacant W o Proposed Land Use Construction of a 119-room -z r� _ hotel with 2,322 sq. ft of retail, °LO , sL /33,350 sq. ft. of office, 4,356 I s�ua�� , sq. ft. restaurant, and a single ATLANTIC AVENUE family residence. Water Service Existing on site. I Sewer Service Existing on site. I _I _ �` _ — E b-1 — — I IIIV- -21 i ______ ' 5,E. 1ST LLLbii _, ftl tri - I N 1 IV.D. ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The action before the Board is approval of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4, which incorporates the following aspects of the development proposal for Pineapple Grove Limited, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(F): ■ Class IV Site Plan • Landscape Plan • Architectural Elevations • Waiver Requests The subject property is located on the north side of NE 1st Street, and extends from Pineapple Grove Way (NE 2nd Avenue) to NE 1st Avenue. BACKGROUND The development proposal consists of the south 38.25 feet of Lot 5, 6, 7, 8, the south 34.75 feet of Lot 13, 14, 15, and 16 of Block 75 of the Town of Linton Plat and contains 1.658 acres. The eastern half of the development (Lots 13 through 16) is located in the CBD (Central Business District) zoning district. The western half of the development (Lots 5 through 8) is located in the OSSHAD (Old School Square Historic Arts District) and was (in-part) the former site of Neil's Market. It is noted that the south 34.75 feet of Lot 6 and all of Lots 7 and 8 are subject to the permitted uses and development regulations of the CBD zoning district as it overlays this portion of the OSSHAD. At its meeting of January 4, 2006, Historic Preservation Board approved a Class V site plan for Pineapple Grove Limited. That project consisted of 8 townhouses, 5,764 square feet of office, 4,868 square feet of restaurant, 5,385 square feet of retail floor area, and 30 condominium units. The project was never constructed. The action now before the Board is approval of the site plan, landscape plan, architectural elevations, and waivers for a revised project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The development proposal incorporates the following: ■ Construction of 119 room hotel along Pineapple Grove Way that contains 2,322 square feet of retail and 4,356 square feet of restaurant; • Construction of a 33,350 square feet three-story office building along NE 1st Avenue; ■ Construction of a single family residence at the northwest corner of the property; • Construction of a two-story parking facility along the east side of the alley; and ■ Installation of dumpster enclosures and associated landscaping. The development proposal includes waivers to the following sections of the Land Development Regulations: 1. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.14(A)(2), which requires a 40-foot visibility triangle at the intersection of two public rights-of-way. Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 2. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.18(B)(14)(iv)(2), which requires that the minimum transparency or glass surface area on the ground floor wall area of all non-residential and mixed-use buildings shall be a minimum of 75% of the wall area for that elevation. SITE PLAN ANALYSIS COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development application/request. Building Setbacks: The following tables indicate that the proposal complies with LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4) as it pertains to the Central Business District (CBD) zone district, except for those portions of the buildings as noted in the furthest column to the right: Hotel Required Compliance with Road/ %Building Building Proposed LDR Building Building Frontage Required Frontage Building Requirements? Height Setback Frontage Side (min/max) at or setback Setback Yes No 70% 179.02' Pineapple Ground min./90% 10'max. min./230. 224' * Grove Floor to max. 17'max. Way 25' Remaining * 15'min. 25'min. 25' 255.75'^^ length Building Frontage 48, to 70%min. 15' min. 179'min. 175.17'A * Si 70% 84' NE 1 Ground min./90% 10'max. min./108' 101' * Street Floor to max. max. 120' 25' Remaining 15' min. 12'min. 13.83' Building length Frontage 48,to 70%min. 15'min. 84'min. 86' Side Interior 0' 0' * (north)Rear (alley) 10' 10' " A condition of approval is attached that a minimum of 179 feet of building frontage at a minimum of 15 feet is provided for the upper levels of the hotel along Pineapple Grove Way. AA The plans incorrectly note the hotel building frontage along Pineapple Grove Way as 254' 6". Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that the plans are revised to correctly note the building frontage along Pineapple Grove Way as 255.75 feet. 2/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Office Required Compliance with % Proposed LDR Road/ Building Building Building Building Frontage Required Frontage Building Requirements? Height Setback Frontage Side (min/max) at or Setback Setback Yes No NE 1st 70% 118.47' Avenue Ground min./90% 10' max. min./152. 124.58' * 169.25' Floor to max. 32'max. (Lower) 25' Remaining 15'min. 16.93' 44.67 length min. 157.25' (Upper) 25' to 48, Building 48 70%min. 15' min. 110'min. 110.17' * Frontage 1st 70% 77.7' NE Street Ground min./90% 10' max. min./99.9' 79.25' * Floor to max. max. 111' 25' Remaining 15'min. 11.1'min. 31.75' * Building length 'to 25 Frontage 48 70%min. 15' min. 77'min. 77.75' Rear 10' 10' * (alley) Allowable Upper Level Floor Area Building Level Allowable Ground Maximum Floor Area (70%) Proposed Floor Area Floor Area Hotel Third 29,500 sq.ft. 20,650 sq. ft. 19,370 sq.ft. (65.7%) Floor Fourth 29,500 sq.ft. 20,650 sq.ft. 18,870 sq.ft. (63.9%) Floor Office Third 18,351 sq.ft. 12,845.7 sq.ft. 12,840 sq.ft. Floor (69.96%) The following table indicates that the proposal complies with LDR Section 4.3.4(K) as it pertains to that portion of the development (single family residence) located in the OSSHAD zone district: Required Provided Building Height (max.) 35' 28' 9" Open Space 25% 41% Maximum Lot Coverage 40% 39.9% Setbacks ■ Front 25' 25' • Side Interior (North & South) 7.5' 7.5' ■ '` Rear 10' 10' 3/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Central Business District (CBD) District Regulations: Parking Requirements: Per LDR Section 4.4.13(G)(1)(a), 1 parking space per 300 square feet of total floor area is required for all nonresidential uses except restaurants. Per LDR Section 4.4.13(G)(1)(d), the required parking for restaurants is 6 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of total floor area. Per LDR Section 4.4.13(G)(1)(e), the required parking for the hotel is 0.7 parking spaces per guest room plus one space per 300 square feet for the meeting room. Per LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(2)(a), the required parking for single family residences is 2 parking spaces per unit. The proposed development contains 33,350 square feet of office, 2,322 square feet of retail, 4,356 square feet of restaurant, 119 hotel rooms and 1,000 square feet of meeting room, and a single family residence. Based on this development mix, the shared parking calculation for the proposed development is 199 parking spaces as indicated in the shared parking table provided below. It is noted that the two parking spaces for the single family residence are accommodated within the garage of the house. LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(8)(a) — Shared Parking allows for buildings or a combination of buildings on a unified site to utilize the shared parking calculations which affords reduced parking requirements by accommodating varied peak utilization periods for different uses (see below). Weekday Weekend Night Day Evening Day Evening Midnight to 6 6 PM to 6 PM to Use Required AM 9 AM to 4 PM Midnight 9 AM to 4 PM Midnight Residential 100% 0 60% 0 90% 0 80% 0 90% 0 Office 111.16 5% 5.558 100% 111.16 10% 11.116 10% 11.116 5% 5.558 Commercial/Retail 7.74 5% 0.387 70% 5.418 90% 6.966 100% 7.74 70% 5.418 Hotel 86.63 80% 69.304 80% 69.304 100% 86.63 80% 69.304 100% 86.63 Restaurant 26.13 10% 2.613 50% : 13.065 100% ! 26.13 50% 13.065 100% i 26.13 Entertainment/Recreational (theatres,bowling alleys, etc) 10% 0 40% 0 100%' 0 80% 0 100% 0 Reserved Parking 100% 0 100% 0 100% 0 100% 0 100% ; 0 Other 100% 0 100% 0 100%` 0 100% 0 100% 0 TOTALS 232 78 199 131 102 124 Per LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(8)(b), administrative relief may be granted to allow double counting of parking spaces for uses within a development that have separate hours of operation. The Planning and Zoning Department has determined that the restaurant will have separate hours from the office uses. Therefore, a reduction of 26 parking spaces can be taken. Based on this reduction, a total of 173 parking spaces are required. The development provides a total of 169 parking spaces via a combination of 74 parking spaces within the hotel, 33 parking spaces within the office, 16 valet parking spaces, 6 parallel parking spaces, 10 parallel parking space credit within the adjacent rights-of-way [per LDR Section 4.6.9(E)(3)(e)], and a credit of 30 spaces for property that was owned by the applicant on the south side of NE 1st Street, which has been acquired by the City for use as a public parking facility per LDR Section 4.6.9(B)(4). In order to accommodate the 4 space deficiency, the applicant has requested the in-lieu payment. The City Commission will take final action on this request following consideration of the site plan by the HPB. Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that the in-lieu for the 4/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 deficient parking spaces be approved by the City Commission. It is noted that the in-lieu fee is supportable given the proximity of the project to the public parking garage on the south side of NE 1st Street. The property is located in Area 3, which requires an in-lieu fee payment of$7,800 per space ($31,200 total). Old School Square Historic Arts District(OSSHAD) Regulations: Per LDR Section 4.4.24(F)(4), the maximum allowed width of the single family residence is 60 feet. There must also be a minimum 15-foot separation between buildings that front a street in a development site that contains more than one structure. The proposed residence complies with this requirement since the house is 53 feet 7 inches wide, and is separated 20 feet from the office building. Special District Boundary Treatment: Per LDR Section 4.6.4(A), the north portion of the office building and that portion of the hotel across the alley from the single family property is required to provide a 10-foot setback for the portion of the buildings that are 37 feet or less in height. Further, the hotel is required to provide a 22-foot setback for that portion that is above 37 feet in height. The proposed development complies with the special district boundary treatment since the lower levels of the hotel provide a building setback of 10 feet and 22 feet for the upper level. The office building also complies with this requirement since a 12-foot setback is provided for the lower levels. Provisions for Ingress and Egress: Per LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(2), each required parking space shall be accessible at all times. Due to the proposed valet stacking spaces, the required parking spaces will not be accessible within the upper level of the hotel parking facility. The applicant has indicated that the parking within this area will be exclusively by valet. Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that a valet attendant be provided on-site 24 hours a day. OTHER ITEMS: Auxiliary Power Generator: Per LDR Section 4.3.3(00), the hotel is required to provide an auxiliary power generator for all interior corridor lighting and exit signs and at least one public elevator. Further, the generator needs to be designed and equipped to operate the full capacity of the equipment being served for a period not less than 120 hours. The site plan indicates that the generator will be within a room in the ground floor of the hotel and will be connected to a gas line along the alley. Paving Material: Per LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(f)(1), the front setback area shall be finished with paving materials to match the existing or planned sidewalks within the adjacent right-of-way. The site plan indicates that paver blocks will be installed between the buildings and the public rights-of-way and they will match the existing pavers within the streets. Photometric Plan: A photometric plan has been submitted for the vehicular areas within the property that includes the alley. However, the illumination levels have not been provided for the pedestrian areas at the building entrances. Further, the cut sheet details have not been provided for the wall 5/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 mounted light fixtures on the office building. It is noted that the garage entrances exceed the maximum night time illumination level of 10 foot candles. A condition of approval is attached that photometric plan be revised to comply with the illumination levels of LDR Section 4.6.8, provide cut sheet details of all wall mounted light fixtures, and include the building entrance illumination levels. Pineapple Grove Main Street Redevelopment Plan: The Pineapple Grove Main Street Neighborhood Plan (The Plan) contains several design guidelines that address redevelopment efforts within this area. The following is an analysis of the applicable design guidelines: Street Improvements: The Plan indicates that the intersection at NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue be resurfaced with paver bricks to match the intersection of Pineapple Grove Way and Atlantic Avenue. A condition of approval is attached that the applicant contributes one-quarter of the cost associated with these improvements. Overhead Power Lines: Overhead cables (electric, telephone, CATV) are required to be placed under ground whenever feasible. The site plan includes a note that all that all overhead utility lines (including the alley) will be placed under ground. Right-of-Way Dedication: Pursuant to LDR Sections 5.3.1 (A) and (D) and Table T-1 of the Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element, the following table describes the required rights-of-way and the existing rights-of-way adjacent to the subject property: Right-of-Way Required Existing Required Dedication Pineapple Grove Way 60' 50' 0' NE 1st Street 55' 50' 5' NE 1st Avenue 60' 50' 5' Alley 20'or dominant width 16' 4' Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1(D)(4), a reduction in the required right-of-way width of existing streets may be granted by the City Engineer upon favorable recommendation from the Development Services Management Group (DSMG). The City Engineer and DSMG considered the reductions and approved Pineapple Grove Way to the existing width. However, a 5 foot dedication will be required for NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue together with a 4 foot dedication for the alley. These dedications have been accommodated with the layout of the project. A condition of approval is attached that the right-of-way deeds be submitted and recorded or provided on the plat prior to certification of the site plan. WAIVERS 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: 6/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 (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; and (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. Visibility at Intersections: Per LDR Section 4.6.14(A)(2), the required sight visibility triangles are 40 feet at the intersection of two or more public rights-of-way. The hotel encroaches into the 40-foot visibility triangle at the northwest corner of Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Street. The office building encroaches into the 40-foot visibility triangle at the northeast corner of NE 1st Avenue and NE 1st Street. These encroachments result in a 20-foot visibility triangle at both intersections. The applicant has submitted the following verbatim narrative in support of the waiver: "...The request is for partial obstruction at the intersection of Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Street.." Waiver Analysis: Given the relatively low traffic speeds along NE 1st Street now that it has been converted back to two-way traffic flow, there is no concern with respect to the reduced visibility triangles 20 feet. It is also noted that north/south traffic along Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Avenue are required to stop at their respective intersections with NE 1st Street, which also enhances the traffic safety. Similar circumstances on other properties would lead to the same conclusion. Consequently, positive findings can be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), Waiver Findings. Transparency: Per LDR Section 4.6.18(B)(14)(iv)(2), the minimum transparency or glass surface area on the ground floor wall area of all non-residential and mixed-use buildings shall be a minimum of 75% of the wall area for that elevation. The proposed office building provides a transparency of 60% along NE 1st Street and 60% along NE 1st Avenue. The applicant has submitted the following verbatim narrative in support of the waiver: "...Our request is for the office component only as it fronts NE 1st Avenue and whose architecture dictates more sensitivity to proportional fenestration..." Waiver Analysis: The purpose of the transparency requirement is to provide a pedestrian friendly streetscape. Window shopping opportunities encourage pedestrians to proceed along a street. This pedestrian friendly environment is particularly important along corridors such as Pineapple Grove Way and Atlantic Avenue. However, the location of the office building is not as critical to the pedestrian experience since it is located on the periphery of the core commercial areas. Further, the reduced window area will be more compatible with the "lower" scale mixed use development pattern with the historic district along NE 1st Avenue. It is noted that the City has approved similar reduction such as the 5th Avenue at Delray project on NE 5th Avenue. Similar circumstances on other properties would lead to the same conclusion. Consequently, positive findings can be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), Waiver Findings. 7/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Technical Items: While the revised site plan has accommodated some staff concerns; the following items remain outstanding, and will need to be addressed prior to building permit submittal (unless stated otherwise): 1. That a plat application be submitted prior to certification of the site plan and that the recorded plat be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. That the door from the upper level garage be locked and monitored at all times. 3. That a traffic statement be submitted for the revised development proposal prior to certification of the site plan. LANDSCAPE ANALYSIS The proposed landscaping for the commercial portion of the development consists primarily of foundation areas, raised planters on the pool deck, and street trees that include Key Thatch Palms, Yellow Lantana, Alexander Palms, Live Oaks, Bismarck Palms, Clerodendrum trees, Cassia trees, Royal Palms, Hibiscus trees, Fishtail Palms, and Sabal Palms. These areas will be under planted with Foxtail Fern, Cocoplum, Crown of Thorn, Purple Crinum Lily, Gold Mound, Dwarf Fakahatchee Grass, Ficus Vine, Florida Privet, Green Island Ficus, Spider Lily, Pentas, Spanish Stopper, and Xanadu. The landscaping for the single family residence consists of Clerodendrum trees, Coconut Palms, Gumbo Limbo trees, Geiger trees, Hibiscus trees, Key Thatch Palms, Alexander Palms, Pigmy Date Palms, Live Oak trees, and White Bird of Paradise. These areas will be underplanted with annuals, Purple Crinum Lily, European Fan Palms, Dwarf Fakahatchee Grass, Florida Privet, Gardenia, Spider Lily, Nora Grant Ixora, Trinette, Viburnum, and Coontie. The landscape plans for the project complies with LDR Section 4.6.16. Landscape Technical Items: The following Landscape Plan items remain outstanding, and will need to be addressed prior to building permit submission unless as otherwise noted. 1. That a landscape maintenance and hold harmless agreement for landscaping within adjacent rights-of-way be recorded prior to certification of the site plan. 2. That cross section of the landscape beds be provided that identify how they will be drained. ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS Per LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(2), the single family residence is considered a major development and the office building is a minor development. Visual compatibility with surrounding historic neighborhood for new construction is based on LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(8)(a)-(I)[Visual Compatibility Standards]. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.18(E), the following criteria shall be considered, by the Historic Preservation Board, in the review of plans for building permits associated with the hotel. If the following criteria are not met, the application shall be disapproved. a) The plan or the proposed structure is in conformity with good taste, good design, and in general, contributes to the image of the City as a place of beauty, spaciousness, harmony, taste, fitness, broad vistas, and high quality. 8/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 b) The proposed structure, or project, is in its exterior design and appearance of quality such as not to cause the nature of the local environment or evolving environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value. c) The proposed structure, or project, is in harmony with the proposed developments in the general area, with the Comprehensive Plan, and with the supplemental criteria which may be set forth for the Board from time to time. Visual Compatibility Standards: The following Standards apply, in part, to the office building and single family residence: (a) Height: The height of proposed buildings or modifications shall be visually compatible in comparison or relation to the height of existing structures and buildings in a historic district for all major and minor development. (b) Front Facade Proportion: The front facade of each building or structure shall be visually compatible with and be in direct relationship to the width of the building and to the height of the front elevation of other existing structures and buildings within the subject historic district. (c) Proportion of Openings (Windows and Doors): The openings of any building within a historic district shall be visually compatible with the openings exemplified by prevailing historic architectural styles of similar buildings within the district. The relationship of the width of windows and doors to the height of windows and doors among buildings shall be visually compatible within the subject historic district. (d) Rhythm of Solids to Voids: The relationship of solids to voids of a building or structure shall be visually compatible with existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district for all development, with particular attention paid to the front facades. (e) Rhythm of Buildings on Streets: The relationship of buildings to open space between them and adjoining buildings shall be visually compatible with the relationship between existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district. (f) Rhythm of Entrance and/or Porch Projections: The relationship of entrances and porch projections to the sidewalks of a building shall be visually compatible with existing architectural styles of entrances and porch projections on existing historic buildings and structures within the subject historic district for all development. (g) Relationship of Materials, Texture, and Color: The relationship of materials, texture, and color of the facade of a building and/or hardscaping shall be visually compatible with the predominant materials used in the historic buildings and structures within the subject historic district. (h) Roof Shapes: The roof shape, including type and slope, of a building or structure shall be visually compatible with the roof shape of existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district. The roof shape shall be consistent with the architectural style of the building. 9/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 (i) Walls of Continuity: Walls, fences, evergreen landscape masses, or building facades, shall form cohesive walls of enclosure along a street to ensure visual compatibility with historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district and the structure to which it is visually related. (j) Scale of a Building: The size of a building and the building mass in relation to open spaces, windows, door openings, balconies, porches, and lot size shall be visually compatible with the building size and mass of historic buildings and structures within a historic district for all development. (k) Directional Expression of Front Elevation: A building shall be visually compatible with the buildings, structures, and sites within a historic district for all development with regard to its directional character, whether vertical or horizontal. (I) Architectural Style: All major and minor development shall consist of only one (1) architectural style per structure or property and not introduce elements definitive of another style. Analysis: The predominant characteristic of the existing buildings along NE 1st Avenue between NE 1st Street and NE 2 Street is one and two story structures. The proposed single family residence (major development) complies with the building height plane and maximum floor height requirements. However, the proposed three story office building (minor development) is inconsistent with the existing historic area. As noted in the Building Setback section of this report, the third floor of office building cannot exceed 70% of the allowable ground floor area. This 30% reduction is designed along the rear of the building along the alley. The reduction on the alley side provides no meaningful relief in the massing of the building along NE 1st Avenue or to the one and two story buildings along the west side of NE 1st Avenue. In order to comply with the visual compatibility standards, a condition of approval is attached that the 30% reduction in floor area be transferred to the north and west sides of the building. The architectural interpretation of the single family residence is influenced by the French Renaissance movement. The architecture of the single family residence introduces a foreign design interpretation that is incompatible with the neighborhood based on the visual standards mentioned above. Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that the architectural design of the single family residence is changed to be visually compatible with the neighborhood and approved by the Historic Preservation Board. The hotel is a contemporary architectural interpretation. The most striking architectural features are the vertical glass facades along the east side of the building. The north side of the hotel contains two large facades with little architectural treatment (scorelines). A condition of approval is attached, that vertical and horizontal architectural treatments are provided for these two planes. Further, the Pineapple Grove Main Street Redevelopment Plan indicates that development's need to incorporate "Floribbean" design standards. These include vibrant color schemes. The proposed Hadley Red is very dark and is not consistent with the district. Thus, a condition of approval is attached that the Hadley Red is replaced with a vibrant color consistent with the Floribbean standard. 10/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Parapet: Per LDR Section 4.6.18(B)(14)(i)3), flat roofs shall be screened from adjacent properties and streets with decorative parapets. The maximum height of the parapet wall shall be 6 feet or be of sufficient height to screen all roof mounted equipment, whichever is greater, measured from the top of the roof deck to the top of the parapet wall. The parapet on the tower at the southeast corner of the hotel building is 9 feet 4 inches high. The applicant has indicated that the restaurant equipment will be located in this area. In order to justify this height, a condition of approval is attached that details of the equipment are provided and watermarked on the building elevations. REQUIRED FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the approval of development applications, certain findings must be made in a form which is part of the official record. This may be achieved through information on the application, written materials submitted by the applicant, the staff report, or minutes. Findings shall be made by the body which has the authority to approve or deny the development application. These findings relate to the Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan Consistency, Concurrency, and Compliance with the Land Development Regulations. At its meeting of May 7, 2002, the City Commission made positive findings with respect to the Future Land Use Map, Comprehensive Plan Consistency, and Concurrency provided conditions of approval are addressed. However, the following is provided: Section 3.1.1 (A) - Future Land Use Map: That portion of the subject property west of the alley has a FLUM (Future Land Use Map) designation of OMU (Other Mixed Use) and zoning designation of OSSHAD. The portion of the property located east of the alley has a Future Land Use Map designation of CC (Commercial Core) and a zoning designation of CBD (Central Business District). The zoning districts are consistent with the CC Future Land Use Map designations. As noted in the background section, the southern 34.75 feet of Lot 6 and all of Lots 7 and 8 are subject to the permitted uses and development regulations of the CBD zoning district as the CBD overlay extends into this area. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(B)(1), (2), (3), and (5), hotels, retail, office and restaurants are allowed uses within the CBD zoning district. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.24(B)(1), the proposed single family residence is considered an allowed use in the OSSHAD zoning district. Thus, positive findings can be made with respect to Future Land Use Map consistency. Section 3.1.1 (B) -Concurrency: As described in Appendix A, a positive finding of concurrency can be made as it relates to water, sewer, streets and traffic, drainage, parks and recreation, open space, schools, and solid waste. Section 3.1.1 (C) -Consistency (Standards for Site Plan Actions): As described in Appendix B, a positive finding of consistency can be made as it relates to Standards for Site Plan Actions. 