The URL can be used to link to this page

HPB 02-20-08 ��. AGENDA HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEETING qy e CITY OF DELRAY BEACH Meeting Date: Wednesday, February 20, 2008 Time: 6:00 P.M. Meeting Type: Regular Meeting Location: City Commission Chambers, City Hall The City shall furnish appropriate auxiliary aids and services where necessary to afford an individual with a disability an equal opportunity to participate in and enjoy the benefits of a service, program, or activity conducted by the City. Please contact Doug 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. CERTIFICATES OF APPROPRIATENESS A. 418 NE 2"d Avenue, Del-Ida Park Historic District, Gordon Bartlett, Property Owner Consideration of a Certificate of Appropriateness (2008-080) associated with replacement windows and the installation of a fence at a non-contributing property. B. 211 NW 1st Street, West Settlers Historic District, Bryce Newell, Property Owner Consideration of a Certificate of Appropriateness (2008-090-COA) associated with the demolition of a non-contributing structure and construction of a new garage. C. Pineapple Grove Limited, Louis Carbone, Applicant The project is located on the north side of NE 15t Street between Pineapple Grove Way and NE 15t Avenue. Consideration of the extension of the Certificate of Appropriateness (2004-231-COA) and Class V site plan, landscape plan, and architectural elevations associated with the construction of a mixed-use. project that contains 8 townhouses, 2 duplexes, and a three-story 5,764 square foot office building along the west side of the alley; construction of a mixed-use building along the east side of the alley that contains 4,868 square feet of restaurant floor area, 5,385 square feet of retail floor area, and 30 condominium dwelling units along the east side of the alley. III. REPORTS AND COMMENTS • Public Comments • Reports from Historic District Representatives • Board Members • Staff IV. ADJOURN 4Vcrre4ii A dam ' Warren Adams Posted On: February 12, 2008 r v HISTORIC.PRESERVATION BOARD MEMORANDUM STAFF REPORT Property Owner: Gordon Bartlett Project Location: 418 NE 2"d Avenue, Del-Ida Park Historic District HPB Meeting Date: February 20, 2008 COA: 2008-080 ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The item before the Board is approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness for replacement windows and the installation of a fence on a non-contributing structure at 418 NE 2"' Avenue, Del-Ida Park Historic District, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(H). BACKGROUND/PROJECT DESCRIPTION The project was before the Board at its previous meeting on February 7, 2008. At that meeting, the Board required answers to a number of questions; however, the applicant was not in attendance to provide answers. The Board therefore continued the application with the following direction: 1) That proof is provided that the windows are impact resistant or that suitable hurricane protection is installed. 2) That a plan of the building showing the location of the new windows and the location of the existing original windows is provided. - 3) That photographs of all elevations are provided. 4) That no future work is to be undertaken on the structure without first obtaining the required approval of the HPB or Staff. A letter has been sent to the applicant detailing the Board's direction and advising that the applicant is strongly recommended to attend the meeting to answer the Board's questions. No additional materials have been submitted to the COA file and application, therefore, the previous staff report from the last meeting is attached for Board reference. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Continue with direction. B. Move approval of 2008-080-COA for 418 NE 2' Avenue, Del-Ida Park Historic District by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in Section 4.5.1(E)(4) and (E)(8)(g) of 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 proof is provided that the windows are impact resistant or that suitable hurricane protection is installed. 2) That a plan of the building showing the location of the new windows and the location of the existing original windows is provided. A 418 NE 2"'Avenue:2008-080-COA HPB Meeting February 20, 2008 Page 2 of 2 3) That photographs of all elevations are provided. 4) That no future work is to be undertaken on the structure without first obtaining the required approval of the HPB or Staff. C. Move denial of 2008-080-COA for 418 NE 2"d Avenue, Del-Ida Park Historic District by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not meet criteria set forth in Section 4.5.1(E)(4) and (E)(8)(g) of the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. (Motion to be phrased in the affirmative. See above) RECOMMENDATION ' At the Board's discretion Report Prepared by: Warren Adams Attachments: • February 7, 2008 Staff Report with attachments S. r DEFRAY BEACH DEDtAY SUCH HISTORIC PRESERVATION ;BOARD liii► MEMORANDUM STAFF REPORT �II� Property Owner: Gordon Bartlett Project Location: 418 NE 2"d Avenue, Del-Ida Park Historic District HPB Meeting Date: February 7, 2008 COA: 2008-080 `ITEM BEFORE THE;BOARD The item before the Board is approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness for replacement windows and the installation of a fence on a non-contributing structure at 418 NE 2nd Avenue, Del-Ida Park Historic District, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.6(H). BACKGROUND/PROJECT DESCRIPTION The subject property consists of Del Ida Park Lt 15 Blk 6 (Del Ida Park Historic District) and is located on the southwest corner of NE 2"d Avenue and NE 5t Street. The property contains a non- contributing structure built in 1947. In June, 2004, a Certificate of Appropriateness application was submitted for the construction of a 3,780 sq. It, two-story, traditional Florida style duplex; however, it appears that the application was never presented to the Board and the project was not carried out. The current proposal involves the installation of aluminum-frame single-hung sash windows and.a wooden fence. The windows and fence have been installed and the applicant is now before the Board under the direction of Code Enforcement. d „ f ANALYSIS LDR Section 4.5.1(E)(4), (E)(8)(c), and (E)(8)(g) "Development Standards" provides guidelines in evaluating Certificates of Appropriateness for the alteration or addition of exterior architectural features. The applicable standards are as follows: The Board Shall Consider: (E)(4) A historic site, or building, structure, site, improvement, or appurtenance within a historic district shall be altered, restored, preserved, repaired, relocated, demolished, or otherwise changed in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, as amended from time to time. (E)(8) All improvements to buildings, structures, and appurtenances shall be visually compatible. Visual compatibility shall be determined in terms of the following criteria: (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 the prevailing historic architectural styles within the district. The relationship of the width of windows and doors to the height of windows and doors among buildings within the district shall be visually compatible. 418 NE 2' Avenue:2008..080-COP HPB Meeting February 7,2008 , Page 2 of 3 (g) Relationship of Materials, Texture, and Color: The relationship of materials, texture, and color of the facade of a building shall be visually compatible with the predominant materials used in the historic sites, buildings, and structures within a historic district. The following is suggested by the Delray Beach Design Guidelines regarding: Retain distinctive windows which feature a sash, muntins, glazing, sills, heads, hood molds, paneled, or decorative doors jambs and moldings and shutters and blinds. Changing the historic appearance through inappropriate design materials or adding a finish or color that changes the sash, depth of reveal, the reflectivity, or the appearance of the frame should be avoided. Replacing viable windows rather than maintaining the original should be avoided. The Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation suggest the following: The historic character of a property shall be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property shall be avoided. Deteriorated historic features shall be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color,,texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Analysis Windows Repairing the existing awning windows or replacing them with an identical design would be the most appropriate methods for repairing this building according to the LDRs, the Delray Beach Design Guidelines and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. The applicant has, however, replaced a number of the original aluminum-frame awning windows with aluminum- frame, single hung windows. This work was undertaken without the submission of a COA application or building permit application. The applicant has been directed by Code Enforcement to submit a COA and appear before the HPB. The applicant has explained that when he purchased the property, it had been vacant for 18 months and a number of windows were missing and boarded up. To secure and protect the structure, the applicant installed the new aluminum-frame windows only where windows were missing. He did not remove any of the original awning windows. For record purposes, a sketch of the footprint of the dwelling should be prepared by the owner indicating windows that have been replaced and those that are original. Fence The new six foot (6') high wooden fence has been installed along the southern property boundary. Again, this work was completed without the submission of a COA or building permit application. The style of fence and material is compatible with the existing structure. 418 NE 2"i Avenue:2008-080-COP HPB Meeting February 7,2008 Page 3 of 3 ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS` A. Continue with direction. B. Move approval of 2008-080-COA for 418 NE 2' Avenue, Del-Ida Park Historic District by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and meets criteria set forth in Section 4.5.1(E)(4) and (E)(8)(c) and (g) of the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, with consideration that the windows already replaced be documented. C. Move denial of 2008-080-COA for 418 NE 2' Avenue, Del-Ida Park Historic District by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and does not meet criteria set forth in Section 4.5.1(E)(4) and (E)(8)(c) and (g) of the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. (Motion to be phrased in the affirmative. See above) ` RECOMMENDATION, At the Board's discretion Report Prepared by:Warren Adams Attachments: • Photographs ti X • - - �' ' • Y 4 -ram {_ '_7 _ > { .1 �'r•;.:,.tea, •k s .zjr � R ) i Wf i �'.. � 4��GGxL[Ye3c�Gdstr at I•e 4yg. ��..�e .ram "'L v� y. Se rye..•'tcvia.. �g�. �,ea+�q .. ,ar }. „� .{f t .'" •C d1S�' f� i h��b c. } � } 'Sr ¢ ,- .p4 .sue f.+ ryi. # ,a '^sr�-•ar' /�_ r 1 -9 `' ai f,y,�,,ry,"�.r6�C,f•. .x�,�,R :..a� ..i> �,: 0 a .� L:F:-: j ic a k ti.,�_� r �e..�.-.s u:.�vv-�=t-�---��,£�,e,..„y�. _ .�� tG7 t .. .'e�.�`-•----a'rz t �f - P i t. AYct[2 .!.m"aOaRs.c I t > J f µ. I4�v�+w'� •t`d�"y+ �`f �s.� �,z .. .. °.,x ., -.....}.r:,�.. ,r i•€•..,vv F :}'l.Y"uc _it't'. . pus nr-.':'�.c i r,.�..x x. +•.rt*F;k .v. 0 .Yx t n J iT .0 a � S xb-Yc s c Y,'�'?S,� .?9x r �'`�Tx��c' aft•,"' s 2 r_ I, , - . '-1>"c i�k� t�4��°-'�YN`'_''�b�SY+� � _go-_' �4.:.- •_:}y,.� M Y�� i �,� � ��-� '�a � t'r i ��`: k`_��^' ' Zt ' - — - - - --- ; : L :: - - rI I ' - - I- -v - ...- 2 -- . . -... A r HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEMORANDUM STAFF REPORT Property Owner: Bryce Newell Project Location: 211 NW 1st Street, West Settlers Historic District HPB Meeting Date: February 20, 2008 COA: 2008-090 ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The item before the Board is the consideration of a Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) associated with the demolition of a non-contributing structure and construction of a new garage located at 211 NW 1st Street, West Settlers Historic District, pursuant to Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 2.4.6(H). BACKGROUND The subject property consists of Lot 8, Block 43, Town of Delray, and is located on the northeast corner of NW 1st Street and NW 3`d Avenue within the West Settlers Historic District. The property contains a concrete block and stucco ranch-style, non-contributing structure built in 1959. 'A detached garage, constructed in 1983, is located to the rear of the property. A permit was recently issued to re-roof the structure with asphalt shingles. A request to."rebuild" the west and north walls of the garage has been approved administratively. The walls were severely damaged in the 2005 hurricane season. - - At its meeting of December 6, 2007, the Board approved the installation of impact rated, 6/6, single hung windows with defined (not flat) muntins throughout both the principal and detached structures. The COA application before the Board is for the demolition of the existing two-car garage and for construction of a new two-car garage. PROJECT DESCRIPTION' Demolition The existing 790 square foot two-car garage is a non-contributing structure that is located to the rear of the house. It was constructed in 1983 of wood frame and stucco construction. The garage.is in extremely poor condition and may be unsafe. Recently, the owners have had problemswith homeless people and drug addicts using the structure. The owners have stated that the police have advised them to remove the garage. New Construction The proposed two-car garage is to the rear of the house and is of concrete block and stucco construction, painted white with a pitched roof of tan-colored asphalt shingles. The construction and color will match the existing house. The windows will be aluminum framed with impact glass and will match those previously approved for the house. Internally, the 888 square foot garage will contain parking for two cars and a separate workshop to the rear. 211 NW 1``Street, 2008-090-COA HPB Meeting February 20,2008 Page 2 of 5 ANALYSIS Demolition LDR Section 4.5.1(G), Unsafe Buildings, states the following: In the event the Chief Building Official determines that any structure within a designated historic site or district is unsafe pursuant to the applicable Code of Ordinances, the Chief Building Official will immediately notify the Board of his findings. Where appropriate and in accordance with applicable ordinances, the Chief Building Official will attempt to have the structure repaired rather than demolished, and will take into consideration any comments and recommendations by the Board. However, the provisions contained within division (A) of this section shall not apply to the Chief Building Official's declaration that a building is unsafe, nor will the Chief Building Official be precluded from taking whatever steps, as may be required by applicable ordinances to protect the public health and safety of the community. The Board may also endeavor to negotiate with the owner and interested parties, provided such actions do not interfere with procedures in the applicable ordinances. As referenced above, LDR Section 4.5.1 (A), General, states the following: In recognition of findings as set forth in the original enactment of Ordinance 13-87, passed March 10, 1987; this Section is created in order to provide for the identification, preservation, protection, enhancement, perpetuation, and the use of districts, archeological sites, buildings, structures, improvements,`and appurtenances that are reminders of past eras, events, and persons important in local, state, and national history; that provide significant examples of architectural styles of the past; that are unique and irreplaceable assets to the City and its neighborhoods; or that provide this and future generations with examples of the physical surroundings in which past generations lived; and other purposes. The applicant has been advised to contact the Chief Building Official as the garage appears to be in an extremely poor and unsafe condition. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.5.1(F)(1), the HPB shall consider the following guidelines in evaluating Certificate of Appropriateness applications for the demolition of historic buildings or structures within designated historic districts: a) Whether the structure is of such interest or quality that it would reasonably fulfill`the criteria for designation for listing in the National Register. The garage was constructed in 1983. It does not fulfill the criteria for National Register listing. b) Whether the structure is of such design, craftsmanship, or material that it could be reproduced only with great difficulty or economically nonviable expense. The garage is of wood frame and stucco construction and is of a very common design that could easily be created at viable expense. The applicant is proposing the construction of a new garage. c) Whether the structure is one of the last remaining examples of its kind in the designated historic district within the city. There are many surviving examples of this style of garage within the City of Delray Beach. d) Whether there are definite plans for immediate reuse of the property if the proposed demolition is carried out, and what effect those plans will have on the character of the surrounding area. 211 NW 1`'`Street,2008-090-COA HPB Meeting February 20,2008 Page 3 of 5 The applicant has submitted plans for a new concrete block and stucco garage. The proposed new garage will have a positive impact on the character of the surrounding area as the existing garage is extremely unsightly and appears to be in a dangerous condition. e) Whether retaining the structure would promote the general welfare of the city by providing an opportunity to study local history, architecture, and design, or by developing an understanding of the importance and value of a particular culture and heritage. Retaining the existing garage would not promote the general welfare of the city. The existing garage is constructed of common materials to a common design and does not provide an opportunity for study or to develop an understanding of a particular culture or heritage. The demolition of a historic structure is a great loss to the community as well as the city; however, the existing garage was constructed in 1983 and is not considered historic. If the West Settlers Historic District was to be surveyed within the next few years, the garage would not be considered a contributing structure. The garage is currently in very poor condition and has a negative impact on the existing house and adjacent properties. Recently, the owners have had problems with homeless people and drug addicts using the garage. The owners stated that the police have advised them to have the garage removed. Based upon the above, positive findings can be made with regard to the application for demolition of the garage. New Construction LDR Section 4.3.4(K) Required Provided Building Height (max.) 35' 11' 6" Building Setbacks (min.) - Front 25' N/A Side Street (south) 15' 22.33' Side Interior (north) 7.5' 16.28' Rear 10' 10.09' LDR Section4.4.3(H)(1) The height of accessory structures shall not exceed the height of the associated principal structure. The proposed garage does not exceed the height of the principal structure. LDR Section 4.5i(E)(4), E(7) and (E)(8) "Development Standards" provides guidelines in evaluating Certificates of Appropriateness for the alteration or addition of exterior architectural features.The guidelines are as follows: The Board Shall Consider: (E)(4) A historic site, or building, structure, site improvement, or appurtenance within a historic district shall be altered, restored, preserved, repaired, relocated, demolished; or otherwise changed in accordance with the Secretary of Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation, as amended from time to time. 211 NW 1"Street, 2008-090-COA HPB Meeting February 20,2008 Page 4 of 5 (E)(7) The construction of new buildings or structures, or the relocation, alteration, reconstruction, or major repair or maintenance of a non-contributing building or structure within a designated historic district shall meet the same compatibility standards as any material change in the exterior appearance of an existing non-contributing building. Any material change in the exterior appearance if any existing non-contributing building, structure, or appurtenance in a designated historic district shall be generally compatible with the form, proportion, mass, configuration, building material, texture, color, and location of historic buildings, structures, or sites adjoining or reasonably approximate to the non-contributing building, structure, or site. The proposed new garage is compatible with the existing house and the West Settlers Historic District in terms of form, proportion, mass, configuration, building material, texture, color, and location. (E)(8) All improvement to buildings, structures, and appurtenances within a designated historic district shall be visually compatible. With respect to this application, visual compatibility shall be determined in terms of:: (a) height„ (c) proportion of openings (windows and doors), (d) rhythm of solids to voids: front facades, (e) rhythm of buildings on streets,, (g) consistency in relation to materials, texture, color, (h) roof shapes, (I) scale of+a building, and(k) directional expression of a front elevation. The proposed new garage is visually compatible in terms of height (as shown in the above matrix), proportion of openings, rhythm of solids to voids, rhythm of buildings on streets, consistency in relation to materials, texture, color, roof shape, scale, and directional expression of the front elevation. The Secretary of the Interior Standards for Rehabilitation recommends that: New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction shall not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and shall be compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment. (Standard#9) The proposed new construction is compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the existing residence. New additions and adjacent or related new construction shall be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired. (Standard#10) The garage could easily be removed in the future without any adverse effect on the existing residence. The Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines recommend the following with respect to new construction: • The relationship of new construction adjacent to significant historic resources can either enhance or detract from the historic setting of the district. The new garage will enhance the historic setting of the district. • All new construction should compliment the historic architecture of the district. New construction should not create a false sense of historical development by utilizing conjectural features of stylistic elements taken from other buildings. The new construction will compliment the existing historic architecture of the district and does not create a false sense of historical development. 211 NW 1't Street, 2008-090-COA HPB Meeting February 20,2008 Page 5 of 5 • The height of any new building should be similar to those of other buildings along the streetscape. The height of the new garage is similar to other buildings along the streetscape. • Materials should be compatible in quality, color, texture, finish and dimension to those commonly found in the historic district. The materials are compatible in quality, color, texture, finish and dimension to those commonly found in the historic district. • The character of the massing should be compatible with the surrounding buildings. The character of the massing is compatible with the surrounding buildings. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Continue with direction. B. Move approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness for 211 NW 1St Street, West Settlers 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 Section 4.5.1 of the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. C. Deny approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness for 211 NW 1st Street, West Settlers 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 Section 4.5.1 of the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. (Motion to be phrased in the affirmative. See above). RECOMMENDATION: Move approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness for 211 NW 1st Street, West Settlers 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 Section 4.5.1 of the Land Development Regulations, the Delray Beach Historic Preservation Design Guidelines, and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Rehabilitation. Report Prepared by: Warren Adams Attachments: ■ Survey ■ Photographs ■ Drawings Boundary Survey for • BRYCE W.NEWELL • . STIRVEYOR'S NOTES U4901990J90 IMPROVd1ENT5 NOT LOCATED EXCEPT AS SHOWN. • 10.0' LEGS..DESCPoPTION PROVIDED BY CLIENT. IAKC DA ROAD I}-.-- 5 SURVEYOR HAS NOT ABSTRACTED TICS SVRVEY FOR EASf41ENTs' I 20.00� BV LOT�'4'3� a "I �@ NG RJNT5 Of WAY]OF REWRD. III I LOT 7 ,O rya U1 I SITE SURD HOT VAUD NITNOUT A RArs6O s6AL. • (P&M) 1135•6O' ed < 0 BEARINfS•IF t#10YMARE BASED ON RECQtD P.J.T. . • bHNN UNK FENCE 1A'NatTN I �i Nw ts1 siR¢T ' 0.1'OVER` x— r---A�-!•-• r--xw— x— x x—+�S -FOUND I/7'IRON 800 UNLESS NOTED OTHER4AEE • 2G7� i.�ae ovEx Q� t. 4 coNc PATID 1P `= A71AN11C AYENUC ® -FOUND NIUL ir • • ssa' 7 tt.e +. 114' •2a.6 _x_—x —x —' —x ---x VICINITY S1 TCR to -vrnm PaE . ONA1N L146 FENCE ( NDT TO$C41 W.N.••w.ITFA 11E108 . 55.6' CONC CONCRETE ^W 4.9' 16.9' 120• , (PW)-PLAT ANO NEASURLD Nm ' tD. PD R10 Ws coNc'wAtx L01 8 24.0 -+ I b R/W-RI0111-O-WAY 01 ea' 3 i a r j B'• �p te. LEGAL DESCRIPTION l 0o 15.0'• .`„ .' . o Lora 9Locxu.wrctmBTowRaetarTWL7TacaArn9arro7 LA A p 7�j "'1 051.18Y AOCOODDTQT0T 9 PLATT86RROPR500RD®DIIAT { :t yn, �I �-( � �R�,�AO9AOFr)18 POID]C RPLOP,060PPAT�fffiACR000NIY, . a L� N • O` 19.4' i.L O O • 35.7' 3 CONC • 24.0' x —N— CERTIFIED T I \ 11.6' • I 11.9' • •0 20 40 •L+Attm+a+vA�R•T$ffiQAH,PA ' `('1 �A— AT7DRHE7J']S7T3IN6URANCR FSAID.INC i .•+.��\�. tli SCALE:.1•-2O' )tATULRHCTTfATOC.7TWCt10WJ A1 90Pe iDRLt =M UN=FENCEx� 1 � ASSfON9 A67HP9tDi18t>i4'IL MAYAPPSAR •1 1 (P&M) 135.60' ) 'RFDmt o"c°NAr a • TTOOOO)4 D�A ADDRESS \ o DAY� / u / \ N if'AS°f1ALT PAVEMENT —_—_—_—•— FY.00D ZONE . L._._._._._------- _._____. PLo0DZQ1sx NW 1ST STREET • u m (40'R/Y) • DATED:5I8L69 CERTIFTCJSIONi PREPARED BY: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT IMAGE TWO SUR',fY AND THA - • THEW uu wcaL STANDARDS Bob BLiggeel Inc. AS•ET FOR �•r .7F PRQt>,Iona.!./ the "SURVEYOR" • SUVEYDRS A By: r'� ` P.O.Box 36e7 /A BOYNION 9EAOH,FLORIDA 33426 RO3ERT A EW00[E.0.,FLORIDA LAN•R3-, 2 • SUIjV1;Y k NAPPING 9U0NE53/6942 2JJ E,GATEWAY BLVD.�60YNTON =' DA 661-7J2-7877 DATE OF FIELD SURVEY. 11/01/07 J ' DWG y1007807 � - h!� i tF r � d f�tnW+ ;r •tt R'T �".?-. t i V V yt`"At'Y f of r5 t �a y♦ u 1. •riS 4 e G' , •a�mm: c'; a Y$r{ .z' ' x rd ''.x, rY Q'S'a4 y.Pq fyi � �', i.1?�J 'C ,>,' `�•• ,t.kv ki 'rfZ�'r '✓.+ %�'`'' f�r.74 �}1�}t ,.ctiwt�,t. .':a `f tI.:ri'< tt"r •••• :�1+" l �' �} at 't `ry;: G e "� Yany h v`� :� c sx ''; �..t �. .{• h• T a `. �',�rr�H S.�,. S ,;e ��t�#�r"'� a><=��,,''; '�6�x'vF�fJ �l4rS� �bW6 `t d y i k• "sr r� �� `x.Y'�.^t � ,a��`°"��iyx��` �c k ^sre �`�ga� �k'S � � J.�";�E a �'3a�t i.. •. .p,. �. r,� ,y.'e�a� 'iY/', �+.'• r..,r �'", .i '9�r �` j� �. - .f .J ,qk r !' 14 �{,y.S 's� za�`` rs ."a�' $'Nr� � 1 �°w.�r,�,r',�f 6: C;.y,;� '• y �.r g'('4�fb' d. ) yr� r �:`i%''+ ,'Y�; �'r' ...... M?t.�'ra{ i�i V3"•�.4i�. -�� LRS"xd � T. 'inf,:' :. 4 � �"' N : ..✓. r r 1�1i .."1 ., t°l�i$'�^v y�°.T�" atsy�'l��j,,t it.�€a s9. ec k rrC 4 e i 4+' +.l � �`: .d�"•:..y�+., �+.. e.k '.,ai.. ystgl? r1 Gy�F�'�z',h,},3. 'v f 'v I' rt "t� v tr��.�3 �K ey tr i n � .i•rl� .,5r t�3 Y � .'d"ry. � S1Yr• ;r•. i«„ 'SrI. - .S+s }vo sP�.S Ei .`��d�es .j � .z�y .r �.� r12`:+ �"fil � t N sc+ a a' t �y5"rr7t4d� � L�,.a''4t1 ,�H - 4. '{d••,r. . . I S' ti o:•n.. t t S " r x as .1- 4 ad .^ °� • 7 . q6 r . i !e3• l< >i �t I.f az tr . y^ • ... 1k! .r t. C 4 t j z' t rL as � ri' �y:'.ry Y } t" •r. * 1 'y 1 + 1 ., �5rhi y3 r i,. �� C,s,� .{yy, •; �. � y e y ° S � 4 F� r r�V • x4iV.x : I :, r } s 4 G tax2. , ,.� 1. . .,,• fK•' '� .>✓ 'w,F1it t�'y �n• Xcratxp r �{' �1" .h e,r �•. yy.�s,,,,.',a3' } 4 t. 3 3 .. .1 ram¢ r Ej •'d jd "Stke ,�,�u•;� - :x j f j �, r r ,t ^ Y.i°a,*A r5, :'*�'fr' `i"" —a,,o. y d z p kr-"�. -' {{ .'•V.* ` 1 cT ti �, a ;L. " �k* "r�w.�.^w• �, I ) • ..��`z.1+re$y't'43° ',KyT .jj .t. ^:.ro,t t',r ' sy `Yt�4IK,. <b{'S� kv fS.� � .�'f�..+ n ]...w t C-i +"Xta'F iL}" hC s #t f �' r +�h 'C i t Cvr 4, ty r 'R •,�.r�' .�I � lr.r� ";ts sl s y5'{tt �c� '�}}�$ } Fh' V. .. .. f..':{ Irx ,N s i» ,�.a s 1`�jf,"- �f r4s..,�,�?'`• �2`i zl y '. S y��+ rs yi. 9rt. X' `"i r` a .. <,:..� i" p+.;.K'.L z<w - .7:r�} i+ 1r.., `'y{. .7czJar a..R • .rP' t' •'.F'• y^nN ��'� r, t�1. t •" . t' � �S r7 :.�.A,7>;.`.1h s"r ..�:ffl �.. ..{ti f j x }Y h '.: � �-rryt7it a k��sY�t^'..' r �t,•,� x ..;....- F to ��.. �'s\. � T�—s•�•. _.'.��f%.y. /..... ..'„` # ... .. - tktF ' rY• jVRI��?��t; 3'•�t��. +fi;�.ar � „ :4a 3. 44 lam, r; —..—.._. F- 1,+ kk . - — (t..a • _..-..-t Y ` . � RJr 3 ` __"'• y �3•[W7} � My .`'.( y y ,.`'...l+r l . . , , ":..�? � � .:� r.,,�< ,; ^�,f..,'...f�aet..:t`��4'�;. �^'. �$t vAY �}dr°'4 :t�4 as w.ti� t 1 1 f ! , w tt•�t�ii ✓.��t YI -� � ,�Y;iat\\ i,;,t3 •Yg a t �s z 4� dV 1=S �1��'i.�t�y3 d.1� k �a.i 3l tt � � ,1$ w ? � \ rlxS yt ' .:5'�bf �...SI� 1 r r y:.( , a ;�t"�:�" ".a 1;t• s• sf ,$ ' 4�:;s y�; a•' .ts. •�{ '.S',�. A ;.> t/ -.Y•'- r't, F'�'t�, �: p; !�:�7., r em; � .�it i Y,.: •a. �i}y'Y s� � r,..��, •! ��. l�� ,i f ` ; � +. �¢••.f, �,tr A 1 14 %.,c�7 `.�b �1:¢•-yp :. 4 ;t - Y: 1't `r, -.k ; y +ri.rE•''h. ,3.1 ;C 4 3. .t cI�TY'� ;'.:�� b} w< t�d��,^/ .i'' a)� �;+ � r`�• J �.r .' �,�.. g ..3°�. ��e °laa�.a�', rJ�� a q.; .:.i: 3.{ -ry,' .� v I k'�'� ,. d�.r �L�:;i.i �• iM.��. •t � ,^. � ,ts t� t tt '. 1 � "q't.. tx'� �1 t . ,< ";t.Y� 'l� t�"' '� �- �'I rF ,'�'�s'W 5� �w.-:Ji. °� � 'i:.i)Q'`..rq{,S� .y,.-xo,... �•L•.p� • 4,:�: .x�i+'�t'I�s;�;L�V �''' t %f„K#s �5,+",�S ;�,x Y',,.�1 .wF171- .�r' J ,tom •t.J.,�. .�K� S '�� •..%7;- �A. �?" tlf• h{�� i':; ;�i� �•.. /t +�.�} l�a t.,yfr � ''. :d +.} 2�.• 'Y,,'�I�.�.S+y Sri�.jYk' -�►�A., .�f T �}.xy '�„ 'tr j s 5 a t � .S*' ff _ •�r` �5 p �� y :,y., •ftt: B � �V',.�'hf.`.6` ''3...•^:,;,,,,,� �.„rl ""`. - j •1 q $( t W� .�,xr' 4,19, ? , 5y "'..�. ,. 3Y�.',(:.� .�: - �� pJ,Y .�' :r1 1 " .! ;:" t,,q• ;l..r,."F•,X''-j ,"„ c "� `v'.'` y.,: ti., ,�5 :� ;'. ";�� ,�" �r y�•�' i �e Jt .f i�: 5�. �Y�� '} •� `.}..