11/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Section 3.1.1 (D) - Compliance With the Land Development Regulations: As described under the Site Plan Analysis of this report, a positive finding of compliance with the LDRs can be made, provided that all outstanding items attached as conditions of approval are addressed. Comprehensive Plan Policies: A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following applicable objectives or policies were noted: Future Land Use Element Objective A-1 - Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate and complies in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations, is complimentary to adjacent land uses, and fulfills remaining land use needs. The guests of the hotel will provide a unique tourist customer base for the surrounding businesses. These quests will provide economic stability for businesses in the area, particularly with respect to the restaurant and entertainment sectors. This is also true of the office portion of the development. The office employees will provide a day-time customer base for area businesses with a particular emphasis on restaurants. As noted previously, there is a concern with respect to the compatibility of the office building with the historic neighborhood in terms of scale and massing. A condition of approval is attached that the required reduction of the third floor of the office building be relocated to the north and west sides. This will reduce the massing of the office building in relation to the lower scale historic district. Future Land Use Element Policy C-4.4. — The City supports the efforts to revitalize the Pineapple Grove Main Street (PGMS) area, and the use of the Main Street approach: organization, promotion, design, and economic restructuring. While the CRA is the lead support agency for the PGMS organization, the City will provide technical support and assistance through the Planning &Zoning and Community Improvement Departments. The Pineapple Grove Main Street Neighborhood Plan contains several design guidelines that address redevelopment efforts within this area. These items were previously discussed under the "Compliance with LDRs" Section of this report. Transportation Element Policy D-2.2 — Bicycle parking and facilities shall be required on all new development and redevelopment. Particular emphasis is to be placed on development within the TCEA Area. Bicycle parking is provided at the southeast and southwest corners of the development. Section 2.4.5 (F)(5) - Compatibility (Site Plan Findings): The approving body must make a finding that development of the property pursuant to the site plan will be compatible and harmonious with adjacent and nearby properties and the City as a whole, so as not to cause substantial depreciation of property values. The subject property is bordered to the north, south and west by the Old School Square Historic Arts District zoning district and to east and south by the CBD zoning district. The adjacent land uses include: to the north and west single family residential and commercial uses; to the east by the Astor mixed use development; and to the south by the public parking garage. The proposed redevelopment will provide year-round customer and employment base for the nearby commercial redevelopment along Pineapple Grove Way as well as new opportunities for businesses. The stability of the downtown area will be enhanced by the addition of the hotel 12/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 quests that will patronize area businesses and contribute to the long term revitalization of this redevelopment area together with employment base of the commercial uses. REVIEW BY OTHERS The development proposal is located in an area which requires review by the PGAD (Pineapple Grove Arts District) Executive Committee, the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency), and the DDA (Downtown Development Authority). Pineapple Grove Arts District Executive Committee At its meeting of August 12, 2009, the Design Review Committee reviewed the proposal and recommended approval of the development proposal. Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) At its meeting of July 23, 2009, the CRA reviewed the proposal and recommended approval. Downtown Development Authority (DDA! At its meeting of July 20, 2009, the DDA reviewed the proposal and recommended approval. Courtesy Notice: Courtesy notices have been provided to the following homeowner's associations, which have requested notice of developments in their areas: • Neighborhood Advisory Council • Chamber of Commerce • Progressive Residents of Delray (PROD) • Old School Square Any letters of support or objection will be presented at the Historic Preservation Board meeting. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION The mixed-use development will further enhance the vibrancy of the downtown area and the continued redevelopment of the Pineapple Grove redevelopment area. The recommended condition of approval to step-down the office building along the north and west sides will ensure compatibility with the historic neighborhood. The proposed use is consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Chapter 3 of the Land Development Regulations. Positive findings can be made with respect to Section 2.4.5(F)(5) regarding compatibility of the proposed development with surrounding properties. Positive findings can be made with respect to compliance with the Land Development Regulations provided the conditions of approval are addressed. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Postpone with direction. B. Move approval of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL-4, associated Class IV site plan modification, landscape plan, design elements, and waivers for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the 13/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, subject to conditions of approval. C. Move denial of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL-4, associated Class IV site plan modification, landscape plan, design elements, and waivers for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, does not meet criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION By Separate Motions: Waivers: 1. Recommend approval to the City Commission of the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.14(A)(2), which requires a 40-foot visibility triangle at the intersection of two public rights-of-way, based on a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 2. Recommend approval to the City Commission of the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.18(B)(14)(iv)(2), which requires that the minimum transparency or glass surface area on the ground floor wall area of all non-residential and mixed-use buildings shall be a minimum of 75% of the wall area for that elevation, based on a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). Site Plan Modification: Approve COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 and associated Class IV site plan for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, subject to the following conditions of approval. 1. Address all Site Plan Technical Items and submit three (4) copies of the revised plans. 2. That the site plan approval is contingent upon City Commission approval of the requested fee in-lieu of parking. 3. That a minimum of 179 feet of building frontage at a minimum of 15 feet is provided for the upper levels of the hotel along Pineapple Grove Way. 4. That the plans are revised to correctly note the hotel building frontage along Pineapple Grove Way as 255.75 feet. 5. That a valet attendant be provided on-site 24 hours a day. 6. That the photometric plan be revised to comply with the illumination levels of LDR Section 4.6.8, provide cut sheet details of all wall mounted light fixtures, and include the building entrance illumination levels. 7. That the applicant contributes one-quarter of the cost associated with the improvement to the intersection of NE 1st Street and NE 15t Avenue prior to certification of the site plan. 14/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 8. That the right-of-way deeds be submitted and recorded or provided with the plat prior to certification of the site plan. 9. That a finding of concurrency be submitted from the School District for the residence. 10. That the payment of the parks and recreation impact of $60,000 be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. Landscape Plan: Approve COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 and associated landscape plan for Pineapple Grove Limited, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.6.16, subject to the condition that all Landscape Technical Items are addressed and three (3) copies of the revised plans are submitted. Elevations: Approve COA-2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 and associated design elements for Pineapple Grove Limited, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.6.18, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the 30% reduction in floor area be transferred to the west and north sides of the office building. 2. That the architectural design of the single family residence is changed to be visually compatible with the neighborhood and approved by the Historic Preservation Board. 3. That vertical and horizontal architectural treatments are provided for the two blank planes on the north side of the hotel. 4. That the Hadley Red is replaced with a vibrant color consistent with the Floribbean standard. 5. That details of the rooftop equipment within the hotel tower are provided and watermarked on the building elevations that justify the increased parapet height. Attachments: • Appendix A • Appendix B • Site Plan • Architectural Elevations • Landscape Plan Report prepared by: Scott D. Pape, AICP, Senior Planner 15/19 Appendix A Page 1 APPENDIX A CONCURRENCY FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(B) Concurrency as defined pursuant to Objective B-2 of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan must be met and a determination made that the public facility needs of the requested land use and/or development application will not exceed the ability of the City to fund and provide, or to require the provision of, needed capital improvements for the following areas: Water and Sewer: With respect to water and sewer service, the following is noted: ➢ Water service will be available to the site via lateral connection to a proposed 8" main along the alley from an existing 8" main along NE 1st Street. ➢ Sewer service exists to the site via an 8" sewer main located within the alley. ➢ It is noted that adequate fire fighting capabilities are provided via the installation of two new fire hydrants along NE 1st Avenue, one new fire hydrant along the alley, one existing fire hydrant at the southeast corner of Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Street, and one existing fire hydrant on the east side of Pineapple Grove Way at the north end of the subject development. Pursuant to the City's Comprehensive Plan, treatment capacity is available at the City's Water Treatment Plant and the South Central County Waste Water Treatment Plant for the City at build-out. Based upon the above, positive findings can be made with respect to these levels of service standards. Streets and Traffic: The subject property is located in the City's TCEA (Traffic Concurrency Exception Area), which encompasses the CBD, CBD-RC, and OSSHAD zoning districts, as well as the West Atlantic Avenue corridor. The TCEA was established in December, 1995 to aid in the revitalization of downtown, with a purpose of reducing the adverse impacts of transportation concurrency requirements on urban infill development and redevelopment. These revitalization efforts are achieved by exempting development within the TCEA from the requirements of traffic concurrency. Therefore, a positive finding can be made with respect to traffic concurrency. A technical item is attached that the applicant submits a traffic statement for record keeping purposes prior to certification of the site plan. Parks and Recreation Facilities: The 119 hotel rooms and one single family unit will not have a significant impact with respect to level of service standards for parks and recreation facilities. However, pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.2(C), Impact Fee Required, whenever a development is proposed upon land which is not designated for park purposes in the Comprehensive Plan, a impact fee of $500.00 per dwelling unit (including hotel rooms) will be collected prior to issuance of building permits for each unit. Thus, an impact fee of$60,000 will be required of this development. Solid Waste: Trash generated each year by the hotel, 2,322 square feet of retail, 4,356 square feet of restaurant, 33,350 square feet of office will be 396.54 tons. The single family residence will generate 1.99 tons of solid waste per year. The Solid Waste Authority has indicated that its Appendix A Page 2 facilities have sufficient capacity to handle all development proposals until the year 2024, thus a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Drainage: Preliminary drainage plans were submitted which indicate that drainage will be accommodated via sheet flow to culverts that will direct stormwater to the City's stormwater collection system along NE 1st Street. Based on the above, positive findings with respect to this level of service standard can be made. School Concurrency: A finding of concurrency has not been received from the School District for the proposed single family residence. Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that a finding of concurrency be submitted from the School District for the residence. 17/19 Appendix B Page 1 Page 1 APPENDIX B STANDARDS FOR SITE PLAN ACTIONS A. Building design, landscaping, and lighting (glare) shall be such that they do not create unwarranted distractions or blockage of visibility as it pertains to traffic circulation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X (Provided the condition of approval is addressed) Does not meet intent B. Separation of different forms of transportation shall be encouraged. This includes pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles in a manner consistent with policies found under Objectives D-1 and D-2 of the Transportation Element. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent C. Open space enhancements as described in Policies found under Objective B-1 of the Open Space and Recreation Element are appropriately addressed. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent D. The City shall evaluate the effect that any street widening or traffic circulation modification may have upon an existing neighborhood. If it is determined that the widening or modification will be detrimental and result in a degradation of the neighborhood, the project shall not be permitted. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent E. Development of vacant land which is zoned for residential purposes shall be planned in a manner which is consistent with adjacent development regardless of zoning designations. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent F. Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity are appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations; complementary to adjacent land uses; and fulfills remaining land use needs. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent Appendix B Page 2 G. Redevelopment and the development of new land shall result in the provision of a variety of housing types which shall continue to accommodate the diverse makeup of the City's demographic profile, and meet the housing needs identified in the Housing Element. This shall be accomplished through the implementation of policies under Objective B-2 of the Housing Element. Not applicable 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 modified accordingly or denied. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent I. Development shall not be approved if traffic associated with such development would create a new high accident location, or exacerbate an existing situation causing it to become a high accident location, without such development taking actions to remedy the accident situation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent J. Tot lots and recreational areas, serving children from toddler to teens, shall be a feature of all new housing developments as part of the design to accommodate households having a range of ages. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential developments located in the downtown area, and for infill projects having fewer than 25 units. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent 19/19 rcu... 1"1' I SITE SETBACKS AND DATA: .,,, a. SITE :.a��r_�.r1 n _ ,:... tnc,nm.n �I ignigitimiv.... / Y tv.nv., ..r.u.......«r..»....u... a... ,.. _.II M y y wit • 1 I •.s•iv u i4r. •'f;x............... 17 ma's+_ — mu 3. 11 1 j/y sl e ._ . .,,,,. yp > lit [s sus t �.c ldEgF T� e" ... ... r.'--t-';:". 11--:\ii% Mite ._ 4=1= lit SIVIMI DAk .. ..AM.. N..a.. o. 1 �L'_ ,.. I..: .: 11.1.1" VICINITY MAP 4, .. , Slattery'l.`u L J leatiumetin j BIM 0.... ...C4,3E'x _ g■ma ¢ I y 1— -, .I NOM t I1I �t Associates �,...� [ „� I .,,• �� �. �v I b Q t���� mn x,Dm,:, . A, . ARCHITECTS „ .....:,w,. a I • r l 0 14_ _ ;��fYl1Yl■•I I L a. . PLANNERS „� I was,l/ .. ge l!! •.�,. M.v .,. .aaetl 1.10.x,,,v.GLw. itIll: : I _ CIIIL' _ I • �e: '" d• ..,, 1CIW ., ..,,,n„„,. — rol,,trl»ns • 110. — I I I�1� ' to.. n, . ,.-- ...,.w. . ,.a.„...,,,_ . II., n .I . MU I p ; �% .. M!'i ., :, ,.. ,°. OJ ' • I . I.t t. I .94 .m d.� a ;WEIR , . 1 • 1 I . I:I: !MIS__ i'"4.iti , ,; II. MR mew!fri..1.1..1111.4 ff....). no,r.vrer...mit Mt qr. I 1 auaN' I/ I 1Wt a'll %/�%/.1 1 s° I 1 ....,.. ,..,.., III ;//� `, ``mae .,...ow I i �� I .._U. t r.ST..qu.•...L,mm/. 1. .n. _._[SL'..Ln9up.J__..._ 11 ,,r fifi • M11.1InsMarn•loiel I LLI ><IJJ L.° CL rrT All ` , VA 111 y��T �Il�tll llll;. I A 3.:i= `,i. V-`^ ,.,yam ` (-P;r19 Illll11 Illff x ♦ iALSd L CBI J: � , ^W W I _ • I of Wei . . . . i s 9 I 1� I Ih w . .::, W p Z I __._.____Si __ _ I ....._.. b ...N:.:. ILL nsrA i N.m, b •S— —�- -�1 •o..a .,mow,. I,w:-.�wl....zyd s ° w _, W 11 I I I II I I' I .1 t o , i fT iillill' P' .. "[ 1 MY in IMMII ,,..; r MASTER SITE PLAN(COMPOSITE UTILITY PLAN) .% 1 1 1 L u"•.r.[Da I.,..T>„I?.....,I.. A.<uca., rr....1-, r,uUr N.M..' (WIC[BUILDING DATA: HOTEL DUIIDING DATA: L .............P•.• ............M.11'..:^!'. ................ti♦._._........_...................._1�___....._...................1 rW.n,tfut,wr,t..uoe.,l _ mi4! l u.r,nt row T..No ... [r Ir I mE P[m.u[T:w: ton coP[mnnunm.Ns.ns[,mr..M[w,l w[D.Wxrx,.r, .,a Tn.„ .. 14...r, A(r,.smw, ABBEEVIATIONBSYMOOL LEGEND: 0'0 A"[. Mir , w P A..1 ... ... ... ... .....I II. w[°...YLDaA..v n.wis.r. ROARK IDD..Y. [..n[t,. ...... .B.,mNY. • ..,..n,.+l,..r. :........«,:..•.,5,xt._9.tP.Wn.^..^...._:....:....c9eE................._.........._..............._...in• ..... OMNI...ant: .....M.wn: nN.n..[:...o-m ® tmr.wn ;,',•.TaalpaMln,.a,.!n..!a'!!!�1................................................................................. w r•,us,<N:n.u,o.0 Pr:.t„STORY It,W![L ow,m..,m.,TORT Q T.a...w ♦ u...ur..+n. nG,x llD as:mar is.,msnla•.,.0 or nn1 INII....W.w....•to sat,,.e weer alNSID I. vt•on:Daman Naar,DOD 'Tr.OC.,.ew A.•[atllTS .. O .•aLN,W °.°It.1..er,A.,.,mM[.MMMtvlIWS....a,.M..m SD per 3..41.6..nl:el.1.•Mnt . ar,ND.L'O.AbM1A A.GW 1.0•1.JI.T,.Or•.a Cwnly old•amS.tbs 4[.flNl•l•T:.eW u,o: u ..r. .x.n..w„am.enaewn w.mlws. Z .r.,twa.0 nn..A us...Du,m ♦ .-„[,,.u„ '_,r..y,'.,^ge.^s..r.,^.h...........................................___...__.......................... .-._............._........._ ... I .............„.. Ta.�e Tnag MMil..1.w+i Emi,,... Y..u...m o ..sn.e r,.. •irnnro,.:a.rv,A•a.v.Nm,..u.nl•,.a.,c.,H, '(r..l n' BAlD BC.CtoT ING UDSIACATB[ETox[ORAYT.DT[[Tt[xrw Mltc..e.c(u T.,.m[.DDTC.w Y1[u.uu ...T• wTASI.. uw.,.uoo:s[crtwIT.WI,IUm,utr,Tl VOM.ruut[ev[[.el..aaw.[wTxnclm oot,11m,rw Lomar..,.wr 1.._._._N.._....t... SsagLI...wee....._..._._....._._.._.....—......J_ I- ,m.IDDx>,ANDM.,»llCA'a,r:nM0 noU„°t[^„W Ou ol.on.N [DaaD,D , .a...,... a„..T...la [ .,..Wa ~ A01.1 , . . • ,e + iru pg . $ JERRY TURNER "e. & ASSOCIATES • of FLORIDA.INC. 8 E LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE 4 LAND PLANNING FIG ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN b _:s Ima`s .tf+ ii`� Yi '.c;= d Tr — aiiH: .„ ., ,<�:tea; jas;l o9e_bss �• I L L�� m �� xw glrA e, n'ansnm r•. APROJECT .s .LE FAMILY•ESI, r1�� I.-_i,.II N _ ° ° If • ?? — � �`_ � `III I '— • �°-- I on''am PINEAPPLE [€ _,�_S£igq< SEE SHEETL.3 I .\ vm °t ' GROVE E. k,p,.,. D ANt1NroENCE �r C j •.� ®- — I . 21D sowus.2.,2t.e.a.m..a LTD. G GIF - • RE a. -b$oiEo:�t... e.,vl.� I l e�1 _ oot EDr,m«. € Cr 4 V I ) S[saM R — •^�• f Use Root Barrier-Detail Sheet L-A under $ GIF I '- �S 0�� ® I i' m - --- '•'• l �' IT all tree/palm plantings in N.E.Tnd Avenue p5 L ' v Ipf`97�HLC�•F3Il I I I Et ' t I. I Right of Way. R:]" n , I I I -;, I � 3 DELRAY BEACH,FL G Mt sK�Ra« II V. : .;: I .,n„Dn - I /.� t 'd26VJ ✓f v Atve V f I D / V' d •♦ Ic T/14V3 Ala comments IS [[ I �� + I I T' �� - LANDSCAPE DATA E 61 LQ► __ v d Q I .I �. I �•�•� P I II RE ® I«Rno,L.wXUED.+. f 4� v m e N ST �.. II a TOTH MHO uul.,CH,I,.•�., MU ST /, TDT4 INTERIOR [ eee sI i IS ` 0 I I I ' Top of Pipe wMUM MCA e,o rom :.n v OIiiii f I iI elev.approx.!below grade SEDUM [ '' E LIF twr[na,T«[n,[au•mT TAM A ell ® I I I lf I TD TDT41«rt4D,THIS TTDnp[D i.R[6 FIFPOSTA MM.(MA C Ov v 12 `�r 11� I`i p •� I.! GA e[rr+v[x IT u[.WHEN, Li o %//////.I dl 1 1. I-0 t nono,Rom: m<.i�MuiEon.m 0 SF li TS 0 -15 ',I,�IN �- % // //� Il Q TOT.L nioEiiiDu,[ocu.. r•nom a THIS IX 1 A GTa e[1 MIMED TEn.v[T[«a E«TINOR LA«Df[4E �,• 'I,I •D: .1 , I j�// =--'-`---- HMSO WA nDnuD ,a,,E �7y SS v % ® I . LIFMCA. .' T D.,�.TMaal,mMETS II ,eD tr 0‘j ,... ur MATH HART MA Am ®: v �' ty.,.,., v II ::1 �j BE ItATVE n.Dr4LD„a,EL.r 1 Of All :WINO/,D AC MOTH •••••—D. [D— ® �.I !ft = �! 0 �:a.�—�► >r p 9 vDT4«.Krn'6$�D'� n SCLE OArc es IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL b• !7—•/%� r.:o ]640oA TOTAL Ma. i l G ( IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIL oT4.a,ENATIHATTA OU o Da,a D<an,A •T,.[E . 1 a I It'. I� _ . .— 'I , RATHAMMONom ,T,,T • Landscape — ' la a _ — fi E 115 S I Plan c _.,.L .. it.;- a 1 f I l n li[[Ilf➢if[Ifllilf \IIIIIIIIII IIIIIV' — }f • ® Lr,� 563E.1 iii ii, Et Eft 11, 0 txt..Timer o14 LAtllt • ire $ JERRY TURNER & ASSOCIATES of FLORIDA,INC. I tIFT. 1 .______i 1.—u—, 1—,,---1 LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE LAND PLANNING ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN $ '•_ t= a,S N.E.)I t STREET b _ ooc+n+ron,rLowo•axaT •• ' ••• :.:..,.,. ; PINEAPPLE .:'I GROVE r C0soao r "•z, -- ----- 1 Lim m =E.', . F;., ;I LTD. iiil p14. `.;ar,'i m ice . _. _I:_._.._.__, 1 TN — Iii II I DELRAY BEACH,FL 91z9'09 stall comments q _t �1 �� Al! --- EY..'F .. Bo�,.FL 184 ,b—EL 2210^': f ■i■`,� �� I of Pool __....._._._ L m 1 II v I lii` IiPI f Wall 10 � 0 3 � 18Z' E � . L Walk 1 II1i��_Ifr.0 0 �4 �.. Ak: m ter-1 EL;-18'1,� [44, oPtN / v. 7y, -I �I -of Plan 1.4; Bottom ' te IVMyLOi+� ®DFn 41,6-. of Planter _ Q 35.20 �,f}� ® NGVD z2 .. 9®9'' I. ► 4'..j' = •DT.m Drtaco THE ABOVE SECTION IS NOT AN EXACT REPRESENTATION rtyesrr,r,'bprie: :::: r<ua o C OF TLC RANTING PUN AT THE PJCHT ANOISINCLINED FOR - _ (g,,,s,aonoo1$ •.......•..•. - FL.1T10' REVIEW CLARIFICATION ONLY. ® V + Bottom 1'•10 1/Ja'5009 ,,, DETAILS OF CfLMNAGE AND ALL PLANTING BED DEPTHS ® ••• � of Planter •anc A KILL BE PROVIDEDKITICONSTRLCTONDOCIRIENTS. :.:::::::::::.............!a.i§:+: ::::..-' Landscape .• Plan a Second Floor i /;iu " Pool Area Detail 4 u- B•1oo9-IP 563.3 _..._....... I .SUL ELT NO.� .---4. Imo_ -T g - Tifton BermudaGrass IlYpl To,Tunrr of 4 O unt 1 + jib 4 ® V ®® ® III Am AM p D JERRY TURNER & ASSOCIATES of FLORIDA.INC. F p r 135' f �� �1� •Qb�ayMil,;,�.,:.X' �':��r+�'�:{C'O'�61"eMCi,'>A1 V'O�O'0Y'b�0 I0. Coup<i'•L• OT4+'�;41i"0'I�'r 9Y000Ob V�►`c'� 'r v• Qe� ///``` �pk Arli li 1 k0 IMil Immo b \ ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN 6 © 1 Y! O '♦ ' _ I 6I�' I[ es N.PAT L[tRamom[n _ IMio.ll.ez p p a I g, KT • IO k o stag p IJ I11111 [ p I 5.00157o I t, _�__�-___ J�gws PINEAPPLE f m IKI, pet Iii GROVE P ® ;si t: 10° ast p �. .,.,y.;,•.g•;,;c•c, L ' LTD. 6 p , —#4••••..i.j I �1 e a ,.�,�,e t'. L__J pm, 4!� ' �a m® 22 ❑ ` L__J 6 p : ,' ?}�!Q 11 . l E 'm , •1�I0.1., ♦V D J h \� p 0oa,�t*0'.00**rnS0000 • DELRAY BEACH,FL 1 Lppp IV• • E o3 O OCa : I •.rMN s .sr.•C. O Oil e.O 605 erg •62sm �� Yl 729109 staff cow.. 5 triO44 1 Iiiii Y E t PLANT LIST d KEY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME OTY HT SP REMARKS gANN Annual Flowers Annuals 32 6" CLE Cleradendrumquedrlloculare'StaiClerodendrum 2 8' 4'treetorm LANDSCAPE DATA CN Cocos nuclfera'Green Mayalan' Coconut Palm 4 6'gw Green 6 CM Crinum agustum'Queen Emma' Purple Crinum Lily 10 36" 30" arzno+[..osurzo.r. 2 EUP Chamaerops humfis European Fen Palm 2 36" 24" Multi trunk I x FAK Tripsacum 6oddona Dwarf Fokahatchee Grass 9 18" 12" +4';•I;,�0,1,5 FP Forestena seareaata Florida Privet 59 32' 24" mruia.e'mrso0',o 4•'a.r ,e....� cK o� GAR Gardenia augusta Gardenia 1 4' 3' [ 6 GL Bursere sire tuba Gumbo Limbo 2 12' 6' TOTAL MOTM DT DT e GT Cordiasebestena Geiger Tree 1 8' 4' e.m[n¢ rea as [rah •so•Le o.rz HEL Hefconia psldacorum'Lady or Helaconia 2 4' 30" o 14555 s MO tnD2oo3 HIS Hibiscus'Seminole Pink' Hibiscus Tree 3 6' 3'tree form . I HL Hymenou.11is latifolla Spider UN 6 24" 16" Landscape I%O Nora'Nora Grant' Nora Grant Ixore • 3 24" 16" KT Thrinax morrisii Key Thatch Palm 5 T' 5'ct min. PED Ptychosperma elegans Alexander Palm 3 10'gw Double trunk Plan ROB Phoenix roebelenii Pigmy Date Palm 5 6' 3' triple trunk CV Ouercus virginia Live Oak 2 12' 6' 3"cal ! SN Stre6t:ia nicolal Write Bird of Paradise 2 6' 4' Single Family VAR Schelbiera orboricola'hinette' Tdnette 115 24" 16" P VIB Vibumumsuspensum Viburnum 56 30" 124" Residence Detail e 2AM Zenlin floridana Coontie 9 17' 18" era,I o.•••••••••+oe ao.- 6-10D34p 5634'1Mo— •t jOf4 ,...... ,. 1i rCir 0 Or 0 0 0 o o o la •c BUILDING ELEVATION NOTES: •..,....,..•r, . ,......7.1+___ 1 ..2r..... ......Er._ — BEV - •‘.4.=-.......... , • I ;----+A -,-.,. in.1 ID III if M iii M I El I! Ell M M El M IN Ell I .,.,- I .4--- - I. ---- -. , All STORMONT..GORR,,,,,RIPT1.11, yr. II . IUD I I/ III III II IIIII m m m m m ra go Eji : VW,.1,0 It TRAWARIRt.4COR,C.J.1 Mr aid.. : ' ..•011... p ... -41'-: :i'[. NM ..- -.--- --- I '-- ;r4- • .Fos.v.or.tron N.pn i!" .10 !E !NI !N IN OD Ei - 1 °-• DJ [1] NI N! I! IIII_ !IN II! . 1. Al I.RI,RD,RRIRRIO CA.•11.101,41.4•10, r ...101jt ...-7e444.--..-'-- mi FIRRJR/9.Of.OPM 1.14.4 101 igWilil .. I! • • ' . War.ILLIIMMIII MIMIIS __.:." "IM- jaillirgi.2.Thikil„ monk __ ?.-..1!..5 — •..- . . 19 ' i iso illidonimi. EMMEN nisiAlimmi-limin • ._. -__ A:sticiai,:s.t ARCHITECTS m 10-0 a a • u co \-E. Le o',--0 o m o m a u o o 1 PLANNERS .r.... .....: 0 EAST ELEVATION SCALE:I/16'•SO. /5, .,,,,/,. r//.,/ ////,i „Y•/////////.1 ' V ' i : ,,V ////////, '1/////./1%/2/ '' , E0] TRANSPARENT GUSSET WALL AREA 17611 p 0 r /./ : = SOLID WALL AREA i LAP i //f/ / ,///A_ 4 & • CI GROUND FLOOR TRANSPARENCY DIAGRAM•EAST ELEVATION I I.L.1 > r o or /-0 o 0 o ;li MATERIAL LEGEND: 0 ill 5 Ei RCOI AI Fll ino eit"IIMM I rs• U..1 ...,,.---;,:. ,---1-- 43.....„" El 1101111r0 ovum IIMIMMil Illi .,. v...,..,, 0 .00n....ma 061.11ki OM a. c' I Li MUM WIN g 11111 -L- --- -.,,,. 0 tro.rn mwrn 1111 illIl Ci... , 0 111KCO 6.11,4 lyr ...:, ..„..... , ,,, I : 0 um roof tow wv. IJJ -..- --',.+--1---- -41-1-01111 -I-- ---4,:t.',—.,---. 0 klIPARRAI 11.IR,PAR1 MAO,. Z , mill ! DI pri m Fil HIER ;:i El AL Vb1.111.All LW%DCO. ..,. IM Ni • CL. ...-,,,÷1*-i-----• MI --- m 1---W.,--,7,7R: I 11 .7111 41 ! rail Imo mg Ns=1,m ri...=4 v2.01,1 1 0 on ire um..worn In r I, i, • CI PIMPS IM M.11 r.,..-r,.:::+-1 I 4. 0,C-R• 0 t roonwrrnx, ili al" 0 0 0 0 0 03 -.V.:.— —,..•,.. i I '- ,,,„,, g Allig4.1.ill all. ... .. ..." 8 KM 11111110, tn.. ID ram.wnta ri,moo'rotor.munorr SOUTH ELEVATION ..._ %AIL I/IV•V.IT ... 0 Z 'zzz, :,:-/-,,,,,,,,,,Agi2"2/eizzi///4 z A f,/,,//4.-//// ,;:::,' '/ . (El TRANSPARENT GLASSED WALL AREA(WI / ; 1= SOLID WALL AREA(MI cr co - :r.1) , /' 0 /0 .:=.( 1 IL"ED GROUND rtooR TRANSPARENCY DIAGRAM•SCUM ELEVATION M A03.1 rji-e:;?:,e:.:,(1.—24.......A, _.1 • = „... -7) • . . . . . . . .. . ....,- .. il. (--,--•,:.;,:.--:•-4+*-- --ii oFal Fa .II B UILaOmMlDl I1 N1101r/,Gao11f E ,9c(L0r1".E1v,oV.IIAw 1WET,1WI1 OnI N/1o1M N 2S0aO M,,TEI0T.Si „. - flM , mimn TIII SlaitaV• & 1i III Eli 0 10 Po -.E1.1 N J GT. mitt. . a . 1-1 0- , PP' 41111; ism NS WPM 00 i 00•1110iirit 01 I i1 _k ;1 10 E0 0 I El TI Fl ry .....,.__ ...__ , 1--- i :NMI . \ . •-,-.-.•• ... et.: ,, •:.t.•:.-•,r:•. ,e, • !I'r • e, t cl. .: ...410111 ..,...- . - elegiallE IgIMIN eggligina .. lleglbat . 41----fM--.e.:. .., Na '.-. •'..-.':,.'12;... .: •.F.•:2;•,i .,,..24 -,-,.4;• '•:L::;4,.!.. Vig.ifi.VV. I. AssocNiks., . ,,,---_,.. \-0 -1:1--0 fa ra 0 01 01 0 a \-E1 A RCH ITECTS PLANNERS 0 WEST ELEVATION SCALE:1/16'•1,0" • CI I— _1 U..1 > I MATERIAL LEGEND: 2 0 1 11111ilm o m o n r 1:-'v w = 6•,:x 0 7.° i kil 701:Sill(ta t I ! IA f IEEE IF— i=, won,map ta_ ' i„..4,_ :__mi.......mmifilmairmi... _...4._+.,.. . Ei IIIII(0 I'M IaL CL Fl g I P71 II-I gj NIM1 1 , 441,---... . 11 I ED I 11 I El 0 A.m.,earaCT 41.413,0, Z -II- . •• • ou I in I so I n * i ..1 a. ^ 4 r WIIIM-MU 0 1.1.0.0 nnurr 0 4 ni i missommuimm • I i. "•, --er.:?...— 0 Al01,,l11 touvrit ............. • '''*"'" 1•1 0 „ 0 SCRIM WM*IIMI PM Mal toulmr . 4 J ,...... .,.... 0 NORTH ELEVATION KEY PLAN 40 ..... .... . SCALE:1/16-*1..0" Z 0 ..- C=4° ••• c== A03.2 , /I ri",.‘-.A-e ?:•..27:6„,..,,,,,, 4,i,:.-.,v-,t,.... ..,..:, • l''' ___, = • • • i .„... .. 1 -.1 t 1 0 0 006110000 . IMIEN1.0.1111.1Pri: ----o.t...—oes:mr---a_A__1_10E- ..acre 1 .__I__.;.:.+ ___,._,,,.. MT*4-.4 I- --',..-.L."-, ,1 •,----,,-Y-... -1-mem! _imm El Walr ! SlilitCIA.& - , MATERIAL LEGEND: ...o. „:,4-.: i-.1-, 11 .H--I-"- -i--1--- El Knells :'1 n 11 T ": li II ii 11 1111 I II II 1111 1 1. El 111.1.1.1.11S CO leorrill.....go,i: 111.11.11112111221116H 111.illi ____i_ .z:,4_ _.,..... 0 WM..MCC/ • ......- ...4-1-1----- - - - _122111122 r-- , — '''-'""".1.4- 1-I ----ej •-q-iieji; NMI 0 SCO.C.PUCCl/ -1 ' ideO,AC , N ,-., Ill n ,iii _,1 \,4 + ' : IGHBF11111101iiiiiiiirellitini ' ID fn.,L.1.1.4 war ...i•ENr : 0 I ...1 ....... Iv! Ns mu ..,..,.. a a o a a m I ARCHITECTS .III 2 Elmar.e.nrnot EjOA.... 0 WEST ELEVATION 0 SOUTH ELEVATION ID ............ SCALE:1/16'•1.0* SCALE:1 flr•l'.0- El Krnoma • --I U I I I Lil e-, W -- —_ ,•,R1117.4-: •1:- :,,:_ _ 1. - 1 —, -- ---- ---r 1 ‘..., Lit - -4-1---- -..—,... w m ..:, c.. - --- -1 _i - m ...- -•,.46-, --1,_ .•--• All_i____4„4„. , ..., „.,.. . ..„. El Mill illifilf II II SO1111111111 1: \[: 'L'Ilii,',:' '.'i), ZU-1 u ,. .,. 0..- 0 EAST ELEVATION 0 NORTH ELEVATION - - . SCALE:INF•i..rr SCALE:1/16"•ID. I 1 ,...4‘...:,',AT.W....... BUILDING ELEVATION NOTES: I t _ 43 •- J..C.C......... ...•WM. .•.... •• ' c/ ? .. ,. ... .- ....,. i, ,, 2;:t./..r;)„,f/..,..A4v6(e77, c:::.° A03.3 . '' • •--- •• 0 0 O OrEl M 0 O /-3 a El 0 El II /CI . . .'....• r etitr tvii,Wroll.r....m.p; - "Irate 1/110400iltiiiikiiiiiiii,iiiiiiiquppluktuitritiiii! -4 4114,,..barailavu.!;,,j;i), N 7;Wide'.iiiialdarniiiiik., "Iliggitikitkiithifidefiliningigifilignitiiiifiiikkgatilitliitt14,..____ c,r,.,.. Sliilitlx • , .... / .c,'-ity..if'wi-' ',‘*kl., ! I 1 I t 111,Vd.4. 71.1.1 I' 1 . : t rif . , , nentivollow.tr,,, III .er,21,3-:- , 4, ,,,.„,,„,„,„ atitieriglattlar,A 11111111111 I 111111111 :_,,* +.n., ',. 