% t ,n f� �. � �f��.,dP ,.q� 7 {,F4f'+ . '�q� �n <;;�",}�, •spas t; I x '•�4-x� �•z�'t�° 1 y,,,nurumw,,,i Sr'`1'{ {�t _i.'.t I�, t: �� t6:/G'�•t��.,-�, �,`. `'�, ,..;^4b� 4' f i' �.«''}Kd �3 �1 *,§,t�'�'+"�. i r" ., .... "^»o'�,s..,, � ,�.�i bF F.. a is +�, 't �,.� ^•_ T� (�� , ::� '��`��»'�+ �`'" =..f"rr?, £� �> ,n ,-•w �^,,, 't 1 • {. y;rppY.^z.:•.xV;�Y '..+n,:o-.- .t,..•,.. o„ •sa= � , .,.sa ,"° „.r �c:. '�i.: .' y'4' k x .• � e: ��} ". e /j ?0Rrr^,ARr'. .-•.,.�..>'n'.,...,. _ .1. .. i•- 1' -1 '� ,":-..!" ,�'.','h �r, + 4 f.', r- ♦f � '�.q 'q}''. F�t �...�• G' '.fr` •,,.> �,i�'-_,a. •►< .re ..�. �,'ti ...K ` . A;.�N- ,. .,5: ..y„F':f ..'t:'.:f l' - }t Jr:; •u*'. t'.r< r r. �t .... � � p;,.Y :. X at' e - �.< , JCR :� .r vrr ^Y r� dc:.f* .. ?1 '�:1 .. w f x :3 -.? w,t _ ...� r+Y'tan ;m. �w .�:r 9 ,'.•Y h •ylp� •�� t , .„ri:r .r..-r^• � i J�,.�y�!!ee'� "Kk.�i< "`' `l�. s'�:.:'t� �` �- a :'t t �+,��r i � 'fDy��'�"T:. .• .:? r .t , �✓ ,�,. jRi... �i� ,S \� fie! v /4t�•+5. � ,..:<:. � �. 1 M •.., .r .:. { ^_-:.'_,h"wyw '#,', ) �5�' :'.,/� � .a:'.'tR t�r.�?cq if' `:'!� �`. `i��` :,'y��•�':v4Ksq. s; N+ ..: r.; ��11 � �� or ¢� �� :.t / t.� '��.'�cv �..,i,�'f,�,• •aK.;� y ,� �i,,. ,;... e� � � '�d:.,;?�fi3 �;,"� � �.i' ''' •(�r €�� ' �',;'� s '�t.r'�+t�,,,:t: °fix �` t€ t�` ..@ •a -:,�, d't':4,,�P'r�.r!'. � :;.r ,S,y,-e£,' <(' .,a.. •'�. `�� yf`5,. �.+ `;' t,.,. ".,�:`+i:: .�� '-�' 't.v` .a! �� h' (11. .F:yx ,I �;�f •�A'„ • s _•.1ca[�` t� f)f ..A%mSw'`• ' ;Y Y ,•/ .1, •_ j / '!t �tt�t ;`f A fi•; J ,: ..,•., ,p ky. 1 �\'"+••„ ,•'+'�.a. r:,+. A { •--W-i—.e _:: ... ... 1.. .. .. W101 CAA Ae0 W101 An AIRO .. GHT ELEVATIOf SI -- 8 - 8 LEFT ELEVATION1/8" scE 1/8" SCALE .. 5/12 PITCH 12 PITCH � MATCH RObF AND FACIA OF HOUSE MATCH ROOF AND FACIA OF HOUSE MATCH STUCCO HOUSE STUCCO ' MATCH STUCCO HOUSE STUCCO i.� O C F�Of\ T ELEVATIO \ �EA ELEVATI01 DOOR JAMB . MARK TYPE WIDTH HEIGHT THICK MATT . RNISH MAIL FlNISH _. HARDWARE REMARKS _Q PANEL 2'8 6'B' 13/4 WOOD. PANT WOOD PAINT PRIVACY © BE 2—8- 6'8 1 3J4�. . WOOD PANT WOOD PAINT PRIVACY - Gcc� cG�L fl FE2 0 6 201 o L L__-- PLANMNG&ZC f 1 24'-O' 17-10' 5-2 / -t ' 2 2 SH 24 SH 1/2 33 O 11� o ° �eo ace STUB '0R FUTURE SINK BATH o I YB68 f MPERNWS RC� ' WORK SHOP o 9'—O" CLG : R 30 ac _ NON AC SPACE 3 N p p 0? - ° 2-3068 - 08 2-2898 8F - -_-SLQS___- R x - lt INSULATION ROD/514 2 LAYERS 5/8'DRYWALL - o v o I f M 0 2 CAR GARAGE 9'-6' CLG p 51-I 24 514 24 o II 22 X 54 PD S,AIR � o I N ' HB j_ 2 0 i� q p 3068(8)PANEL ALUM DOOR - • o p o WATER STOP p D p o. WATER STOP a0 ° p p 9060 ALUM OND ^� 9080 AWN OHD� 2-O 9'-O. 2'-O" 9'-O� 2'-O / y r 24'-0' / PAUL CUARnw ETTE AlA 1"X 4"NO.2 SOUTHERN PINE CONTINUOUS LATERAL BRACING. • AT 6-0"O.C,W/(Z ED NAILS AT EA.INTERSECTION. BRACING SHALL BE RESTRAINED AT EACH END AND f— — OFPRE-ENWNEERE518"GYP.WALL BD. DWD.TRUSS AT \ ___ UcERsE;ool62T ASPHAULT SHINGLES SEE MANF SPECSysD ii 1 ._— MOPPED OVER 30//FELT TIN TAGGED R" I V "'"I"Z. JAMB —"-- ON 5/8"EXT.PLYWD OVER PRE- V .v- " ' — • I— ENGINEERED WD.ROOF TRUSSES i ,- TILEATTACHEDWINAILONSYSTEM AS PER ATTACHED PRODUCT APP NON—FEARING, INT. WALL A SEE ROOF PLAN FORTYPE COLUMN TO BEAM — DETAIL OF CONNECTOR AND NUMBER R-30ABOVE SHOP c. J C) OF FASTENERS N.T.S. . ..,..... x oSEE EXT.ELEV. 'IFOR HEIGHT II —1� L I 5/8'DRY WALL CL IX4FIRESOP HEAD \J 2-8"BOND BEAM 1 6%EACH METAL DRIP EXTERIOR DOOR HEAD! U. JAMB DETAIL N.T.S. < • P. NAILER •= . . I IIIII!I I FASCIA 10 DRYWALL U U 1 J RU JAMB \ [ Zt STUCCO SOFFIT W/ 1 1 HEADswan�° III \ JIiT$. SCREENED VENTS AT [ UCIU RU 1 I /-WI MEUA a. CONT.PVC4"X12"@8OC LJ.IW -COLUMN TO TO FTC. — DETAIL • RU ____________ CASTCREATEEEAM SEE ROOF NTS *UAco-, HORIZONTAL JOINT REINFORCING R EVERY OTHER COURSE IT . U U lUll I�{�'. a,oo.."a RU STUCCO FINISH ON8 CONC. — II U BLOCK WALL.SEE EXT.ELEV. mac .. l FORTEXTURE. . . . • UlUl SILL I fiVij(GliG IIUUUU XNDOW HEAD SILL f - AND JAMB DETAIL N.T.S. CONCRETE SLAB AND FOOTING 0 HEAD CC SEE FOUNDATION PLAN. BEAM CORNER — DETAIL INTERIOR DOOR HEAD! BASE MOLDING NTS JAMB DETAIL N.T.S. 11/2RECESS (MIN CTis r U) -7 Z APPROXIMATE FINISH GRADE mow / — Q SEE EXT.ELEV — — RUi1__ r U _ _ i1 / DEPTH OF HI - 4111=1 I 1=11 MONOLITHIC r.... . 1LUU.UUURU. T Y P. Vk/A S E C ON B " ' " ATTIC ACCESS DETAIL• IOU.) 3/4 =I-O" AM-WS A—I GARAGE DOOR BUCK DETAIL 1 1121=1_DO O EXTERIOR DOOR BUCK DETAIL N.T.S. N.T.S. PAUE CI WiEfE CIA ATTACHMENT/FASTENER SPECIFICATIONS„. wIMPSOONCCNNEOTIONSCNNWULE� - / a.vLoow s•a.r"w nr• cm+w ava i� '^oc...,awv�.n u+a,...waa.aauao ••••s" n�au n. �•'a..a ua r.w �w w w m ��a1w w »'a �w n w "'� lKENSE AR OOt6]a9 \ �� cm�G•�w w.wa[a Y•rwr w ai�M a�Gs ;x n.,n GAL .x�•rvw.rwr� uca coww.rvt Cwau wr m w a.�u �w ..a uv w n .w � »w.iu ,w uw iw w ua a � Q M / p'Are¢CPc.rwre iL. ww wAr.0 a.aw,t. nwa ac.w Gw.�a as n wraa m m©aP .0 o'yw w..^ r�.r.u. ~ Z(_) d' O ��w i i - rm a.G• a i xa%..aGa x.�..n:a Gt.Gd.•wG*,. tiaw.ww......a ..a.a nmG ..., ® ..a aiw..w.<rwa.wo.m�c Kr. ... . I+. oa wn�n � ....a,wa p aS Cf Q GALS,...,a..aa.S GALLS .a a.". .o S x .w o. GA a..'..a,...a r. ,.A ,.GALL _ = o o n CROSS BRACING DETAIL Q • o a M � mPanNa• .aDY rn. Vr.uawa /"a�awaa ��itcG.va� p ~ Z ' • / SCI Wilium a d I ii- I,— uu,I o-u,srl ♦.�m jai � v1 W Q P A4NEW F O rwicuursaKewr.�sPucE J w o LATERAL BRACING DETAIL TRUSS BRACING DETAILS I Q o NTS NTS i• I•I I•a r. PU — - �� m— AS w m Ge A ,w 2CAR GARAGE - 9'-6'CLG c C a ,.•„a.,..w>a.�. aoxou�•mcsrAre :a-. w - ¢ x � N q PLYWOOD NAILING DETAIL 9.TRP .-au-U NTS PE"$9"` A4 PM LPAUL CHARETTE CIA ELECTRICAL RISER ELECTRICAL SYMBOLS LICENSE M0016119 O .w >,oa S. 4 >. ZJ ."w. $ n © .... :. ErusTo �... �.,.. • .., .w .Awr LU o n I ® . ® + I— o a LOAD CALCULATION SUB-PANEL'A _ 2 o _ ♦ CL LU c z ..• 1 .> ,we wo W a z c 0D D 0�o�oo—ono °cth rC) � � o WORK SHOP ...._.e*...wo L I— ._.,..w III ♦ 'wl \ i � . - 2 CAR GARAGE \ O@z \ I .. \ I / O / / / C m I / x \ a \ ono 000 Dl // C F- N U TICC z W C W a > a Z � U — ,. I Sr.ni[— aLNSw E1 HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD MEMORADUM STAFF REPORT Applicant: Louis J. Carbone Project Name: Pineapple Grove Limited Project Location: The subject property is located on the north side of NE 1st Street, between Pineapple Grove Way (NE 2"d Avenue) and NE 1st Avenue. ITEM _BEFORE THE BOARD The item before the Board is that of granting an extension of the following aspects of a development proposal for Pineapple Grove Limited, pursuant to Land Development Regulations (LDR) Section 2.4.4(F): . ■ COA-2004-231; Class V site plan; • Landscape plan; and - . ■ Architectural elevations. �.BACKGROUND_. .' The,development proposal consists of the south 38.25 feet of Lot 5, 6,,7;.8,,the south 34 75rieotf Lot 13, 14, 15, and 16 of Block-75•of the Town of Linton Plat and contains 1,.658 acres The eastern half of,the development (Lots 13 through 16) is located in the CBD (Central Business District) zoning district and contained two buildings that were built in 1965 and have subsequently' been .demolished. The western,half of the development (Lots 5 through 8) .is located 'in the OSSHAD (Old School Square Historic Arts District) zoning district and contained multipleSfa'mily development that was constructed in 1950 (subsequently demolished) and is'also'the`former site of Neil's Market: It is noted that the south 34.75 feet of Lot 6 and all of Lots 7 and 8 are subject to the permitted uses and development regulations of the CBD zoning district. ' Further, the development proposal was submitted on May 3, 2004, which was prior to the final approval of the Downtown. Design Guidelines by the City Commission on May 4, 2004. Therefore, the development proposal .was reviewed and approved based on the regulations that were in place prior to the initial and amended Downtown Design Guidelines. At its meeting of January 4, 2006, the Historic Preservation Board approved the-site:piartrffln�tre subject property. The development proposal consisted of 8 townhouses, 2 duplexes, and a:three- story 5,764 square foot office building along the west side of the alley; construction of a mixed-use building along the east side of the alley that contained 4,868 square feet of restaurant:floorarea`; 5,385 square feet of retail floor area, and 30 condominium dwelling units. The site plan approval expired on January 4, 2008. The applicant submitted a'site plan extension request on December. 10, 2007: While the extension request was submitted after the 45 day deadline requirement (24 days prior to expiration), the Director of Planning and Zoning has.allowed a Historic Preservation Board Staff Report- February 20, 2008 Pineapple Grove Limited Site Plan Approval Extension Request Page 2 the request to be processed. Additional background information and full analysis of the proposal can be found in the attached SPRAB staff report, dated January 4, 2006. It is noted that the:site plan has been certified, however, the development has not been established. ' The applicant has submitted a request for an extension of the site plan approval, which is now before the Board .for consideration. EXTENSION ANALYSIS Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.4(F)(1) (Extensions), extensions may be granted to the previously approved application, pursuant to the following: • A written request for an extension must have been received by the City at least forty-five (45) days prior to the expiration date; • The letter must set forth the basis and reason for the extension; - • The extension shall be considered by the same body which granted the original approval; and • The extension, if granted,shall be for eighteen (18) months unless otherwise,stated ,>> LDR Section 2.4:4 includes two categories for extension considerations,.LDR Section.2 4 4 (F)(2) 'Construction Has Commenced' and LDR Section 2.4.4 (F)(3) "No Construction": LDR Section 2.4.4(F)(2) "Construction Has Commenced" Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.4(F)(2), when there are substantial improvements on the site, but the 25% establishment standard is not met, the granting agency shall consider the diligence and good faith of the developer to actually commence and complete construction: In this 'case;'an extension to the originally approved project without change or without evaluation, pursuant to subsection (3), shall be granted to enable the developer to complete the project as opposed .to allowing'a continuing approval in order to more readily sell the land and/or project. Per LDR Section 2.4.4(D)(1), a development shall be considered established when improvements representing 25% of the total cost of all improvements to be used in developing the project'have been constructed. The physical improvements to the property associated with the development include environmental, soil, and underground testing, demolition of the four structures thatwereon the property, grading, and fencing of the site. These improvements to the property do not represent 25% of the total cost of all improvements in developing the project; `Given the demolitiori activity that has occurred, the provisions of Section 2.4.4(F)(2) shall apply to the proposed extension. In considering "diligence and good faith", the granting body shall consider: ■ When the construction commenced (construction which is commenced immediately preceding expiration generally indicates a lack of good faith); ■ The extent to which construction has proceeded; ■ The extent to which there has been a bonafide continuous effort to develop but because of circumstances beyond the control of the developer, it was not possible to meet the 25% standard. The applicant has submitted the following verbatim narrative in support of the extension request:" . Historic Preservation Board Staff Report- February 20, 2008 Pineapple Grove Limited Site Plan Approval Extension Request Page 3 «...History: The original Site Plan was approved by the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) on January 4,.2006 for the development of a mixed use project consisting of thirty (30) residential condominium units, approximately 92,000 square feet of commercial retail use with an associated parking garage;<ten (90) three-story residential townhomes and a 6,500 square foot office building (the `Project') There was a subsequent appeal of several set back waivers requested to the City Commission;on February 7, 2006. Thereafter, the Site Plan was submitted to the HPB for elevation modifications and color changes. The Site Plan was then certified on or about August 4, 2006. Commencement of Construction: Prior to and after the Site Plan for the Project was certified, the Owner and developer have made bona fide efforts to commence and continue construction improvements and otherwise develop the Project. Such activities include. Obtaining environmental testing, soil and underground testing for. site improvements ■ Obtaining permits and completing the demolition of four structures on the site, including a`two story apartment building, a 10,000 square foot commercial warehouse and a 5,000 square foot retail store; - ■ The installation of clean fill, grading and stabilization of soil and sub=soil conditions for foundation improvements; ■ The excavation and removal of all environmentally sensitive materials frorn;•the site;'° ■ The installation of temporary electric and utility connections for construction improvements, ■ The installation of construction fencing, interior barriers and signage; ■ The relocation of utility services. ■ The preparation of exterior and interior architectural, mechanical and engineering construction plans for the development of the Project; ■ Preparing and obtaining competitive bids for the construction of the Project; ■ Preparing a preliminary Plat for the Project(unfiled); ■ Meetings with utility providers to coordinate utility pole removal along the alley way within the Project and submission of a preliminary plan to such utilities for new services. ■ Obtaining a pre-construction loan from Grand Bank and Trust of Florida to assist in the financing of costs relating to architectural and engineering plans, marketing and sales material, preparation and filing of condominium documents and construction improvements for the development of the Project. Basis for Extension: The extension under LDR Section 2.4.4(F)(2) is now requested due to the following circumstances: Although the applicant has proceeded with a continuous bona fide effort to continue construction improvements and develop the Project, due to the well documented deteriorating local and national economic and financial conditions relative to the residential housing market the"'continued construction of the Project has been delayed such that the applicant has been unable to meet the 25% improvement establishment standard as of the time of this request. It is expected that such conditions will remain through 2008 at which time it is anticipated that conditions will be more favorable for the continuation of construction improvements. Given these circumstances and since the majority of the Project is residential, it has been deemed not prudent to continue with construction improvements at this time therefore an extension is required. In addition, financial institutions have requested a certain level of pre-sale'activity prior'to the continuation of funding construction loans as would be required for the complete development of Historic Preservation Board Staff Report- February 20, 2008 Pineapple Grove Limited Site Plan Approval Extension Request Page 4 the Project. Typically this pre-sale requirement is equal to or greater than 50% of all residential units in a development. The initial residential sales activity of Project as well as consultation with local residential market experts has concluded that there is currently insufficient pre-sale activity at this time to continue to meet the typical construction lending requirements of financial institutions. This condition is expected to improve over the next year which also requires the extension of the Site Plan. These above circumstances are certainly beyond the control of the Owner and developer of the Project and therefore, the extension of the Site Plan approval of the Project is now necessary - Current Use: For the past year in an effort to utilize the Project Site and assist the City with development projects within the downtown area, the Owner has temporarily leased the site to the City of Delray Beach without cost for (a) construction parking associated with the construction of the new Old School Square Parking Garage and (b) public parking for Pineapple Grove, Old School Square,and.the downtown area. Required Findinqs: The extension of the Site Plan Approval for an additional eighteen (98) month period`wvilf`riot adversely impact the required findings that were made at the time of the approval of the Site'Plan for the Project..." Board Considerations: ■ The buildings were demolished in December 2006, well in advance of the expiration date of the site plan approval, which supports the extension request. The site has undergone environmental, soil and underground testing. ■ The site has been graded and fenced. Also during the two-year site plan approval period, the > site was leased to the City for use as a public parking lot. The applicant indicates that the primary reason for the delay in the construction of the 'proposed development is related to the downturn in the residential market. The applicant indicates that:in order to obtain financing, a developer needs to demonstrate at least 50% presale activity;:_Thus, given the "softness" in the residential market the applicant has been unable to obtain construction loans. Based on these delays, it is reasonable to grant the extension of the site plan approval since these issues were beyond the control of the developer. Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.4(F)(1)(d), eighteen month extensions are allowed by code unless otherwise stated. The applicant has requested that the expiration date for the project be extended 18 months. If granted, the extension request would be valid through July 4, 2009. ALTERNATIVE-• ACTIONS A. Postpone with direction. B. Move approval of the request for an extension of COA 2004-231, associated Class V-site plan approval, landscape plan and 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 2.4.5(F)(5) of the "Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, subject to conditions of approval. - Historic Preservation Board Staff Report- February 20, 2008 Pineapple Grove Limited Site Plan Approval Extension Request Page 5 C. Move denial of the request for an extension of COA 2004-231, associated Class V site plan approval, landscape plan and 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 2.4.5(F)(5) of the. Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan. .RECOMMENDATION " Move approval of the request for an extension of COA 2004-231, associated Class V site plan approval, landscape plan and 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 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, subject to the previous conditions of approval, with said approval to be valid until July 4, 2009. Attachments: Extension Request Letter from Louis Carbone dated December 11, 2007. ■ HPB Staff Report Dated January 4, 2006 LAW OFFICES LOUIS J. CARBONE, P.A. u �` A PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION PLANNINu u 90 SOUTHEAST 4TU AVENUE DELRAY BEACH,FL 33483 MEMBER OF N.Y.,C.T. (561)272-0282 NEW YORK OFFICE FL&D.C.BAR FAX (561)272-6013 111 NORTH CENTRAL PARK AVENUE E-MAIL:LJCLEGAL a AOL.COM HARTSDALE,NEW YORK 10530 (914)684-0201 December 11, 2007 HAND DELIVERED Paul Dorling, AICP Director of Planning and Zoning � ,f City of Delray Beach .s 100 N.W. 1st. Avenue FEB 1 3 2008 Delray Beach, Florida 33444 PLANNING & ZONING RE: Pineapple Grove Limited Project Class V Site Plan COA 2004-231 Dear Mr. Dorling: On behalf of Pineapple Grove, Ltd., we hereby submit the attached request for an extension of the above referenced Class V Site Plan for Pineapple Grove Ltd., pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.4.(F)(2). History: The original Site Plan was approved by the Historic Preservation Board (HPB) on January 4, 2006 for the development of a mixed use project consisting of thirty (30) residential condominium units, approximately 12,000 square feet of commercial retail use with an associated parking garage, ten (10)three-story residential townhomes and a 6,500 square foot office building (the "Project"). There was a subsequent appeal of several set back waivers requested to the City Commission on February 7, 2006. Thereafter, the Site Plan was submitted to the HPB for elevation modifications and color changes. The Site Plan was then certified on or about August 4, 2006. Commencement: Prior to and after the Site Plan for the Project was certified, the Owner and of Construction: developer have made bona fide efforts to commence and continue construction improvements and otherwise develop the Project. Such activities include. • Obtaining environmental testing, soil and underground testing for site improvements; • Obtaining permits and completing the demolition of four structures on the site, including a two story apartment building, a 10,000 square foot commercial warehouse and a 5,000 square foot retail store; RE:Pineapple Grove Limited Project December 11,2007 Page-2- • The installation of clean fill, grading and stabilization of soil and sub- soil conditions for foundation improvements; • The excavation and removal of all environmentally sensitive materials from the site; • The installation of temporary electric and utility connections for construction improvements; • The installation of construction fencing,interior barriers and signage; • The relocation of utility services. • The preparation of exterior and interior architectural, mechanical and engineering construction plans for the development of the Project; • Preparing and obtaining competitive bids for the construction of the Project; • Preparing a preliminary Plat for the Project(unfiled); • Meetings with utility providers to coordinate utility pole removal along the alley way within the Project and submission of a preliminary plan to such utilities for new services. • Obtaining a pre-construction loan from Grand Bank and Trust of Florida to assist in the financing of costs relating to architectural and engineering plans, marketing and sales material, preparation and filing of condominium documents and construction improvements for the development of the Project. Basis for Extension: The extension under LDR Section 2.4.4(F)(2) is now requested due to the following circumstances: Although the applicant has proceeded with a continuous bona fide effort to continue construction improvements and develop the Project, due to the well documented deteriorating local and national economic and financial conditions relative to the residential housing market the continued construction of the Project has been delayed such that the applicant has been unable to meet the 25% improvement establishment standard as of the time of this request. It is expected that such conditions will remain through 2008 at which time it is anticipated that conditions will be more favorable for the continuation of construction improvements. Given these circumstances and since the majority of the Project is residential, it has been deemed not prudent to continue with construction improvements at this time therefore an extension is required. RE:Pineapple Grove Limited Project December 11,2007 Page-3- In addition, financial institutions have requested a certain level of pre- sale activity prior to the continuation of funding construction loans as would be required for the complete development of the Project. Typically this pre-sale requirement is equal to or greater than 50% of all residential units in a development. The initial residential sales activity of Project as well as consultation with local residential market experts has concluded that there is currently insufficient pre-sale activity at this time to continue to meet the typical construction lending requirements of financial institutions. This condition is expected to improve over the next year which also requires the extension of the Site Plan. These above circumstances are certainly beyond the control of the Owner and developer of the Project and therefore, the extension of the Site Plan approval of the Project is now necessary Current Use: For the past year in an effort to utilize the Project Site and assist the City with development projects within the downtown area, the Owner has temporarily leased the site to the City of Delray Beach without cost for (a) construction parking associated with the construction of the new Old School Square Parking Garage and(b)public parking for Pineapple Grove, Old School Square and the downtown area. Required Findings: The extension of the Site Plan Approval for an additional eighteen (18) month period will not adversely impact the required findings that were made at the time of the approval of the Site Plan for the Project. Based on the foregoing, it is respectfully requested that the Site Plan Approval obtained for the Class V Site Plan for Pineapple Grove Ltd. be extended for an addition eighteen (18) month period as permitted under LDR Section 2.4.4.(F)(2). Very truly yours, LOUIS J. CARBONE, P.A. By: Louis J. Carbone LJC/aja cc: Pineapple Grove, Ltd. Martin Satalino File • 1 HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD •CITY OF DELRAY BEACH ---STAFF REPORT--- MEETING DATE: January 4, 2006 AGENDA ITEM: II. B. ITEM: Consideration of COA 2004-231 Which Incorporates The Class V Site Plan, Landscape Plan, And Architectural Elevations For Pineapple Grove Limited, Located On The North Side Of NE 1st Street, Between Pineapple Grove Way And NE 1st Avenue. POST CASON OFFICE METHODIST CHURCH ■ GENERAL DATA: ■ ■ ■ ■ Owner/Applicant Pineapple Grove Ltd. a �' ■ Agent Jeffrey Silberstein Architects & N.W. 3RD ST. N.E. 3RD ST. Associates Location Located on the north side of NE 1st Street, between Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Avenue ATTORNEY Z Property Size 1.658 acres BUILDING Future Land Use Map CC (Commercial Core) & OMU MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.DR. N.E. 2ND ST. (Other Mixed Use) z ■■ ■ Current Zoning CBD (Central Business District) N W & OSSHAD (Old School Z Square Historic Arts District) 3 W �OY . : ■ Adjacent Zoning....North: OSSHAD & CBD HA East: CBD _ < _ - N.W. 1ST ST. N.E. . 15T- ST. South: CBD & OSSHAD West: OSSHAD Existing Land Use Vacant Commercial & Multiple COENUNkTY 3 Family Residential Z z z Proposed Land Use Construction of a 39-unit mixed SCHOOL use project with 5,385 sq.ft of SQUARE retail, 5,764 sq. ft. of office, and A IL A N T I C A V EN U E 4,868 sq. ft. restaurant. - u„ Water Service Existing on site. —; Sewer Service Existing on site. ` ■ ` ■S ■ - B Z I N S.W. 1ST ST._ S.E. 3 � N-- S 3- Vl - I1I1I l II. B. ITEM BEFORE THE BOARD The action before the Board is approval of a COA-2004-231, which incorporates the following aspects of the development proposal for Pineapple Grove Limited, pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.5(F): ■ Class V Site Plan ■ Landscape Plan ■ Architectural Elevations ■ Waiver Request ■ Variance Request The subject property is located on the north side of NE 1st Street, between Pineapple Grove Way (NE 2r Avenue) and NE 1st Avenue. • BACKGROUND • The development proposal consists of the south 38.25 feet of Lot 5, 6, 7, 8, the south 34.75 feet of Lot 13, 14, 15, and 16 of Block 75 of the Town of Linton Plat and contains 1.658 acres. The eastern half of the development (Lots 13 through 16) is located in the CBD (Central Business District) zoning district and contains two buildings that were built in 1965. The western half of the development (Lots 5 through 8) is located in the OSSHAD (Old School Square Historic Arts District) and contains a multiple family development that was constructed in 1950 and was the former site of Neil's Market. It is noted that the south 34.75 feet of Lot 6 and all of Lots 7 and 8 are subject to the permitted uses and development regulations of the CBD zoning district. Further, the development proposal was submitted on May 3, 2004, which was prior to the final approval of the Downtown Design Guidelines by the City Commission on May 4, 2004. Therefore, the development proposal has been reviewed based on the regulations in place prior to the Downtown Design Guidelines. The action now before the Board is approval of the site plan, landscape plan, architectural elevations, a series of waivers and a variance. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The development proposal incorporates the following: ■ Demolition of the existing buildings and construction of a mixed-use project that contains 8 townhouses, 2 duplexes, and a three-story 5,764 square foot office building along the west side of the alley; construction of a mixed-use building along the east side of the alley that contains 4,868 square feet of restaurant floor area, 5,385 square feet of retail floor area, and 30 condominium dwelling units along the east side of the alley; ■ Construction of a two-story parking facility along the east side of the alley; ■ Construction of a pool and garden deck along the east side of the alley; and ■ Installation of dumpster enclosures and associated landscaping. The development proposal includes waivers to the following sections of the Land Development Regulations: Historic Preservation Board M^ °Ming of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited CO1 04-231 1. LDR Section 4.6.5(C), which limits the height of walls within the required front or street side yard to 6 feet. 2. LDR Section 4.6.5(E), which requires the screening of walls in the front yard. 3. LDR Section 4.6.5(F), which requires that walls located in the front yard be setback a minimum of 2 feet. 4. LDR Section 4.6.14(A), which requires 40 feet visibility triangles at the intersections of public rights-of-way. 5. LDR Section 4.6.15(G)(1), which prohibits swimming pools within the front setback area. The development proposal includes a variance to LDR Section 4.3.4(K), which requires a rear setback of 10 feet, and 8 feet is proposed for the mixed use building along the east side of the alley. ... SITE PLAN ANALYSIS COMPLIANCE WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS: Items identified in the Land Development Regulations shall specifically be addressed by the body taking final action on the site and development application/request. LDR Section 4.3.4(K) Development Standards Matrix: The following table indicates that the proposal complies with LDR Section 4.3.4(K) as it pertains to that portion of the development located in the CBD zone district: Required Provided Building Height (maximum) 48' 48' Setbacks Rear 10' 8' (See Variance Analysis) The following table indicates that the proposal complies with LDR Section 4.3.4(K) as it