'i Acitifin.1,rkr.porhengf,107,411 pi in II ill 1 t Ili I°Him 1 loll ill 1 1 Iv 1 1 iv ii it,tirpfirpringto iil,, ..1.,..,,.:4'.;1,,' '1,7,'.4,?,. ''4:1'1',.'..i.r..i. h ,4;''Aiik, silid!.1,'4,1',!,Iva,p,1 .. +•:z:,.,,, vivir _ i ini. i. 0 .. a -17. III :111: 2 11111 : 111 C LEI LI II. It 11 10E111 11111=L I ft .1! lc igirom• ..di ' ' EN 2 \ , - • .., - - oe.:,.:::= 2i ; 1' _ __ T = ANsociate I ARCHITECTS 11:1\-EI a u a a u a a Val a a a a a a a a C:::-.,.. PLANNERS C) WEST ELEVATION C) NORTH ELEVATION SCALE:1/0"•1,CE SCALE:1/a-•HT W a 0 in U 0 0 w rr3 /-1=1 r° r° a m • • . . 0 1144"iiii1,1401iffirtiliir, I- ";1116rititaktiett , te•;:,',,,,, iligtifitalriggiraig,113.61KFINtariYirtrallttli,. •:;,.._ Lu ,:;,-...--...,---.......—....4..r7 .. . . ' . INMENtartrilitradrnti Milt .--_-_• -.414: 0 171 5 VOIPPM"Igliilf x t' Iii now= 11,117.=.... __ I - =--- . ..',:.....,.„. ppm Artfillpfpftlyi Nil.,ilhickifaradirkfiiii_-• '-- LU x = — , 'i lifilill: ,1 \II i\1_,. 1\\_1: ., • :, .=--. CI- +:::-..,7.0.• " L.L.1 Z ...... C) EAST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION a. 0 SCALE:IFS•1,0 SCALE:UP'•1,0" MATERIAL LEGEND: 1 It ItN 43 Ei WO,KAY. P. ...a VaP"WY FP El tivrmc rrovn KEY PLAN -1 ...... .•••mn.t.b. 40 . > u.., 0 OrCOMIK1.1101.,n.l. 1=1 Cs., FIE /(2,,,_, c> ° A03.4 ...i . . . ._1!.. ... ! !! Mr • a a a a- I — II Q • N.W. 3RD ST. N.E. 3RD ST. �N.E. 3RD ST. J LL ► I _ , - _ _ �� .a IP.=u. in 0 01 .. CITY _ N FIN I ATTORNEY _-- Li BUILDING 1 S i = III MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.DR. N.E. 2ND ST. c ELM E` W - - r• Z I- -E- a [!7 W .- _J- z Q -I Q Z CITY > w- o HALL Q �� II z n; l , o - / N.W. 1ST ST. N.E. 1ST ST. x p COMMUNITY O Z • CENTER § w w IT ` Z Z Z O O to - OL TENNIS OLD . Tr STADIUM I J SQUARE I I Z:Li ` A T L A N TIC AVENUE SOUTH I I I II Z COUNTY COURT > › a > ; > _. _ HOUSE a a a Q a vi Z O F o. ce = z N N N > w Z iQ. S.W. 1ST ST. — S.E. tit1ST ST. --�-'T —' FIDELITY FEDERAL - i-- BANK w w LLi w in 3 vi— _vi vi vi vi — — Lai (N 0 c>.`� °� N SUBJECT PROPERTY PINEAPPLE GROVE LTD ` /02 PLANNING AND ZONING LOCATION MAP �P4 '-- S' DEPARTMENT -- DIGITAL BASE MAP SYSTEM -- MAP REF: S:\Plonning & Zoning\DBMS\File—Cob\Z—LM 500-1000\LM889_Pineopple Grove LTD 1 HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEMORANDUM STAFF REPORT Property Owner: Pineapple Grove Limited Project Location: Old School Square Historic District HPB Meeting Date: September 2, 2009 COA: 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The item before the Board is consideration of the building elevations for the Pineapple Grove Limited project located in the Old School Square Historic District pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.1(E) and Section 4.6.18. BACKGROUND/PROJECT DESCRIPTION The development proposal consists of the south 38.25 feet of Lot 5, 6, 7, 8, the south 34.75 feet of Lot 13, 14, 15, and 16 of Block 75 of the Town of Linton Plat and contains 1.658 acres. The eastern half of the development (Lots 13 through 16) is located in the CBD (Central Business District) zoning district. The western half of the development (Lots 5 through 8) is located in the OSSHAD (Old School Square Historic Arts District) and was (in-part) the former site of Neil's Market. It is noted that the south 34.75 feet of Lot 6 and all of Lots 7 and 8 are subject to the permitted uses and development regulations of the CBD zoning district as it overlays this portion of the OSSHAD. At its meeting of August 19, 2009, the Historic Preservation Board approved the Class IV site plan modification and landscape plan for a mixed-use project consisting of 119 hotel rooms, 2,322 square feet of retail, 4,356 square feet of restaurant, 33,350 square feet of office and a single family residence. However, the Board postponed the building elevations with the direction that the office building be redesigned to transfer the required upper level floor reduction to the northwest portion of the building and the single family residence be redesigned to be visually compatible with the neighborhood. Further, the Board noted that the north façade of the hotel needed to be redesigned to provide additional architectural treatment for the two blank planes. The applicant has revised the building elevations for the office building and the single family residence and is now before the Board for consideration. ANALYSIS Development Standards The single family residence is considered major development and the office building is considered minor development [Per LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(2)]. Visual compatibility with the surrounding historic neighborhood for new construction in the OSSHAD is based upon criteria in the LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(8)(a)-(I), Visual Compatibility Standards. Because this section of the historic district is included within the CBD overlay, LDR Section 4.6.18(E) also applies to the review of the elevations. The elevations for the hotel/restaurant are reviewed exclusively under LDR Section 4.6.18(E) because this eastern half of the project is not in the historic district. Pineapple Grove Limited Building Elevations COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 HPB Meeting September 2,2009 LDR Section 4.6.18(E), Criteria for Board Action: The following specific criteria are noted: a) The plan or the proposed structure is in conformity with good taste, good design, and in general, contributes to the image of the City as a place of beauty, spaciousness, harmony, taste, fitness, broad vistas, and high quality. b) The proposed structure, or project, is in its exterior design and appearance of quality such as not to cause the nature of the local environment or evolving environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value. c) The proposed structure, or project, is in harmony with the proposed developments in the general area, with the Comprehensive Plan, and with the supplemental criteria which may be set forth for the Board from time to time. LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(8)(a)-(I), Visual Compatibility Standards: The following Standards apply, in part, to the office building and single family residence: (a) Height: The height of proposed buildings or modifications shall be visually compatible in comparison or relation to the height of existing structures and buildings in a historic district for all major and minor development. (b) Front Facade Proportion: The front facade of each building or structure shall be visually compatible with and be in direct relationship to the width of the building and to the height of the front elevation of other existing structures and buildings within the subject historic district. (c) Proportion of Openings (Windows and Doors): The openings of any building within a historic district shall be visually compatible with the openings exemplified by prevailing historic architectural styles of similar buildings within the district. The relationship of the width of windows and doors to the height of windows and doors among buildings shall be visually compatible within the subject historic district. (d) Rhythm of Solids to Voids: The relationship of solids to voids of a building or structure shall be visually compatible with existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district for all development, with particular attention paid to the front facades. (e) Rhythm of Buildings on Streets: The relationship of buildings to open space between them and adjoining buildings shall be visually compatible with the relationship between existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district. (f) Rhythm of Entrance and/or Porch Projections: The relationship of entrances and porch projections to the sidewalks of a building shall be visually compatible with existing architectural styles of entrances and porch projections on existing historic buildings and structures within the subject historic district for all development. (g) Relationship of Materials, Texture, and Color: The relationship of materials, texture, and color of the facade of a building and/or hardscaping 2/4 Pineapple Grove Limited Building Elevations COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 HPB Meeting September 2,2009 shall be visually compatible with the predominant materials used in the historic buildings and structures within the subject historic district. (h) Roof Shapes: The roof shape, including type and slope, of a building or structure shall be visually compatible with the roof shape of existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district. The roof shape shall be consistent with the architectural style of the building. (i) Walls of Continuity: Walls, fences, evergreen landscape masses, or building facades, shall form cohesive walls of enclosure along a street to ensure visual compatibility with historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district and the structure to which it is visually related. (j) Scale of a Building: The size of a building and the building mass in relation to open spaces, windows, door openings, balconies, porches, and lot size shall be visually compatible with the building size and mass of historic buildings and structures within a historic district for all development. (k) Directional Expression of Front Elevation: A building shall be visually compatible with the buildings, structures, and sites within a historic district for all development with regard to its directional character, whether vertical or horizontal. (I) Architectural Style: All major and minor development shall consist of only one (1) architectural style per structure or property and not introduce elements definitive of another style. Office Building: The third floor of the office building has been redesigned to relocate a substantial portion of the required 30% reduction to the northwest corner of the building. This redesign has resulted in a third floor building setback of 42 feet from NE 1st Avenue at the northwest corner of the building. This redesign will substantially improve the compatibility with the historic neighborhood in terms of scale and massing. Single Family Residence: The French Renaissance architectural interpretation of the single family residence has been changed to British Colonial. The setbacks of the building remain the same, the change has only been cosmetic to the exterior of the building. The roof material is a white flat concrete tile. The ground floor will be painted Wind's Breath (light beige) and the upper floor will have a cementitious siding painted Antique Yellow (dark beige). The house will have fluted columns with a natural stone finish. The decorative metal railings will be painted black. The applicant has provided floor plans of this house per the direction of the Board. While British Colonial is not an architectural style that is found in the historic neighborhood, it is not the harsh contrast that the previous French Renaissance interpretation presented. If the Board finds the current design acceptable, it may want to address the two ground floor windows on the east and west sides of the home. These windows serve three restrooms and a bedroom. These windows are not in proportion to the space they occupy in the exterior wall plane. A condition of approval is attached that the size of these windows are increased to achieve proportionality with the exterior wall plane. 3/4 Pineapple Grove Limited Building Elevations COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 HPB Meeting September 2,2009 Hotel: With respect to the hotel, these elevations have not been revised to address the conditions with respect to the color selection, equipment details, or architectural treatments for the north façade. Therefore, these conditions have been brought forward and are also attached. Based on the above, positive findings can be made based on the noted LDRs, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines provided the conditions of approval are addressed. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Postpone with direction. B. Move approval of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL-4, design elements for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 4.6.18(E) and Section 4.5.1(E)(8) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, the Delray Beach Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, subject to conditions of approval. C. Move denial of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL-4, design elements for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, does not meet criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 4.6.18(E) and Section 4.5.1(E)(8) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, the Delray Beach Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. RECOMMENDATION Move approval of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL-4, design elements for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 4.6.18(E) and Section 4.5.1(E)(8) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, the Delray Beach Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. That vertical and horizontal architectural treatments are provided for the two blank planes on the north side of the hotel. 2. That the Hadley Red is replaced with a vibrant color consistent with the Floribbean standard. 3. That details of the rooftop equipment within the hotel tower are provided and watermarked on the building elevations that justify the increased parapet height. 4. That the size of the two windows on the east and west elevations of the single family residence are increased to achieve proportionality with the exterior wall plane. 11111 Report Prepared by: Scott Pape, AICP, Senior Planner Attachment: Revised Building Elevations and Floor Plans Staff Report Date August 19, 2009 4/4 1 r I ,O ,W Si o, f 0 o n o m o p CO CB E1 CI I° ID 0 m 0 a U o EI = i1 e.a .w m_F i i�1(l� o.. >� n..�.� I�1 ����9_��K,..K, �— 11 1T, F F , .p � � I �, i ERIAL LEGEND: • 3 nn�nunnlmllllllwolallllnnaumlll ill ___1 _11rr 1 9•ram m 1111G 111 Ilip il llllll,�uli II:, o p M11 IIII ■I �1 IIII .. , �_ il 0 MM.,o.,xxAx4„UCCO°NON "6:'� .. _,___■■ ■■■■ ■.a IIIIIIIIIII II ■■. a■■ HMI $»ow N,o ro oDDv tir dll'll tll I III W nm. ❑s r.00.w STUCCO WO. 41P. �' AI C _ 0 ..n. `fl �.,��I' - MIMI 111�� �€1 idniiking illI 141111\11'1 ALUMINUM ..• ..:..@ 1 .. 1 111I� IEEE .�■ _1■■.■L. ■■—. I w. w�m; � . .. ■ ■, ■ ■ 1�,11►7■ ` �w. El „ � � �•»ape a m OD 0 p m o a 0 0 �j — a a a 0 o m n m a ❑ ARCI�TECTS W e _ .. - D.,a ,.,..- a ALUMINUM AMC, D»D W,Kn. PLANNERS 0 METAL TRELLIS NW P OCA FA ON UL\I. O LICKING ICNRE suite: O WEST ELEVATION SOUTH ELEVATION ❑ D�NA,Awa , D TARAt N.rUN,I 0 DaO.Ann xE.0 e.Accn eC.ssisv:aw SCALE:I/16-•i'dl" SCALE:1/16'•1'-P 0 METAL DOOR EN°SPIov:,wc 0 —.WELL WELL o.00,ro.Wocw.tour»e.. 11111IIATELET.A=Rt O DECORATIVE ETUCCOWdN O DECORATIVEGRILLE 0 IR.1i iI Ii I g @I i I �p ,....., I # } / o m �O� a m i 1 r . f / w W 11 I _L_LI III MI 1 111111 ❑ '1 ' • � 'e m 1m m 11 ® I a I A� I D- ---�_ e €€€€I€€€€ E€€€lit Eii€€€• - `r-'`I-�•_ oT -I aDkrc I �` I �'� I_ . L-�: LU Z_ 21 �,.� D.,a 1r. CL _ .L,,. ,a.- Of Ire »W.o< ».K.E.W.. 4 O EAST ELEVATION 0SCALE:1/16-•7'-0' NORTH ELEVATION SCALE:1/16-•1'-T' A BUILDING ELEVATION NOTES: I 110 PM I.SLATITRV oo.w.uN W l714, Z v n.a,aA.aTI'.E if a . STREET AJLE TO RI IM NON MIRRORED Mt LIONT J_ IIIANS.EDUCTION c,NO MORE TOM PDR'a WSa L.,REDUCTION o,NO MORE TWIST, '"" .y� :fr, ' O A03.3 AUG 2 6 2009 m nil 0 0 CI al al o El TO n —_ A- ► — — so.;..-...... SkIIIL'I'\• Ll - 'r'".... D"r" - IIII- III IIII IIII 1111@_OIIIIIl - `I!Ii liipl ,/<D�D,.,D,,. ,� - iii_allii�iiii�_ali� _-- �_.;/ _ - Iluunl�_all ii►<ai a_i � ./. �.,T> ...-. , -- ... as ]. Y tm.cNr. L4�� �'�4 II 1 n II I do MT g ilium. ii iI lii t- ,-! I,` I'd 1 Iti A.(DL ND NT. luJ�11s QQ �Q ■■1I:1 1 l 11 S. � �1)ll,lll � 1 °�:�"rt IVSNaP�D CAI n .n $. ARCHITECTS s��.�. . • ; :::... ,ems �. ---.- ; .-p a a a a a a m m 0 0 a m U 0 U D a $TND wD EA.D PLANNERS O WEST ELEVATION O NORTH ELEVATION 2004 YOCA.RaATOND`T"' SW SCALE:1/8'•1'-0' SCALE:1/8'•1'0 AEON,R,H1: Pax;,D1.,r.,aoD snsxnUTAto®rnf.1 0 D m m m O m a , m Ho C1111 I�11 __ < D NI PL. 8„I I�,I , , ��'_ "•, •�• .__Ti. ::::::.- SO_ �s`{ .:ffDP.NPU 0O 00W �' I a. IMEMI•maMI IMa. OM ❑ IN in 1 1 111. ■�. k J X V�1�1 l01 •• ■ •11 ■I- w 0 © o 40 gc�Po P..D - z O EAST ELEVATION O SOUTH ELEVATION p.- SCALE:1/8"•1'-0' SCALE:UT•1--0' MATERIAL LEGEND: �E PIAT CONUETE TLE POOP 2 pTOPCOAT PEDIMENT,/LINT-, V' I: SMOOTH STU. t 0 ALUMINUM PPAME IMPACT WINDOW EE[•0'.',®E.,,,OII VMD®11 pALUMINUM W ALT GLASS 0000. l° oALUMINUM RAILING IDLIGHTING ITATUA1 —. O MRAL GOON KEY PLAN /�K,1 ODVEPNIA0 WOODOMACE DOd6 ••�• C\.—/7 m aA.ENT,TIDU„ONO L., ;;;_ sALUMINUM SNUTTER LT_ oDEtDL,TLEENM,NETb._, . ,o PRECAST TAMED LOLL , � , pr, ,/ I AtVii 6 2009 1 1 • 1 \\T Q- 1$11/b‘ COURTYARD MOW e�r.,ow e..�.w I , Sh,lil�1. & . . I U (J E I U [av[snow \\77( 1. -... ■:•,p :10 roARD[ '1' 1 1 n ■■■ II; I'< ' 1 I , HALL I .AI --— --- 1 i ARCHITECTS PLANNERS WAX. [ . r ] erom. meow [-_ � w ATON.[ igt! 6311 I. SECOND FLOOR PLAN ID ROOF PLAN , - ]•.So 5.r SCAM ITt d SELL[:1ir•I'd J W O vWi S taIN jj W X � r___ MI w . n., •\ COURTYARD ; SUIT[e O III • ._., i; • • [ i . ci. � I \ COMM MPH, ( r Al=1= 1 t ill . \I_\I_ _) a I � _ GMAT ROCA, L•m.ommimmmn ....- - - i' ll MOMS ILOOR FUR ROTR VOX/ON/Of li MCI. BE ___1 I PALM I 81,ATTFRY ,. I ' . ,_,../ GROUND FLOOR PLAN S.F..,e SCAM I.,.I d A02.6 A G 2 6 2009 , i ,.} t. •r a;...=;> I I I N �qw�,r..,� a__ c r r } r -;n wa� I . „I SI.►iion �` a 1 $.,r,w.r y u .,!.,'.M", I ..,... �.�..p o...;.: � � E � ��� I ANIiil;lll'N 1 O SECTION 1-1 ARCHITECTS PLANNERS SCALE:1/16-•1'-0' ,000A,uxANAIONBl.,v. rl I UM,AA11;19.1FL 11 101 r-....,,.,,.... ...wo..m•. ,.,.wo..r.w i I mantmfu�avtw e ,, wro nv nA 1- + I*-- ' . ,,,wro 1_'" I , I , I ,... •'", ,o.co wu , -___. I } 1. IN mm II II II Ii II iI 1 ,w B I I f I , ,V�„,I��,�^ ,..Mam.,n� ,.-- jj - %�1-j__ Is•i m ei 1s•I min 1••I 1••1 IUI 1••1 f••1 �,,.,...• ,_W �. - i-;--` I- -h',a II II II II II •� II II II ,,, IAI.1, Lo .a,a • ii (VI ,,. . ,n$ --- .m , .-- 'I yr!-1I'•"••• •I_I••I 1• _Inc__Ism__ISM 1•T Mil l IE•1 .,...,. ® '--�" I- r _ I>I ! 111.11.1.1111•II II•LI 11J I. I I•_ '� ,.,. ,..a... i I ,, —I -I-1-1 -- -• 1 w tl l no t�.; $ >o s a 1 l 1 � W W cl O SECTION 2-2 aQ SCALE:1/16'•1,0' W I II j `L�,I1I a,,ww r. I ;...m.� n$ I_— —_�_1 �� f—a �� o n 1 `� I i it — i I • _ - , Fr r — mmmm — mmmm �'- - , I1. -� 1 �..,,�w,,•,�I. -`--r ,t a I 1 II• r III I. '.i la ' n MUM.ium111 I m m m m m m irl �I y p 1�1� ,.,,wnr.» °9 PIT F� FF I � �_ I .�,.�. $1 __ )_,.. I I I Nptl _tom r- a.v - 1 s .. a .'le.r i it r- 1 ���� r I 1=1 2 d KEY PLAN �� �I ..,, 0 SECTON 3-3 „41 f//l//! SCALE:1/16-•1'0- A04.1 I I II G 2 6 2009 we nen. es pineeppt•...Ltd Green gullensInelgt WM.to Pa toed -------------------------- _ I 1 r HOTEL - __... y . lne el. to follow.mmnun,ma.a adopted,r the American loin lodging/mean.WW In peen . _ J 1' - ❑ ❑ ❑ • I I ewe ante r°.e,�"Jew,: I. The I __ T J _._.._._.._.._.., noel n.uprnwanmaAnnenn,e•neM„e I .ntp:rn+wrod.mwrvbw..rmu,.a,p.RauhnnierMluno-Nwl•w,a rrpnnele 1>developing n tmhn�nul q-, ,,.{{�� I Green Ilan fore ,water,and W.I..w. T I rood i I ' d'„ r,.'w �nr n �1� `b I ' ° i. Ire lets ennu>M>Awstonnnteelec..per.water..wme wee Flo..onan•nthlyand.. .IL rbe Incandescent lamps.MM:rrww.ante.comramaAreanlMluaxFuhrelPerahvenYo-i.Ju.with erpn I It— •—� I I • �� I 1. a 11 '^� .n 4. Thetnnulimn a ap wherever wu,nenowt.nttpllem anla.t.rnrw„RveanaARae•R1r.en,menaenern10.1 0In I ' _seen ■is I —■In■, .I Ire,n,ow,.nem�n.R,k Non.I 1+-I -I I I I` _ 11 11 ■ t n.rarnnr. .nlv:nww.e,la.ewesrw.nlr.as<,Rn+aMenn.annwm v«se.prwr.,, I a a . - ---- I I- ��_� •I—ci'.�+�n'.I-�' ,e+^�.�e�l-_ .t.� .,.seen I i :a1.wlro,per.lrwnaN,.errem..ai,,..ra:.5,>.nl.nfo I 1 I .ua ' 1 I T. Installation 4,pe,ventawWM.mplger • ` I 1 —` I —L '. I e,:rTMwrm+a a L•pnntoileu ses,m:nrwwaluap.rw.wnnlnal. RSm>n,ner•amn.lo-lme.b 4l g Alm dim, Ian' ` l ILL\h I_\A�4'�, I I mrn.a{—�?"� E ���'= 1 O e.ntalmnp a ntxune pram.•n,m:new.amatemwweama.R..nNwentlm.l 1.0.mr.. 'Jll�l�ls�� l\ I R I O _„n ..Incl.ns pwnc pace, ea._._. -� Rwww.ahl.comm a1..5,.lc.InRr.ne ° ;1 r A�; I nnlPMr.mn nnw,_te I, �� it _ ilir!o',, 0_ 'M .v..t-5 • 1ye.I�,n Nrwgnten a an.4eprovide',cneaeemnknaeoe n,Dufo,,e.,,.M+,M,yn,M �,r I,'.^■}:y. R �■Ir� � �i :yri I R o .,w.I Senrn..n,p rrwwada teen,w..nod n an,R anrn oJn .leaeeww 1 8 =� ;• p II. Usee el.paw products nprr.w.a.co.rw,rRA,earllna.ap.RH,eent.ml to 4�, 401 1 I R a I I- 3 `,• ,- . ,' 09 � lui tI 4 I post eonr..r be contemn• ter,lma. a .Io-r.Nr.wwJn.,re. �/'��.' f. 1 .K>I; .:.,,sec I l nnhdog MI MI meet./wens as n.,of house nen wen pos... I ;ti , ■�� ,,,,ten w n°n"„:ii:,„",e,vh,i: ,mute,,,,,we lee•ndwlIl turn the lens after pace A■ E �4:.i; % � .GI'Iv.1 .gira■�A, npl„% <w.m a alw,M en ,eNrwr,ew m. ■� .A E, 11 I r , Yr..ace S: - :RI .1'.I �I ❑. Ire.,nm to fed.the tIn a temperature a ha water to vet..to m mouse wnlrol. IN • I Reglement•program to tun on the lights n meeting wan,and pas or tog•wen..pan,we nog I♦It- ��I♦I♦ tog A I 2.: err _ _ ter 1 ji 1,_.Y}A:i%:o''n nrii.��,;.,,„,.„ m.I= ,, I I 0/YK[dmdw,G ,see. f I I - .y i, ��i/ y ,�ta�i i� Ci�■rory7pt'=i—" dun k,n.tlte,n.,aof methods at.m.lm.n.,rew«for new p..nhu.e.g construct. \�t�lll�lJ\i I. ' , 1� " C•i t q;`C� - •r•n �Q I mu amend n.,e.n:Min re,e.YTooa,.nm5gel pran.Ln rn R. nog I I . I ��■ l�Ir3; :� _�_r�. l *:4 —, I I I n ■■t/Y� uses ,`` I � ■■■i , .� `*I n.y1Sl I OI [teeYEnergy[mt teelhnt(IR.ry:Mph[...H.Spolpent,MI new,NKeprpmem wRILM.Y..Ne Cne.R. .r,mr,NU On ■■�■ ji\ V, -V E..KEEP Tler.anew.le.Wm... %A R AEON RIAD. I I 1 j• e:Ali ammo sal !"s. „ i I En.). n.pen,ImsR_n,en.nepu,lllnlog the WemR.,le plan aunt 4l - t e n _ ,IINF: I I I•�I� ■■■ �j�jO' <2_ -._.Y����, _ ta�_� �- roplrhmle,nvnpnnrv.ro.,nv.tmllw.plumcln..mtammnmeronv wat4n,.r,eother m,em,nw.nmm�.general C ■ ■■ IEInp potIcles Ruch as peen clean. environmental punNtiry,eta.The pin lNwle den.amnsE.11ty el win,proper 1 e�� r1 I T sec flues.desnbnannof propee,mmeloter.n R cut sheets...la.moan Won.. Om:A RAION.ILO n I -- I 1 I 1 as i[ r �]�R/, I�p !I 1 replacement/ Ter plan nwlewtl.ude pnmMrmntM,aNnwn,.lYMnp plan,.Rea..moth.Ourn.. tiL:Sel.fl:.>up F. mod -- aalmwaer,Rnps,bnne,erroMpra,an 1 t I ■ ■■1, e_ •ter 1 R I r IAllllli I � � �— •, I I i -- f p 1Y i r ' , 'w•O.M�µ. �_Z � I e. <ahneulfnelnM 1,Mrtln pmn.lanlrarreuMeoarnw„en,lps artlMenaN Neltiry,ly Mune vllrev teen iA%:Snl.1r,:.S,r._ _ -1�rllIIIIIIl�' I ■ ■ � l mn,en Inter. utiY eleas,e nneN. `��— I I rsr '' I '� �', r f t # ,5.r nodl,mlWe,ell for floors,eoa,,wa,n,ten,nps,,,tm.e,weneml.At teat SptNal Merb punMMr.Ire InnrATiLLiAYffiRiRD°t w . ,{��; I Ilneu feet,meet roue pan..modem. _ _J i..l .---1-I — - I I ' _..,1 ?P ! [- - 1 ,1]�-� I_. l _NGn • I _e - \��o, p , K'CF�•Iil■ ■■■ ■�� 4«. • .� `���IA-I ,eon.p❑uuva.1 TOR.rww mugs I ;tog I ,�t•■■e G ,,,,, _ �j� r-- ■■ ■c� �1J., ,seep OR Mr MOM 4.55 k i I I I =■ � �� \ I I i i■�■l� � • _•_/..seal 6�.I.•..`-b I Ilir isusi[xt tea TO Ru,cneloccuss J ? nYant \ ♦ ; 1` j■ O1 5\ ■ r■ cg! C OST men I I W I I I I ��• �I �? .C.'}�t t' 1, „wen \ > W 1 I 7 �.. p I I itiFfr ''d, ,I.4ss s• ,7mr'_�I L,�r���t a z- I WC) h • pig' I I I I 8 I ` IN e•�r>.r;:! ••.. . ..i. !0i1:ar,�i. �n�`8 i E �I I d�%� taama,wr -/ — 1 ' 1 3 n Li�r�i... 1 LV � INI 11=111.11MMIIIIIIIMME IIIIMWANIIIMIO, NM jj MAI:11 I EwJ III II; �. . i II tlfltl tl119 j �i�� I�II�I ■;IIIiYiV°I� I I I�Il;IIIl� •� i Q ji I_ II I —' �.�� Cg nnISIKpRpGR sop,RAR MSn«dIG„ W Z f' I` j h,lml_ii;_ I —:1 '44" 111. 100, I wn,n.p room n- 1 11.1.4.' ; m 31 In i _. , CAI out ■1 e ■i i■ n� 1 n OESSO OR C �I RLDRRRK KIX CUSS L 'r 11 .racer I: — I :,BRn z I , A.A If _. _.._._._.._.._.._.._. I IIIMISHM ramsern 1, .., .„., our • `. I ,e.er — .nerr0e, — — —,:■ aRrul tl an..m n' aaa .m..n -9'0."M O o. .. SECOND FLOOR PLAN f+. ,w _amwnt,e. BAOAtlmp 4IA®e '�� `' .Kl r w,p..e„nn•mean..oilA, OFFICE BUILDING SECOND FLOW PLAN NO : HOTEL SECOND FLOOR PUN NOTES: ,. NOBS: IST 1. CECONO FLOOR GROSS AMTI,0S.F. III - I. EGR❑SSTAIRS/,fi II,ELEVATOR SHAFT•LIR RATED 1. EACH SLUNK GROSS CONTAINS FLOOR J. EGRESS CORRIDOR.TNR RAM. I. or MS S.F.INGROPg C. 3101E1) MG ABOVE TIE WrRWHR[QUR[0 / M S1,S.F. Ct•1.ELEVATJ 0 GLASS RAILING SYSTEM D ••OL 1,•CI< .. MRCCNR AREA I3,JAg1. J. EGRESS STAIRS Ott•HRRATE. LIArt.bM Mi(D I 5 .. EGRESS CORRIDOR•1N0.RATED. 11. / /s[—/ !/ ......_ A02.2 AUG 2 6 2009 P•�al.afIcada�.aa.R.R�n.-. _ — am , o 1-- ( 1 I I '•I 0 6 T',Il,V 2P„ I i ' ^ I i i II I I I' 's I\ 1 . '--1^ _ c�.+ .1. �' - - P I A.� I I I= I 1.��l I ! .fel i I .- ' I ii I ' I III" 1 ' i- 0, _ eery II I ----- - - -F , __ MI y I I I LR _ �. l I I I' ..I. ntt�I<<l�,�Rt • ; ' I 1IlIerti . V I I u•R ' � ARCHITECTS 0=rw e. F ...a .._ Y_ I !t �_ �� :�.� �� I PLANNERS • • FR, _..�.._.Wg�.u.tF_;Y.va —.._-4 I I II . I�� 4 VI — I DMONWO RATON 0G9. .,� I , .• l I.,I.. - I 1.rn 1 1 5 Ain. ■ill'a 0OOA WON,FL lN11 ^� II I _� _ ■ - - 1 •j = 1 III L � ' TEL:1R1:101JN1 I ` -:.R € R 9 I t'RII1 1 ! Pr.'rR � y FAx:s0laPs.o: iF - ---R :111M..-. —. I I ■r-r1+�.� - �i �'QI W IIII I ms.Tmr.LR�lenml L. .III I. n, I I • I h II A•:,R L. . - � ♦ i, Ii ; i -• : id ^ N I ;li � wry ••i R I I � 1 "r 1r1 I€I U !� V1. ! i1 LI W � j^c. y=..� I..i� I I Vin wpm 1uC ry i I I I I - L I Q R I I ill h .51 4 j ' c.9 o m5'' �` u./ I I III� ■ Ii ■_ wx I I,,. t , n/ . I ' �ll •:rop I ' r I I Co I L�a _ ' . ---igRL.A.wr. _, ., I I , , I�tIFII, I I. y C iCL d' I I` LII;II,, - a H / Iw � . •C. - R I z 4 +; I 1 ir r,Ic , _■L.■ �� I IA►�, sC i [ i I CL I. PAUL I.sLARIRV THIRD FLOOR PLAN SCALD I,II.Ed OFFICE BUILDING THIRD FLOOR PLAN NOTES: HOTEL THIRD FLOOR PLAN NOTES: 1 THIRD R00R DROSS R00R ARIA IS I2,R41 Si.140.90,I0F ALL0A. I. THIRD FLOOR ARIA IS I R,IRO SF.IA0.IOFNC0AFD .r.F 0 B F0 O0R BUILDING OLPRINT AS ILA LON SEC.1.1.11IFIMNOIO GROUND FLOOR RUILUING FOOTPRINT AS ILA IDII SEC.R.R.INFIEDILNN) 1. ALLOWED WUILDINGr00rMRINT 1R,111 S.F.110O.1109 SIC.4.0.110)I0NM01 1. ALLO1LD DUILMNG 1LOTPRINT 10,I00 S.F.(MT LOA SEC.0.1.IO1FILII,N1) PROVIDED BUILDING FOOTPRINT 11.546 Si. PROVIDED WILDING FOOTPRINT MORI,. „v., 1. TIIIRO ROOK NET ORIEL A I0.S50 SS. T. GEN SLIM.ROOM CONTAINS FLOOR ARGWrt ATIILAYIRAVLERLQURLD ' / 4. LGRISS STAIRS Pt R PP,ELEVATOR OMR•LIR RATIO OF 11S S.F.ILOR SIC.R.I.I.UINI I S/ S. EGRESS CORRIDOR•IIM RAM. I. ELMS STAIRS PI•.1,LLFVATOR LUST•»IR BLOOD S. MRCSS CORRIDOR•IIIR MM. A02.3 i kit 2 6 2009 i • • ' I ' i j, 1 i j i I -_ III ■III■ 11'1 OHM II '■ __ ( wa 1 41,116 I1 I I1 :::�J 1' i V--/-- ! , i iE: �:�� tili��tl'�\ t\ I �� .• \1 I 1 1 I ■ 1 JI,m �, ;I_l Cis'.�i Mum MI' �_;01 C� i V9P:ii i � _.._ _.._ _._ _ �l — i �\ --- ::d I illy fi ARCHITZCTS t ; I :; ' ] I Is !E� ��I!M H lI �. F GAR DIATOCA RATON BLVD. I II' j I' I A... ] I � I OOOA RAI ON,FL GAD ;;>'` ' IIII • � - i FAX:R ;,k141 I I :MIME] • - , II ' n1_i"o ...iAT1mTRRCe1RIFG OSf II "' I • CI g i l --- r�.R�', C , I I f 7 A I ���_� e I ill' _� E &C,I_•_ I i W �_.oR T.NI Ill i �: t :I I A•.m■.�. .. iI 1 O FA V f �r.Rar I I I I IIII ■ i s co0a i-- I .. I W o I I hII ••-I 'c, a. c, ■ Jx o II I _ C I [1 I I• , l[��'llll - -- C� a t.I_ _ w L It lir a. 1 a i I II - 1 lor Irk 144. U/LI•G'row. GOLI.IMAGERY HCCO mRR, MTnGAAA®I ROOF Et FOURTH FLOOR PLAN S', NOTE: HOTEL FOURTH FLOOR PLAN NOTES: (OR OFFICE BUILDING ROOF NOTE SR SI[[T ADDS I. FOURTH FLOM AREA Is IR.REO S.F.(RE':)OF THE ASSOMD GROUND ROOK NAG ]. GCN fI[[FIMG aOOM CONTAINS ROOK MG WARM WIRRRW R[paam OF GS S.F.(TOR SEC.a.S.S.IMNI I S. EGRESS CORRIDOR R(1,ELEVATOR F•IxR NATOL 4kVA II a. EGRESS GORRIOOIDO NLV R•INR MUD "r / A02.4 I AUG 2 6 2009 HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ---STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE: August 19, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: IV.D. ITEM: Consideration of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Which Incorporates The Class IV Site Plan Modification, Landscape Plan, And Architectural Elevations For Pineapple Grove Limited, Located On The North Side Of NE 1st Street and Extends From Pineapple Grove Way To NE 1st Avenue. ! W. {- !I - K 31.E 3R6 ST. GENERAL DATA: - - _ Owner/Applicant Pineapple Grove Ltd. Location Located on the north side of NE 1st _ c— 1 1___ i Street and extends From Pineapple i — Grove Way To NE 1st Avenue ii Property Size 1.658 acres --N-E 2ND T. Future Land Use Map CC (Commercial Core) & OMU — (Other Mixed Use) E ,- III Current Zoning CBD (Central Business District) �' .��; J� & OSSHAD (Old SchoolL. � - — Square Historic Arts District) . — Adjacent Zoning....North: OSSHAD & CBD - East: CBD t N.E. _ 1S -1 South: CBD & OSSHAD Igr.:. West: OSSHAD _Existing Land Use Vacant - wProposed Land Use Construction of a 119-room _hotel with 2,322 sq. ft of retail, SCH -33,350 sq. ft. of office, 4,356 1Is � 4 y Il Ii sq. ft. restaurant, and a single {� T L i4 N T 1 AVENUE family residence. 1 ( 11 1 111 1 ' Water Service Existing on site. I Sewer Service Existing on site. - _ Quid1 = _z, _0_'- _ : L1 _ 1S1 ( I - - t /_ -[ — -- 1 IV.D. ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The action before the Board is approval of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4, which incorporates the following aspects of the development proposal for Pineapple Grove Limited, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(F): • Class IV Site Plan • Landscape Plan • Architectural Elevations ■ Waiver Requests The subject property is located on the north side of NE 1st Street, and extends from Pineapple Grove Way (NE 2nd Avenue) to NE 1st Avenue. BACKGROUND The development proposal consists of the south 38.25 feet of Lot 5, 6, 7, 8, the south 34.75 feet of Lot 13, 14, 15, and 16 of Block 75 of the Town of Linton Plat and contains 1.658 acres. The eastern half of the development (Lots 13 through 16) is located in the CBD (Central Business District) zoning district. The western half of the development (Lots 5 through 8) is located in the OSSHAD (Old School Square Historic Arts District) and was (in-part) the former site of Neil's Market. It is noted that the south 34.75 feet of Lot 6 and all of Lots 7 and 8 are subject to the permitted uses and development regulations of the CBD zoning district as it overlays this portion of the OSSHAD. At its meeting of January 4, 2006, Historic Preservation Board approved a Class V site plan for Pineapple Grove Limited. That project consisted of 8 townhouses, 5,764 square feet of office, 4,868 square feet of restaurant, 5,385 square feet of retail floor area, and 30 condominium units. The project was never constructed. The action now before the Board is approval of the site plan, landscape plan, architectural elevations, and waivers for a revised project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The development proposal incorporates the following: ■ Construction of 119 room hotel along Pineapple Grove Way that contains 2,322 square feet of retail and 4,356 square feet of restaurant; • Construction of a 33,350 square feet three-story office building along NE 1st Avenue; • Construction of a single family residence at the northwest corner of the property; • Construction of a two-story parking facility along the east side of the alley; and • Installation of dumpster enclosures and associated landscaping. The development proposal includes waivers to the following sections of the Land Development Regulations: 1. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.14(A)(2), which requires a 40-foot visibility triangle at the intersection of two public rights-of-way. Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 2. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.18(B)(14)(iv)(2), which requires that the minimum transparency or glass surface area on the ground floor wall area of all non-residential and mixed-use buildings shall be a minimum of 75% of the wall area for that elevation. SITE PLAN ANALYSIS COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development application/request. Building Setbacks: The following tables indicate that the proposal complies with LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4) as it pertains to the Central Business District (CBD) zone district, except for those portions of the buildings as noted in the furthest column to the right: Hotel Required Compliance with Road/ %Building Building Proposed LDR Building Building Frontage Required Frontage Building Requirements? Height Setback Frontage Side (min/max) at or setback Setback Yes No 70% 179.02' Pineapple min./90% 10'max. min./230. 224' * Grove Ground max. 17'max. Way Floor to 25' Remaining * 15'min. 25'min. 25' 255.75'^^ length Building Frontage 48 25' to 70%min. 15' min. 179'min. 175.17'^ 1st 70% 84' NE 1 Ground min./90% 10' max. min./108' 101' Street Floor to max. max. 120' 25' Remaining 15'min. 12' min. 13.83' Building length Frontage 25'to 48 70%min. 15' min. 84'min. 86' Side Interior 0' 0' * (north) Rear(alley) 10' 10' ^ A condition of approval is attached that a minimum of 179 feet of building frontage at a minimum of 15 feet is provided for the upper levels of the hotel along Pineapple Grove Way. ^^ The plans incorrectly note the hotel building frontage along Pineapple Grove Way as 254' 6". Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that the plans are revised to correctly note the building frontage along Pineapple Grove Way as 255.75 feet. 2/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 • Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Office Required Compliance with Road/ % Building Building Proposed LDR Building Required Building Requirements? Building Frontage Frontage, q Height Setback Frontage Side (min/max) at or Setback Setback Yes No NE 1st 70% 118.47' Avenue Ground min./90% 10' max. min./152. 124.58' * 169.25' Floor to max. 32'max. (Lower) 25' Remaining 16.93' length 15' min. min 44.67 157.25' (Upper) 25' to 48 Building 48' 70%min. 15' min. 110'min. 110.17' * Frontage 70% 77.7' NE 1stGround min./90% 10' max. min./99.9' 79.25' * Street Floor to max. max. 111' 25' Remaining 15' min. 11.1'min. 31.75' * Building length Frontage 48,to 70%min. 15'min. 77'min. 77.75' * Rear 10' 10' (alley) Allowable Upper Level Floor Area Building Level Allowable Ground Maximum Floor Area (70%) Proposed Floor Area Floor Area Hotel Third 29,500 sq.ft. 20,650 sq. ft. 19,370 sq.ft. (65.7%) Floor Fourth 29,500 sq.ft. 20,650 sq.ft. 18,870 sq.ft. (63.9%) Floor Office Third 18,351 sq.ft. 12,845.7 sq.ft. 12,840 sq.ft. Floor (69.96%) The following table indicates that the proposal complies with LDR Section 4.3.4(K) as it pertains to that portion of the development (single family residence) located in the OSSHAD zone district: Required Provided Building Height (max.) 35' 28' 9" Open Space 25% 41% Maximum Lot Coverage 40% 39.9% Setbacks • Front 25' 25' • ` Side Interior (North & South) ' 7.5' 7.5' ■ Rear 10' 10' 3/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Central Business District (CBD) District Regulations: Parking Requirements: Per LDR Section 4.4.13(G)(1)(a), 1 parking space per 300 square feet of total floor area is required for all nonresidential uses except restaurants. Per LDR Section 4.4.13(G)(1)(d), the required parking for restaurants is 6 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of total floor area. Per LDR Section 4.4.13(G)(1)(e), the required parking for the hotel is 0.7 parking spaces per guest room plus one space per 300 square feet for the meeting room. Per LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(2)(a), the required parking for single family residences is 2 parking spaces per unit. The proposed development contains 33,350 square feet of office, 2,322 square feet of retail, 4,356 square feet of restaurant, 119 hotel rooms and 1,000 square feet of meeting room, and a single family residence. Based on this development mix, the shared parking calculation for the proposed development is 199 parking spaces as indicated in the shared parking table provided below. It is noted that the two parking spaces for the single family residence are accommodated within the garage of the house. LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(8)(a) — Shared Parking allows for buildings or a combination of buildings on a unified site to utilize the shared parking calculations which affords reduced parking requirements by accommodating varied peak utilization periods for different uses (see below). Weekday Weekend Night Day Evening Day Evening Midnight to 6 6 PM to 6 PM to Use Required AM 9 AM to 4 PM Midnight 9 AM to 4 PM Midnight Residential 100% ; 0 60% 0 90% 0 80% 0 90% 0 Office 111.16 5% ' 5.558 100% 111.16 10% 11.116 10% 11.116 5% 5.558 Commercial/Retail 7.74 5% 0.387 70% 5.418 90% 6.966 100% 7.74 70% 5.418 Hotel 86.63 80% 69.304 80% 69.304 100% 86.63 80% 69.304 100% 86.63 Restaurant 26.13 10% 2.613 50% : 13.065 100% 26.13 50% ` 13.065 100% 26.13 Entertainment/Recreational (theatres,bowling alleys, etc) 10% 0 40% 0 100% 0 80% s 0 100% 0 Reserved Parking 100% 0 100% 0 100% 0 100% ' 0 " 100% 0 Other 100% 0 100% 0 100% 'r 0 100% ' 0 100% 0 TOTALS 232 78 199 131 102 124 Per LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(8)(b), administrative relief may be granted to allow double counting of parking spaces for uses within a development that have separate hours of operation. The Planning and Zoning Department has determined that the restaurant will have separate hours from the office uses. Therefore, a reduction of 26 parking spaces can be taken. Based on this reduction, a total of 173 parking spaces are required. The development provides a total of 169 parking spaces via a combination of 74 parking spaces within the hotel, 33 parking spaces within the office, 16 valet parking spaces, 6 parallel parking spaces, 10 parallel parking space credit within the adjacent rights-of-way [per LDR Section 4.6.9(E)(3)(e)], and a credit of 30 spaces for property that was owned by the applicant on the south side of NE 1st Street, which has been acquired by the City for use as a public parking facility per LDR Section 4.6.9(B)(4). In order to accommodate the 4 space deficiency, the applicant has requested the in-lieu payment. The City Commission will take final action on this request following consideration of the site plan by the HPB. Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that the in-lieu for the 4/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 deficient parking spaces be approved by the City Commission. It is noted that the in-lieu fee is supportable given the proximity of the project to the public parking garage on the south side of NE 1st Street. The property is located in Area 3, which requires an in-lieu fee payment of$7,800 per space ($31,200 total). Old School Square Historic Arts District(OSSHAD) Regulations: Per LDR Section 4.4.24(F)(4), the maximum allowed width of the single family residence is 60 feet. There must also be a minimum 15-foot separation between buildings that front a street in a development site that contains more than one structure. The proposed residence complies with this requirement since the house is 53 feet 7 inches wide, and is separated 20 feet from the office building. Special District Boundary Treatment: Per LDR Section 4.6.4(A), the north portion of the office building and that portion of the hotel across the alley from the single family property is required to provide a 10-foot setback for the portion of the buildings that are 37 feet or less in height. Further, the hotel is required to provide a 22-foot setback for that portion that is above 37 feet in height. The proposed development complies with the special district boundary treatment since the lower levels of the hotel provide a building setback of 10 feet and 22 feet for the upper level. The office building also complies with this requirement since a 12-foot setback is provided for the lower levels. Provisions for Ingress and Egress: Per LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(2), each required parking space shall be accessible at all times. Due to the proposed valet stacking spaces, the required parking spaces will not be accessible within the upper level of the hotel parking facility. The applicant has indicated that the parking within this area will be exclusively by valet. Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that a valet attendant be provided on-site 24 hours a day. OTHER ITEMS: Auxiliary Power Generator: Per LDR Section 4.3.3(00), the hotel is required to provide an auxiliary power generator for all interior corridor lighting and exit signs and at least one public elevator. Further, the generator needs to be designed and equipped to operate the full capacity of the equipment being served for a period not less than 120 hours. The site plan indicates that the generator will be within a room in the ground floor of the hotel and will be connected to a gas line along the alley. Paving Material: Per LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(f)(1), the front setback area shall be finished with paving materials to match the existing or planned sidewalks within the adjacent right-of-way. The site plan indicates that paver blocks will be installed between the buildings and the public rights-of-way and they will match the existing pavers within the streets. Photometric Plan: A photometric plan has been submitted for the vehicular areas within the property that includes the alley. However, the illumination levels have not been provided for the pedestrian areas at the building entrances. Further, the cut sheet details have not been provided for the wall 5/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 mounted light fixtures on the office building. It is noted that the garage entrances exceed the maximum night time illumination level of 10 foot candles. A condition of approval is attached that photometric plan be revised to comply with the illumination levels of LDR Section 4.6.8, provide cut sheet details of all wall mounted light fixtures, and include the building entrance illumination levels. Pineapple Grove Main Street Redevelopment Plan: The Pineapple Grove Main Street Neighborhood Plan (The Plan) contains several design guidelines that address redevelopment efforts within this area. The following is an analysis of the applicable design guidelines: Street Improvements: The Plan indicates that the intersection at NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue be resurfaced with paver bricks to match the intersection of Pineapple Grove Way and Atlantic Avenue. A condition of approval is attached that the applicant contributes one-quarter of the cost associated with these improvements. Overhead Power Lines: Overhead cables (electric, telephone, CATV) are required to be placed under ground whenever feasible. The site plan includes a note that all that all overhead utility lines (including the alley) will be placed under ground. Right-of-Way Dedication: Pursuant to LDR Sections 5.3.1 (A) and (D) and Table T-1 of the Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element, the following table describes the required rights-of-way and the existing rights-of-way adjacent to the subject property: Right-of-Way Required Existing Required Dedication Pineapple Grove Way 60' 50' 0' NE 1st Street 55' 50' 5' NE 1st Avenue 60' 50' 5' Alley 20'or dominant width 16' 4' Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1(D)(4), a reduction in the required right-of-way width of existing streets may be granted by the City Engineer upon favorable recommendation from the Development Services Management Group (DSMG). The City Engineer and DSMG considered the reductions and approved Pineapple Grove Way to the existing width. However, a 5 foot dedication will be required for NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue together with a 4 foot dedication for the alley. These dedications have been accommodated with the layout of the project. A condition of approval is attached that the right-of-way deeds be submitted and recorded or provided on the plat prior to certification of the site plan. WAIVERS 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: 6/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 (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; and (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. Visibility at Intersections: Per LDR Section 4.6.14(A)(2), the required sight visibility triangles are 40 feet at the intersection of two or more public rights-of-way. The hotel encroaches into the 40-foot visibility triangle at the northwest corner of Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Street. The office building encroaches into the 40-foot visibility triangle at the northeast corner of NE 1st Avenue and NE 1st Street. These encroachments result in a 20-foot visibility triangle at both intersections. The applicant has submitted the following verbatim narrative in support of the waiver: "...The request is for partial obstruction at the intersection of Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Street..." Waiver Analysis: Given the relatively low traffic speeds along NE 1st Street now that it has been converted back to two-way traffic flow, there is no concern with respect to the reduced visibility triangles 20 feet. It is also noted that north/south traffic along Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Avenue are required to stop at their respective intersections with NE 1st Street, which also enhances the traffic safety. Similar circumstances on other properties would lead to the same conclusion. Consequently, positive findings can be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), Waiver Findings. Transparency: Per LDR Section 4.6.18(B)(14)(iv)(2), the minimum transparency or glass surface area on the ground floor wall area of all non-residential and mixed-use buildings shall be a minimum of 75% of the wall area for that elevation. The proposed office building provides a transparency of 60% along NE 1st Street and 60% along NE 1st Avenue. The applicant has submitted the following verbatim narrative in support of the waiver: "...Our request is for the office component only as it fronts NE 1st Avenue and whose architecture dictates more sensitivity to proportional fenestration..." Waiver Analysis: The purpose of the transparency requirement is to provide a pedestrian friendly streetscape. Window shopping opportunities encourage pedestrians to proceed along a street. This pedestrian friendly environment is particularly important along corridors such as Pineapple Grove Way and Atlantic Avenue. However, the location of the office building is not as critical to the pedestrian experience since it is located on the periphery of the core commercial areas. Further, the reduced window area will be more compatible with the "lower" scale mixed use development pattern with the historic district along NE 1st Avenue. It is noted that the City has approved similar reduction such as the 5th Avenue at Delray project on NE 5th Avenue. Similar circumstances on other properties would lead to the same conclusion. Consequently, positive findings can be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), Waiver Findings. 7/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Technical Items: While the revised site plan has accommodated some staff concerns; the following items remain outstanding, and will need to be addressed prior to building permit submittal (unless stated otherwise): 1. That a plat application be submitted prior to certification of the site plan and that the recorded plat be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. That the door from the upper level garage be locked and monitored at all times. 3. That a traffic statement be submitted for the revised development proposal prior to certification of the site plan. LANDSCAPE ANALYSIS The proposed landscaping for the commercial portion of the development consists primarily of foundation areas, raised planters on the pool deck, and street trees that include Key Thatch Palms, Yellow Lantana, Alexander Palms, Live Oaks, Bismarck Palms, Clerodendrum trees, Cassia trees, Royal Palms, Hibiscus trees, Fishtail Palms, and Sabal Palms. These areas will be under planted with Foxtail Fern, Cocoplum, Crown of Thorn, Purple Crinum Lily, Gold Mound, Dwarf Fakahatchee Grass, Ficus Vine, Florida Privet, Green Island Ficus, Spider Lily, Pentas, Spanish Stopper, and Xanadu. The landscaping for the single family residence consists of Clerodendrum trees, Coconut Palms, Gumbo Limbo trees, Geiger trees, Hibiscus trees, Key Thatch Palms, Alexander Palms, Pigmy Date Palms, Live Oak trees, and White Bird of Paradise. These areas will be underplanted with annuals, Purple Crinum Lily, European Fan Palms, Dwarf Fakahatchee Grass, Florida Privet, Gardenia, Spider Lily, Nora Grant Ixora, Trinette, Viburnum, and Coontie. The landscape plans for the project complies with LDR Section 4.6.16. Landscape Technical Items: The following Landscape Plan items remain outstanding, and will need to be addressed prior to building permit submission unless as otherwise noted. 1. That a landscape maintenance and hold harmless agreement for landscaping within adjacent rights-of-way be recorded prior to certification of the site plan. 2. That cross section of the landscape beds be provided that identify how they will be drained. ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS Per LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(2), the single family residence is considered a major development and the office building is a minor development. Visual compatibility with surrounding historic neighborhood for new construction is based on LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(8)(a)-(I)[Visual Compatibility Standards]. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.18(E), the following criteria shall be considered, by the Historic Preservation Board, in the review of plans for building permits associated with the hotel. If the following criteria are not met, the application shall be disapproved. a) The plan or the proposed structure is in conformity with good taste, good design, and in general, contributes to the image of the City as a place of beauty, spaciousness, harmony, taste, fitness, broad vistas, and high quality. 8/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 b) The proposed structure, or project, is in its exterior design and appearance of quality such as not to cause the nature of the local environment or evolving environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value. c) The proposed structure, or project, is in harmony with the proposed developments in the general area, with the Comprehensive Plan, and with the supplemental criteria which may be set forth for the Board from time to time. Visual Compatibility Standards: The following Standards apply, in part, to the office building and single family residence: (a) Height: The height of proposed buildings or modifications shall be visually compatible in comparison or relation to the height of existing structures and buildings in a historic district for all major and minor development. (b) Front Facade Proportion: The front facade of each building or structure shall be visually compatible with and be in direct relationship to the width of the building and to the height of the front elevation of other existing structures and buildings within the subject historic district. (c) Proportion of Openings (Windows and Doors): The openings of any building within a historic district shall be visually compatible with the openings exemplified by prevailing historic architectural styles of similar buildings within the district. The relationship of the width of windows and doors to the height of windows and doors among buildings shall be visually compatible within the subject historic district. (d) Rhythm of Solids to Voids: The relationship of solids to voids of a building or structure shall be visually compatible with existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district for all development, with particular attention paid to the front facades. (e) Rhythm of Buildings on Streets: The relationship of buildings to open space between them and adjoining buildings shall be visually compatible with the relationship between existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district. (f) Rhythm of Entrance and/or Porch Projections: The relationship of entrances and porch projections to the sidewalks of a building shall be visually compatible with existing architectural styles of entrances and porch projections on existing historic buildings and structures within the subject historic district for all development. (g) Relationship of Materials, Texture, and Color: The relationship of materials, texture, and color of the facade of a building and/or hardscaping shall be visually compatible with the predominant materials used in the historic buildings and structures within the subject historic district. (h) Roof Shapes: The roof shape, including type and slope, of a building or structure shall be visually compatible with the roof shape of existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district. The roof shape shall be consistent with the architectural style of the building. 9/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 (i) Walls of Continuity: Walls, fences, evergreen landscape masses, or building facades, shall form cohesive walls of enclosure along a street to ensure visual compatibility with historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district and the structure to which it is visually related. (j) Scale of a Building: The size of a building and the building mass in relation to open spaces, windows, door openings, balconies, porches, and lot size shall be visually compatible with the building size and mass of historic buildings and structures within a historic district for all development. (k) Directional Expression of Front Elevation: A building shall be visually compatible with the buildings, structures, and sites within a historic district for all development with regard to its directional character, whether vertical or horizontal. (I) Architectural Style: All major and minor development shall consist of only one (1) architectural style per structure or property and not introduce elements definitive of another style. Analysis: The predominant characteristic of the existing buildings along NE 1st Avenue between NE 1st Street and NE 2 Street is one and two story structures. The proposed single family residence (major development) complies with the building height plane and maximum floor height requirements. However, the proposed three story office building (minor development) is inconsistent with the existing historic area. As noted in the Building Setback section of this report, the third floor of office building cannot exceed 70% of the allowable ground floor area. This 30% reduction is designed along the rear of the building along the alley. The reduction on the alley side provides no meaningful relief in the massing of the building along NE 1st Avenue or to the one and two story buildings along the west side of NE 1st Avenue. In order to comply with the visual compatibility standards, a condition of approval is attached that the 30% reduction in floor area be transferred to the north and west sides of the building. The architectural interpretation of the single family residence is influenced by the French Renaissance movement. The architecture of the single family residence introduces a foreign design interpretation that is incompatible with the neighborhood based on the visual standards mentioned above. Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that the architectural design of the single family residence is changed to be visually compatible with the neighborhood and approved by the Historic Preservation Board. The hotel is a contemporary architectural interpretation. The most striking architectural features are the vertical glass facades along the east side of the building. The north side of the hotel contains two large facades with little architectural treatment (scorelines). A condition of approval is attached, that vertical and horizontal architectural treatments are provided for these two planes. Further, the Pineapple Grove Main Street Redevelopment Plan indicates that development's need to incorporate "Floribbean" design standards. These include vibrant color schemes. The proposed Hadley Red is very dark and is not consistent with the district. Thus, a condition of approval is attached that the Hadley Red is replaced with a vibrant color consistent with the Floribbean standard. 10/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Parapet: Per LDR Section 4.6.18(B)(14)(i)3), flat roofs shall be screened from adjacent properties and streets with decorative parapets. The maximum height of the parapet wall shall be 6 feet or be of sufficient height to screen all roof mounted equipment, whichever is greater, measured from the top of the roof deck to the top of the parapet wall. The parapet on the tower at the southeast corner of the hotel building is 9 feet 4 inches high. The applicant has indicated that the restaurant equipment will be located in this area. In order to justify this height, a condition of approval is attached that details of the equipment are provided and watermarked on the building elevations. REQUIRED FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the approval of development applications, certain findings must be made in a form which is part of the official record. This may be achieved through information on the application, written materials submitted by the applicant, the staff report, or minutes. Findings shall be made by the body which has the authority to approve or deny the development application. These findings relate to the Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan Consistency, Concurrency, and Compliance with the Land Development Regulations. At its meeting of May 7, 2002, the City Commission made positive findings with respect to the Future Land Use Map, Comprehensive Plan Consistency, and Concurrency provided conditions of approval are addressed. However, the following is provided: Section 3.1.1 (A) - Future Land Use Map: That portion of the subject property west of the alley has a FLUM (Future Land Use Map) designation of OMU (Other Mixed Use) and zoning designation of OSSHAD. The portion of the property located east of the alley has a Future Land Use Map designation of CC (Commercial Core) and a zoning designation of CBD (Central Business District). The zoning districts are consistent with the CC Future Land Use Map designations. As noted in the background section, the southern 34.75 feet of Lot 6 and all of Lots 7 and 8 are subject to the permitted uses and development regulations of the CBD zoning district as the CBD overlay extends into this area. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(B)(1), (2), (3), and (5), hotels, retail, office and restaurants are allowed uses within the CBD zoning district. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.24(B)(1), the proposed single family residence is considered an allowed use in the OSSHAD zoning district. Thus, positive findings can be made with respect to Future Land Use Map consistency. Section 3.1.1 (B) -Concurrence: As described in Appendix A, a positive finding of concurrency can be made as it relates to water, sewer, streets and traffic, drainage, parks and recreation, open space, schools, and solid waste. Section 3.1.1 (C) - Consistency (Standards for Site Plan Actions): As described in Appendix B, a positive finding of consistency can be made as it relates to Standards for Site Plan Actions. 11/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Section 3.1.1 (D) - Compliance With the Land Development Regulations: As described under the Site Plan Analysis of this report, a positive finding of compliance with the LDRs can be made, provided that all outstanding items attached as conditions of approval are addressed. Comprehensive Plan Policies: A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following applicable objectives or policies were noted: Future Land Use Element Objective A-1 - Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate and complies in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations, is complimentary to adjacent land uses, and fulfills remaining land use needs. The guests of the hotel will provide a unique tourist customer base for the surrounding businesses. These quests will provide economic stability for businesses in the area, particularly with respect to the restaurant and entertainment sectors. This is also true of the office portion of the development. The office employees will provide a day-time customer base for area businesses with a particular emphasis on restaurants. As noted previously, there is a concern with respect to the compatibility of the office building with the historic neighborhood in terms of scale and massing. A condition of approval is attached that the required reduction of the third floor of the office building be relocated to the north and west sides. This will reduce the massing of the office building in relation to the lower scale historic district. Future Land Use Element Policy C-4.4. — The City supports the efforts to revitalize the Pineapple Grove Main Street (PGMS) area, and the use of the Main Street approach: organization, promotion, design, and economic restructuring. While the CRA is the lead support agency for the PGMS organization, the City will provide technical support and assistance through the Planning &Zoning and Community Improvement Departments. The Pineapple Grove Main Street Neighborhood Plan contains several design guidelines that address redevelopment efforts within this area. These items were previously discussed under the "Compliance with LDRs" Section of this report. Transportation Element Policy D-2.2 — Bicycle parking and facilities shall be required on all new development and redevelopment. Particular emphasis is to be placed on development within the TCEA Area. Bicycle parking is provided at the southeast and southwest corners of the development. Section 2.4.5 (F)(5) - Compatibility (Site Plan Findings): The approving body must make a finding that development of the property pursuant to the site plan will be compatible and harmonious with adjacent and nearby properties and the City as a whole, so as not to cause substantial depreciation of property values. The subject property is bordered to the north, south and west by the Old School Square Historic Arts District zoning district and to east and south by the CBD zoning district. The adjacent land uses include: to the north and west single family residential and commercial uses; to the east by the Astor mixed use development; and to the south by the public parking garage. The proposed redevelopment will provide year-round customer and employment base for the nearby commercial redevelopment along Pineapple Grove Way as well as new opportunities for businesses. The stability of the downtown area will be enhanced by the addition of the hotel 12/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 quests that will patronize area businesses and contribute to the long term revitalization of this redevelopment area together with employment base of the commercial uses. REVIEW BY OTHERS The development proposal is located in an area which requires review by the PGAD (Pineapple Grove Arts District) Executive Committee, the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency), and the DDA (Downtown Development Authority). Pineapple Grove Arts District Executive Committee At its meeting of August 12, 2009, the Design Review Committee reviewed the proposal and recommended approval of the development proposal. Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) At its meeting of July 23, 2009, the CRA reviewed the proposal and recommended approval. Downtown Development Authority (DDA) At its meeting of July 20, 2009, the DDA reviewed the proposal and recommended approval. Courtesy Notice: Courtesy notices have been provided to the following homeowner's associations, which have requested notice of developments in their areas: ■ Neighborhood Advisory Council ■ Chamber of Commerce ■ Progressive Residents of Delray (PROD) ■ Old School Square Any letters of support or objection will be presented at the Historic Preservation Board meeting. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION The mixed-use development will further enhance the vibrancy of the downtown area and the continued redevelopment of the Pineapple Grove redevelopment area. The recommended condition of approval to step-down the office building along the north and west sides will ensure compatibility with the historic neighborhood. The proposed use is consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Chapter 3 of the Land Development Regulations. Positive findings can be made with respect to Section 2.4.5(F)(5) regarding compatibility of the proposed development with surrounding properties. Positive findings can be made with respect to compliance with the Land Development Regulations provided the conditions of approval are addressed. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Postpone with direction. B. Move approval of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL-4, associated Class IV site plan modification, landscape plan, design elements, and waivers for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the 13/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, subject to conditions of approval. C. Move denial of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL-4, associated Class IV site plan modification, landscape plan, design elements, and waivers for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, does not meet criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION By Separate Motions: Waivers: 1. Recommend approval to the City Commission of the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.14(A)(2), which requires a 40-foot visibility triangle at the intersection of two public rights-of-way, based on a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 2. Recommend approval to the City Commission of the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.18(B)(14)(iv)(2), which requires that the minimum transparency or glass surface area on the ground floor wall area of all non-residential and mixed-use buildings shall be a minimum of 75% of the wall area for that elevation, based on a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). Site Plan Modification: Approve COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 and associated Class IV site plan for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, subject to the following conditions of approval. 1. Address all Site Plan Technical Items and submit three (4) copies of the revised plans. 2. That the site plan approval is contingent upon City Commission approval of the requested fee in-lieu of parking. 3. That a minimum of 179 feet of building frontage at a minimum of 15 feet is provided for the upper levels of the hotel along Pineapple Grove Way. 4. That the plans are revised to correctly note the hotel building frontage along Pineapple Grove Way as 255.75 feet. 5. That a valet attendant be provided on-site 24 hours a day. 6. That the photometric plan be revised to comply with the illumination levels of LDR Section 4.6.8, provide cut sheet details of all wall mounted light fixtures, and include the building entrance illumination levels. 7. That the applicant contributes one-quarter of the cost associated with the improvement to the intersection of NE 1st Street and NE 1s'Avenue prior to certification of the site plan. 14/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 8. That the right-of-way deeds be submitted and recorded or provided with the plat prior to certification of the site plan. 9. That a finding of concurrency be submitted from the School District for the residence. 10. That the payment of the parks and recreation impact of $60,000 be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. Landscape Plan: Approve COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 and associated landscape plan for Pineapple Grove Limited, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.6.16, subject to the condition that all Landscape Technical Items are addressed and three (3) copies of the revised plans are submitted. Elevations: Approve COA-2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 and associated design elements for Pineapple Grove Limited, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.6.18, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the 30% reduction in floor area be transferred to the west and north sides of the office building. 2. That the architectural design of the single family residence is changed to be visually compatible with the neighborhood and approved by the Historic Preservation Board. 3. That vertical and horizontal architectural treatments are provided for the two blank planes on the north side of the hotel. 4. That the Hadley Red is replaced with a vibrant color consistent with the Floribbean standard. 5. That details of the rooftop equipment within the hotel tower are provided and watermarked on the building elevations that justify the increased parapet height. Attachments: • Appendix A • Appendix B • Site Plan • Architectural Elevations • Landscape Plan Report prepared by: Scott D. Pape, AICP. Senior Planner • 15/19 Appendix A Page 1 APPENDIX .A CONCURRENCY FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(B) Concurrency as defined pursuant to Objective B-2 of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan must be met and a determination made that the public facility needs of the requested land use and/or development application will not exceed the ability of the City to fund and provide, or to require the provision of, needed capital improvements for the following areas: Water and Sewer: With respect to water and sewer service, the following is noted: ➢ Water service will be available to the site via lateral connection to a proposed 8" main along the alley from an existing 8" main along NE 1st Street. ➢ Sewer service exists to the site via an 8" sewer main located within the alley. ➢ It is noted that adequate fire fighting capabilities are provided via the installation of two new fire hydrants along NE 1st Avenue, one new fire hydrant along the alley, one existing fire hydrant at the southeast corner of Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Street, and one existing fire hydrant on the east side of Pineapple Grove Way at the north end of the subject development. Pursuant to the City's Comprehensive Plan, treatment capacity is available at the City's Water Treatment Plant and the South Central County Waste Water Treatment Plant for the City at build-out. Based upon the above, positive findings can be made with respect to these levels of service standards. Streets and Traffic: The subject property is located in the City's TCEA (Traffic Concurrency Exception Area), which encompasses the CBD, CBD-RC, and OSSHAD zoning districts, as well as the West Atlantic Avenue corridor. The TCEA was established in December, 1995 to aid in the revitalization of downtown, with a purpose of reducing the adverse impacts of transportation concurrency requirements on urban infill development and redevelopment. These revitalization efforts are achieved by exempting development within the TCEA from the requirements of traffic concurrency. Therefore, a positive finding can be made with respect to traffic concurrency. A technical item is attached that the applicant submits a traffic statement for record keeping purposes prior to certification of the site plan. Parks and Recreation Facilities: The 119 hotel rooms and one single family unit will not have a significant impact with respect to level of service standards for parks and recreation facilities. However, pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.2(C), Impact Fee Required, whenever a development is proposed upon land which is not designated for park purposes in the Comprehensive Plan, a impact fee of $500.00 per dwelling unit (including hotel rooms) will be collected prior to issuance of building permits for each unit. Thus, an impact fee of$60,000 will be required of this development. Solid Waste: Trash generated each year by the hotel, 2,322 square feet of retail, 4,356 square feet of restaurant, 33,350 square feet of office will be 396.54 tons. The single family residence will generate 1.99 tons of solid waste per year. The Solid Waste Authority has indicated that its Appendix A Page 2 facilities have sufficient capacity to handle all development proposals until the year 2024, thus a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Drainage: Preliminary drainage plans were submitted which indicate that drainage will be accommodated via sheet flow to culverts that will direct stormwater to the City's stormwater collection system along NE 1st Street. Based on the above, positive findings with respect to this level of service standard can be made. School Concurrency: A finding of concurrency has not been received from the School District for the proposed single family residence. Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that a finding of concurrency be submitted from the School District for the residence. 17/19 Appendix B Page 1 Page 1 APPENDIX B STANDARDS FOR SITE PLAN ACTIONS A. Building design, landscaping, and lighting (glare) shall be such that they do not create unwarranted distractions or blockage of visibility as it pertains to traffic circulation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X (Provided the condition of approval is addressed) Does not meet intent B. Separation of different forms of transportation shall be encouraged. This includes pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles in a manner consistent with policies found under Objectives D-1 and D-2 of the Transportation Element. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent C. Open space enhancements as described in Policies found under Objective B-1 of the Open Space and Recreation Element are appropriately addressed. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent D. The City shall evaluate the effect that any street widening or traffic circulation modification may have upon an existing neighborhood. If it is determined that the widening or modification will be detrimental and result in a degradation of the neighborhood, the project shall not be permitted. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent E. Development of vacant land which is zoned for residential purposes shall be planned in a manner which is consistent with adjacent development regardless of zoning designations. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent F. Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity are appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations; complementary to adjacent land uses; and fulfills remaining land use needs. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent Appendix B Page 2 G. Redevelopment and the development of new land shall result in the provision of a variety of housing types which shall continue to accommodate the diverse makeup of the City's demographic profile, and meet the housing needs identified in the Housing Element. This shall be accomplished through the implementation of policies under Objective B-2 of the Housing Element. Not applicable 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 modified accordingly or denied. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent I. Development shall not be approved if traffic associated with such development would create a new high accident location, or exacerbate an existing situation causing it to become a high accident location, without such development taking actions to remedy the accident situation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent J. Tot lots and recreational areas, serving children from toddler to teens, shall be a feature of all new housing developments as part of the design to accommodate households having a range of ages. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential developments located in the downtown area, and for infill projects having fewer than 25 units. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent 19/19 I SITE SETBACKS AND DATA: ) SITE ,•• ":`,•=1 ,,,, • A:f. ., ,,• 1 I A.=1.,...............,K.*.c.,..r.•tu....."... / 0 "Er:al T'T.,,TrIF:ai W-i /M.. P•19,.. . :1 '--!:,..Tilf:1;4,i! ! ! :I.,._m:11,,,, . li ,751,:=,_• 4 I 11 5 rA g 1 w I d i ..........,........-.......---,.........*. ...,,,...,,„,,,„...., IV.31716T -. 1 {A:110•7..r.atW MOM : .......1,ST.w.se.Se."... L'7...-.,,.........,,,...., 1 a i• i 4,.,' r 1: mc..,;•:--- • --,AS" AnAAno MG b....gray.II erossol.11....,..4 '.'„ 1 1 ..',..'.i '' • '.•n i re 'F-11/7 '4 '''.."'" ::".. I 41',,W. I 'Km Am was a."n :1 I 1 tt --- .................. •,..II n ei.al sae :'I9 (7 liE ::-... I ;:- VICINITY MAP Slattery&Er arson ran.. ..st 1 nos see ii ,. ,,,: I I -, 1., .t... I I l' ..-3 sue.Kr s. low has.,as. mot.nn Ken Ws II ss•ress,/....1 I ontsall.elewss..........es ".7.ii'''.:':7":. 1 I jf, `,E'S. 1 !A.A.DIKKOIN.0 "7.:::;.=.":,..7-X.t'7".:,r,'....r."":47,1.1I' PP' II 10 - t 1-...-,,, :' ' 1 ll. -- , , .. i sa........•news.vs....a so 4 sis...A.•seem...fovea..sl .... ........111P ft sessised ive 0..••••••••,..s•sa•assf ssaess es.. AMIE, • i it.... ;•• ... r, L----11 , . t i .11.1Y- .01$1111 .• I li ''A.,4 2 Mans.sm. ;:......:=::::S.7"rso7stet:11.=:::==ifi Le' APP • (t:' A. ...;“""kr s • w" .• . '9.4,':.sas a••:V. .......°'all. I I I " ersal i•s s , nt SOUTI 14./1 reil Of Loa M...sin°met... II, ...41iP i .0,1 ,. ,, I ;,1,L,I=ti,71.,r,r24=7,ZW."L,1,11=4 rZt.r.."4:;.7..`,=-Z,:,7:::,,r;:=7.*:...',:.:.*.l. nor- .ai 0.•- - - 1,.11 I :.- ...\.,..--......4 A 7.A.,a. I •-•,••••••• MK' .41111M1 " lid.b.0.11/,..4....•is...era aval....•ss•solas.e.44.1. • [I .„.._-. PK . 41,104%1-WI .al. '''' .. ,, I zs is I EIT.Trealaiirtasi."7:tP"I':4.'". kw*Kau tens...se*KA. WY,WOK:....ven.....s.as rm.& Associates _ri ,....„,1 - 1:_!-:), . , I 1 i ,, t. .,_t All:a i 'sways... .ses vsn Mess r•s:Vsr..' '1;,01"::: .=:..: I ,. I 1711011110 .41 11 ARCI-IITECTS, - c(re , .. . . I $1. ' 312111 1.... ' I' V•II e • Clk MEMNON I "',0 2 -3' LIMN,' - I'; 1 I. .7,..1%.7.S.FIIVIIIIII=.:rear....=”' I. Ia"`"'""L'Ir""'!'"'"" m.,...▪.. 1110 ss Is S.,Is.si.....1.en N.,s........1.....: ••Suns....seauasaNkssvesered.....s......11.4essliKss....... sssalostst•sssee.sKs..........f.....1. .............swass•ans,sseuess....s..••11,......a.......•........ NO NW UOCAUTUN.111,13 SUITS: 110CA RATON.EL 1301 I A -4-13. 1 O'• 1 V'• r Al 4if,5,- !UM 1 • ' -I- 1 , "ears17:=1=s"sn'ArXii71 111,41-192.31.. 's,!.f's le• i I , ":7:1ri'l, II 1 . .49......... ?2,..I I iiirlek7ral 1 ..j ' .X12:11111:EiME175/7:12ik Z=:::::::'01::.4.17::•;14(=:.:INVIIV-74' 1..%Xs 341.192.1.= 1 ".---1,?;•: .i!.. It se P"Of ss I • g 1r ,: I I I 41• .11,,,,,,,,,. ItYle.54MIVA0.1.1111101.0.11.1 ,...s. I 1 a I 131=214111at '• P:1=14=ngtstIM'147•=i1="'M r:s1==.:=Z171:atts.1717=7.Vit:=.7:1=1'' 0 „ • I •.• I ''. • .$. i • I let'llii 1 • "...,1....".:VITI:I=C?”""°"''''''''' .......,▪no......on..a.S s.......s. •no o.no.oKot,...owc,rot Mal 1.6.1.11. • iE..;E::::•... ,1!:':::::".4 '.7..7.4.: .,...,. I I"....40 I I • itt• I r..*...,,"":7' 7:::1:,::..". -I, ' 1 1 I I I .••.'11% .41 I I , ...,.... LLI 9 , I •----• __ , 1 .1' , > Emil 0 ,• kg.,,,,,-_\NIFE:mull ra,le4 ;i i'''' i' ', 0,1', NMI 614 I i.1 • :r•11. ,__, t•- -." 1 - ,„ .+ I g, I PM s svoss marry mamas I---. : . omumo monArrom Z•1 I rE,'\I ••,. :oc.romet .4 (III: -.1., UM.. ...-- --- • `t1 ,:t'::.: .- ,,..n . 01.1 N soon 1 119 IS rel ii Fsr. % l' f-t ---.--,.-- ........ • I \ I ' .. _ .4 la Suetsslal easel .. ..I•i. *1 , •,„ .4. ,Bril. . v ,•Airri. ii, •. ,,,,.!, CL. .E,.!!..,..i. .... 'Tani.04.:•.;:i.i IIIM a 1 ...' 's'.l'ii,f,eT,,q;.1' ''iml". ',,0:...'t.- .4,, utioolat,„/..=?,1= -,74.4.ALK.iw.lm.„,orzymv ..... stwx.,•• •,,, ,•,,4,,,,..„.„.... LLJ i L , .,,,,,44:"..,m,„ Li Ttycal, e2,.• •• - • • • .. Afx,tgroTiliiit_thi !show ro.,,,CreAt yota sn...;.,1,0, s• : 1.14,11., I I Z I 30 g; _‘• / ffie 'asa...11Me I ''s 1 il E4,.1 - •_ :111.4 w.:-.... =1= ,,......,...- : CL. = ._. ILI •••-.1 - KA*meas."as s 11 tv1121 se c ---I 44 '• - _ .... -te.___,. = ptfi.L....i....,..v...- = =eas. N LIST SUER , II E.• ,TI :El 1 wr,:tr,.T:-. Tniv....val ,=;,, .I.E.-1).. =•‘--= P. 2 VOeveltspess.lendatellslatsls los esepwise M14.4 1...***.lb,s..<1..n.U..03i 1 .....r•-•'' ...... I 1. = , 11THITI P w ,..., r- _,_ 1 1,, i i . -I y,"‘g iiiiiillIIITIVIII ;.as .... tees 12. Ins0.1.' An ...I 1,111 P... M.. SAM SIN. I MA SIM P.M 4. 117: „ 111 1:111•)"M:Va;:lfs:j,111,77:e ::•70.1'1;1...7'.... 1.71: 2...VM X. .g;-kr,...1:,,;ali,f,v,....;r:_,.:4;..•1_,:.;;. f-.7...... . MASTER SITE PLAN(COMPOSITE UTILITY PLAN) 0 !:i.7.$A,,,$,E. Tir-±1-2iii2iFtioli: ,11!.! I. 73; Orr=WILDING OAT., NOT..BUILDING MU: LOT..total Spaces Perish-0_ I 11.01LIZetlfge"17.10.4re7eM1S1 Nloy Neat.apses Proweed Mr OF LONSINASKIK s le W if./OW Take Sesl TM OF COM114.110K.1SW 0114.100V SAM MI .e...1,s1VP,,,S : I ,./a!eliSaaSe.eiVeV6leaSae1.NeleSCeA•selli.:,:q .... eut.OS.4 NECNT: lute.NICKIN AS Wes STOSSI AlleeiVIATION Se SYMBOL LEGENCS 2 I l'eeS SSVNI.VIVI.e.,...r.""e're 129 I vOrlis MN/NS ess..00./1.0011.4‘, NA.ONS nooses. ,,.,...,,. :•,4K.,E1E,B.,IETBI W1E!EE,Bol..,'EME,... no • 75•104.76.tniro:CA3 , „..,...„, i..oonA,Odno issul prov4e1 I. I JOT rKetars.00 4.0.s. OCCUINSS CAW, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,.., =......”. . 0*orn.........1 •••Comoo,Grow.LID as ow.es entred so s vat.ol IssIllealpS.Isese Pitt•pa wan,la that speed ova.o/ GS nal 3l3,and consent se essataelresse Mal S.,St VOOS alas.snOsse cm ra SO ID............*<kart 11.61 Mew sm. coo.of.KA FAD,fletiall 0 Melds ie*I lut to.Bea.Cssrste sal.PK Sassian.1.611S.A.4 or Ole 1.41.1 0000*1 it DV i!woo war pumas OsseIsmeril Ps gas Yaws 01111•Crs al Deleass Inds Ia. . mono Z 7017 • 11 MELO//V laapest 4 ee.',ssee.d.',AV,,!.,.I,..s. KeRfaselit Mt.•isalsarassr, 4- A.nu to....m ',.o..tii.o4 VI.Mr,.NOSS EC] 1 laT . moo.rot.Aoffloto 'WV rompara savers eras:Mot Irsial•M•ass•../,,, 'OWN ,CLW IFIS SUISOINGS N THIS'KUM OS tO.Mlle Ve0r..0 111.aleal11.....K.VOISsalualte STUN ANO rler MAWS , SISALS St Smear.eV AN Alsace.COOSA ITAMN Sitaiall.SWIM IN ACCOADASKS MIN IBC Se,/1.01110All. .A) Drew roc mom, '..Zr:.'"171.!SITZ7e'senVS'e'ara's= r- .1 lx-W You**. ea MITS.COOL 200/Mt ION.KVA I U140.4 NH I00,11.0.0a SOO/SIMION.NIPS 101 SIT W./C004 ROMS 100/SOITY.MOS..elel.W.Mite SUR MO CITY CI 0......4.11M.ONO CODIS AND OPONAPK/S. ' Ve A01.1 • • .: • • p , lira k JERRY TURNER e & ASSOCIATES k of FLORIDA.INC. F I. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE • LAND PLANNING 4 w• I FIC I .^1122 •• ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN b ►t ► P .F. , °..,..., 44 22 II 4 e �, °iY.1 s'. c*i+� ►: 0¢ , I\! I IIw — Castla le". �a e r r it ( ieal L•-i':• 1 m �2 ; a e N GaTp T ROmoe]).a, il i ;.�:�: RN oT; r i _ I ♦lk I 'I \ ® I i ��e, •1 N la ron�la,.. e 14.4 1422.0 yy nikj :LE FAMILY ESI., `- I .I•II �'�I' m I - "m PINEAPPLE Y — ,=flfitoo I SEE SHEET L-] v® CI o.PO GROVE 6 1 s�• FOR RESIDENCE NW- — "' E a ptt £ kl PLANTING h-}i aFi °' 20 u n� ieMn,.,,a..e LTD. 63 ti DETAIL LJ�aa 12 \i i LS 0 i .I ® a•1 0M v I�1 I aI 4 II.= d• 1 Use Root Barrier•Detail Sheet L-4 under 6 LI n all �� I I FP m - -- �' IT ell tree/palm plantings in N.E.2nd Avenue gp€g ® jr �: 9 0 I TD • O. I • . i Right of Way. EE p R� 1�� fa Ark I I I ••••� t II DELRAY BEACH,FL � y[me Drbr I ,I 1 I ws 1 �'� M°Te I i..i?' % ip Is t •T/29109 Earl comments illii % X. , I I iil'' I Ei •'I r 420 LANDSCAPE DATA ' I® _. ma b 4 1 I 1 I ` la H»ReAIMeT(M[xT. }451 v D N l— N i '% b II B TOTAL ouPIKS�l�x,w ,e,r — Top of Pipe ALwn.IOATAvnw[MarAowvm MB , I I' -An — •= elev."pee' S bele'grade toru,xnuoam[nrr •s (n 1 I I I 1 �[ I _ LIF noA TAUSr OW. i•n V WL»I1{,xdi(,r(O,Ta C AS ulI a • I \ CAS ovr,vcvUxrMuan,°ci or xy Ov I}�\� 0 12 l t 0O°a[(MmrowmTxUA • s 1 �1((z/A dI I b % pp TOTAL TOTAL MIST IIxUfUr;12WA,411�A.m 0 IF 0 SF 25 ~ 0 °¢l r tE I ,—U TOTAL TrsUOr SF a°°arum nom a TAUS ilip ° V////// Ini/i , tPEW. liiiit A 'I r...SOS It [OO;mrrtRr 9.01/Or OVERS » D I " .. O --_...----_. `""�[rr[.2I.T[41or"22rmFo[Ru" °,.n •- ® 1 Q I,•, GIF 'II/ I I T9 MIli . ® 11 �s. • ® B ITT OF All l on2IEDMEI TO SUM.TO BE WIVE •De. CMRO� V v y _ a v (, cCIF ` •' r — _► / 0 P. 1 ® ALA(nK( ors�x It mn �"` °R t I•-aa IMR009 20 °11111111111111111111i s''. T g Q • — 0.�.�' r AI, i 11111111111 1 TOTAL a°SHRUB Mxe•r0Io000VESMIA [ Y __ ',I 1 ' _ _ ____. ,� III x,KMu:.o�o »„r Landscape WIVE65 SF 49 — - -'; I a — II E!1STSTR a an r `..�. - 1 = - — € Ilium imp.= .:_._ .._._ _ I 1 I_ I I 1111111 II • LP1 GGSt.txO "CAL PIE, at LEL fil • 'WV i �► di, "9 fir .el-1 oDien,.vianvi of LA 1131 g + iTu JERRY TURNER n & ASSOCIATES a _' of FLORIDA.INC. {-- k— J�—� +'--a H—r�--1 LANDSCAPE ARCHI TEC,URE t!.I LAND PLANNING u ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN 1O. lilt HO Boceae N.E T at 17,t b G _ A a r LORIOA a�.eT :pO2 'aun nal la E ":;::::':::0... PINEAPPLE =iIs,4Mr GROVE m d =i'a'.o.R0 , LTD. -\ a _ my �l �' _:..I,"` ill DELRAY BEACH,FL I _ I 6 0I1111 ® - L II myo�BaanreB�.H. I r!I► Ak'1 1 hi ° Lr,..! _ 11111 El.18'4' EL;2110--- r i P. I: �I�IlI E,l 0 Bottom �.__.._..-.__ I I. of Pool 9 . I ' �117 1�i I --._ - - L i EL.P22'l O' B .!I 0 I r IWalt t( I F, 187 ea ' -ice L_I Walk I Ll� '-MC Imo MY ;...;.;. ..I r aa..�, ir,r. ,.,__ _�..f� :: -;.,I ia I l Bottom r}7_ :ie a al Plari A.�` i EF 6 Bottoms al v '' vim.=—,'t'`gJ/�Ny er arsr Oliar�PI,�8' 2 of Planer A'liar;.-'_Q_._`_. O:yy=Q'� 35:h Floo I — !Ell _i2t'. ® NGVD '•����7� NTHE ABOVE SECTION IS NOT ANEXAOT REPRESENTATION ® 8 E ��+4 'YgOY{/'j 9 •Or OTa`o— OFTHEPUMIN6PUNATTHERIGHTANDISINGLIAEDFOR I�tdp OQDO0001/ 'ata� C 777 I;000.R061ite 10 -•:.•:.•:.-.---.- 1� B tt m0• ,'.,0 ,/JMoo9 REVIEW CLARIFICATION ONLY. Q --'y '='-:•:•::.{�Q.1— BOLLOm B DETAILS OFF DRAINAGE AND ALL PANTINOBEO DEPTHS ® 5 y�`a17y of Planter aartt WILL BE FRONDED KITH CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS. a,. ::.• .•.• S•:S1.I.y:ilw1•{a••�W••LL. ' Landscape V. :I Plan Second Floor r u i N o_ a — s Pool Area Detail ■■ MN RI alx.. .g .e iu�fm ,aaslP ws1, : Tifton BennudaGrass / 'G/ & tout a um,Turc Df 4 a • ® o � _ ire Q _ IRA ®® ® v ® v IN IV v A O JERRY TURNER usiii & ASSOCIATES of i QIDA,INC. , °t bkiii II a•1,nno:�I tb'�1S;;y n • aw t Iry- LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE ' ^ I Cg CI000'0006r -,CA;' 7OvYr.';`.'1 C��t�O�E00o� 1��b LAND PLANNING b Q� e. 94 -��-•'"��(atiSSW^Fb .ty6 l ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN f2 ��„n rtfi >Ti ���� �� r Y, 0.000.OA t 611 v u°�I� �l I ■•LS 1 — milPINEAPPLE mma,v �I rl_U LTD. g3 w i�i��t'�i�°ii�i� J I ® I —� i�i i�•i���ihi�l I b a fk.., .e�:ziL m �ff 5 m i;-+ 1A�Eli 1p® .0 22 I I v :` oosy'c000r.9i:}�wtieo � �►`'`x1l1 • DO oA DELRAY BEACH,FL �•m3 •••• •ooe c:r• ,i : I ._I Z r .0 31, OP :I 1 rf O. .. •6R6/09s I 7R9109 staff commerm �v v v m 41.0 7 Y 0 ¢ PLANT LIST d KEY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME OTY HT SP REMARKS PANN Annual Flowers Annuals 32 6" CLE Clerodendrum quadrlloculare'Sla Clerodendrum 2 8' 4'tree farm CN Cocos nudfera'Green Mayalan'•Coconut Palm 4 8'gw Green LANDSCAPE DATA • CRI Crinumegustum'Queen Emma' Purple Crinum Lily 10 36" 30" rio.l+xosurzo.r. EUP Chemaerapa humllis FAK Tripsecum Bondana European Fan Palm 2 36" 24" Multl trunk • mm c Dwarf Fakahatchee Grass 9 18" 12' ea ,r I.eOn xec sr A FP Ftta Florida Privet 59 30" 24" it,o&orie,o LW sr oresene seareea f mTu q GAR Gardenia augusta Gardenia 1 4' 3' r To per lxov 1.e,o .os+. �cML c o� b GL Burserasimaruba Gumbo Limbo 2 12' 6' �`:oiui.NW.,iron O7 DT t: GT Gordis sebestene Geiger Tree 1 8• 4' a WE HEL Hetconiapsittacorum'Lady DI' Heloconla 2 4' 30" x,nn nas 1r6.11l0 s ma *.,IV 1/90/2009 g HIB Hibiscus'Seminole Pink' Hibiscus Tree 3 6' 3'tree form . Y HL Hymenocellis 1ahlolia Spider Llly 6 24" 18' IXO Ixore'Nora GrenF Nora Grant lxore 3 24" 18" Landscape v KT Thrinax morns!' Key Thatch Palm 5 7' 5'ct min. PED Pychosperme elegans Alexander Palm 3 10'9w Double trunk Plan 666d ROB Phoenix roebeienli Pigmy Dale Palm 5 6' 3' triple trunk OV Ouercus virginla Live Oak 2 12' 6' 3"cal £ SN StreliDla nicolai Mite Bird of Paradise 2 6' 4' Single Family VAR Sche1fera arboricoia'Mnette' Trnette 115 24" 18" g y VIB Viburnum suspensum Viburnum 56 30" 124" Residence Detail 5 ZAM Zemia Sonde. Coontle 9 17' 18" ems xo. ..we 6.10094p 5614.16� 2 _ 0 oe�,.T r of • (le ........ .. .1i 0 0 0 0/0 0 0 0 0 n re UN 1!:R BUILDING ELEVATION NOTES: — — ml- - / _ UV ',''..''.54.._--_;.-,/-_1,I:- '• rl.i. nEl m illmn-iM il=ci E:LI1 iii • 111/1111 1111M61111111161111 ______±,..: 1 1E111 I ! IIm [1 [El 1! IlNINI! ku,... , .a1t 1..ST7M.1,1o10r.a IIm GcIn.r wO.tt axS n0.,1 1MING11. . ......- ,, M1. 1_1__1, oi111lib__ r -- -- --- n • :. ; .i.E ,' 1,1 ‘ liL11111111__1_1 111i111MA1 .,..,,.., ii\rsor.c-i a.,1HgarP- - ARCHITECTS non a • oc0-0 sou aro u io a a o n I PLANNERS ...” •I T.: 11.1p111A17,11,01 0 EAST ELEVATION SCALE:I/16•E-CF ',/ >7, Y.,:II/Di././//yi F;',//.///////.1 ,' / ,/ ..,- / ,, .6,,,,y//,,,ye .././z,/,,/,2, /2 lal TRANSPARENT CLASSED WALL AREA 176H 0 V/ 7 mr/ / , ,/, ; re4 /• , ,_ A,,i /, / : -. ,. ,, '. , ,/ /, //, :: = SOLID wALL AREA r2.01 • 0 GROUND FLOOR TRANSPARENCY DIAGRAM•EAST ELEVATION I . ..i L.L.I r ig 0 0 a ral NUN !II MATERIAL LEGEND: 0 leg 3 t..9 0 ,.•c e .t 8 RCO,III liJ 151-<' g2 ..,--„x#1---- - _::_4:- -: _______/..___-,,, ..B.M.—....11•.1 .....,,,„ 8 MIMI,VISE. 1111M ---1 R ...,, .,. s,........ 0 1.101,4 tlt[VI 1111111111ii MI a. C' I - III till 121 Air,I 11 II 16116116111 Ill 0 1111111 U-I ___-nolli rall ! niim ill01 dim .1--;;. 0 All...WIC,CUSS CO. liiiM Itit 11 '. ,,,,,,, .1 II 11 1, CL. ilPIN te'1- • '' -' 1 1 Hi Nil" 1 riiiiiii III i v 8 i room MT. i o_i . \_E) a \_ci 0. ki .--- ,1Apl la11Hm 11111 .,.. a MAL fr011 •ne.. ‘,.. 0 SOUTH ELEVATION .._ SCALE:1/16'•1,0" KEY PLAN 0 •..... .... 0 ., a zazz. -,,,,,,,,,,,-,zi.1/4;,,,;,,y,.1z,,,,,,,,,,/,,,, Ho . 1:2E3 SD LLCA(MINu RE msPAN1 GLASSED wALL AREA , N.,.... cr) 5 ; = OLI WA AR ,.., •=, -J -" 41 CV 1_ GROUND FLOOR TRANSPARENCY DIAGRAM•SOUTH ELEVATION '=' X A03.1 .-.,—.,--,-,..-", -/1c-- 1 , `--4-.6t; .t. 1./..,. a. • ..--44. 4 1.1 U : ' ., i' BUILDING ELEVATION NOTES: a r • h-i .r--"-"," I :I 1 /lt,11.11110./6 CUSS rt1.,/1,11-11,r,/41 ..L.L____ ....... KM+1111311/0 9/MIR 11.101,101191 f SlatlaV& 1 fi M M 1 F n- _._ __Lilt i iq; 0 ED ''''•'•';' I • 'i MINI 4" 1---.Z.. ... PIPP-AiPi'.. -- -41-1R Ft R . . 1,7• — 1 "•• 7 !!'.' ,Z, •• I 1 111111 gigiliA .: k .,. .^ 'Omiketemiammi — smitet ' • —-1---- ,;.,-...,„ me •::,),:*:'::, .\ ..7 °: .'. 1:i:..r..!,i.0•::. '-. '.:,.i.. 1.Vit, -li .t.:' 'I ' 4,:,7,,'-- ---. ASSOCIalb i -0 a\-0 a m al a a a\-S ARCHITECTS PLANNERS ....„ :WI NW 111N1t.11.11111,111.,1/ 1111.4 S1 1.11: • 0 WEST ELEVATION SCALE:1/16-•1,0" • CI I-- Lu > 2 r ';.' I MATERIAL LEGEND ‘Ir Ce = on g 11. i ° m a a I' ti.1 g 9, I=1 nrru'orn 1.111M1 U-I X E to' : ' V J8 .-.sn,,,. ,..,,,,/i.4...:,. :_....M11111.11. 1MINUINIIMINUM=IM/MM..... ..,.__•r_ ;4ig.,,,. Ell Incco rom. ' CL. 03 01 if 03 mil 1 '', xi .ct . . 11 I Ell I 11 1 11 i E „,„,Iroft<IGIASS V., „4'11-1 Ct. 1,---r- ' • MI----1Mik• r . D Wm.1 RIM 8 1161,71114.nrrm P..' 1 ' I Migininlinnii. I IMIPPIIMINCINIIIIIIII . 0 41111.11./WM k.—.--' .•/../.- --4",:e ' I ...., •A'-'-'1CINT:./. ....... /''' I••••••e•' ••••• CD NORTH ELEVATION KEY PLAN .,.... SCALE:1/1A.•1..(r z 6 ..., .... cr-6 ...... oto ... o --Za'),..._.,e': :34':i. cr'/•:67 i C=,m A03.2 cep = .• . . 1 li yj . r il it o Ch 0 0 o m o 0 0 o sl --- ..m,„ Ili■• 'a��i1ifil sin , ---- --- ----- _r-^- ---`----- -- ---- {— --- ------- -- 'II � �� �7�1/mil ���..+• __F__ o,�.no �•^^�•: --I �II�■�J�■I 1 —„ MATERIAL LEGEND: SIIIit�1I` l� 1� nA a 111111 ai�o�mi�i�m I�1111111111.1111■ua1 a T T 6®u�d. I iiiiV gig', ya I1 0-- mom - .—� l�l I _.,. .,,•,, ,. ,...r,,,a[.� A <tiCl ilCS I I a �� 0 0 0 o o m o o ..,. ❑ '� �, 'v ARCHITECTS III}}} 1 O r PLANNERS ElWA MUM O WEST ELEVATION O SOUTH ELEVATION O '..Y —,., SCALE:I/16'•1'0' SCALE:1/16-•1'-0' �' O u •.wr m.w[•[w • il II fpp� — I I F I -.-'., 0 i -- 1LQIII, A'— B 1 f1— — `d .••e llifil 3 E is-Ile 2L�ECEf=Eq T o ' ' f�'� \1 :1 1 1 _ —91, Z Eu- 41 n o o p— 0 EAST ELEVATION O NORTH ELEVATION 4 9 1 SCALE:1/16'• T SCALE:1/16'•V0' BUILDING ELEVATION NOTES: 1' /1 •- ' .. a.:ro... E Z .mc*ro•ao.ii i�,..im..0 1 ... 1 OM r./nr ro•V... KEY PLAN =14 LI •. w,o.a,4 ,,•.•,� .n•,. /r,i cE o° A03.3 / /; jv U /-( tea• / .. r ......... .. n 13 II arB ni U n ro 13 D U U U FO . . • .• r ii:41.14Viityr,wprolk - sPqtlifeWpflpplftrAVOHOVVWVprilupTirpTgipit Idgfifigad#61WWWMaggaggWONMANWA _ d:;.iti;hitid 4,hiblimingrar 44.____ +1,,,_ Yalta V& `1, 1 Ill i " r..i, il,A p;41:111riMATIMIT ,.... .=.... Prityrifi IT , • ' I !I ii 1111/1 (7. ), . , ...."11.11.1 , prP:ilt " .4,1ottitat-iiipe. 1111111111 1111111111 is _,, agfitiiigitrifitI/0111,441111111111"11711111111111 III I III 1 III 111111114 1111231—rmrittrit:.,,, 8.:?;:°----• • egS.:0°) dloimittkApimmuil -Ir- ---- --- • o I oir I III: .-x-- '"I '1 I I% IIIl"II II 'I''I%III. lig VIIIN I on,1 J:i•.18 ,i, . ,, ... __ +Z,,..., ii;g10°F-df " i Ir 11 I Ili III in, rii iZ rai —II III C I I. in I 11. •111 111 E 111 E c E mil : . iii k 1111111111 =1 1Ft II Iiiill I :_ ___.4__u ___= all . CP .4 = ARCHITECTS CI 1/11 El CI a a a a a a a El U U +,..-7,.0 PLANNERS 0 WEST ELEVATION 0 NORTH ELEVATION m10: SCALE:1 ll'•10' SEAM 1/8'•1,0' 1111100 00 0 '/E FED u 13 u rti ro 1€ • 1 o .....'..................=r.1i ih ivn.h,,iid,it.gfi:iE1d.9pl,T d.o"...,if,"a4".r.t,"1g4wt'ir4,.il.ip111'.3ig1'd.t1 A1mut i1i1m!1a1"p3 aa.'pbIrg.'i.i,ApEg I:jli'ici.th..imgth't,3 a ii1 r,.d.'RVlIqi ifii'i,r'1, itrithis 44P,..,"70.°.,- ,X...., iggit,S aV' l4"I1L11Lir1a8l =1111nMMi 11 1 21111.,1..Wh iaI lmomIw 4r i4hOi 3 , I Vii X '3- .'.I•II.h4t•..__ •g_+_4, - --"""""--+.:W....., t..7 m ;°_E ir s k ir = W _ . w gS >< all ' = _ = Mg 111M, U el --33 u u 0 EAST ELEVATION 0 SOUTH ELEVATION a. SCALE:1/8'•I'D SCALE:1/V'•0.0- MATERIAL LEGEND: 2 ▪ PPICAll rmimmrs•00711% 1 * WEI 64,11 4 3 ...