pertains to that portion of the development located in the OSSHAD zone district: Required Provided Building Height (max.) 35' 34' 9" Open Space 25% 15%* Maximum Lot Coverage 40% 28% Setbacks ■ Front 25' 20' ** ■ Side Interior(North & South) 7.5' 10' ■ Rear 10' 29' * Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(K), a minimum of 25% open space is required in the OSSHAD zoning district and 15% is proposed. A condition of approval is attached that the site plan be revised to provide a minimum of 25% open space for Lots 5 & 6. If the minimum required open space is not provided, consideration of the site plan must be delayed until a variance application is submitted and processed. ** The required front setback in the OSSHAD zoning district is 25 feet and 25 feet is proposed from the current right-of-way of NE 1st Avenue. However, as discussed later in this report, the applicant will be required to dedicate 5 feet along the NE 1st Avenue right-of-way. This will reduce the proposed front 2/2 Historic Preservation Board M- fling of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited COS 04-231 setback to 20 feet. Therefore, a condition of approval is attached that the duplex be redesigned to comply with the required 25 foot front setback based on the ultimate right-of-way. Otherwise, consideration of the site plan must be delayed until a variance application is submitted and processed. Central Business District (CBD) District Requlations: Setbacks: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(G)(2)(a), within those sections of the CBD zoning district located in the Pineapple Grove Main Street area and east of the Intracoastal Waterway, a front setback of not less than 5 feet nor greater than 10 feet and a 5 foot side (street) setback shall be provided. There shall be no required side (interior) or rear building setbacks except where there is no dedicated access to the rear of a building, a 10 foot side setback shall be provided. The applicant has indicated that a non-vehicular access line will be placed along the south side of the property adjacent to NE 1st Street. This will locate the front yards for this project along both Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Avenue the lot front respectively. The proposed development complies with this requirement as a 5 foot minimum setback has been provided along Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Street. The development along NE 1st Avenue is a townhouse design that has a front setback that is consistent with the Old School Square Historic Arts District. Parking: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(G)(1) and utilizing the shared parking table of LDR Section 4.6.9(C)(8)(a)[Appendix C], the 39 residential units; 5,385 square feet of retail floor area; 5,764 square feet of office floor area; and 4,868 square feet of restaurant floor area, together require 130 parking spaces, and 103 parking spaces are provided on-site. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.9(B)(4), the applicant has been granted a credit of 30 spaces for property that is owned by the applicant on the south side of NE 1st Street, which has been acquired by the City for use as a public parking facility. Based on this credit, the proposed development provides 133 total parking spaces, which complies with the minimum parking requirement. Minimum Residential Floor Area: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(H)(3), the minimum floor area for multi-family residential dwelling units shall be as established for the Medium Density Residential (RM) zoning district in Section 4.3.4(K). The following table indicates that the proposed residential development satisfies the City's minimum Multiple Family development floor area: Minimum Floor Area* Minimum Proposed Floor Number of Units Area* One Bedroom 600 824 12 Two Bedroom 900 1,731 15 Three Bedroom 1,250 1,954 12 * Square Feet VARIANCE ANALYSIS Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(K), the required rear setback in the CBD zoning district is 10 feet and 8 feet is proposed for the mixed-use building along the east side of the alley. The applicant 3/3 Historic Preservation Board M 1ting of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited CO. 104-231 has submitted a waiver request to reduce the rear yard setback and has submitted the following narrative in support of the request: "The project was designed to meet the 10'setback from the existing rear property line. Upon review of the submitted plans, the City has requested a ROW dedication of 2 feet on each side of the alley witch [sic] is west of the rear of the proposed structure, thereby reducing the rear setback to 8' The applicant has proposed to widen the alley to 24' (at staff's suggestion) thereby creating a ROW that is wider than requested new 20'ROW[sic]. This approach is in the interest of the public's safety and welfare. Visually and physically the setback will read as 10'from the existing property line and hence will not alter the character of the neighborhood. Lastly, HBD has consistently recommended approval for deduction [sic] of setbacks due to the City's requests for ROW dedications. The Board's justification has been based for example on the premise if a 5'ROW dedication was requested than [sic] the applicant should be allowed a 5'setback reduction as this would have no impact visually on the streetscape and character of the area." The criteria for a variance are provided in Appendix "C" of this report. The building subject to the setback variance is located in the CBD zoning district and has no historic significance. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.3.4(H)(1), setbacks are established from the property line based on the ultimate right-of-way. In the downtown area, the City has required dedication of right-of-way to meet the 20 foot alley dimension. The City has not provided relief for the rear setback along the alley for new development. The proposed variance is not necessary for the adaptive reuse of an existing structure or site (all development is new). Further, the setback is necessary to mitigate the "canyon" effect within the alleys. Given this mitigation, the granting of the variance would be contrary to the public interest, safety, or welfare. Based on the above, the variance request does not meet the required basis in Section 4.5.1(J). Therefore, the variance should be denied and the development redesigned to meet the required 10 foot rear setback. WAIVER ANALYSIS Pursuant to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), prior to granting a waiver, the approving body shall make a finding that the granting of the waiver: (a) Shall not adversely affect the neighboring area; (b) Shall not significantly diminish the provision of public facilities; (c) Shall not create an unsafe situation; or, (d) Does not result in the grant of a special privilege in that the same waiver would be granted under similar circumstances on other property for another applicant or owner. Wall Height: Per LDR Section 4.6.5(C), the maximum height of walls within the required front or street side yard is 6 feet. The proposed wall and gates along the west side of the property are 11 feet 8 inches high. The applicant has requested a waiver to allow an increase in the height of the wall. The applicant has submitted the following narrative in support of the waiver: "The applicant believes that this design element is consistent with the neighborhood. The wall height complies with the LDR requirement except where they break to denote the entry. Similar applications can be found in other parts of the City. The applicant requests relief." 4/4 Historic Preservation Board M -"ting of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited CO. ,04-231 Waiver Analysis: There are several of these pergola gate features along NE 1st Avenue that are approximately 8 feet high. The proposed 11 feet 8 inch pergola/wall features would not be consistent with the neighborhood. Furthermore, there are no cases that staff is aware of concerning increasing the height of the wall or gate. Based on the above, a positive finding cannot be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), Waiver Findings. Wall Setback Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.5(E) & (F), masonry walls located in the front yard must be screened by landscape material that is to be maintained at a minimum height equal to half the height of the wall. Landscape materials must be of the type that will reach the required height within two years of planting. These walls must be setback 2 feet from the property line to provide adequate area for vegetation to mature. The proposed wall is located along the property line with no setback and landscaping. The applicant has requested a waiver to eliminate the required wall setback and landscaping. The applicant has submitted the following narrative in support of the waiver: "The applicant believes that this design element is consistent with the neighborhood. For instance, one block north, property walls abut the property line with vines trained to grow over the walls. We have proposed similar landscaping scheme. The applicant requests relief." Waiver Analysis: There are several homes along NE 1st Avenue that do not provide the required setback or landscaping. It is noted that these requirements were not effect at the time these walls were constructed. The purpose for the setback and landscaping is to soften these features. Otherwise, the wall would directly abut the public sidewalk and create a harsh pedestrian environment. Consequently, a positive finding cannot be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), Waiver Findings. Sight Visibility Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.14(A), a 40 foot visibility triangle is required at the intersections of public rights-of-way. The building at the intersection of Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Street and the garden wall at the intersection of NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue encroach into the required visibility triangle. The applicant has requested a waiver to reduce these visibility triangles, however, a narrative in support of the waiver has not been provided. Waiver Analysis: There is no concern with respect to the reduced visibility triangles since the restaurant encroaches approximately 4 feet into this area and the wall encroaches approximately 6 feet. Given the location of the stop bars along Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Avenue, there will be adequate sight lines for cross traffic along NE 1st Street. It is also noted that NE 1st Street will be converted to two-way traffic flow, which should serve to calm traffic with respect to vehicle speeds. Similar circumstances on other properties would lead to the same conclusion. Consequently, positive findings can be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), Waiver Findings. 5/5 Historic Preservation Board M- +ing of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited CO. _ ;04-231 Swimming Pool Setbacks: Pursuant to LDR Section 4.6.15(G)(1), swimming pools are allowed to extend into a rear or side setback area but no closer than 10 feet to any property line. However, swimming pools are prohibited within the front setback since there is no provision for their encroachment. The proposed duplex and townhouse pools are located completely within the front yard setback. The applicant has submitted a waiver request to allow the pools within the front setback. The applicant submitted the following narrative in support of the waiver request: "...In order to provide for a more pedestrian friendly streetscape and as had been requested by the Historic Preservation Board and Pineapple Grove Main Street Board we opted to located the garages and vehicular access to the town homes to the rear instead of locating garages in the front yards. As a result, the town homes have their courtyard gardens with pools in the front rather than the rear. We believe this application is standard for this type of development. As noted, the location of the pools within the setback has been approved by other projects located within the Historic Districts of Delray Beach." Waiver Analysis: The Historic Preservation Board approved relief for pools within the front setback for the Marina Bay Townhomes project. This approval was based on the design of the project, which had vehicular access to the rear of the units. It is noted that the Pineapple Grove Limited project offers recreational facilities that the townhouses could have access to, which includes a common pool. There is a concern that the pools within the front yard would detract from the character of this neighborhood, which have no pools in the front yard. Consequently, a positive cannot be made with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5), Waiver Findings. Landscape Islands: The landscape islands along the east side of the townhomes range from 12 feet to 14 feet. There is a concern with respect to vehicles parking in these areas. If a vehicle parks in these areas, they will encroach into the one-way drive aisle and impede traffic. These landscape islands need to be increased to a depth of 20 feet or reduced to a maximum of 5 feet (to discourage parking) and this is attached as a condition of approval. If the islands are shortened, the air conditioning units would need to be relocated (likely to roof wells). Pineapple Grove Main Street Redevelopment Plan: The Pineapple Grove Main Street Neighborhood Plan (The Plan) contains several design guidelines that address redevelopment efforts within this area. The following is an analysis of the applicable design guidelines: Street Improvements: The Plan indicates that the intersection at NE 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 resurface this intersection accordingly. Overhead Power Lines: 6/6 Historic Preservation Board F 'ting of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited CC J04-231 Overhead cables (electric, telephone, CATV) are required to be placed under ground whenever feasible. A condition of approval is attached that all overhead utility lines (including the alley) be placed under ground. Street and Parking Lot Lighting: Pursuant to The Plan, the street and parking lot lighting should be consistent with the Pineapple Grove Main Street lighting. The light poles and fixtures should have a pedestrian scale of 12 feet to 14 feet. The street lights should be staggered from one side of the street to the other with a separation of approximately 75 feet. The lamps must be metal halide and powder-coated cast aluminum for the pole and fixture and fitted to accept banners. A condition of approval is attached that the street lighting for NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue be identified on the plans and that they consist of the typical acorn light fixture and spun concrete poles for the redevelopment area. Street Furniture: The Plan indicates that benches and trash receptacles will be provided. It will be necessary for the applicant to obtain the approved street bench, trash receptacle and bollard details from the Engineering Department and this attached as a condition of approval. Right-of-Way Dedication: Pursuant to LDR Sections 5.3.1 (A) and (D) and Table T-1 of the. Comprehensive Plan Transportation Element, the following table describes the required rights-of-way and the existing rights-of-way adjacent to the subject property: Right-of-Way Required Existing Proposed Required Dedication Pineapple Grove Way 60' 50' 50' 0' NE 1st Street 55' 50' 50' 5' NE 1st Avenue 60' 50' 50' 5' Alley 20'or dominant width 16' 20' 4' Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.1(D)(4), a reduction in the required right-of-way width of existing streets may be granted by the City Engineer upon favorable recommendation from the Development Services Management Group (DSMG). The City Engineer and DSMG considered the reductions and approved the reduction of right-of-way for Pineapple Grove Way to the existing width. However, a 5 foot dedication will be required for NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue together with a 4 foot dedication for the alley and is attached as a condition of approval. As noted previously, the dedication of the 5 feet for NE 1st Avenue will require redesign of the duplex, which requires a 25 foot front setback from the ultimate right-of-way line. Technical Items: While the revised site plan has accommodated some staff concerns; the following items remain outstanding, and will need to be addressed prior to building permit submittal (unless stated otherwise): �(. That an easement is provided for the encroachment of the townhouse roof eaves that / encroach over the duplex property lines. JZ. That a 20 foot corner clip is provided at the northwest corner of NE 2' Avenue and NE 1st Street and northeast comer of NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue. 7/7 Historic Preservation Board Meeting of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited COA 2004-231 3. That the finished floor elevation is established as a minimum of 18 inches above the centerline of roadway along NE 1st Avenue. 