- ...Mx, A. 0 ....- El KEY PLAN O 'mat DOM ".17 7 0 0 L-) 0 to c) ° A03.4 1.--- ---1 . . • =, • . a W L__ a— > Il — ST. N.E. 3RD ST. — . N.E. 3RD ST. II Will) 'Lill J a - 1 ,T - - _= I— i CITY - EM Li ATTORNEY BUILDING N M III ^ MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.DR. N.E. 2ND ST. 1 • c } z c` W 3 o cr o in /i/i Q z CITY > r�:W U w HALL Q z a w N.W. 1ST ST. N.E. 1ST ST. I 0 Z COMMUNITY m CENTER 3 w w F - z z z v) TENNIS OLD STADIUM I J SCHOL L.;SQUARE Iit z O • T A T L A N TIC AVENUE SOUTH I 11 a QI _iZ COUNTY COURT a> > > _ HOUSE a a a vi E 1- F Q S.W. 1ST ST. — S.E. 1ST ST. -�'—-.- -- — S FIDE ELI TY FEDERAL —_, N H BANK L.; w w w i— �� — — N ui vi — lij v) r N SUBJECT PROPERTY PINEAPPLE GROVE LTD l c1 a PLANNING AND ZONING IEEE �f'qY "g�P DEPARTMENT LOCATION MAP -- DIGITAL BASE MAP SYSTEM -- MAP REF: S:\Planning do Zoning\DBMS\File—Cob\Z—LM 500-1000\LM889_Pineapple Grove LTD HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEMORANDUM STAFF REPORT Property Owner: Pineapple Grove Limited Project Location: Old School Square Historic District HPB Meeting Date: September 2, 2009 COA: 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The item before the Board is consideration of the building elevations for the Pineapple Grove Limited project located in the Old School Square Historic District pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.1(E) and Section 4.6.18. BACKGROUND/PROJECT DESCRIPTION The development proposal consists of the south 38.25 feet of Lot 5, 6, 7, 8, the south 34.75 feet of Lot 13, 14, 15, and 16 of Block 75 of the Town of Linton Plat and contains 1.658 acres. The eastern half of the development (Lots 13 through 16) is located in the CBD (Central Business District) zoning district. The western half of the development (Lots 5 through 8) is located in the OSSHAD (Old School Square Historic Arts District) and was (in-part) the former site of Neil's Market. It is noted that the south 34.75 feet of Lot 6 and all of Lots 7 and 8 are subject to the permitted uses and development regulations of the CBD zoning district as it overlays this portion of the OSSHAD. At its meeting of August 19, 2009, the Historic Preservation Board approved the Class IV site plan modification and landscape plan for a mixed-use project consisting of 119 hotel rooms, 2,322 square feet of retail, 4,356 square feet of restaurant, 33,350 square feet of office and a single family residence. However, the Board postponed the building elevations with the direction that the office building be redesigned to transfer the required upper level floor reduction to the northwest portion of the building and the single family residence be redesigned to be visually compatible with the neighborhood. Further, the Board noted that the north facade of the hotel needed to be redesigned to provide additional architectural treatment for the two blank planes. The applicant has revised the building elevations for the office building and the single family residence and is now before the Board for consideration. ANALYSIS Development Standards The single family residence is considered major development and the office building is considered minor development [Per LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(2)]. Visual compatibility with the surrounding historic neighborhood for new construction in the OSSHAD is based upon criteria in the LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(8)(a)-(I), Visual Compatibility Standards. Because this section of the historic district is included within the CBD overlay, LDR Section 4.6.18(E) also applies to the review of the elevations. • The elevations for the hotel/restaurant are reviewed exclusively under LDR Section 4.6.18(E) because this eastern half of the project is not in the historic district. Pineapple Grove Limited Building Elevations COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 HPB Meeting September 2, 2009 LDR Section 4.6.18(E), Criteria for Board Action: The following specific criteria are noted: a) The plan or the proposed structure is in conformity with good taste, good design, and in general, contributes to the image of the City as a place of beauty, spaciousness, harmony, taste, fitness, broad vistas, and high quality. b) The proposed structure, or project, is in its exterior design and appearance of quality such as not to cause the nature of the local environment or evolving environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value. c) The proposed structure, or project, is in harmony with the proposed developments in the general area, with the Comprehensive Plan, and with the supplemental criteria which may be set forth for the Board from time to time. LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(8)(a)-(I), Visual Compatibility Standards: The following Standards apply, in part, to the office building and single family residence: (a) Height: The height of proposed buildings or modifications shall be visually compatible in comparison or relation to the height of existing structures and �1 buildings in a historic district for all major and minor development. (b) Front Facade Proportion: The front facade of each building or structure " r shall be visually compatible with and be in direct relationship to the width of the building and to the height of the front elevation of other existing structures and buildings within the subject historic district. (c) Proportion of Openings (Windows and Doors): The openings of any building within a historic district shall be visually compatible with the openings `ly exemplified by prevailing historic architectural styles of similar buildings within the district. The relationship of the width of windows and doors to the height of windows and doors among buildings shall be visually compatible within the subject historic district. (d) Rhythm of Solids to Voids: The relationship of solids to voids of a building or structure shall be visually compatible with existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district for all development, with particular attention paid to the front facades. (e) Rhythm of Buildings on Streets: The relationship of buildings to open space between them and adjoining buildings shall be visually compatible with the relationship between existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district. (f) Rhythm of Entrance and/or Porch Projections: The relationship of entrances and porch projections to the sidewalks of a building shall be visually compatible with existing architectural styles of entrances and porch projections on existing historic buildings and structures within the subject historic district for all development. (g) Relationship of Materials, Texture, and Color: The relationship of materials, texture, and color of the facade of a building and/or hardscaping 2/4 • Pineapple Grove Limited Building Elevations COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 HPB Meeting September 2, 2009 shall be visually compatible with the predominant materials used in the historic buildings and structures within the subject historic district. (h) Roof Shapes: The roof shape, including type and slope, of a building or structure shall be visually compatible with the roof shape of existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district. The roof shape shall be consistent with the architectural style of the building. (i) Walls of Continuity: Walls, fences, evergreen landscape masses, or building facades, shall form cohesive walls of enclosure along a street to ensure visual compatibility with historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district and the structure to which it is visually related. (j) Scale of a Building: The size of a building and the building mass in relation to open spaces, windows, door openings, balconies, porches, and lot size shall be visually compatible with the building size and mass of historic buildings and structures within a historic district for all development. (k) Directional Expression of Front Elevation: A building shall be visually compatible with the buildings, structures, and sites within a historic district for all development with regard to its directional character, whether vertical or horizontal. (I) Architectural Style: All major and minor development shall consist of only one (1) architectural style per structure or property and not introduce elements definitive of another style. Office Building: The third floor of the office building has been redesigned to relocate a substantial portion of the required 30% reduction to the northwest corner of the building. This redesign has resulted in a third floor building setback of 42 feet from NE 1st Avenue at the northwest corner of the building. This redesign will substantially improve the compatibility with the historic neighborhood in terms of scale and massing. Single Family Residence: The French Renaissance architectural interpretation of the single family residence has been changed to British Colonial. The setbacks of the building remain the same, the change has only been cosmetic to the exterior of the building. The roof material is a white flat concrete tile. The ground floor will be painted Wind's Breath (light beige) and the upper floor will have a cementitious siding painted Antique Yellow (dark beige). The house will have fluted columns with a natural stone finish. The decorative metal railings will be painted black. The applicant has provided floor plans of this house per the direction of the Board. While British Colonial is not an architectural style that is found in the historic neighborhood, it is not the harsh contrast that the previous French Renaissance interpretation presented. If the Board finds the current design acceptable, it may want to address the two ground floor windows on the east and west sides of the home. These windows serve three restrooms and a bedroom. These windows are not in proportion to the space they occupy in the exterior wall plane. A condition of approval is attached that the size of these windows are increased to achieve proportionality with the exterior wall plane. 3/4 Pineapple Grove Limited Building Elevations COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 HPB Meeting September 2, 2009 Hotel: With respect to the hotel, these elevations have not been revised to address the conditions with respect to the color selection, equipment details, or architectural treatments for the north façade. Therefore, these conditions have been brought forward and are also attached. Based on the above, positive findings can be made based on the noted LDRs, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation and the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines provided the conditions of approval are addressed. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Postpone with direction. B. Move approval of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL-4, design elements for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 4.6.18(E) and Section 4.5.1(E)(8) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, the Delray Beach Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, subject to conditions of approval. C. Move denial of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL-4, design elements for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, does not meet criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 4.6.18(E) and Section 4.5.1(E)(8) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, the Delray Beach Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. RECOMMENDATION Move approval of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL-4, design elements for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 4.6.18(E) and Section 4.5.1(E)(8) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, the Delray Beach Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, subject to the following conditions of approval: 1-77 1. That vertical and horizontal architectural treatments are provided for the two blank planes on the north side of the hotel. �, G-ze'�-' 2. That the Hadley Red is replaced with a-vibrant-rotor consistent with the Floribbe standard. n�/ 6.)/7 3. That details of the rooftop equipment within the hotel tower are provided and watermarked on the building elevations that justify the increfis,Xparapet height. 4. That the size of the two windows on the east and west elevations of the single family residence are increased to achieve proportionality with the exterior wall plane. Report Prepared by: Scott Pape, AICP, Senior Planner V-- Attachment: Revised Building Elevations and Floor Plans . ,)/f1 9 C Staff Report Date August 19, 2009 4/4 IEI II D. i= „� a a ar m --p a a elm gI I= CIa a m Elo o a a -I/ � 1 d v.o.m.era ---- L. y���-yy-�-� II■rirrrrina� � -- 1- i _ _ ,n „a . �,Ill�'I'� L. H� — / ll l f 1 1 Ill MATERIAL LEGEND: •i■,.i..., • ,_ • .F, MI 11 11 1 11 jl Ib jl ii' 1111 r lllimmmIII1mlll=iillll�l1ol:+ EMETAL ROOF ■■• a■ .: H ■ ■I■ I ;i,i-I111 1 11 1111 1 11 11 11 1 11 � � 11�I�I IIIIIIII ■■ ■■■■ I1Ipl 11lllp 1 • 1 : " MN,I 7'‘._.I--- �f-2 ■.\■� i. ' I M 1 o PRECAST STONE ■r. . 'Hi n- — — ' �111110!1E�11 1 ■■II 11 ^�°"�°�° ■r •■■■ . �1■■■ • 11► 1■:. ► 'tit" L■..■■.■. -+V= .�. ..• 1 Iu p_E _Its, ■■_■��J1►11,1••. 111n_u '') �� 0 D.RDMPRAMI..P,ctwnow �� m m O o o o m o 0 11 —� L,S a a s Buono m o m� LL F [J Uw UwRARNO ARCHITECTS I4 APPLIED . PLANNERS ElMETAL TRELLIS SAO PRO. ON DLSU. EIk0TIR0P .I MED II O DECOAIANMNDS UOCARATT,FL,4,1 O WEST ELEVATION O SOUTH ELEVATION p D AIMNOS lRKRS IA;»]AUP SCALE:1/16'•1'.O SCALE:1/16'-1'-0- 0 METAL DOOR FNE:561•10 SAIS OSCREE.wall.ROOF FOR WON.iitn>NM ImsA»nA.CICI8,m ODECORATIVE STUCCO QUOIN oDECORATIvEGRRIE 0 s II F I- 1f —1-1 a p 13 gI I a III a m CDl ,` gl / _ - J ri �i it S 11 11 j j 11.ZIT.�IT.11�-.�-.�fil Illl..lI� w g J .w. n. ,r. .IEiiiiii.ii ii.nib Iliiiiiiii .10;Wiil.Ei WIlki;at'i■iii _,4. T ia 11 ❑ t i ; ,t1 11 m 11 m m 11 11 11 a � ■■ ■■ ■■ 1 0inill" ' ill%Et. - ' •• Hie Him,.:{,3,.... .. ,..........-...-.. r- 1-+A=,..,,,o, ,,,....,,,.. • _ „ U w V. O EAST ELEVATION O NORTH ELEVATION SCALE:1/16'.1 ' 'P 1 0 SCALE:1/16'•1'-0" I BUILDING ELEVATION NOTES: IF If ���A'0'R111Y10A1 "71.3 R10" ERE M OMIltV , PROVIDED .. n i Kr 01 REDUCTION Of NO MORE MAN 20, i . 5 me,rtr MAP 44 if?! ' E 0 A03.3 AUG 2 6 2009 D a n n U m m m n " m 0 • Nair' All �� - AI 1n� • 7 7;7Y �- n . ■■1 _ summon rot �' .i. S �IIII �tiIIIUIIIIOIIII�� o;mM.x«" . ; �Imili i�uttit�i gl�lp�iltl11u ilk®1��lu�un prom---'— �'o'�,r. i ��� ii4� I��1 Pi 1; oo nit���'�, 011� 111� IHIII� IA] �'! I P NI' �E` �� L. �illE �i111 1.1. I 1 � I � 1111 ' 1/ _!ftii pi] �iI 7.11 r'I�I+fill;�I II�— — t' .A��� _ �d �1J w� A \IJc' r lei �, f�P R OR Axcwl 1).af 1mro rlr.xexrzR �wPrPP r. m$ "" m n U O U n O m m n m n o U m U n U P.xPrxP.P ARCHITECTS PLANNERS O WEST ELEVATION 2 NORTH ELEVATION :OM NW oa:n Qeroe uuu. St Ire: SCALE:Inc•1'-P SCALE:1/8••1'-0• P X;ARAmrv.r.31411 rel.:5e1.3e:5ue FAX:50ISelSRC 1AMiA21RTAICILISKIf01 n n m m m a n n =-----• Pry a _� — y �;P.e 4 m _r ,..._ o� • iI ['lop,- all ee�e k - Il�lil�l- �� � 1� �� = O vi'`�i 1 n u _I41 ff.mon Mt i fl ..■ ■■ ■ ■ --■_ Is ■— _ - __ suoxPnwsxru t 2 ta9 Ca YmCxc xr. E _ - �_ t �� -.� :i: coa 1.0 gO NH."..— . .- . .''''. ".---- . —.. ..' .. ...=d=1 WM H Milki-1 7MT:- CL i�.n rts �T�xrm o�ro.O :3L?JauJu..u•(i�uw.irn.eu„,u...:s:a..iGu.ul,:d.....ri�L.Li..,uu''I ......u.,...,..:�...�., .:: ,._ au:.ir:i.•L..:. ;:..� �u.�'nrt; U ® . m m o,..�n ..El 0ilmcimil Rogow IN°II, . • f © e o Sg::xo,..P " Z O EAST ELEVATION O SOUTH ELEVATION d SCALE:1/8••1'-IT SCALE:1/0..1'-0' MATERIAL LEGEND: ElFLAT CONCRETE TIE ROOF 2 O PRECAST PEDIMENTS/uOTUS _ 0 SMoor:STUCCO ESOLID WOOD PANEL DOOR W/ Qi ooTenxis ruxrzoe.xoTRAxswC ' C /3 .w=.fueTR 1 uMINUM MAve DONTWIxoow namnonuTReiiu®vt pa.m.IMPACT GLASS DOOR 111 oALU,xxU,IRAILING Ee STUCCO WM 0 oL.,.rPtuR< Z 0 MET KEY PLAN ElTe:�OODOAXAC MOPS Q0Oo 0TInous unxc l5J ..,, O ALUMINUM SEA U XUR T. oPrrOR„TIVeCxwxr~ o e�PRECASTTAKRreuw, , • i t jr, off A 1114 6 2009 • rewrote lir 1.. A a Ir \\T Q \ / La.D,RRMew \�,: v IV ,00,L19x E••Shit •• �- .i��; U u u _ G , V- LIT. LLB I:j. r_. = I .ji a,L ax L !1 I _==r N— -T =__�1.4L:__- "L— _ - - 1 Gu► .011E _ 11 x L --- __.__-----------__.__--.._ 'C;! — [![obOr Hll iii ",N 1 - - MlR®uTM 1 TEL:Sn.lcl•lNe SAM •-- !Al,561.39,102 SECOND FLOOR PLAN ROOF PLAN H 2,150 SI SUM in-IC amt.1,1'.,O J LU • rr• 1 0L, = • — • Ce = o t'•M"m L1J X - �` CO , WTIMCI- W CI I I w 14 iv. 71 1 1: LIMA, COVERED.a. , iiimmill ji. Jr I OFWAIWAST i =gal ID II ii .. o.aIr .RL� = I 'An 1 SLATS L L,lAT,mx ❑ i LAALL I MmARQRl,�11 1 rCr I� 1 .L,tLRrz,La0tpL0R.orz,. o 0 0 _ ,o,��.,L,�AL.maWU oL, N . 7 21.2000 Po . MIMI"TO,LLauL,L9w,ILc N MO . 1 . GROUND FLOOR PLAN Q A02.6 ,919,,. ,<ALL.1, A G 2 6' 2.009 I I � 1 I i I Ir°0r -- ' i , t .a.rw n.tl .1 I I �f � r� I p ,.,..,$ _ � - ��� w — r f ,,ini.� 111 �m ... m f 8n:q�.,..,I Sla�t�'r� �`. '- — .mom — I`cw $ ' '7 IT �� .I_ al _is 1 MPS, ' PPI 1 t I I 1411.P .:A► �:. �ir..w ra••..A�.� au.u..u.;.»w:u. .-.. _..•u .,' .n�u....a,nau.v..::l..un 1 :1,.A.�:u1. ..Irw�alru�.. ..a..uu.:ln..uu...�r".Lrw ..n:...ai...uL.u......u : vw..l<wy' �ar� nwv. Mt ,/111111 O SECTION 1-1 ARCHITECTS PLANNERS SCALE:1/16-•1'-0' nroN otw.72 ff'. 5 IItfCA0.A1,.N,.3001 r.— re.,.am.• i I I msamru..a..m r,aw w'Z.,il, L 4- 4 -I1--I-- I -,o— I, 1 11 11 11 11 .1 11 11 11 /1 ® .T.— i 8 l L_', ,wM.w.,r..4, i II II It It _III, It i�.1 in, it , (''� 11 II 1 11 II II I II II I; t p' 0 ,•.,,,.'''4 I'--- -- II �',e lm-1'1_[NE _mai Thu LHJi t•.L L _ my" mei_ .Imo ® -- I I -I- +.,=Il..,1 J .-,1Et 11 canto �0i1 ""' ,e.,„ I . ' TM.� m. 'onooi o �cmouumwen.e� n� _ 4 3 .�.�. u..,w •f.. I I- +pop .., > ��•a . I 11,11 9 O SECTION 2-2 CL SCALE:1/16.•1,0' Q W } } CL . , hd F-14,i7 iiiiiiir I..,,.-.,..4 r .0•s.r. 0� J_ , ---- �ILi -G ` ; I 1 fj-------;� I I- '�E� mm MI mm mlI1 E.t.a I '� ill , i � ;1 • f _`I T J1 IIIIII LL m _ III II I ,, E � " ', !E! _ ii P0m1Yl01V1111f0Yl .. i ' I „' �J SECTON 3-3 KEY PLAN ;'�. /�•77,,//�o�� - iip 2 / - '/h' '�.% 0 SCALE:1/16'•1'-0' �� T S/ A04.1 lUG 2 6 2009 DPLDm..la a.xda I. • Oren lalans o.dn wuea la.•met i — — — — -- — — — „r ND, — ..._ Si D D .4— The MA 1M Igo..mMnum,dm.a...m by w.ne,kn lael laEPA MM..V-•Al.men 1. The Mel ALAI pro..an.dronerental Cminlmee ' I T I .. 1 M.:,M...alacamMorlt ea,IFRlteq.RFuantYle«NRIreMD7001.tat Is mumble lv<em1.Fl An EmYmivm+l pap pap L,�p, I ben Ilan for ener..met..ra wla waste w. I i I ' ,I.rxn r.. rr V V rr yl� I I S. Imminbn Amon...MM.tommltorearlssai,a.r.Arotunawee Wam.om en A monthly,.annual bash. C3D �. Mo.Fame,<n.lamD,•mp:,rw...anla.<am ewe.tu,autw.nwamlrc«wll.mo•l.ne.mu mP.d I(— —> , I I I+i� • 1. • 11 .n err 1 al. T„'M un.lan er`ma �lMrmat.ls Antm:ll..w.Ama tirMorwe.nran..nwamme«amdnm•leaa•F . IFS' -PI I ' ': ......' ,�11•n _�11■rtx ••,,�iiai• ."• : _T—`e Im,traank.a urawmrrllaa ratan..n,e.mtv:ll«..nl..amr.`wtr.ulHRan.n..aennn.,.aan.mlo-,asst.MM. t MYedlta,.LOOM Fr mn000mmerFea I . a I ' • I- �I�� ` �",e'—�.F�.�`, �� °.e`+�7 (i. I ..:n«w, a<amr e. aaw.nwanae,.abien...xe•.le.In SI mars.SM.age maim. I i I 1 r-lT_,7t11` II �.T 1, Amer ass. p I , I 1^1I J L t�i..t_• 1 Imd asap el l.etmn toilets.mprn.....d.....M.vmaaigtArgamlemid6 n+o•l.n..F NI 1` 1\ 5 ,a [u� I l V- I A I emenutFne•ISMI.0SMam.nnDn..w.m.<o-nmaw.ulM.n.mmF...n«aexemo-tnre 1.'Il�ll�l�` ll7 .t�p —IImpincluding e•�.I I ' J I I i ' j : Da W.and rituMment. .711101 I ea PO- - - -` r � IuG7— - --� E"y ,, ..= y I 17."rim.' mint tant,Fm wasp d..aba.r .a, np� rem F illOr dli r .�i��a ,a A ,.. : ' __ �F.t___II. t_wr`�-�■ MICE 1 i.;..:'. 1 _ /1Ui I,IIt ._.._. _.._. n y,l.l utilize fNady meth.am ime.o..... Frl/u.�E I.Plumbing AAA. [Irce Tlt OVA MI bum . at t LA 1 ; —�I • / 1°,I��Lt} 1 ■ I *IL I ' .F nr __ �. .I Ie a 111111•IS Y ,.••t i.- 7 a I I �� � :buIlOnsPolM�or��I I�Dartt�h�Fr.rt.pRw,anlwm.a.b a ',{, .... .� 21 _.y�.��. ��_. 1,..r hMa Fnrdm.0F[rac.,ane AM mem,m well m mar..gird RI IiF: ��...�tltitl :. Ei yi e. green dean,ennmeen , ..n plan AM,Mg.Amilell ea.xD peeper I rye.nwro t ®�• rorta ,]��/. ■ J j 00,M....., ..,PM.use,model nuMd a eut,M°u.manufacturer contac.Flarm.dmruna•ARAroN.Ft llal I Y�� ale a Ima The plan,MAEMI Fawe whMFprnmMaOeP_,.IMMFpgm many,miry.N,�.hFp. ' 1 Mown,Irrpasl°wd e.PMb, TEL:SAI.1o:A,E r I I�Ir., • I I i m •.uni L Fd __y t,llili ' mops', liter� om i a. a ,ambme°.face tram.wa.,ut lemi M. Mines P.I.Inc me w.em.n lint.,d.tl FAX:SeI-1n:a„: _ . Ca _ I etF �1tFp"Eer»lemur I I II II: ._ — r:" '•: . x t.rcIn el K emlme°all trenI or ma.Alls.aRl ...IIAtQM.�O C{NE li r ' t n naroceen,. a rant. y,.w.ww,,.at.<atutentOsawl Furl,was Pygvv,e ■ ■ t E'e . 1!IJI. 1 ew : II 11 . {II 1 a. I �1�I1�1111� E. — 1 • - r 1111 :.. — Ix t MA n' ;.FARIL a.: • I I —.`\� I I I t�ii�'ui.• ■ �s.,. 'WPC. r�.r� ��r�i�- FOR YIMMI FRAUD T�E'.:P ;tr I I 1 1� 111r1e`76, .t;�_t.' -■ :_, ,', .n • �.p u,r CLASS ca• 4 aeonm TnvEuvcws 4 aJ "' 2 �?•,\ a i I AEYr:� '^:r,.:` �I u'Il/,�1-�i�1-b I nerraa eLss[m[ I Towrzxrw cuss i �i �, I inch ,. .<i`,;::• �lI'OIIIl'1111,, Aro rose m+.l W �� I I ilirl Cj C,,,., uI I 1 ; '_. � I ' 4C2>k y ..l �rE.�;��E. �., / / h illi i' I I I �,.. ';.' I�. e a T1 ■ (t I E W X I ,� ` �; _ „ I - - — -' moo a,h I • I ; �`'� motor I -yl�,irllla� I III!i»l, I !� [ _ I © 1 •r NxI1NDRGDR DDT Ina ,,, nD N 1nl w — [anon; I I D,LIt - I ` Il•f , 'R. 1 `�ii`i- 1' lii'i-, 1. Z I 1 f' •,,...::, .....— . Hi 'II m:1 -��- "I�- 1 -.14i4 i°® I wM< I m,m.n_.�m. n- I I I / Iill ... . _. .— ! M` 41 • II MOM I�jen '■ I d l � I I4 i� �, '�•. a�� '; III VOODOO CUSS TO.0101 Nr0R1BOX CUPS _, ... • sy sq., 14 Mr ITT 64 CNCRETE t:l Me.as .n .aemarron. :I d.. ae �� .AreL1,EAr, r . Rr 'lt/l'.Ix [ '• D .,turn i.n 14ID11EREAMIEAArm11 SECOND FLOOR PLAN ` �'' .oxonv/o4v win co wall roo.....,Tom ern me.n mat laear SOF OFFICE BUILDING SECOND FLOOR PLAN NOTES: HOTEL SECOND FLOOR PLAN NOTES: ° 1. SECOND FLOOR GROSS MA'Tpn S.F. • Z. EGRESS STAIRS NI h•1,ELEVATOR SNOT•.IR RATIO 1. SECONDM100R CROSS MMAINSF0.171 SF. 1. EGRESS CORRIDOR•1NR MrMD. 3. MCN SLEEPING 51.F.(LOROOA.CONTAINS R00R ARMAEOv[1NCWMwW REQIRP[D OF ESS.TAISNIh0 1.1..ELEVA101 TO p GLASS RAILING SYSTEM D 'COL o• K/ 1. oR1CC N[T ARM 15,1>O S.F. 1. MESS CORRI O h•0.RAEe4MSHM.nIR Mira lWol A. [DRESS COR0.IDOR•1N0.RATE ma D71/. r A02.2 • AUG 2 6 2009 i - - - - - - - - --� .Rr. . lc _ - - I, 1 arA nI _;l; _n iiiIVIII Or 1 I fir.• Wig■ 1 ma =: 1 _ ... fx.W.W.-1 p fizie• I, '.. , ....n , Syr .... H I . i. !- 1 •. 1 'dpr" Ai , ..... •— 1 no r.• .r' :. .I ., .. -r.nE� ' 1.0 ;'..ua i A >€tt:ialk.'> A A, I _vats I •o . n3. _ 1 J% .. . I B �� ol_�_ ; IIIIPLANNERS q• ,�aa�� s 'Y Y I .---,-1 � � y ..NW 11uA NAlON Ma I I ,1I1I- ure: ,r. .U.• N I I I ■I a ��-� ^ ](, DOCA RATON,FL IIRII I I ) �III'IIIII i I III ��a '1 LJ. •., 41 1 L:Se,>9:-1.5 II IN LI� 1 I_�_4 "Aww i .J��^'•¢`rQ FAX:SOI.Jv:.slu: I i r _ __-i ' In - i 1 I= I .iil ,...�' - .... � ■°li W I maA33nr.13®Jsnca _ II I 1 L n. I 11 1 : I�%. • I )I -- r -��� NI ` I I ;III ,_■ 1 Fa m --- I ,/ 1 ,r. ' I I I € it i6. V ■ �� 01 �� �I�� W X Ci ' I DI..r�.. I t IM _..._0€ I CL _IT k,, .- _ I I^ 1 - t vjl 1 'wW' NIA ^: ; z I� ® a I HI,M�lI,II 1 1 _.IV,r °-- I V ■ In . Ii I N i : ; -ttb !' L' --------- —_—_-- =J — — — — — — — — — s a >.<„M. M.R..rronge 53. THIRD FLOOR PLAN )\: SCAM I]L..Iff OFFICE BUILDING THIRD FILCH PLAN NOTES: HOTEL THIRD FLDDR PLAN NOTES: I. THIRD ROOK GROSS rt00RARLA IS II.NS S.F.IAEA.1 OE ALIO., I. THIRD BOOR AREA 1519,1]D S.F.Im'.IOFAIIgnID .IQ GROUND BOOR WIlgNO(OOIIRINi AS PLR IM SM.X.lIXF1NXrXN LRWND BOOR RNlgHO(OOIIRINT AS P[R lORYt.IR.NIF)HlfcNil 1. ALLOWED RUMS.FOOTPRINT IR,SSI S.P.I oR4 LOR SEC..A.IXFX.11rX11 1. RLOwCO WIIdNG(OOtPRINF 19,5005.I.1100'.IIMYC.A.X.IJ(M.1(<Illl i11W91i PROVIDED WILDING FOOTPRINT 1].LNLS.F. PROVIDER WARM FOOTPRINT 19,.k5.f. / 1. THIRD ODR NET MICE AMA 10..5.F. T. EACH Y[VING ROOK CONTAINS FLOOR ARIA ADOCETHFAVHwV.LnEEl.1RV j / EGRESSA. MIAS RI 9I I,ELEVATOR MUST.]HA RAID Of IEs S.F.UDR SIC.N.I.I.IMXII S. MIMS CORRIDOR•INA UM. EGRESS StAIRf RIRII,FLLVATOII SNAR.b1R GiED S. SUESS CORRIWR•IHR MTV. A02.3 itit 2 6 2009 4.4 worm m I� „ i:IIll --- II I I ,.,.■I I'C, "o ln,, o I ' I 'II jIai 11. 5 r . z _._,._.,_.._.._,._ I I 1� ,.. , -iGGF' G'I-ice Ir � iii i 1.31 —' � 1 II t I p, 1 I — tieARCHITECTS I PLANNERS 1 I i 3 a — I6 ■ e� ire ■ II I •_ :MO NaDceARA,DN MAD . i I •.1 �-— Ili! I I sit I I I,., n ,4 0, • ,,j Ba'n RnION FC1uN I I iIAIIIII I I I IIII d�_� 1� 'L •7' € PP tlR:,., i Illlllilil I F,.:r-__1 -_..(al,(L) I Z FAX:MI.17,Po: II I I 1 I �I�i �,-__` . LI ■1• 'V , C i miATiBTAl�IR4tnf I I ■ ' 1 .�,-�, I - I �l' IIII 49 ■ .�:�� � 1 I I i II • i i —. LU ` I i �m�� ` I ' I I i13I� ■ .G,ci ��I-•- '1 I J I I ,. .R,...a,.,,., e ' III ■ � I ■ III �-•- ' I ,.. I I I .'' —.--Fri] f 41 Ia•,{of .i I 0 N 5 , III ��rr--I•. ,,., I .i I 4 = ,�a I ' III -■ .�, ';IEll„f-P_ I I h LD W ;E -- w • IU I I II 1. 111 `ts,-I � �eIIP:,i 1 I X �� • , d s M1 ■ E•' i 1i ' Q LU R ' r Zx , � I 4:= I , I r d °! 1 1 wow martme A .. PAUL I.AL All WV®S 11RKIMISAII]IMA®SI ROOF a FOURTH FLOOR PLAN SCALP.1,R "s ''" NOTE: HOTEL FOURTH FLOOR PLAN NOTE: FOR ORM MOLDING ROOF NORM.MT AMA I. FOURTN FLOOR AREA IS I8,170S F.(WA OF THE MIMED CROWD FLOOR MG 1. EAU SLEEPING ROOM CONTAINS FLOOR AREA ABOVE THE MIRAN REWRCD OF 11S S.F.ILOR SIC...3(1,,NI1 1. EGRESS STAIRS FI h F 1•ELEVATOR S,WT•PM RATED .. EGRESS CORRIDOR RATED.IIIRRATED. ' //''1/ .„ L V A02.4 • AUG 2 6 2009 HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ---STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE: August 19, 2009 AGENDA ITEM: IV.D. ITEM: Consideration of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Which Incorporates The Class IV Site Plan Modification, Landscape Plan, And Architectural Elevations For Pineapple Grove Limited, Located On The North Side Of NE 1st Street and Extends From Pineapple Grove Way To NE 1st Avenue. ! — ty: .q--- -j- K � N.E._ _ - 596 457. L GENERAL DATA: j - Owner/Applicant Pineapple Grove Ltd. Location Located on the north side of NE 1st —1 jI c h Street and extends From Pineapple I i — /- Grove Way To NE 1st Avenue I 1 — Property Size 1.658 acres - i Wt. 6 T. Future Land Use Map CC (Commercial Core) & OMU l_ (Other Mixed Use) _b— _ L w LI :61 Current Zoning CBD (Central Business District) :Lunt �— & OSSHAD (Old School -'' — -'� Square Historic Arts District) — Adjacent Zoning....North: OSSHAD & CBD - t —. East: CBD T N,E.- 1s South: CBD & OSSHAD -i r 2 r West: OSSHAD - — _ Existing Land Use Vacant _= r, Proposed Land Use Construction of a 119-room =s hotel with 2,322 sq. ft of retail, 1 CO , -a---- I. 33,350 sq. ft. of office, 4,356 s Iy sq. ft. restaurant, and a single ATLANTIC AVENUE' family residence. 7.‘ rr. Water Service Existing on site. I I I I WI I 1 Sewer Service Existing on site. — d- -{ _ —f}; 1 1 1 V-- —5° ____. : SSE. 1ST sr_ 4. Ill 1 - /1/ - ' i kt N IV.D. ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The action before the Board is approval of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4, which incorporates the following aspects of the development proposal for Pineapple Grove Limited, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(F): • Class IV Site Plan • Landscape Plan • Architectural Elevations • Waiver Requests The subject property is located on the north side of NE 1st Street, and extends from Pineapple Grove Way (NE 2nd Avenue) to NE 1st Avenue. BACKGROUND The development proposal consists of the south 38.25 feet of Lot 5, 6, 7, 8, the south 34.75 feet of Lot 13, 14, 15, and 16 of Block 75 of the Town of Linton Plat and contains 1.658 acres. The eastern half of the development (Lots 13 through 16) is located in the CBD (Central Business District) zoning district. The western half of the development (Lots 5 through 8) is located in the OSSHAD (Old School Square Historic Arts District) and was (in-part) the former site of Neil's Market. It is noted that the south 34.75 feet of Lot 6 and all of Lots 7 and 8 are subject to the permitted uses and development regulations of the CBD zoning district as it overlays this portion of the OSSHAD. At its meeting of January 4, 2006, Historic Preservation Board approved a Class V site plan for Pineapple Grove Limited. That project consisted of 8 townhouses, 5,764 square feet of office, 4,868 square feet of restaurant, 5,385 square feet of retail floor area, and 30 condominium units. The project was never constructed. The action now before the Board is approval of the site plan, landscape plan, architectural elevations, and waivers for a revised project. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The development proposal incorporates the following: • Construction of 119 room hotel along Pineapple Grove Way that contains 2,322 square feet of retail and 4,356 square feet of restaurant; • Construction of a 33,350 square feet three-story office building along NE 1st Avenue; • Construction of a single family residence at the northwest corner of the property; • Construction of a two-story parking facility along the east side of the alley; and • Installation of dumpster enclosures and associated landscaping. The development proposal includes waivers to the following sections of the Land Development Regulations: 1. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.14(A)(2), which requires a 40-foot visibility triangle at the intersection of two public rights-of-way. Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 2. A waiver to LDR Section 4.6.18(B)(14)(iv)(2), which requires that the minimum transparency or glass surface area on the ground floor wall area of all non-residential and mixed-use buildings shall be a minimum of 75% of the wall area for that elevation. SITE PLAN ANALYSIS COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development application/request. Building Setbacks: The following tables indicate that the proposal complies with LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4) as it pertains to the Central Business District (CBD) zone district, except for those portions of the buildings as noted in the furthest column to the right: Hotel Required Compliance with Road/ %Building Building Proposed LDR Building Building Frontage Required Frontage Building Requirements? Height Setback Frontage Side (min/max) at or setback Setback Yes No 70% 179.02' Pineapple Ground min./90% 10'max. min./230. 224' Grove max. 17' max. Way Floor to 25' Remaining * 15'min. 25'min. 25' 255.75'^" length Building Frontage 45' to 70%min. 15'min. 179' min. 175.17'A * 5t 70% 84' StreetNE1Ground min./90% 10'max. min./108' 101' * Floor to max. max. 120' 25' Remaining 15'min. 12'min. 13.83' Building length Frontage 25'to 48 70%min. 15'min. 84'min. 86' Side Interior 0' 0' * (north) Rear(alley) 10' 10' A A condition of approval is attached that a minimum of 179 feet of building frontage at a minimum of 15 feet is provided for the upper levels of the hotel along Pineapple Grove Way. ^" The plans incorrectly note the hotel building frontage along Pineapple Grove Way as 254' 6". Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that the plans are revised to correctly note the building frontage along Pineapple Grove Way as 255.75 feet. 2/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Office Required Compliance with Road/ % Building Building Proposed LDR Building Building Frontage Required Frontage Building Requirements? Height Setback Frontage Side (min/max) at or Setback Setback Yes No NE 1 70% 118.47' Avenue Ground min./90% 10'max. min./152. 