4. That type "F" curbing shall be required along NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue. 5. That an exclusive 12 foot water easement be provided over water main. 6. That a minimum of 10 feet be provided between the water main and the building. 7. That tactile warning devices are installed at the entrances to the parking garage to warn drivers. 8. That the site data table is revised to remove the 8 parallel parking spaces from the total provided. 9. That the location of the grease trap is noted on the site plan. 10. That the location of the nearest existing fire hydrants and additional fire hydrants per the direction of the Fire Department and City Engineer be provided. 11. That a composite utility plan including the proposed landscaping is provided prior to certification of the site plan. 12. That a 10 foot general utility easement is provided through the property. 13. That the located and method of mail collection be noted on the site plan. 14. That the applicant contributes $7,500.00 toward a bus shelter. 15. That a revised traffic statement be submitted that reflects the current development proposal: 16. That a finding of concurrency be submitted from the School District of Palm Beach County. LAN DSCAPE ANALYSIS .' The proposed landscaping consists primarily of foundation areas and street trees that include Royal Palms, existing Cassia trees, Live Oak trees, Japanese Fern trees, Green Malayan. Coconut Palms, and Alexander Palms. These areas will be under planted with Arboricola, Variegated Ginger, Black Magic Ti Plant, Redtip Cocoplum, Purple Crinum Lily, Fakahatchee Grass, Ficus hedge, Foxtail Fern, Lobster Claw Ginger, Green Island Ginger, Horizontal Cocoplum, Hibiscus Standard, Ixora Nora Grant, Yellow Lantana, Mona Lavender, Lady Palm, White Bird of Paradise, Red Sister Ti Plant, Trinette, Wart Fern, and Sweet Viburnum. The landscape plan complies with LDR Section 4.6.16, except with regard to the north perimeter_ landscape strip, which is discussed below. Landscape Technical Items: The following Landscape Plan items remain outstanding, and will need to be addressed prior to building permit submission. 1. That conflicts between landscaping, utilities, and light poles are resolved in accordance with the City Horticulturalist. 2. That all visibility triangles are graphically noted on the landscape plan. 8/21 Historic Preservation Board D" sting of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited CC ,004-231 DESIGN ELEMENTS The proposed residential and mixed-use buildings are in the vernacular style. The townhouses and duplex have a combination of gable and hip roofs with silver standing seam metal. All buildings will be painted white and have variations of lap siding and stucco. The architecture of these units are monotonous with little variations. The Board may want to consider requiring variations in architectural appurtenances such as rail, awning, window, and door styles to differentiate between units. The Pineapple Grove Main Street Design Review Committee considered the elevations and recommended the color scheme be revised to provide more vibrant colors. A condition of approval is attached that the color scheme be revised to provide more vibrant colors and that variations of color schemes be provided to distinguish between units. The applicant has indicated that the sliding glass doors are manufactured to match French doors. In order to maintain a higher quality of development, a condition of approval is attached that the sliding glass doors are changed to French doors. REQUIRED FINDINGS Pursuant to Section 3.1.1 (Required Findings), prior to the approval of development applications, certain findings must be made in a form which is part of the official record. This may be achieved through information on the application, written materials submitted by the applicant, the staff report, or minutes. Findings shall be made by the body which has the authority to approve or deny the development application. These findings relate to the Future Land Use Map and Comprehensive Plan Consistency, Concurrency, and Compliance with the Land Development Regulations. At its meeting of May 7, 2002, the City Commission made positive findings with respect to the Future Land Use Map, Comprehensive Plan Consistency, and Concurrency provided conditions of approval are addressed. However, the following is provided: Section 3.1.1 (A) - Future Land Use Map: That portion of the subject property west of the alley has a FLUM (Future Land Use Map) designation of OMU (Other Mixed Use) and zoning designation of OSSHAD. The portion of the property located east of the alley has a Future Land Use Map designation of CC (Commercial Core) and a zoning designation of CBD (Central Business District). The zoning districts are consistent with the CC Future Land Use Map designations. As noted in the background section, the southern 34.75 feet of Lot 6 and all of Lots 7 and 8 are subject to the permitted uses and development regulations of the CBD zoning district. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.13(B)(4), within the CBD zoning district, mixed use developments are allowed. The development will have less than the 30 units per acre (23.32 dwelling units per acre), which is considered a permitted use in the CBD zoning district. Pursuant to LDR Section 4.4.24(B)(1), the proposed duplex is considered an allowed use in the OSSHAD zoning district. Thus, positive findings can be made with respect to Future Land Use Map consistency. Section 3.1.1 (B) -Concurrency: As described in Appendix A, a positive finding of concurrency can be made as it relates to water, sewer, streets and traffic, drainage, parks and recreation, open space, and solid waste. Section 3.1.1 (C) -Consistency (Standards for Site Plan Actions): As described in Appendix B, a positive finding of consistency can be made as it relates to Standards for Site Plan Actions. 9/9 Historic Preservation Board M sting of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited CC 04-231 Section 3.1.1 (D) -Compliance With the Land Development Regulations: As described under the Site Plan Analysis of this report, a positive finding of compliance with the LDRs can be made, provided that all outstanding items attached as conditions of approval are addressed. Comprehensive Plan Policies: A review of the objectives and policies of the adopted Comprehensive Plan was conducted and the following applicable objectives or policies were noted: Future Land Use Element Objective A-1 - Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity is appropriate and complies in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations, is complimentary to adjacent land uses, and fulfills remaining land use needs. The property contains several vacant commercial buildings and multiple family structures and also includes the former site of Neal's Market (demolished). There are no special physical, historic, or environmental characteristics of the land that would be negatively impacted by the proposed mixed-use development. The development will be complimentary with the surrounding commercial developments and provide a customer base for area businesses on a year-round basis instead of seasonal, which provides economic stability for the area. In terms of fulfilling remaining land use needs, the Housing Element of the Comprehensive Plan states as follows: One of the most important objectives of the City's overall housing policy is the establishment of housing in the downtown area. In the years since adoption of the 1989 Comprehensive Plan the downtown has changed from a somewhat sleepy, seasonally oriented shopping district to a vibrant year-round retail, service, and entertainment area with an active nightlife. A critical missing element is a significant housing development. The City recognizes the importance of providing housing in close proximity to shopping, employment, and transportation, and the need to have a residential base to support the businesses in the downtown area. The proposed development will help to fulfill this stated land use need, and is therefore consistent with this policy. Future Land Use Element Policy C-4.4. — The City supports the efforts to revitalize the Pineapple Grove Main Street (PGMS) area, and the use of the Main Street approach: organization, promotion, design, and economic restructuring. While the CRA is the lead support agency for the PGMS organization, the City will provide technical support and assistance through the Planning &Zoning and Community Improvement Departments. The Pineapple Grove Main Street Neighborhood Plan contains several design guidelines that address redevelopment efforts within this area. These items were previously discussed under the "Compliance with LDRs" Section of this report. Transportation Element Policy D-2.2 — Bicycle parking and facilities shall be required on all new development and redevelopment. Particular emphasis is to be placed on development within the TCEA Area. Bicycle parking is provided within the covered parking area and at the northeast corner of the development. 10/10 Historic Preservation Board P"-Ming of January 4,2006 Pineapple Grove Limited CC 004-231 Open Space and Recreation Element Policy A-3.1 -Tot lots and recreation areas serving children from toddlers to teens, shall be a feature of all new housing developments as part of the design to accommodate households having a range of ages. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential developments located in the downtown area, and for infill projects having fewer than 25 units. This policy may be waived for projects in the downtown because the City recognizes the following: that households located in the downtown are likely to have fewer children than those located in suburban settings; that land in the central business district is at a premium and it can be cost prohibitive to provide recreational features such as tennis courts, volleyball courts, etc.; and, that there are other cultural and recreational opportunities located in the downtown that are not readily available to residents of suburban apartment complexes. Some of the recreational, cultural, and open space opportunities located in proximity to the project include: Veteran's Park, which includes a large playground and recreational area; the Atlantic Ocean, the City's Tennis Center, Old School Square Cultural Center, the Milagro Center. Based on the above, this policy is not applicable to this project. Housing Element Objective B-2 - Redevelopment and the development of new land shall result in the provision of a variety of housing types which shall continue to accommodate the diverse makeup of the City's demographic profile, and meet the housing needs identified in this Element. Policies, which will implement this objective, include: Housing Element Policy B-2.2 - The development of new adult oriented communities within the City is discouraged. New housing developments shall be designed to accommodate households having a range of ages, especially families with children, and shall be required to provide 3 and 4 bedroom units and activity areas for children ranging from toddlers to teens. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential development located in the downtown area, and for infill projects having fewer than 25 units. This development provides 7 three bedroom units (43%) and will not be excluded to occupancy by adults only. However, it is acknowledged that downtown dwellings are not typically occupied by households with children. This complex will primarily accommodate young and middle-age professionals. As allowed by this policy, it is appropriate that there not be a requirement to provide 4 bedroom units and specific activity areas for children. Housinq Element Policy B-2.6 - Housing in and near the downtown area, in close proximity to employment opportunities and services, is a critical need. In order to help stimulate demand for new housing in and around the Central Business District, the development of new rental housing projects outside of the TCEA and North Federal Highway area is discouraged. The development proposal complies with this policy as it provides the desired type of residential development within the CBD. Housing Objective A-12: To assist residents of the City in maintaining and enhancing their neighborhood environment, the City shall take steps to ensure that modifications in and around the neighborhood do not lead to its decline, such as those described in the following policies. Housing Policy A-12.3: In evaluating proposals for new development or redevelopment, the City shall consider the effect that the proposal will have on the stability of nearby neighborhoods. Factors such as noise, odors, dust, traffic volumes and circulation 11/11 Historic Preservation Board P°-Ming of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited CC 004-231 patterns shall be reviewed in terms of their potential to negatively impact the safety, habitability and stability of residential areas. If it is determined that a proposed development will result in a degradation of any neighborhood, the project shall be modified accordingly or denied. This project is located within the commercial core area of the City. As noted previously, the residents and commercial components of this development will aid in the economic stability of the Pineapple Grove Main Street area as well as the Atlantic Avenue downtown area. The project is located within an area that consists of the traditional road grid system. This system is conducive to traffic distribution, wherein, automobiles have a diverse choice of options to navigating the downtown