124.58' * 169.25' Floor to max. 32'max. (Lower) 25' Remaining 16.93' length 15' min. min. 44.67 157.25' (Upper) 25' to 70%min. 15'min. 110'min. 110.17' * Building 48' Frontage st 70% 77.7' NE 1 Ground min./90% 10'max. min./99.9' 79.25' * Street Floor to max. max. 111' 25' Remaining 15'min. 11.1' min. 31.75' * Building length Frontage 48,to 70%min. 15' min. 77'min. 77.75' * (alley) 10' 10' Allowable Upper Level Floor Area Building Level Allowable Ground Maximum Floor Area(70%) Proposed Floor Area Floor Area Hotel Third 29,500 sq.ft. 20,650 sq. ft. 19,370 sq.ft. (65.7%) Floor Fourth 29,500 sq.ft. 20,650 sq.ft. 18,870 sq.ft. (63.9%) Floor Office Third 18,351 sq.ft. 12,845.7 sq.ft. 12,840 sq.ft. Floor (69.96%) The following table indicates that the proposal complies with LDR Section 4.3.4(K) as it pertains to that portion of the development (single family residence) located in the OSSHAD zone district: Required Provided Building Height (max.) 35' 28' 9" Open Space 25% 41% Maximum Lot Coverage 40% 39.9% Setbacks • Front 25' 25' • Side Interior (North & South) 7.5' 7.5' • Rear 10' 10' 3/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Central Business District (CBD) District Regulations: Parking Requirements: Per LDR Section 4.4.13(G)(1)(a), 1 parking space per 300 square feet of total floor area is required for all nonresidential uses except restaurants. Per LDR Section 4.4.13(G)(1)(d), the required parking for restaurants is 6 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. of total floor area. Per LDR Section 4.4.13(G)(1)(e), the required parking for the hotel is 0.7 parking spaces per guest room plus one space per 300 square feet for the meeting room. Per LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(2)(a), the required parking for single family residences is 2 parking spaces per unit. The proposed development contains 33,350 square feet of office, 2,322 square feet of retail, 4,356 square feet of restaurant, 119 hotel rooms and 1,000 square feet of meeting room, and a single family residence. Based on this development mix, the shared parking calculation for the proposed development is 199 parking spaces as indicated in the shared parking table provided below. It is noted that the two parking spaces for the single family residence are accommodated within the garage of the house. LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(8)(a) — Shared Parking allows for buildings or a combination of buildings on a unified site to utilize the shared parking calculations which affords reduced parking requirements by accommodating varied peak utilization periods for different uses (see below). Weekday Weekend Night Day Evening Day Evening Midnight to 6 6 PM to 6 PM to Use Required. AM 9 AM to 4 PM Midnight 9 AM.to 4 PM Midnight Residential 100% 0 60% 0 90% 0 80% 0 90% 0 Office 111.16 5% 5.558 100% 111.16 10% ? 11.116 10% 11.116 5% 5.558 Commercial/Retail 7.74 5%0 0.387 70% 5.418 90% 6.966 100% ? 7.74 70% 5.418 Hotel 86.63 80% 69.304 80% 69.304 100% ' 86.63 80% ! 69.304 100% 86.63 Restaurant 26.13 10% '. 2.613 50% 13.065 - 100% 26.13 26.13 50% 13.065 100% 26.13 Entertainment/Recreational (theatres,bowling alleys, etc) 10% 0 40% 0 100% 0 80% 0 100% 0 Reserved Parking 100% 0 100% , 0 100% ' 0 100% 's 0 100% 0 Other 100% 0 100% 0 100% 0 100% 0 100%' 0 TOTALS 232 78 199 131 102 124 Per LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(8)(b), administrative relief may be granted to allow double counting of parking spaces for uses within a development that have separate hours of operation. The Planning and Zoning Department has determined that the restaurant will have separate hours from the office uses. Therefore, a reduction of 26 parking spaces can be taken. Based on this reduction, a total of 173 parking spaces are required. The development provides a total of 169 parking spaces via a combination of 74 parking spaces within the hotel, 33 parking spaces within the office, 16 valet parking spaces, 6 parallel parking spaces, 10 parallel parking space credit within the adjacent rights-of-way [per LDR Section 4.6.9(E)(3)(e)], and a credit of 30 spaces for property that was owned by the applicant on the south side of NE 1st Street, which has been acquired by the City for use as a public parking facility per LDR Section 4.6.9(B)(4). In order to accommodate the 4 space deficiency, the applicant has requested the in-lieu payment. The City Commission will take final action on this request following consideration of the site plan by the HPB. Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that the in-lieu for the 4/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 deficient parking spaces be approved by the City Commission. It is noted that the in-lieu fee is supportable given the proximity of the project to the public parking garage on the south side of NE 1st Street. The property is located in Area 3, which requires an in-lieu fee payment of$7,800 per space ($31,200 total). Old School Square Historic Arts District(OSSHAD) Regulations: Per LDR Section 4.4.24(F)(4), the maximum allowed width of the single family residence is 60 feet. There must also be a minimum 15-foot separation between buildings that front a street in a development site that contains more than one structure. The proposed residence complies with this requirement since the house is 53 feet 7 inches wide, and is separated 20 feet from the office building. Special District Boundary Treatment: Per LDR Section 4.6.4(A), the north portion of the office building and that portion of the hotel across the alley from the single family property is required to provide a 10-foot setback for the portion of the buildings that are 37 feet or less in height. Further, the hotel is required to provide a 22-foot setback for that portion that is above 37 feet in height. The proposed development complies with the special district boundary treatment since the lower levels of the hotel provide a building setback of 10 feet and 22 feet for the upper level. The office building also complies with this requirement since a 12-foot setback is provided for the lower levels. Provisions for Ingress and Egress: Per LDR Section 4.6.9(D)(2), each required parking space shall be accessible at all times. Due to the proposed valet stacking spaces, the required parking spaces will not be accessible within the upper level of the hotel parking facility. The applicant has indicated that the parking within this area will be exclusively by valet. Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that a valet attendant be provided on-site 24 hours a day. OTHER ITEMS: Auxiliary Power Generator: Per LDR Section 4.3.3(00), the hotel is required to provide an auxiliary power generator for all interior corridor lighting and exit signs and at least one public elevator. Further, the generator needs to be designed and equipped to operate the full capacity of the equipment being served for a period not less than 120 hours. The site plan indicates that the generator will be within a room in the ground floor of the hotel and will be connected to a gas line along the alley. Paving Material: Per LDR Section 4.4.13(F)(4)(f)(1), the front setback area shall be finished with paving materials to match the existing or planned sidewalks within the adjacent right-of-way. The site plan indicates that paver blocks will be installed between the buildings and the public rights-of-way and they will match the existing pavers within the streets. Photometric Plan: A photometric plan has been submitted for the vehicular areas within the property that includes the alley. However, the illumination levels have not been provided for the pedestrian areas at the building entrances. Further, the cut sheet details have not been provided for the wall 5/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 mounted light fixtures on the office building. It is noted that the garage entrances exceed the maximum night time illumination level of 10 foot candles. A condition of approval is attached that photometric plan be revised to comply with the illumination levels of LDR Section 4.6.8, provide cut sheet details of all wall mounted light fixtures, and include the building entrance illumination levels. Pineapple Grove Main Street Redevelopment Plan: The Pineapple Grove Main Street Neighborhood Plan (The Plan) contains several design guidelines that address redevelopment efforts within this area. The following is an analysis of the applicable design guidelines: Street Improvements: The Plan indicates that the intersection at NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue be resurfaced with paver bricks to match the intersection of Pineapple Grove Way and Atlantic Avenue. A condition of approval is attached that the applicant contributes one-quarter of the cost associated with these improvements. Overhead Power Lines: Overhead cables (electric, telephone, CATV) are required to be placed under ground whenever feasible. The site plan includes a note that all that all overhead utility lines (including the alley) will be placed under ground. Right-of-Way Dedication: Pursuant to LDR Sections 5.3.1 (A) and (D) and Table T-1 of the Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element, the following table describes the required rights-of-way and the existing rights-of-way adjacent to the subject property: Right-of-Way Required Existing Required Dedication Pineapple Grove Way 60' 50' 0' NE 1st Street 55' 50' 5' NE 1st Avenue 60' 50' 5' Alley 20'or dominant width 16' 4' Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1(D)(4), a reduction in the required right-of-way width of existing streets may be granted by the City Engineer upon favorable recommendation from the Development Services Management Group (DSMG). The City Engineer and DSMG considered the reductions and approved Pineapple Grove Way to the existing width. However, a 5 foot dedication will be required for NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue together with a 4 foot dedication for the alley. These dedications have been accommodated with the layout of the project. A condition of approval is attached that the right-of-way deeds be submitted and recorded or provided on the plat prior to certification of the site plan. WAIVERS 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: 6/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 (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; and (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. Visibility at Intersections: Per LDR Section 4.6.14(A)(2), the required sight visibility triangles are 40 feet at the intersection of two or more public rights-of-way. The hotel encroaches into the 40-foot visibility triangle at the northwest corner of Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Street. The office building encroaches into the 40-foot visibility triangle at the northeast corner of NE 1st Avenue and NE 1st Street. These encroachments result in a 20-foot visibility triangle at both intersections. The applicant has submitted the following verbatim narrative in support of the waiver: "...The request is for partial obstruction at the intersection of Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Street..." Waiver Analysis: Given the relatively low traffic speeds along NE 1st Street now that it has been converted back to two-way traffic flow, there is no concern with respect to the reduced visibility triangles 20 feet. It is also noted that north/south traffic along Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Avenue are required to stop at their respective intersections with NE 1st Street, which also enhances the traffic safety. Similar circumstances on other properties would lead to the same conclusion. Consequently, positive findings can be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(6)(5), Waiver Findings. Transparency: Per LDR Section 4.6.18(B)(14)(iv)(2), the minimum transparency or glass surface area on the ground floor wall area of all non-residential and mixed-use buildings shall be a minimum of 75% of the wall area for that elevation. The proposed office building provides a transparency of 60% along NE 1st Street and 60% along NE 1st Avenue. The applicant has submitted the following verbatim narrative in support of the waiver: "...Our request is for the office component only as it fronts NE 1st Avenue and whose architecture dictates more sensitivity to proportional fenestration..." Waiver Analysis: The purpose of the transparency requirement is to provide a pedestrian friendly streetscape. Window shopping opportunities encourage pedestrians to proceed along a street. This pedestrian friendly environment is particularly important along corridors such as Pineapple Grove Way and Atlantic Avenue. However, the location of the office building is not as critical to the pedestrian experience since it is located on the periphery of the core commercial areas. Further, the reduced window area will be more compatible with the "lower" scale mixed use development pattern with the historic district along NE 1st Avenue. It is noted that the City has approved similar reduction such as the 5th Avenue at Delray project on NE 5th Avenue. Similar circumstances on other properties would lead to the same conclusion. Consequently, positive findings can be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), Waiver Findings. 7/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Technical Items: While the revised site plan has accommodated some staff concerns; the following items remain outstanding, and will need to be addressed prior to building permit submittal (unless stated otherwise): 1. That a plat application be submitted prior to certification of the site plan and that the recorded plat be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. 2. That the door from the upper level garage be locked and monitored at all times. 3. That a traffic statement be submitted for the revised development proposal prior to certification of the site plan. LANDSCAPE ANALYSIS The proposed landscaping for the commercial portion of the development consists primarily of foundation areas, raised planters on the pool deck, and street trees that include Key Thatch Palms, Yellow Lantana, Alexander Palms, Live Oaks, Bismarck Palms, Clerodendrum trees, Cassia trees, Royal Palms, Hibiscus trees, Fishtail Palms, and Saba! Palms. These areas will be under planted with Foxtail Fern, Cocoplum, Crown of Thorn, Purple Crinum Lily, Gold Mound, Dwarf Fakahatchee Grass, Ficus Vine, Florida Privet, Green Island Ficus, Spider Lily, Pentas, Spanish Stopper, and Xanadu. The landscaping for the single family residence consists of Clerodendrum trees, Coconut Palms, Gumbo Limbo trees, Geiger trees, Hibiscus trees, Key Thatch Palms, Alexander Palms, Pigmy Date Palms, Live Oak trees, and White Bird of Paradise. These areas will be underplanted with annuals, Purple Crinum Lily, European Fan Palms, Dwarf Fakahatchee Grass, Florida Privet, Gardenia, Spider Lily, Nora Grant lxora, Trinette, Viburnum, and Coontie. The landscape plans for the project complies with LDR Section 4.6.16. Landscape Technical Items: The following Landscape Plan items remain outstanding, and will need to be addressed prior to building permit submission unless as otherwise noted. 1. That a landscape maintenance and hold harmless agreement for landscaping within adjacent rights-of-way be recorded prior to certification of the site plan. 2. That cross section of the landscape beds be provided that identify how they will be drained. ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS Per LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(2), the single family residence is considered a major development and the office building is a minor development. Visual compatibility with surrounding historic neighborhood for new construction is based on LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(8)(a)-(l)[Visual Compatibility Standards]. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.18(E), the following criteria shall be considered, by the Historic Preservation Board, in the review of plans for building permits associated with the hotel. If the following criteria are not met, the application shall be disapproved. a) The plan or the proposed structure is in conformity with good taste, good design, and in general, contributes to the image of the City as a place of beauty, spaciousness, harmony, taste, fitness, broad vistas, and high quality. 8/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 b) The proposed structure, or project, is in its exterior design and appearance of quality such as not to cause the nature of the local environment or evolving environment to materially depreciate in appearance and value. c) The proposed structure, or project, is in harmony with the proposed developments in the general area, with the Comprehensive Plan, and with the supplemental criteria which may be set forth for the Board from time to time. Visual Compatibility Standards: The following Standards apply, in part, to the office building and single family residence: (a) Height: The height of proposed buildings or modifications shall be visually compatible in comparison or relation to the height of existing structures and buildings in a historic district for all major and minor development. (b) Front Facade Proportion: The front facade of each building or structure shall be visually compatible with and be in direct relationship to the width of the building and to the height of the front elevation of other existing structures and buildings within the subject historic district. (c) Proportion of Openings (Windows and Doors): The openings of any building within a historic district shall be visually compatible with the openings exemplified by prevailing historic architectural styles of similar buildings within the district. The relationship of the width of windows and doors to the height of windows and doors among buildings shall be visually compatible within the subject historic district. (d) Rhythm of Solids to Voids: The relationship of solids to voids of a building or structure shall be visually compatible with existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district for all development, with particular attention paid to the front facades. (e) Rhythm of Buildings on Streets: The relationship of buildings to open space between them and adjoining buildings shall be visually compatible with the relationship between existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district. (f) Rhythm of Entrance and/or Porch Projections: The relationship of entrances and porch projections to the sidewalks of a building shall be visually compatible with existing architectural styles of entrances and porch projections on existing historic buildings and structures within the subject historic district for all development. (g) Relationship of Materials, Texture, and Color: The relationship of materials, texture, and color of the facade of a building and/or hardscaping shall be visually compatible with the predominant materials used in the historic buildings and structures within the subject historic district. (h) Roof Shapes: The roof shape, including type and slope, of a building or structure shall be visually compatible with the roof shape of existing historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district. The roof shape shall be consistent with the architectural style of the building. 9/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 (i) Walls of Continuity: Walls, fences, evergreen landscape masses, or building facades, shall form cohesive walls of enclosure along a street to ensure visual compatibility with historic buildings or structures within the subject historic district and the structure to which it is visually related. (j) Scale of a Building: The size of a building and the building mass in relation to open spaces, windows, door openings, balconies, porches, and lot size shall be visually compatible with the building size and mass of historic buildings and structures within a historic district for all development. (k) Directional Expression of Front Elevation: A building shall be visually compatible with the buildings, structures, and sites within a historic district for all development with regard to its directional character, whether vertical or horizontal. (I) Architectural Style: All major and minor development shall consist of only one (1) architectural style per structure or property and not introduce elements definitive of another style. Analysis: The predominant characteristic of the existing buildings along NE 1st Avenue between NE 1st Street and NE 2 Street is one and two story structures. The proposed single family residence (major development) complies with the building height plane and maximum floor height requirements. However, the proposed three story office building (minor development) is inconsistent with the existing historic area. As noted in the Building Setback section of this report, the third floor of office building cannot exceed 70% of the allowable ground floor area. This 30% reduction is designed along the rear of the building along the alley. The reduction on the alley side provides no meaningful relief in the massing of the building along NE 1st Avenue or to the one and two story buildings along the west side of NE 1st Avenue. In order to comply with the visual compatibility standards, a condition of approval is attached that the 30% reduction in floor area be transferred to the north and west sides of the building. The architectural interpretation of the single family residence is influenced by the French Renaissance movement. The architecture of the single family residence introduces a foreign design interpretation that is incompatible with the neighborhood based on the visual standards mentioned above. Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that the architectural design of the single family residence is changed to be visually compatible with the neighborhood and approved by the Historic Preservation Board. The hotel is a contemporary architectural interpretation. The most striking architectural features are the vertical glass facades along the east side of the building. The north side of the hotel contains two large facades with little architectural treatment (scorelines). A condition of approval is attached, that vertical and horizontal architectural treatments are provided for these two planes. Further, the Pineapple Grove Main Street Redevelopment Plan indicates that development's need to incorporate "Floribbean" design standards. These include vibrant color schemes. The proposed Hadley Red is very dark and is not consistent with the district. Thus, a condition of approval is attached that the Hadley Red is replaced with a vibrant color consistent with the Floribbean standard. 10/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Parapet: Per LDR Section 4.6.18(B)(14)(i)3), flat roofs shall be screened from adjacent properties and streets with decorative parapets. The maximum height of the parapet wall shall be 6 feet or be of sufficient height to screen all roof mounted equipment, whichever is greater, measured from the top of the roof deck to the top of the parapet wall. The parapet on the tower at the southeast corner of the hotel building is 9 feet 4 inches high. The applicant has indicated that the restaurant equipment will be located in this area. In order to justify this height, a condition of approval is attached that details of the equipment are provided and watermarked on the building elevations. REQUIRED FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the approval of development applications, certain findings must be made in a form which is part of the official record. This may be achieved through information on the application, written materials submitted by the applicant, the staff report, or minutes. Findings shall be made by the body which has the authority to approve or deny the development application. These findings relate to the Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan Consistency, Concurrency, and Compliance with the Land Development Regulations. At its meeting of May 7, 2002, the City Commission made positive findings with respect to the Future Land Use Map, Comprehensive Plan Consistency, and Concurrency provided conditions of approval are addressed. However, the following is provided: Section 3.1.1 (A) - Future Land Use Map: That portion of the subject property west of the alley has a FLUM (Future Land Use Map) designation of OMU (Other Mixed Use) and zoning designation of OSSHAD. The portion of the property located east of the alley has a Future Land Use Map designation of CC (Commercial Core) and a zoning designation of CBD (Central Business District). The zoning districts are consistent with the CC Future Land Use Map designations. As noted in the background section, the southern 34.75 feet of Lot 6 and all of Lots 7 and 8 are subject to the permitted uses and development regulations of the CBD zoning district as the CBD overlay extends into this area. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(B)(1), (2), (3), and (5), hotels, retail, office and restaurants are allowed uses within the CBD zoning district. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.24(B)(1), the proposed single family residence is considered an allowed use in the OSSHAD zoning district. Thus, positive findings can be made with respect to Future Land Use Map consistency. Section 3.1.1 (B) -Concurrency: As described in Appendix A, a positive finding of concurrency can be made as it relates to water, sewer, streets and traffic, drainage, parks and recreation, open space, schools, and solid waste. Section 3.1.1 (C) - Consistency (Standards for Site Plan Actions): As described in Appendix B, a positive finding of consistency can be made as it relates to Standards for Site Plan Actions. 11/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 Section 3.1.1 (D) - Compliance With the Land Development Regulations: As described under the Site Plan Analysis of this report, a positive finding of compliance with the LDRs can be made, provided that all outstanding items attached as conditions of approval are addressed. Comprehensive Plan Policies: A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following applicable objectives or policies were noted: Future Land Use Element Obiective A-1 - Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate and complies in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations, is complimentary to adjacent land uses, and fulfills remaining land use needs. The guests of the hotel will provide a unique tourist customer base for the surrounding businesses. These quests will provide economic stability for businesses in the area, particularly with respect to the restaurant and entertainment sectors. This is also true of the office portion of the development. The office employees will provide a day-time customer base for area businesses with a particular emphasis on restaurants. As noted previously, there is a concern with respect to the compatibility of the office building with the historic neighborhood in terms of scale and massing. A condition of approval is attached that the required reduction of the third floor of the office building be relocated to the north and west sides. This will reduce the massing of the office building in relation to the lower scale historic district. Future Land Use Element Policy C-4.4. — The City supports the efforts to revitalize the Pineapple Grove Main Street (PGMS) area, and the use of the Main Street approach: organization, promotion, design, and economic restructuring. While the CRA is the lead support agency for the PGMS organization, the City will provide technical support and assistance through the Planning & Zoning and Community Improvement Departments. The Pineapple Grove Main Street Neighborhood Plan contains several design guidelines that address redevelopment efforts within this area. These items were previously discussed under the "Compliance with LDRs" Section of this report. Transportation Element Policy D-2.2 — Bicycle parking and facilities shall be required on all new development and redevelopment. Particular emphasis is to be placed on development within the TCEA Area. Bicycle parking is provided at the southeast and southwest corners of the development. Section 2.4.5 (F)(5) - Compatibility (Site Plan Findings): The approving body must make a finding that development of the property pursuant to the site plan will be compatible and harmonious with adjacent and nearby properties and the City as a whole, so as not to cause substantial depreciation of property values. The subject property is bordered to the north, south and west by the Old School Square Historic Arts District zoning district and to east and south by the CBD zoning district. The adjacent land uses include: to the north and west single family residential and commercial uses; to the east by the Astor mixed use development; and to the south by the public parking garage. The proposed redevelopment will provide year-round customer and employment base for the nearby commercial redevelopment along Pineapple Grove Way as well as new opportunities for businesses. The stability of the downtown area will be enhanced by the addition of the hotel 12/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 quests that will patronize area businesses and contribute to the long term revitalization of this redevelopment area together with employment base of the commercial uses. REVIEW BY OTHERS The development proposal is located in an area which requires review by the PGAD (Pineapple Grove Arts District) Executive Committee, the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency), and the DDA (Downtown Development Authority). Pineapple Grove Arts District Executive Committee At its meeting of August 12, 2009, the Design Review Committee reviewed the proposal and recommended approval of the development proposal. Community Redevelopment Agency (CRA) At its meeting of July 23, 2009, the CRA reviewed the proposal and recommended approval. Downtown Development Authority (DDA) At its meeting of July 20, 2009, the DDA reviewed the proposal and recommended approval. Courtesy Notice: Courtesy notices have been provided to the following homeowner's associations, which have requested notice of developments in their areas: • Neighborhood Advisory Council • Chamber of Commerce ■ Progressive Residents of Delray (PROD) • Old School Square Any letters of support or objection will be presented at the Historic Preservation Board meeting. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION The mixed-use development will further enhance the vibrancy of the downtown area and the continued redevelopment of the Pineapple Grove redevelopment area. The recommended condition of approval to step-down the office building along the north and west sides will ensure compatibility with the historic neighborhood. The proposed use is consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Chapter 3 of the Land Development Regulations. Positive findings can be made with respect to Section 2.4.5(F)(5) regarding compatibility of the proposed development with surrounding properties. Positive findings can be made with respect to compliance with the Land Development Regulations provided the conditions of approval are addressed. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Postpone with direction. B. Move approval of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL-4, associated Class IV site plan modification, landscape plan, design elements, and waivers for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the 13/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, subject to conditions of approval. C. Move denial of COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL-4, associated Class IV site plan modification, landscape plan, design elements, and waivers for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, does not meet criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan. STAFF RECOMMENDATION By Separate Motions: Waivers: 1. Recommend approval to the City Commission of the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.14(A)(2), which requires a 40-foot visibility triangle at the intersection of two public rights-of-way, based on a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 2. Recommend approval to the City Commission of the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.18(B)(14)(iv)(2), which requires that the minimum transparency or glass surface area on the ground floor wall area of all non-residential and mixed-use buildings shall be a minimum of 75% of the wall area for that elevation, based on a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). Site Plan Modification: Approve COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 and associated Class IV site plan for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, subject to the following conditions of approval. 1. Address all Site Plan Technical Items and submit three (4) copies of the revised plans. 2. That the site plan approval is contingent upon City Commission approval of the requested fee in-lieu of parking. 3. That a minimum of 179 feet of building frontage at a minimum of 15 feet is provided for the upper levels of the hotel along Pineapple Grove Way. 4. That the plans are revised to correctly note the hotel building frontage along Pineapple Grove Way as 255.75 feet. 5. That a valet attendant be provided on-site 24 hours a day. 6. That the photometric plan be revised to comply with the illumination levels of LDR Section 4.6.8, provide cut sheet details of all wall mounted light fixtures, and include the building entrance illumination levels. 7. That the applicant contributes one-quarter of the cost associated with the improvement to the intersection of NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue prior to certification of the site plan. 14/19 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of August 19, 2009 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 8. That the right-of-way deeds be submitted and recorded or provided with the plat prior to certification of the site plan. 9. That a finding of concurrency be submitted from the School District for the residence. 10. That the payment of the parks and recreation impact of $60,000 be submitted prior to issuance of a building permit. Landscape Plan: Approve COA 2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 and associated landscape plan for Pineapple Grove Limited, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.6.16, subject to the condition that all Landscape Technical Items are addressed and three (3) copies of the revised plans are submitted. Elevations: Approve COA-2009-078-SPM-SPR-CL4 and associated design elements for Pineapple Grove Limited, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.6.18, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the 30% reduction in floor area be transferred to the west and north sides of the office building. 2. That the architectural design of the single family residence is changed to be visually compatible with the neighborhood and approved by the Historic Preservation Board. 3. That vertical and horizontal architectural treatments are provided for the two blank planes on the north side of the hotel. 4. That the Hadley Red is replaced with a vibrant color consistent with the Floribbean standard. 5. That details of the rooftop equipment within the hotel tower are provided and watermarked on the building elevations that justify the increased parapet height. Attachments: • Appendix A • Appendix B • Site Plan • Architectural Elevations • Landscape Plan Report prepared by: Scott D. Pape, AICP, Senior Planner 15/19 Appendix A Page 1 APPENDIX A CONCURRENCY FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(B) Concurrency as defined pursuant to Objective B-2 of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan must be met and a determination made that the public facility needs of the requested land use and/or development application will not exceed the ability of the City to fund and provide, or to require the provision of, needed capital improvements for the following areas: Water and Sewer: With respect to water and sewer service, the following is noted: ➢ Water service will be available to the site via lateral connection to a proposed 8" main along the alley from an existing 8" main along NE 1st Street. ➢ Sewer service exists to the site via an 8" sewer main located within the alley. ➢ It is noted that adequate fire fighting capabilities are provided via the installation of two new fire hydrants along NE 1st Avenue, one new fire hydrant along the alley, one existing fire hydrant at the southeast corner of Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Street, and one existing fire hydrant on the east side of Pineapple Grove Way at the north end of the subject development. Pursuant to the City's Comprehensive Plan, treatment capacity is available at the City's Water Treatment Plant and the South Central County Waste Water Treatment Plant for the City at build-out. Based upon the above, positive findings can be made with respect to these levels of service standards. Streets and Traffic: The subject property is located in the City's TCEA (Traffic Concurrency Exception Area), which encompasses the CBD, CBD-RC, and OSSHAD zoning districts, as well as the West Atlantic Avenue corridor. The TCEA was established in December, 1995 to aid in the revitalization of downtown, with a purpose of reducing the adverse impacts of transportation concurrency requirements on urban infill development and redevelopment. These revitalization efforts are achieved by exempting development within the TCEA from the requirements of traffic concurrency. Therefore, a positive finding can be made with respect to traffic concurrency. A technical item is attached that the applicant submits a traffic statement for record keeping purposes prior to certification of the site plan. Parks and Recreation Facilities: The 119 hotel rooms and one single family unit will not have a significant impact with respect to level of service standards for parks and recreation facilities. However, pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.2(C), Impact Fee Required, whenever a development is proposed upon land which is not designated for park purposes in the Comprehensive Plan, a impact fee of $500.00 per dwelling unit (including hotel rooms) will be collected prior to issuance of building permits for each unit. Thus, an impact fee of$60,000 will be required of this development. Solid Waste: Trash generated each year by the hotel, 2,322 square feet of retail, 4,356 square feet of restaurant, 33,350 square feet of office will be 396.54 tons. The single family residence will generate 1.99 tons of solid waste per year. The Solid Waste Authority has indicated that its Appendix A Page 2 facilities have sufficient capacity to handle all development proposals until the year 2024, thus a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Drainage: Preliminary drainage plans were submitted which indicate that drainage will be accommodated via sheet flow to culverts that will direct stormwater to the City's stormwater collection system along NE 1st Street. Based on the above, positive findings with respect to this level of service standard can be made. School Concurrency: A finding of concurrency has not been received from the School District for the proposed single family residence. Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that a finding of concurrency be submitted from the School District for the residence. 17/19 Appendix B Page 1 Page 1 APPENDIX B STANDARDS FOR SITE PLAN ACTIONS A. Building design, landscaping, and lighting (glare) shall be such that they do not create unwarranted distractions or blockage of visibility as it pertains to traffic circulation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X (Provided the condition of approval is addressed) Does not meet intent B. Separation of different forms of transportation shall be encouraged. This includes pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles in a manner consistent with policies found under Objectives D-1 and D-2 of the Transportation Element. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent C. Open space enhancements as described in Policies found under Objective B-1 of the Open Space and Recreation Element are appropriately addressed. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent • D. The City shall evaluate the effect that any street widening or traffic circulation modification may have upon an existing neighborhood. If it is determined that the widening or modification will be detrimental and result in a degradation of the neighborhood, the project shall not be permitted. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent E. Development of vacant land which is zoned for residential purposes shall be planned in a manner which is consistent with adjacent development regardless of zoning designations. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent F. Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity are appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations; complementary to adjacent land uses; and fulfills remaining land use needs. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent Appendix B Page 2 G. Redevelopment and the development of new land shall result in the provision of a variety of housing types which shall continue to accommodate the diverse makeup of the City's demographic profile, and meet the housing needs identified in the Housing Element. This shall be accomplished through the implementation of policies under Objective B-2 of the Housing Element. Not applicable 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 modified accordingly or denied. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent I. Development shall not be approved if traffic associated with such development would create a new high accident location, or exacerbate an existing situation causing it to become a high accident location, without such development taking actions to remedy the accident situation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent J. Tot lots and recreational areas, serving children from toddler to teens, shall be a feature of all new housing developments as part of the design to accommodate households having a range of ages. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential developments located in the downtown area, and for infill projects having fewer than 25 units. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent 19/19 I 1 ,,. TI.,%=-= 1-).• ",:',..-7..r.Fi SITE SETE:ACM AND DATA: ......... oy I ' SITE.- .ny .. - 1.d • -•-•-.7-1 ,,,,, ,, / i 1 ilk gi") In unx•c+ricuOcsAI ••••(••••••,owl . voaso 'nfe";:itriRig i ,i l'i•it'":;;;;77 ilii":7.."*".74.1.471:glig..,%,14 f... 11,...,... ' ,,•bo....!...•.1 a i mg"7 c".."'".-- . "'" i ' co•0.1,, g fi' i 0 rd,/II a w ,......ow.... I, 7 titteei _•.110 I I 1 i sigtqls-ig i 1 00 :rot' MI I , ..!•:`. 1 . I. @",•••• L...m. V -- Rj.ti91181N1 Alumna AVG •...•:n........a........ 11. 311 !..", 4--kt3,4•7dn' ''''. ,.„.‘„, .''''''"'""'" a • . ii - V,. ;..11.--"Z. III:1: -..-. '47.1=....... t VICINITy mnp" :,... I I .....•,Le ,........,,...............,........- MEOW .i I f , •,..,.,.............------- III 1 I i' ....= yowl orWW.7.1, I il I W MP" .4 11, .........”...........,.......................,....z.z:v...,...., ,-..................,...-............... ..." _Am .4 = l'•I ,-,.; .; TK sem,.'mortar I.La o..7..to,k r^s":."''.""'""'"' dn.' 0 i 1. 1 t...' . ••• • , %' T.11.wrrie Z.:'"""::°"::::ret7.7•7r,•••!riZIZ..".!::i7;11:171ZI„ Lev ApP . i t ,f,,' a!....-•'""""".--e. T ,.. Ili.. .,1,,A-.) 114101.1.1.71161,4,0711.1.14,111m010114. I Alm, I RUA ''41 tiVet•ERNErrodr%TraZio•17.1,1allall N•":•7:71:===:".1:17:M=X:4.717•r illPr .1E t" .41111 ; = 1 '.' ..,, tot.A.•.___,. - mom . Lt I . . I 1., ' OM .4.......-, ,......„,,,,......u.....”...1.........".....c .....o...,r.......,..... .....s.,........4......••4••••••••1. • •21FiffilaFTE"74.4 T.“47'' --.11111 t a I I .i11110111 i Associates z-,,,,..-: ,,.:74,: .:::.... . ,. ..- t.r•ww '' 7 a 4 4 3 4 " 'mow r (=:.- ARCHITECTS ... mr I „ 't:::.1,1;.- ,, , ,I ;.,612= I I_,.• 1 11:111,i . ) I 1 0 ,.,. , .ylf:,,.,L ,,,, . 1 1111111111num 1 , a I 1.11"ONIAM4HL"."71111%.1.611011•KOIllium•ACROuxe. ' gLe•9:ZB ETINFIRWITU"'""''''''' :7•7.4.t.:"" 3::'•::VO: t.,. Tn.rus P1A:N ER,..,So. INIPANILI 1 ...,, , %,01:. . E 1 • 1 3 ' rav,..1?,",z.,1,1zICI V.ZIP,^"..,=' t.••11.ma...4 litre...4 r••••••1•6.•••1 , n... . SUM I '"I AVI b• '''' 1113111.1 .. 1 . ::•,====-...,...-..."---- „,,,,___________,„,„ ...,„ rA,0% " V ' 1101 • ' , Y i I 1 6.01 1 5 I ii I ltd•7"Etil-: I IN , : '49 Of .."" I • g 1 ,1 I mil ..J foiJor , ,.... ._. 0.,il *ff.- . .1...N.1 IINOM.,..r. usuudilla I 1 11111111111111, ', i =II.6 MOO CM WWW111119.411V ROM,. ML"'"=griVtgir•ft=r4iiinx••• .....,-. 1111V51..‘"::•119:11:711,11.1 0 i--I I • , '• ' . 1 15111111P. ti L. I i. N• . : 1 =Di,,i V,4:1 MI le I/ ..- '• ' AC -,.t '- i-Tj'"1--1 'mu - .......,........WAN 10 I. ...n“ • ". ''. Mr I WI 9. f=1:4=0,04,111111.W1Cf9.10,WONG 11,11.1.00....Of WWI.A.•Fat C Tau.lel hew: non 1•11 MOO • W.. or:+3.• . . 1 't 1 • 19. su L.VICIM[1.1.1O.O.O...MR',tostoert, I , .. I 311V. ) n"'. 0111:0;7)7,,j I ...t ". .1.="VoZailtr"''''''''""'''''" ...tror"." ':.:41V: •••••=.• 121 H. , 1 •11 r..,..-:-...- 11..,,e.... Ow It 1 i I I I I I y , Ir.' • - t t .11:--- > ;1 i-' .'' / rf,1W,A I I G I 1 ...:;i41,ctlill 011.z.1.1 I L°._:IN';" ffigii'NAVA MMHG CALCVLATIOKI Ce M 6 il 1 1 I • I ''',.. ww••••41”..s. '1 .•N 51 1 I ' 'L = 711:21......2.1 till 14 IT i.:1,47.-4.1 r-0.1:41 - I,43.11..e,.........,.12007',;:1,711fiali.rfik t....... N ,........_ 1 °. 1...00,901.01•:,°. . .1;•0. '•°•11,_°' Ilofirl rim. i 0 1 vs ft mon I 119 turn 1 13 10 1 • r.....••....0.1.1 U-I A 3 i mow...late , .0. •• J-.--..-,...--...-- ---------- ''''..'.:.' CI - - - - - ' I 1' '1W.Wa•tn't•i a. . . .;1 ff,s_t_ , _ _ _ _,_ ., .0'1 T.L. ..‘ ,..... -- ....,.....44A. •M•1.1.2 a.12.23Eir,iiralin,,,,, .:3aL,:4?_•-,..F,,,,-7,;;;F: 1 _. , 01 ,. l•••••••••••,ww 'Total Shand',It;11••••••J• I ..i LLI<C Z ' 'ff'.211 • ..”......m . ....• (1. I 11.. -- ....•/ =0 17.47.,13: I II .... ,. ,.. , '7 41E1'M ==>1 =I .. .=t-`=:-1.1 , ..... 1 ._,I I r.f:?,N.,R,..,:t1.-.•" 1.,• ... , = 1 ....•fr•-...a. ..,•••."..,...............•••.,.......•,......(4i''' 'T. -----w-- ..;....1 i HIM!UMW --------------- ---------- -i'. ----% ___..1_1111. 1. 4 . ..,,........ , P.. MOdok1.1 9. 1.11.1. 3.1 11./.1 NA. ..2. ........ ....... .“.Li:....±.23.... .........-.......A.. :M.±-,.....1.4 n1:73:17..... .:.:I 4..........0.,..11*44:1::,,.,'?...M...T.o..71............91 a MASTER SITE PLAN (COMPOSITE UTILITY PLAN) F.ii',-',12'-.1'"'"- C''i -"-ii°1-'2-",- '1-4'-'1-.Ldi..7--'"-I.,.:-.77-77:-',:.":,, 3COM 1.•10-11. 1.1.11111aft.1:41'...;V:=0.11111 Or112[5120.011.1010.T., NOM BUILDING DATA. l'egnii-i;u1s7:7;i7,.e 33i . _.••,sparospa 'Vow. nil of trax10.00.1:la W OW IX:TAM SDI POI Cof Mottotltil011:-We v.loo22.01 MI .cta..VP,F,..^,0.7....P"',,'I. , sox.KIWI, W v 0 00101 Rull.o.O.91.11 49 0.22001 AM:EMT.0 SYMBOL ll4END: 1.711.i.7. .1....1?..'44,..07'....FP'...'.... III vtol;71,1/15 loUt.O.r1.007.A. ....411C011 MG: /1.41.11/. ...0......',..'3.11,A1.11/3,11,,,,,•dl.1".'.V.MFI. 1 a two.. • rttraini.ti. 3.'. En comwearr ',I•i•WW'W tea.rwww•.• 137 .1 . 0(.(tOoKOC1.0uol.: Cat...tt G•00•1: V•IONIA inC•T14.44 WrIUSI IVO. 11 I.•1101.11.it....711•4041,1 SIM r:=I....... • WO IMMO Woof= ...Moot,.fora,110 at caner A onV III to a L..of,orry(1.4 9a.I.,poen posoont to that agromp1 o.d.o.of Won,and 02014.1 td nnA,..de,ed Atoll 1.....9 IL 20.04.01 under cm n0 SO 2064.1.661...somb NI tho Clmiet 09 ILI. 43.•WEN 1.....O.O WOW{I LIM y I'.WIN IMMO C..1 UV. Ill mum.:210‘• l= ''''''''''' COUR Of OW nal ftWILLWW Mud.001:0.1 nd I..v Urn 1000,<cunt.on.:as v.Satiat.I.6'NW)of 04 Ul. 1.4341 on ow............... 0...p... .0 11 11./ :lonalth•Or•a10•20,••01.110102. ,),MEETING ROM w WW MO = ow w "WIWI filLUOWW, IDO.12 ••.•'......•V1!!••n!./ ; 1 mar"AC•AlliCA.C1.11 ORAL k.431.1....” rop•Aorcrno.,, EMI......... ,...T2'.... ,,,,,, 11;' '"In =.7=`,`..":0=17,',7=.7.1=. : ..„..,‘...r.z...m...4........, a-L•U MM..COO(NOY[OM,xl1,11.1140.1,311 IC,9101.0A 100[MOM.XII,101 US 4•11.17 CON.ROMA ;..I .....1........1.... A01.1 IOW 1101-020....02.22.0,042.2E 40.1-2..20 CM er DEWY 122.0110.1020 CM,.000....i. • • + -ire • • e S JERRY TURNER & ASSOCIATES H of FLORIDA.INC. R ILaNDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Es LAND PLANNING — - II m FIC •" ENNRONA/EN7AL DESIGN le De I.R0eved • • le aaG :aI I vy T•",'m:'e;IHiØjiJtI ! IIr wa_ 161. r.wa...e�' ®% = II ie Iva n."mnOeKa i�t LE FAMILY•E t ,ioe To be Darner. E — �I,Iilt. l= I I_ I.-li Al I -- Royal PINEAPPLE 1£rIg SEE SHEETL•7 _ ... :•c• v® Glr ar.• GROVE141/1:€€F•'� f00.RESIDENCE a• .e I Allow. 1 s lPLAMNG Li 'r :i. ® 2D a; :ea E LTD. 4 DETAIL L� ]N GIF i"'l,.••�A{ •LL • 1 j $ t YY I I I • 6 ® i,,I ® vw —� J ,�' I d 4 dll €- B LI 0 �� �' • f \l Use Root Barrier•Detail Sheet L^/under G 0 i@, m y.: �' I all tree/palm plantings In N.E.2nd Avenue { k o I m m d'. I '°'� Right or way. p R&: i" ``� V Cii I I I }, r,1 0: c DELRAY BEACH,FL Dt' Y� I ,y, %i �% + III a . "MVO,° AL • V ' I;r l'` I i rI cg LANDSCAPE DATA ffi9I09rh comments N 0 " I AL • 0 IIT I, �I I y e 1 RE ® ert[uoa[umsur[D,r, pC ® v 1S Oretfia __ 1 r q OME RTED c A Ean.,ill.H,la u.nr fr IY zJ i m I %/%/ 4 I� E TOTAL o"°u,..H., Ir„,r fa I Top of Pipe un[nAroavAmw[AAurrDOD[D ,II 49 m 0 i I • • /Ea •2 elev,appraa,!below grade TD•Alms im x•TREES c 0 0 _�e II,— [ ® GIP Iwn Dx na[aw.m 7 TREES A ® I -1! zD IaRnDAnF[I rAD 0[D ICI rFAWliFA laam[u[D,iA C 1 0 ASP L�E I I a GA ,v[wfxr MADD)ADINT kD D 12 1 Ill 1 •iiip I.! ._ AD„[[xr TO AOw[Om[a PROPERTY Oman ,r A d — naiiouiiiiou.o<ui Aura D ill 0,r • 25 - 1 PE II 4 [I aFO[D A[ -GO Q � :ite�������4 TOUR THE PROVIDED 0 Ta[n t a 0® w`A""[][.e HT[wDAsw IN slam Am us�ui uas a OB 1 REWIRED r[A ree,r Am A IMMOIDI.r[DUAEO RID,r /- m € CIF rxumDAau rr0ua0 nra,r p 1 Q ///��Et RMOM PUTT DM Ev T , .= p _ V 'y f""••� o \�+L` 7✓Jy" (�j x,.o[ aN w n TOrF.,K D•.»_O �x0_ t ar ��� I e _ ► c V7 MO TIVEnE�,�,D.r[D •DT m £ 2D IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIk I'I . b9 . ._•�..—•!� r TOTATAL L o, e��.DmO[D a II "n .,nrm vxiZoos ! _ I ,e� �. .. ., —_al 1111/111 °,MM[,r,OH.xD"D RR,,SI r w„K PROVIDED ui=1 a -_ - _. Landscape — N E l[1STS ` Plan ..... IIIAInI IIII' — I 1 I I II € R C) 4 f LP," 561,.1"CAL 91rET wo� v v v v v ® Debora Tern, 014 LA 1101 A. ira 9 JERRY TURNER e & ASSOCIATES 2 of FLORIDA.INC. uU- 1Ju-7 1-,-1 II`-1 k LANDSCAPE ARGHIlEC7URE LAND PLANNING ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN S +- Lr 15 045 N.E.71 at STREET DCA RATON.FLORIDA JJ.O° MI,957-0507 lag �, Q�j _ :; � y,n:1?!!'?! PINEAPPLE b \kkll =,s : GROVE a ,D =¢�':_',°D���, LTD. 1 ® �A�� i81. ie S i.aA.ei'� fli .:: dR. JY A ..... . CF ) I' Io „ I =-_ _ r DELRAY BEACH,FL 7. Ir —I _.--- '-.-: I 7/ZG'D9 WO romlmMf r= I�C !IL"1 El.18'4' ELr22'10'-:- r MIMIC Bottom 3 of Pool 1 I � II�_IICys�a1i t L EL 2'10' —_ ,I Foa T fop r ,Wall — 4-1 L. e II ��, " El �.he al..._ �C Z i 1 I Bottom ,_'./ /T of Plant _a i \Es/ Bott m� ,JAL - ,$ '/ b. OBEL��07_ of Planter �� oo;4 15.2h0Floo , _ A.Sj�. ® NGVD V TIE ABOVE SECTION IS NOT AN EXACT REPRESENTATION ZZ - :+ f C'''P`j,;/' = •DTI DTaco� C OF THE PUNTING PUN AT THE RIGHT AND IS INCLUDED FOR C t1R;.s B1f'/0 Off' :::::::::::- .xc.., wrt i REVIEWCURIFICATION ONLY. 0 V71'.�ot oou� t Bottomla 1••10 11J00009 B DETAILS OF DRAINAGE AND AU.Ft0NTING BED DEPTHS ® ` of Planter .nG[ E 1MLL BE PROVIDED WITHCONSTRDCT10N DOCUMENTS. •;,.-:.:-:•-: EE •: ::- - --. Landscape : :: : :;•::.:::.:: ::; : :•:. Plan 1 : I Second Floor ' "!:iiuf• i Pool Area Detail� `�,1111 � L 6.1009Jp 5634.1 I 8 ���-.L J.- -1 G.I R✓r - Tilton BerrnudaGraar ,/C'/,1 j1L•J, ® MP) Utor Turner of 4 + JIB v m ©v ® v v p v p �ryy� p JERRY TURNER p p & ASSOCIATES Al, • �, I, 135'. ..'• ® _A1� r FLORIDA,INC. • Q�_V?•� j"1J<�,'O'O:�'g10UtwySS're•�a�,G;,;}ylgi►.'•• �Crb',DypSt(��,•0.0•��, LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE i ob 4ac obo'uoo<roo¢--'t?7�v 4itlTk� '",77 000 ®�� ' ��o_...� � OOb E.N,• G 4 LAND PLANNING F, ® t,��%''A�r�S (V V�)I�i• ` r b•a • ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN i22 III ?row ot _`� •t, O.00.C.O.O v OoO� n v El I4 -1�a K1T I .en00016)ou n Illok t mzra bt,,,r,,� r�, IIM MN .. PINEAPPLE +:��'t%`y"i, I'' I GROVE m ;�,.,� LTD. e ,.,.,,.,.' ;.,. __ I a - MY R$00%,,`,..fiiirreik L--1 fli [ b zpa I . „' t.4, 7, •IEW li 1111. 1 �O ®® zz L---I 411 ea' • ® I DELRAY BEACH,FL �1 , , ,� "' I I •616/09 7R9N3 staff comments 0 m fall Imo' ED h. NB v 0 p p 1 ] fi ! 8 Iiii i 41id v p ¢ PLANT LIST KEY SCIENTIFIC NAME COMMON NAME CITY HT SP REMARKS ANN Annual Flowers Annuals 32 6" E CLE Clerodendrum quadriloculere'Slat Clerodendrum 2 8' 4'tree form CN Cocos nudfera'Green Mayalan' Coconut Palm 4 8'gw Green LANDSCAPE DATA • CRI Crinum agusNm'Queen Emma' Purple Crinum L5y 10 36" 30" mnno.LANDSCAPE o.ra{Ec EUP Chamaerops humilu European Fan Palm 2 36" 24' Multi bunk FAK Tdpsecumfloddane Dwarf Fakohetchee Grass 9 18' 12" Tar am"�`c"o^ em u. ,c FP Forestena meareaata Florida Privet 59 30" 24" µi[.ho t'ST.'anr"' .ua ar s..m c.rac°-mr GAR Gardenia Augusta Gardenia 1 4' 3' rn..a.,)worr um.,.. b GL Bunera simaruba Gumbo Limbo 2 12' 6' 1014 TREIS Ara 10iIt MIS nacOVIDED 4 TPEEIDT DT C GT Cordia sebestena Geiger Tree 1 8' 4' WIVE m¢i rro PROVIDED sa TAM Ma DM o.rc w. t[E HEL He9oonia psinacorum'Ledy DX Heloconia 2 4' 30" °N 1".10 1nanoo3 HIB Hibiscus'Seminole Pink' Hibiscus Tree 3 6' 3'tree form Y HL Hymenocallis latifolia Spider UN 6 24' 1B" e IXO Dora'Nora Grant' Note Grant Nora3 24" 18" Landscape KT Urines monisli Key Thatch Palm 5 7' 5'el min. PED Ptychosperma elegane Alexander Palm 3 10'gw Double trunk Plan ROB Phoenix roebelenli Pigmy Date Palm 5 6' 3' triple trunk DV Overcus Virginia Live Oak 2 12' 6' 3"cal L SN Strelitzla nicolai White Bird of Paradise 2 6' 4' Y VAR Schemers arbodcola Trinette' Tdnette 115 24" 18" Single Family VIB Vibumumsuspensum Viburnum 56 30" 124" Residence Detail e ZAM Zemia Iloridana CoonSe 9 12" 18" • yp 6-10A94p 56�1xo� 7Ki 2 v o T r of 4 nJ1 o or n o 0 0 0 �p o Y � r. �.�w� ----Mil A R�— ID BUILDING ELEVATION NOTES: ;:$----,::ram IA m��- IIIII � �/ 1 . V 1 �� � 1� 1---.4 OM : i°'"' I ���I KII $ 1 t• _ II �� �� �� m. ® ® Of MUM., r 'DR ,.- .�■ MM Wt.,u4P.n.i.w..NAA, e' I I !! i! !! i� ® ® , _ ® ® 19 Ill 2 ID] aro a D�.m,�,.^tR.N . _ i'..=a T R,w�„ Iglingir - o � i11111111�� �►11 !i I1E11 10111"'1111111 ---�,M..,� n"0 'at —$ I ARCHITECTS 0 0 CI m � l `0 0 0 n m 0 0 0 0 0 I PLANNERS T:. -14 �rr,R,I,;,�..I,,. I.•A11 IN.It„III OEAST ELEVATION SCALE:I/16'•I D• ////A !///////� // / / // f!///////%I %///I/%!AX ,%/ TRANSPARENT CUSSED WALL AREA 176t1 / 7 �/ /// ' C '/ / �/ Q SOLID WALL AREA NA., /�� / - �. ice %//1_ • CI GROUND FLOORH TRANSPARENCY DIAGRAM-EAST ELEVATION J L`U o v VVQ Y 0 7{3 .. 0 U 0 CC = m p Ii MATERIAL LEGEND: w W �o --��R ,- T / �..,_�• }--- " .., noon,„IRLD its -a. �`o w _11 m; o W,on1,IRLD .. I - M n n M tlia ® Ill :..,,. 0 V3.,R,T,RIL I �+ a. m am MI am ® 11111 N:.�:W; �„ 112 a�� z I I f--➢ Hill ,; L.T�4n ' lilf PM , a 1I �. N. �. �. I A rr.R LV:T oOo, T .,,�.�� bs� .• L ► f I a NilRu+iNRN T �I . . ppp i ,{ ' + 1 / - ► a;, .e. a , nw; `r 1.4 1111E MA •.. , ..,,, j l .,....... o N.<N,o. i. lmj .W. LRn,.N,.D�m,.TLR ID ND O SOUTH ELEVATION /,+\ _ SCALE:I/16'.I'0' KEY PLAN C!I N .. ..'l7 Z a 2,z,, r7I/u/,,.„02,,,,„,///21ZZA'////o7//7 /• ' MI IRANSPARENI GLASSED WALL AREA 116t1 p7 J ///7.jjA j/ SDLID WALL AREA NAtI O W _ 111//////...... N f.. GROUND FLOOR TRANSPARENCY DIAGRAM-SOUTH ELEVATION // '119Q A03 1 7fK . ••••• .. -.. . !I n CI . n : I• S. BUILDING ELEVATION NOTES: 'KJ' f"" r •ll StP•frIrl,•4./15.1•AS 0.1,..141 ... ...1-4',: - ..... 1"-- — .4--2:7:7— "I-----r -2'--I---4V.r—....,•.,. wn..•••••<0111..1.1111••••11. --9rH 1/-1{3- 1— ill. RI flq41 1:1 Fl l' " ""U 0 11, ,.., -., ,.•. -4---4 --. I-• ;:f1÷7,, - PrdrClIC•C•In ig..,Tom trT SlaNIN& ! • El [1] 0 Lig] 111=. R" 'Ail MR it I Eci a , rFwG%°°1 ...— -4,--i- !wow... sow1--- 1-4--,— 0 ; ;i JD LO 0 I t 0 III 11_ , I'd-fr, m - ----sei— 0., _Egg;:119111 • - ---. • . - : 1 I lieti 1--- -,, I Itile !:.;:;'.:), .:.....;,14-,..,.. .,,,,ve .: .:.: in.--.; ,ii,.;, ,.,:.II.:.: VIVII6,V Mill I' ill ASSOClikS .;i-,A;;, ,,. r-,;•'50:-'''... :t;iii,'ft' se-04,•;.:- .••••::::8'-..;.:. '015' .'''.'.,..1'.'"'I ( \43 \ .1 -1. -.• CII II El IC CI CI CI CI \--0 01 \-ED CI CI L-IU ARCHITECTS PLANNERS .•,.,: • CD WEST ELEVATION SCALE:1/IS.1,0" • C) l' _J U-I >0w MATERIAL LEGEND: Vr = y Ce Or,a :el EI •oo•,LI 0 0 ,..E ',V 7 i El 1411004111.111/fra Ll..1 ...1 9, U.I x E5m 0 4.0,1r MVO ...•••..7 - I _-11111111-wer MIA Illr a ri - '4...- „.. 0 1.40,[0 SMEll Cl.. r;,.,.: 444..,,,, ._,IIIIIIIIMIIIIMIIIIIIIIIIIIIMIIMIII1111/1111111111 - -+ -- __;. ;.z.;,,r„. El VIVO r.r,rA•n Cl- , ri, Al•••••••1 arrror...Kt NM,. L ,;,..._j < , 1 El I El] I En I III 8 .111..1.1..••••11C1.1.1&Mir Z 4 . . , Fil Cl.. • '... ''' ' T 4.' r 1111MIM. II..- ---t 8 WM.M.P. 8 M.41,101 : • •'••• , Ili i I a MILIMINMINIMINIMINIMINIMMINI ----1.4/..r•r•--',4—.w„ 1011,1MOMIPIIMPInin=111411 .1111 .IM[7- • I ............4 - • • • — -4•••! ..r.r.. 0 ......ow, l''I a --- u LI •"" 8 IFFI•I frf•• El KM.Moll•POO,M41401 101/11.1, -4 . _1 •,..• ...v.. „r•••=.1••=.%...... 0 NORTH ELEVATION KEY PLAN ..- •..... SCALE:1/16"•1,0" Z ... Cl rrnrm, 0,3 4/12 0:=P3 ... ... ii,...,,....," .:e,Lil,.., 1,. .L,7.,1,./ ...j47° A03.2 / = • 77) . :•• . . . .. r 1 ,g !; 0-, 21 , a Donal noon -1 I 1 I 1 .rEEIA . _,..„,..., ____ ,..--,--- .,.., _j_rimuolprir_..,..otm pc,. mm.oc,.... __....1. .,,,. - .::,„, MATERIAL LEGEND: MEP'•,E i. ...- -4--.:.: 1- 1-4.1 ' '' '1 '4: II ii ti ii VIII 112111111111 , El 11711Mr0 MSC° CO ,,.. i_kra ____a_mimirs iologion mom so 1 ...._1_ ,.„, El '''''''''''. 4a•P I ---r-----=:-7----1----s . li.Kt \ -1 , 3 srottosnxto tP...44fr a. + .. 4 1 - i_.+,1 v+ _ . : imitivErimillikliiii iiin mir• ...... mow so_so oximo.TAL mit All _.0.. ........._ ID &liClillt:S.i o o o o o m a o 1 I — - I -^ 3 AIIM.4 ARCHITECTS PLANNERS .,-. 3 .4,I Mir% 3 ma".nrrurt ,..,,„ 0 WEST ELEVATION 0 •SOUTH ELEVATION 3 11.1.0,ICTM. 3 NITA 001. SCALE:1/16'•1 CC SCALE:VW•i'Lr • 0 R il 11 vil 1-- ..., A .g . . ro N a . . a . . . ,t 0 0 0 a 0 I. I.J.J I I > •-•"- -:.----T-.--=----1-311=1 -. - -iiiFillilifliiiiiiiiiiiil—WIC ,,,-. 14--::::::-:.:::mai--- --giumENEEM _____, , 0 tni 5 .„.;__4_:,,. __i_.16 .......r.a.r ,•/.....11.....1 1.1100.11 ,........1.1.01.• .4,......„ - - _ .I.4A„,... 1 A .---÷-44 -- ' n"." .....". ."" •- 4=1-1----'':, -- CD a =2 I irMintinliWITAINI B o L.I.J X ,.., _,__ ._4,,,,_,,,.. 1_ ail ill u il iTri•misomArTI ,_q .,,,_444,„ - u+--1- ,,, L_ L_ . III_I I I IL. I ' L.._ 1 a III II ti II II it 811.1111h:fig iiiIi III II II it i 'i : '''; ill 03 II II I : ' , r_____ a. '=4"----1-.:2--- -- 1Fomm-- --NomiWI j-1•- --- ,..... ...;?,74. --LT-----• _HI_MO__ •_ _I____4,1,÷_..,...... - . — =I CL ,ThNIM Minn - •r-,,,- --- --- ---- I ,.-.'...:-,1-h,-;', egeenisussinassainsainvassausso a , ' Urimilinta : 1'.111.4.4-,;:' R11 gl Hill!!14.31 If 111,1 ii ':'4''g In. VI ill : l'i,'LvIntasi,., .1 01.,.9 LI.1 0 ,..!:1 I 1 P.i'..,"wesokeu '41'' _gni • -.- .- KT moo r _ _1_21LL2.—.,...:41,:•===..i::-.....r.w.„-•0:::4'0realalts.: I'd 0..0 0 0 0 0 0 I m cm a a a ,r.... n..• 4 0 EAST ELEVATION 0 NORTH ELEVATION SCALE:Mr-r4r SCALE:tile•r cr I BUILDING ELEVATION NOTES: .......... 2 Crig KY (=DU, ••• EDU/ 7--) 1 / ' c° A03.3 -21 •It-4 .-.,....-i-1...7-714/// az i ,;:4•,-...,-- /.4,/z,',•v ,,,(4.-,/ /c---' __1 • . • . ' •,,... ., • mummro; - mm m ro a an a m ro .;...... . .1, • • • (a-irlitilt4Olkilitliffib', liiiiiiairtiitglii#H#H4l"41iiiiiiitiOiritiiiIihir ' ",iiitilifilifilliddikailigill'i,____ ero• "r.:1.?tigliklittilithiVihinhtffighiNfirkidditigiiiibilAighiltiglifiiktli•••---- 4 ...... '' lillriWri iffirhIli ir.inirMIN.,. IiiiMB ; i =efetitiftrfplytifpfillyttrill MEM 11 El mi nil...5.=.=.=0 '4.7 Aaili,VRAINIO....1...• '•• • ....:=....= •0, ! , .quilmil--47-- a...,I , OP:!,'°.....,.... . it,..1,0,p,,,t..intr,,,,igt.fo,;AT Ar• 1111.0111111111111111 . • , ,,,Iduma,,q„Nraul„,1,.,pir„rt It,,,A,ig,.. 11111111111111 I III 1 I III I 11111111111111111 11111 1 I II 1,yfrievirarn4 ..,• g100°:004° ihn_ignIfillnillgriki1141711;0411 WI Er--' 1'MITI'TV;•11'I 13.'11.'?,,'1',11 Al 1'1 S'Z,:.,,, 111 rom. In . ICI .1 1 p . 4 II 4 - .i, . 11°S.:igt =-4-- 111 ,Il IIIII '0 i-El- 11111 = .1 it vi-,. IE-5111[1.41 111[1111:1 ti, _ . , - c 11, , . a a ci c u a a El a a ID •••••., •••• El II a El .::, .. ARCI-11TECTS PLANNERS 0 WEST ELEVATION 0 NORTH ELEVATION SCALE:Mr•V.Cr SCALE:1 nr•1,0' 01 a a 11:1 ..,, c, - , a a a a a a a irilao 1 i- 49.174:1011411'111101#1117070.4414.1PION....itigr.h74.116.iIiIirti44 -1 urielitAggVham@tt.4„. ...1-4.64.,.1.,.,:„4:4.1.1.,,,,dit thik,darladikr,:r.t.....4,1, qv •1;''11,...kmbil.,,M ,s,-;,,,,.,. w 1 „ .Filif.11. n 1."—itivirirgritigervi,o, , 0,-,..,,:.,,..,. , • t i.„„,„ (fIg ,rfortopprerepanfl.....7 , +.;.,,,,,..,.„ t, .Y4,..itt:li,ged • '.• ..w...i.i.:1..r...."A"r..t- , = - _ — rAr'' 0 0 >.. 6,-- mm 1.,.6 1..• UJ x = 1 lill .. .. v." — = MI ii i liii NI VI inn —1 — d CI- ' ...2,,,,,. ,.r,,,,,.., .,.,,..,,, ,..t. _., ,,.,, .._ ,..ko .. .._, - n „,,..•...„, . .. -,- ,. . . .. . . .. a a a a a , a 1.1.1 Z 0 EAST ELEVATION 0 SOUTH ELEVATION CI-- SCALE:Mir•l'.0- SCALE:1/11'•1.4r MATERIAL LEGEND: pflcflr,rm,•r,Th'trans Ei ;..-0,5;.,,o 1 I I 6 li ft, 4 3 V.4111.011, id& 4 :..._ ....:...7.:, 15 ••;;;,..• KEY PLAN s C.3 w Eliormr.wr rrYnnt,p.m C=) U 2 8 cp ° A03.4 ---.61pi.>" ''e•/ e* • — II Q — N.W. 3RD ST. N.E. 3RD ST. N.E. 3RD ST. - J I III I I? 1W_J1 _�,_1 - Li CITY 0 of ATTORNEY ? 1.4. �� I. Li -BUILDING NWz Z MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.DR. N.E. 2ND ST. .• c } z a CN W 3 1- Z 1— tr a in i z W Q z CITY > CC a CC HALL W o Q z tai W Li ,_. r N.W. 1ST ST. N.E. 1ST ST. / ' o Z COMMUNITY O CENTER w w = - Z z z .: • V) TENNIS OLD _ STADIUM I OL Li J SQUARE I I z = l z _ T ATLANTIC AVENUE I SOUTH I I Z COUNTY COURT > > > > ; >' HOUSE a a a ¢ Q a vi Z O z l--in N N 1 `r > Z -JQ S.W. 1ST ST. — S.E. 1ST ST. —,_-- — —' FIDELITY FEDERAL 1_ Vi 1' BANK b.; w w id tf) vi — — W Vi c?��" - —N_ SUBJECT PROPERTY PINEAPPLE GROVE LTD0 o` - , PLANNING AND ZONING Mali r;94Y.8�Q' DEPARTMENT LOCATION MAP -- DIGITAL BASE MAP SYSTEM -- MAP REF: S:\Planning & Zoning\DBMS\File—Cab\Z—LM 500-1000\LM8B9_Pineopple Grove LTD