area. Motorists are able to navigate the local grid street system to avoid congestion in order to reach collector and arterial roads such as Pineapple Grove Way, NE 1st Street, NE 1st Avenue, NE 2"d Street, Swinton Avenue, NE 4th Street/Lake Ida Road, Atlantic Avenue, and Federal Highway. Given the diffusion of vehicle trips, it is unlikely that adjacent neighborhoods will be negatively impacted by the additional traffic. Section 2.4.5 (F)(5) - Compatibility(Site Plan Findings): The approving body must make a finding that development of the property pursuant to the site plan will be compatible and harmonious with adjacent and nearby properties and the City as a whole, so as not to cause substantial depreciation of property values. The subject property is bordered to the north, south and west by Old School Square Historic Arts District zoning district and to east and south by the CBD zoning district. The adjacent land uses include: to the north and west single family residential and commercial uses; to the east and south by commercial and Old School Square. The mixed-use development proposal will significantly enhance the aesthetics of the subject property together with the neighborhood. The duplexes and townhouses will provide an appropriate transition between the Pineapple Grove Way commercial uses and the lower intensity historic neighborhood to the west. The proposed redevelopment will provide year-- round customer and employment base for the nearby commercial redevelopment along Pineapple Grove Way as well as new opportunities for businesses. The stability of the downtown area will be enhanced by the addition of the households that will patronize area businesses and contribute to the long term revitalization of this redevelopment area together with employment base of the commercial uses. REVIEW BY OTHERS The development proposal is located in an area which requires review by the CRA (Community Redevelopment Agency) and the DDA (Downtown Development Authority). Pineapple Grove Desiqn Review Committee At its meeting of September 7, 2005, the Design Review Committee reviewed the proposal and recommended approval of the development proposal, subject to revision of the color scheme to provide a more vibrant color scheme consistent with the Pineapple Grove Main Street redevelopment area. Community Redevelopment Agency(CRA) At its meeting of August 25, 2005, the CRA reviewed the proposal and recommended approval. Downtown Development Authority(DDA) 12/12 Historic Preservation Board r" sting of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited CC. .004-231 At its meeting of September 12, 2005, the DDA reviewed the proposal and recommended approval. Courtesy Notice: Courtesy notices have been provided to the following homeowner's associations, which have requested notice of developments in their areas: ■ Neighborhood Advisory Council ■ Chamber of Commerce • Old School Square ■ Bankers Row ■ Progressive Residents of Delray (PROD) ■ President's Council Public Notice: Formal public notice has been provided to property owners within a 500 foot radius of the subject property. Any letters of support or objection will be presented at the Historic Preservation Board meeting. ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSION The proposed mixed-use portion of the development will further enhance vibrancy of the downtown area and the continued redevelopment of the Pineapple Grove redevelopment area. The townhouses and duplexes will provide an appropriate transition between the more intense commercial area along Pineapple Grove Way and the low intensity historic neighborhood. The development proposal includes several waivers, several of which cannot be supported including the pools in the front setback, wall setback and landscaping, and the variance to the rear setback. The proposed use is consistent with the policies of the Comprehensive Plan and Chapter 3 of the Land Development Regulations. Positive findings can be made with respect to Section 2.4.5(F)(5) regarding compatibility of the proposed development with surrounding properties. Positive findings can be made with respect to compliance with the Land Development Regulations provided the conditions of approval are addressed. ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS A. Postpone with direction. B. Move approval of COA 2004-231, associated Class V site plan approval, landscape plan, design elements, waivers, and variance for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, subject to conditions of approval. C. Move denial of COA 2004-231, associated Class V site plan approval, landscape plan, design elements, waivers, and variance for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, does not meet criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan. 13/13 Historic Preservation Board M ting of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited CO. J04-231 STAFF RECOMMENDATION By Separate Motions: Variance: Deny the variance to LDR Section 4.3.4(K)[10 foot rear setback], based on a failure to make a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 4.5.1(J). Waivers: 1. Deny the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.5(C), which limits the height of walls within the required front or street side yard to 6 feet, based on a failure to make a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 2. Deny the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.5(E), which requires the screening of walls in the front yard, based on a failure to make a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 3. Deny the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.5(F), which requires that walls located in the front yard be setback a minimum of 2 feet, based on a failure to make a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 4. Approve the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.14(A), which requires 40 feet visibility triangles at the intersections of public rights-of-way, based on a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). 5. Deny the waiver to LDR Section 4.6.15(G)(1), which prohibits swimming pools within the front setback area, based on a failure to make a positive finding with respect to LDR Section 2.4.7(B)(5). Site Plan: Approve COA 2004-231 and associated Class V site plan for Pineapple Grove Limited, by adopting the findings of fact and law contained in the staff report, and finding that the request, and approval thereof, meets criteria set forth in Chapter 3, Section 2.4.5(F)(5) of the Land Development Regulations and Comprehensive Plan, subject to the following conditions of approval. 1. Address all Site Plan Technical Items and submit three (4) copies of the revised plans; 2. That the site plan be revised to provide a minimum of 25% open space for Lots 5 & 6. 3. That the duplex be redesigned to comply with the required 25 foot front setback based on the ultimate right-of-way for NE 1st Avenue. 4. That the landscape islands along the east side of the townhouses be increased to a depth of 20 feet or reduced to a maximum of 5 feet. 5. That the applicant resurface the intersection of NE 1st Avenue and NE 1 Street to match the intersection of Pineapple Grove Way and Atlantic Avenue 6. That all overhead utility lines (including the alley) be placed under ground. 14/14 Historic Preservation Board ' king of January 4, 2006 Pineapple Grove Limited CO. J04-231 7. That the street lighting for NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue be identified on the plans and that they consist of the typical acorn light fixture and spun concrete poles consistent with the redevelopment area. 8. That street bench and trash receptacles be installed along Pineapple Grove Way and NE 1st Street. 9. That a 5 foot dedication is required for NE 1st Street and NE 1st Avenue together with a 4 foot dedication for the alley. Landscape Plan: Approve COA 2004-231 and associated landscape plan for Pineapple Grove Limited, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.6.16, subject to the condition that all Landscape Technical Items are addressed and three (3) copies of the revised plans are submitted. Elevations: Approve the COA and associated design elements for Pineapple Grove Limited, based on positive findings with respect to LDR Section 4.6.18, subject to the following conditions: 1. That the color scheme be revised to provide more vibrant colors and that variations of color schemes be provided to distinguish between units in accordance with direction by the Historic Preservation Board. 2. That the sliding glass doors are changed to French doors. Attachments: • Appendix A • Appendix B • Appendix C • Site Plan • Architectural Elevations • Landscape Plan Report prepared by: Scott D. Pape, Senior Planner 15/15 Appendix A Page 1 APPEN.,D1X A rCONCUR'RENCYm�F;INDINGS Pursuant to Section 3.1.1(B) Concurrency as defined pursuant to Objective B-2 of the Land Use Element of the Comprehensive Plan must be met and a determination made that the public facility needs of the requested land use and/or development application will not exceed the ability of the City to fund and provide, or to require the provision of, needed capital improvements for the following areas: Water and Sewer: With respect to water and sewer service, the following is noted: ➢ Water service will be available to the site via lateral connection to a proposed 8" main along the interior of the property from an existing 8" main along NE 1st Street. ➢ Sewer service exists to the site via an 8" sewer main located within the alley. ➢ The location of existing and proposed fire hydrants must be noted on the engineering plans and is attached as a site plan technical item. Pursuant to the City's Comprehensive Plan, treatment capacity is available at the City's Water Treatment Plant and the South Central County Waste Water Treatment Plant for the City at build-out. Based upon the above, positive findings can be made with respect to these levels of service standards. Streets and Traffic: The applicant submitted a traffic statement that indicates that the mixed use development will generate a net of 1,439 average daily trips (144 p.m. peak trips) onto the surrounding streets compared to generation of the existing uses. Notification has been received from the Palm Beach County Traffic Division that the proposed development meets traffic concurrency. It is noted that the traffic statement was based on a previous development proposal that included 50 multiple family dwelling units, 2,260 square feet of high turn-over restaurant, 6,450 square feet of general office, and 8,000 square feet of general retail. The development proposal under consideration has been scaled back in terms of the number of units. The commercial floor area has been revised to increase the restaurant area and reduce the general retail and office floor area. A technical item is attached that the traffic statement be revised accordingly. The property is located within the Coastal Exception Areas of Palm Beach County and therefore meets the Traffic Performance Standards of Palm Beach County with respect to the residential units. The subject property is located in the City's TCEA (Traffic Concurrency Exception Area), which encompasses the CBD, CBD-RC, and OSSHAD zoning districts, as well as the West Atlantic Avenue corridor. The TCEA was established in December, 1995 to aid in the revitalization of downtown, with a purpose of reducing the adverse impacts of transportation concurrency requirements on urban infill development and redevelopment. These revitalization efforts are achieved by exempting development within the TCEA from the requirements of traffic concurrency. A positive finding can be made with respect to traffic concurrency. Parks and Recreation Facilities: The Open Space and Recreation Element of the Comprehensive Plan indicates in its conclusion that "The City will have sufficient recreation facilities at build-out to meet the adopted standards': A park impact fee is collected to offset any impacts that the project may have on the City's recreational facilities. Pursuant to LDR Section 5.3.2, a park impact fee of $500.00 Appendix A Page 2 per dwelling unit will be collected prior to issuance of a building permit for each unit. A total fee of$19,500 will be required of this development for parks and recreation purposes. Solid Waste: Trash generated each year by the 39 residential units, 5,385 square feet of retail, 5,764 square feet of office, and 4,868 square feet of restaurant will be 123.91 tons of solid waste per year. Per the Solid Waste Authority, the trash generated by this proposal can be accommodated by existing facilities. Therefore, a positive finding with respect to this level of service standard can be made. Drainaqe: Preliminary drainage plans were submitted which indicate that drainage will be accommodated via sheet flow to culverts that will direct stormwater to an exfiltration trench system. Based on the above, positive findings with respect to this level of service standard can be made. School Concurrency: A concurrency application needs to be submitted to the School District of Palm Beach County. A finding of concurrency needs to be submitted from the School District and is attached as a technical item. 17/17 Appendix B Page 1 APPENDIX_ B,- 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 Does not meet intent B. Separation of different forms of transportation shall be encouraged. This includes pedestrians, bicyclists, and vehicles in a manner consistent with policies found under Objectives D-1 and D-2 of the Transportation Element. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent C. Open space enhancements as described in Policies found under Objective B-1 of the Open Space and Recreation Element are appropriately addressed. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent D. The City shall evaluate the effect that any street widening or traffic circulation modification may have upon an existing neighborhood. If it is determined that the widening or modification will be detrimental and result in a degradation of the neighborhood, the project shall not be permitted. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent E. Development of vacant land which is zoned for residential purposes shall be planned in a manner which is consistent with adjacent development regardless of zoning designations. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent F. Property shall be developed or redeveloped in a manner so that the future use and intensity are appropriate in terms of soil, topographic, and other applicable physical considerations; complementary to adjacent land uses; and fulfills remaining land use needs. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent Appendix B Page 2 G. Redevelopment and the development of new land shall result in the provision of a variety of housing types which shall continue to accommodate the diverse makeup of the City's demographic profile, and meet the housing needs identified in the Housing Element. This shall be accomplished through the implementation of policies under Objective B-2 of the Housing Element. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent H. The City shall consider the effect that the proposal will have on the stability of nearby neighborhoods. Factors such as noise, odors, dust, traffic volumes and circulation patterns shall be reviewed in terms of their potential to negatively impact the safety, habitability and stability of residential areas. If it is determined that a proposed development will result in a degradation of any neighborhood, the project shall be modified accordingly or denied. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent I. Development shall not be approved if traffic associated with such development would create a new high accident location, or exacerbate an existing situation causing it to become a high accident location, without such development taking actions to remedy the accident situation. Not applicable Meets intent of standard X Does not meet intent J. Tot lots and recreational areas, serving children from toddler to teens, shall be a feature of all new housing developments as part of the design to accommodate households having a range of ages. This requirement may be waived or modified for residential developments located in the downtown area, and for infill projects having fewer than 25 units. Not applicable X Meets intent of standard Does not meet intent 19/19 Appendix C Page 1 Page 1 APPENDIX C CRITERIA FOR GRANTING VARIANCES Pursuant to Section 2.4.7(A)(5), the Historic Preservation Board must make the following findings prior to granting a variance: (A) That special conditions and circumstances exist which are peculiar to the land, structure, or building involved and which are not generally applicable to other lands, structures, or buildings subject to the same zoning (The matter of economic hardship shall not constitute a basis for the granting of a variance); (B) That literal interpretation of the regulations would deprive the applicant of rights commonly enjoyed by other properties subject to the same zoning; (C) That the special conditions and circumstances have not resulted from actions of the applicant; (D) That granting the variance will not confer into the applicant any special privilege that is denied to other lands, structures, and buildings under the same zoning. Neither the permitted, nor nonconforming use, of neighborhood lands, structures, or buildings under the same zoning shall be considered grounds for the issuance of a variance; (E) That the reasons set forth in the variance petition justify the granting of the variance, and that the variance is the minimum variance that will make possible the reasonable use of the land, building, or structure; and, (F) That the granting of the variance will be in harmony with general purpose and intent of existing regulations, will not be injurious to the neighborhood, or otherwise detrimental to the public welfare. Pursuant to Section 4.5.1(J), in acting on a variance requests the Board may also be guided by the following as an alternative to the above criteria: (1) That a variance is necessary to maintain the historic character of property through demonstrating that: (a) A variance would not be contrary to the public interest, safety, or welfare. (b) Special conditions and circumstances exist, because of the historic setting, location, nature, or character of the land, structure, appurtenances, sign, or building involved, which are not applicable to other lands, structures, appurtenances, signs, or buildings in the same zoning district, which have not been designated as historic sites or a historic district nor listed on the Local Register of Historic Places. (c) Literal interpretation of the provisions of existing ordinances would alter the historic site to such an extent that it would not be feasible to preserve the historic character, of the historic district or historic site. (d) The variance requested is the minimum necessary to preserve the historic character of a historic site or a historic district. (2) Or, as an alternative to Sub-Section (J)(1), that a variance is necessary to accommodate an appropriate adaptive reuse of a structure within a Historic District or upon a Historic Site through demonstrating that: (a) A variance would not be contrary to the public interest, safety, or welfare. (a) The variance would not significantly diminish the historic character of the Historic District or Site (b) That the variance requested is the minimum necessary to effect the adaptive reuse of an existing structure or site. Appendix C Page 2 (3) The Board shall otherwise follow procedures and impose conditions as required of the Board of Adjustments. 21/21 > > > W w > a > > I II > — < III Q N.W. 3RD ST. N.E. 3RD ST. N.E. 3RD ' ST. _ war __ a - 11) _ x CITY II ATTORNEY ? _ ' w BUILDING I =z z MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.DR. N.E. 2ND ST. w aa , 1 w � ■a. iiI z clrY > � - HALL Q is z w w :ate 1� N.W. 1ST ST. N.E. 1ST ST. d z . COMMUNITY 00 CENTER w w - //i// O TENNIS OLD STADIUM I SCHOOL J SQUARE I zIIH T A T L ANT I C AVENUE SOUTH III I Z COUNTY COURT � � > /1/� ft ¢ _ vi Z � E S.W. 1ST ST.— S.E. 1ST ST. �—FIDELITY 1 FEDERAL BANK W w W Li L() 3 hi N 1 vi ui vi LLJ N —� PINEAPPLE GROVE LTD. CITY OF DELRAY BEACH. FL PLANNING do ZONING DEPARTMENT -- DIGITAL BASE MAP SYSTEM -- MAP REF: LM889 Jeffrey Silberstein ` Arch!ua 8 Auoc ata.,Inc. I aa.N■ and 211.21 ],],V I.pN PI.,N.]]u] � J T.I; .a,.m•an I rm u1.u.•.ua o..u:umnnn.pplu,u.m i - oJIw{In/M Nn�r1yy�a,d ® ' ��1�✓r:r.<�r��t ��i '�'N•'SbS'S,%ti1 �_ — �........-...-..� � w +..I�ni+dTF.0 wA.F"'w m SH Ip ~A•y.�/.,w,y''�ylwn_S:'a! SEE EET L-2 �" __J -r�lf �p jL.II•.•'I I `fI�INi;l11i�� o,_. ,iy..r. FOR DUPLEX IL � � IL i, I AREA PLANTING F Aa �I =`�r �1 r _ y COMMEPOUVRETA (� PINEAPPLE GROVE,LTD. DETAILS d '"7 -� v I I j I t r� I v_� t I DELRAY BEACH ouPLEx „f11 v � � �9i1B1 Its ll.•. fr Is © W v ��IIi!Q�P1 s`& - 1. !I��I;, Lu .,w�. Jerry Turner ia � 1. I -2i• I coMMERaAvaEruL Sri u' II' �,��■I�sn�:i� ri�r� Wulm �1 �.nI a I Pl• I W i j II i W 277 S.E,5th Avenue FOR SHEET OU m © Ir uiwu FOR TOWNHOUSE �• t� �I � p+++��yyy � f• � © I' , ��yllll�! ¢ I Dalrey Beach,Florida AREA PLANTING ¢¢fit ^� ® A II ilk, 33483 DETAILS IAA ............um. �a71 Ot �•, � I n, .n I� .. piI v _ m a v Te;581. .��\ : I ��phl N Fax'581-997-8667 1....,;.zs: v•. t. NIAWI ARCHITECT unaw�r1 "�^:�''r"i.� I(•�� \ �Wuuu� illl � Z © It71.0 \al' •(1 ��\ AZT:. •,,, CCMMERLIW RETNL ,I!!'. • - ¢ ._ Wmw. a1 pt l\¢�� II�©�p J 1-- :� t''Li � uwnnr-a.1� uuAW� .•�i�r!' d m \O� !� 111WIIA w7�i{III" y r uuF-�a1�,y.1 �' �� ,Iw*' mm�u JI rW v z l il�..�. ..: .Lb�� )(I`�u •:YIAIW� I( � �I\�L•C► - ��` � �� p � p Ts•• �0 p COMMERLIAURETNL ' SEE SHEET L-2 I V �p� j ��]�.�Iuuui 'IP3I' •` AIR uT ' ll .�. .. ii. ».a DETAIL"G" ill��r aWA , � \ i,. d.. � 0 a r `� "I, I4�f�■ , , ®�1� ,�h .� I v �` }v+_ 6��11•�'a,;xllla��L+ ryl�r�+:;„ I �P��N�I)I I�Iw�d�U11�� 'u!!�W t�a��1I�� :�rJ ��;_��kYfr i �Jf II�!I I�ip��il(j NNi I��!� '`r.,.J..... �N:M::: LIB _ ._.__ ■, maw s.4- �.i w i rr`Irs� . wow 4- w N{E 1S-•TREET a I: ►2. r I�� . °:»',w b:_Nw.•mod I -�`y,`�1— \ __ REVISIONS 1 �+u•v.»..�.. I ]i L.ra......•. � 9IIfA ]A Ni 421 i.'...,a OCIw.AN70 • A..w ra.a r..ws I July 1 S,2006 O Drown oy:oT LANDSCAPE PLAN L- ' 1 r.zo•o• � CUCA0011L\DWe1ANEAPP .I•.•I a• NS dF- ersteln Ar r+.l,Ine. D.I rllt 11111 3 . r,Yr r 1 III I,�+:j:$''��1�1�� i�l��:��1�♦3�1�1��3��1�+ 'i��r• �_� a I nnxw.u•ioml..n � •r;3�5,1'��t�s ?,�00,�6 c ueo�:x � r�1��1��E#�� L� 7�//'r. ® 1: /i � %€!lur0 jxi�33 'x O tir` x.:..♦......:...__.:..: _ _ v� j sIDUPLEX , ®v � ; o�: a � �IpIIII,�iilQl/`� ( ♦ fi � •j4j€I?f.tilfl;lt� t�,'.0{. ! 3 �ri• E t£:;:;3j£n60 II.;IIs j i3 is� � I'.�:. �C�• � :.�.: b�a.g xl;x;j3is;'ti€I:�€'p,': © %?I 3"vY. ! ,.tLi •€,'i€!3 3..1•i E7€73jil' 'it m p tj€;:,:133:fls`I 0 .�;�QiD/��?=''l�Jtj,•s 3 UU ©I;�rlt, ��€ nr 3C.'�,y m ..:i4J tl,�.;:•, S 3 I;x .m 5 ja..' ��I�;„�••��_ _� I�` �3 � v �� . -� ®© : � PINEAPPLE GROVE,LTD��,y� i'..yp ! 2 j �,'..� QY '♦r� � L:Nisstl��(•IiCP�€�.IY.I €�: ,N:,s.�� ` .�► +� €m :♦ralerr�•2�•�'+w� .w� ':t` /\ •^o°� �� , � Y-�+�y�� n'rionnonool _ tr�1i,Ij lllli�.. -� lriFN d•K,?ta•"ytL 4xJ£ O A %0 o �:JIJtgi�yl; ® TOWNHOUSE DUPLEX I • © i- ..ram-.•: DET?�I • I ,� ,�, _� F s'r:�.•rsa_...♦ ., Jerry Turner m ♦.;I , , . _- — & Associates 0 ,,♦r. � 3IE�� ••sy! n'3 i�s:sn nx_it!r it 0 ..♦� '!. ! ixlt a I I..3 i.=• € I :�3 v ® �,•' 11•!€ li�' tl'i '•'•� !7 '� I 277 SE.6th Avenue m .♦.:�i3 1�,3 !.n•x tj s€, # � � a�{i I 0 < v ��;, € I II.:•xlIx.�tF �`' � I II ® p + r•: ® Deiray Beach:Florida � m >;' :ED�D i• 71?.00Pf000110� V _I� m o® �¢ Eoto� *oo•0000roo — - —or� p »7 334t33 p U 000000000000 m I v L4TTi m �� i"bs ` acgao Ko®—o't► I, �1 I�: V' ® Te1:581-278.0453 _I� V\ j�� _ FeX:561.997-8667 v E;♦ ►�DTie►" 4 4,�`_ r a°o°o°o a iratiy'..� O+`� r .} q,` w +. � +_•.,C, .'�Y_{}L� ttlw:9®®QQ��,G e i � � t z�i� ! I + ij7� �I� ARCHITECT ♦ ,. Oil r fIx. ?!tN:!�^� ii011r j ' ® ,o I��'!'€".i3r;s jlslt!>[pI;}s LN p p � L�:.1Tv•€€!3lyt€°'id:tf ixI•'='¢ki A; + ® 5 p �41oii€it3tal3faFiji3€i,N LN DUPLEX AREA _ o m TOWNHOUSE DETAIL DETAIL B 'y7q 'OOf100�00'oa;GO'u7Illlll llIll '1% % :�!?%'s;'s:%%,,,.•. ;°...— REVISIONS QTAF. ' CO44ENTD DETAIL "G" Jury 1,YDQS L-2.0 ®LANDSCAPE DETAILS a Drrwnby:DT vs.ro CMCADUTIL1DWDtPINEAPPL •.•,:.fir£ I J Jeffrey Sllbereteln Arohe•01}*,0041tt,Ino. [ 1 I5•4 N• find•17••1 SITE De..Incl.7.4. 9:TBn GK T•: 161•.e.•..t / , Y r.•: tt1•tot I,••t Ne16N60RIN6 PROrCRTY� 11 �' laln,InI11r.I1x11.11,1.II.N1 A[ j s'I�IGAT Or P III 1? /\ rt..Iwr I.I /•1AY DCDIGATION �10ff •`1/j• p�w I r RI6NT Or pp y wu...wA lw uypy�Ao d I,17')!f-Y.%� •= � NAY OCDILATION d�i1 x•'A S Hoop A.}. •..IPP �IYy.uNy.,.N I^••r�'tMw q ■W . __ liliiiii "_��_�F II II II Illl 1111111 II,T_—_-IIIpV,:_ ""°•a4M"k""„«"r°"� Y3� I� -- �■IIIIIII I Z� ��__-■■JJr I �IIII'al 1 LOCATION MAP r•�r.� _ (IIII• I I =_ =I��I1i�!! I. I I II = '�I\iI�� 110 Illllillll l��I tlll-Ilpl_ ( ®LOCHI NTB II \ PINEAPPLE GROVE, LTD. 1411111 Ii!� I II 111� II II II I IIIIIIIIIIIIllllll I Illllm Illol .4. DELRAY BEACH , aPRp/R. t vNOv11 j t I III _ IIIIIIIII IIII— i �O - m,Iil II ii, I ellllllll,. , O❑ O�RG. .W- 1:4 p1im Ia O❑ nlbnNc ii r_ Ill... ---. i��1.1.1u I� _-I�. __9.R.B c: � ! 16yn,,,1 1 11111■L- :� II h�- -t v nn 4"jr.a 4 1 r- III- II II I ��I '��IIIIiIIIIIIIIuuulullllllllmI1111_�I111111C! ----1, ..•.—....... � �� IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII=_IVIIII1I J.. 111 i '°i __ IIII _ n o0 0 j11j ..�i LU II ' ¢ I1 I V II o 0 0 1: i Z 1 , N GI �— i II fYI-' �I Q 4 ~ M 1..— III�� 1 ��IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIU°eallIIl�lll J.. W odz `� I II �1= �I�I IIIII�IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII °Ilglllll � „,„.„, lipril.M.10 I �' II/I ��III III= O�❑ =i_i'. 1 B C TK'1- K D A; C1A wooIII II - o❑o ° L .. .4 a,,. LH. T. ❑.p r 0 Mt .-.--'w ll '11111. I� I 1 )'I V III 1j1 II.. WnH«y usvw.0 v`", I. N .� �o4.4.star; II I , �. =llllluplllll�� I(��iIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIDo,I w Mill III 1 1 11 I 1 II III .I I '_ IIII_ III"ul—u1,1 xw N u •.a w: II a1 IIII IIII I = DID-1'IJ �pli-—qpl� `� 1. .�IIl�iII.II II I� III _' 'I II III _ BwEss MW NCB 61 S•ilk __ :I II Klmlu i�il-IIII��=_- 'a ull- IIIIIII oil' 111111i6u11 I:�e,.d g I :�1 'IIII �! II ,qQl Ir =Iglu.I L-411u1 j t All llli ; =pull' I I��I �IIIII .Idllll d III II it =1111h 0.1.1. R Lg I 111 • I I I1111111111.0101 11h.oL'I1 I MI III1 dphllllllllllpllml J it »� M 1 r'' OBI [I a N?Ii" @_a $:, / �I- n•. r _ I I 1 I Inul rtWlpi 1 WI•+Pd h ,. IIIIIILIIIIAF It'•O' I.. ?�� rZrwcru.... Mx 1 1 nM L {�¢111 `y nwr w•t.i ''-"-H W.W.10 YAI rM '' _ �' NE 1ST STREET 4- � i J a MRMMNIr I."KMYWN,e bpayyl.y 1Y140 1M/•rre,l 1(E/ �.. I.� uaylP.lwY�IMWIx01,.1, 4inY MVj1NI�ia6/MgrriF119N.rri.b wig nl ,.✓Ji. (�� 1 ,,�,pw.�J1,.,4.•.y r..w rw REVISIONS Y�rYIYi•µil,*••.I.IKMwMea.lb mk-I COMMENTS Cr u'I'rw' rI.rllw .. • ,2005 y Jul 15 ?;7050 ryf5t,.1!V?r!r.1?rW..w i:w ;sC;i:;::........ . . 4►#BP."W O014rpuccci*Ifi:nGle}.1i.blpwie. Drawn by:TDB 0 ROOF PLAN O:UrchlleIX CurelPrrue, lead uae pineeppII prove aqe • SCALE:1'-20'-11,0' me •.,...�,..,,i o,. .,.,..-_._,_... 5'gIbHT I 0 Q saw H , WAY DELdIIGATI F orlr�e. 2 RIGHT OF H' WAY DEDICATION "••'� i 195 O' tiC 1..u�wur,w..lrl.rrn..n t�nn I jDL:X1 +R� � \M 1• ••'� I!x I " e I b nM�.nnµvMlr.t rtwnrq� i Wrywrw.warn pwM..�en W � Y+' •x N 4 m...r.NVNr.r• 11 .•r r> wwu�~ I I nl ul u:� EI�lI' I � � _... I ., 3 �. • h � •°'� slap rya! �♦ _ 1 1 s x c'1 1 1, �'�':: .UPLEx .n. } I 4 nirII I fl L, rrnm� h PINEAPPLE GROVE,LTDr DELRAYBEACH LEGEND NOTE � �/F11 I o 1117tlQE1� F' 1 i II el=�f� fy '�'�� EXISTING POWERLINES 0 = , �•�:�;� BRICK PAVERS � ., ON ALLEYWAY TO BE ✓ '� LI�� ' �I. � il. r i � �Nv� LANDSCAPE LOCATED UNDERGROUND I„ I S 81^ g �°. I COMMERCIAU RETAIL n� f�,! 5 W `�j iiUDld l vLpY.ii, faed!4f 4°71 bP•.pN.�dT IJ1 d4�14fooN��.+brl ap W y l �e�l®' ' I •. Q �\\\\\\ 1816 s'1 ft "il I' O 0 ,,� I * 1.. I. �� 3 t+Je• I Il,' 61.RAaLabARo-rmGvx9a.aYe w /wN/dIdT11a 1411n116.Yae n •' � 1R 11171=F /"1' � �ti1 2 wlc MaN T WI..1 Wxw, TrwlbinR 1!•rouFna Rn =ipM ni Ill n W Q v�A...•el•y pr.s.f)J Rv.lddlf Z � Iv 1b .J>ala n. � � ®Le,�._�.. �fi►�� .Li=7�' � I. Y � h!�� ,� I ��riril{�I' � � Irr� e �1 e2r-++ �Jn 11 an �I R .'1. IIRni1N• ,Ir:1,,- I— E Ii Ii�T// ' ! — I�-yi Z K r�'un elss e..k Or I— NG"a _t�.ir_ r 1 IR/I�L�'rf/'�` — o I 'I e.{;:, (V ra lidrky a�N 9a � W !a� 1,a n 1 �°® U � .r•� } @IIIIE "'t, Z rail A ►�. _a�i I'I r °L1 I14 �eral�aa : - • _ _ I, •mom` I/Gn`u"iw ®I �®®II 'IIIIIwj � 1 LG 1 I! ';I � ; . annul �� Itli �OOS � TI7� nl aa�r�*�� r�..,�e� rrin ,r ',fit, �, . a 4 � a��lunlllln� I I t �, I:I 1, ' I ►� �! Ire"rl I m I�'�►��ilk == ' iiIII I I nna! nnnr' liiLI , OFFICE 17BUpll II 1 �I Il,� �3, 1, r.o• �:>-r �•� gm It II�� fir,' fl IR,a; .��x��, o I ' "' I I"' l t � � I ;', I I '; 1 I u 1 1 1 11 �[1 s � ° 4 � � ?M =dl'; =.�.e•..0•,a..an ^ ,RASP 4 .r: ,1_If P( 1 t I. 1= cal_I r 11 j .eliYls I x� la 1! ! i I ,r 1 Jtn T .1.xc..o •.0 I .... f "• { „�, V� • .w cu u'..r nus e'e.•.e.0 ccs�• ��' ♦ I 2 PARKING STANDARDS 4- 4- f OSCALE:NTS REVISIONS 4 ♦ NE 1ST STREET a I J f- NT' AX July 16,$005 � \ \ (/ Drawn by:TDS ®PARKING FIRST LEVEL AND FIRST FLOOR•OFFICE,COMMERCIAL J/� AND TOWNHOMES � I OMrchlledurolProjedl4nlxed ueeeeppl•Orw.VdwSe'ddA•t.dwp SCALE:IHB'.l'•0' �' TOs f/17/e00!141 PR 1.-I•.-S_I L.•.I pl•n.drp + • NCI6HCORIN6 P `ROPERTY II Juuruy.`Ju09rateIIE • - - J Aryhlttd l AtloAattt•no. I1 114 NI Ind•+n•1 B'RIGHT II• & 0 III parr IYu. WAY DE IGATI•N�• I T. u+.«tt.tan 2'RIGHT OF tu: n+•nt•em i� 196 O I WAY DEDICATION - I C Ia01,Itlilutllbll,Iboll.ul p "" L Y /eW1.nYet. yY...rv.. M tww nYwN hl I �� COMM EROALI RETAIL �� wi-wt wnt.n t«nwlw, I___________ ' P III 1-.r P A """ I \ wet Yulrs(n,MJ+WN' y �YfYY-I 1 w $ «nn,. -1p� '�I1�� 311 i ! ! 1746 sq ft N .j' + .j I. Y.: •UPLE% I ri��1 �� ... �'} 'i: IM d 3 I �N!:EII �t'� W _A�lul�• PINEAPPLE GROVE LTD, ". IH P rw V . JIIIIII '1 I� 1 CF&o.N. •; I! ` «� �.. I y Q! !;9 l 91! •m:iuu� /.1 - j: DELRAY BEACH -----a -- �•� �L. }�-- --- -'�- ---�t ; ;� 1 'I• / LEGEND NOTE f U,duax� 13 °} I. ° ! �_ ! ;'' zz >;;;� EXISTING POWERLINES 0 � rI�� r � -, d , ,,,,,, 1 BRICK PAVER9 � t I„ g - _ � •`•`"• ON ALLEYWAY TO SE ! IuuIIIIIu1 r LAND6CAPE LOCATED UNDERGROUND ' — 4i 111 I g •, Y COMMERCIAURETAIL I' 9 �pa�rtA •- © ��. _ I w r W pE] �0tt11M ldf Wp.nA laa[m.lf d„pIR.agl�pwlN4 Tmlln4 14M0w+n ba Ay L t - d� II -- I 1816sgft 't . W ®.Y�..� �e��' ! s" II _ ,;, z I otxwaaDAi+oimaAvYlsoxa+r�wd dkl.aim>Art!h1e.Ji1«taaM.it. d � '` �� {I. ""� 1 � '. �.N" I. W s 'wt a,p feJwtu �enw+� Ya tertw Isra+liNrr n+u po ai¢ln . r P .'.,-, i AY i4wli fotLLt r t� .00l. :'� rlfli I C'1 9 �� I i � nn •"' ' - ? e d 0 '� r .... N � e..ln -•. a � r --IJ_ a- , 1' d y 'IIIIWII, z L I y II tEIlI+7 �/e� 1 IIIIIIIII• I{ 3 z ��©_'. 9 i I _... y d': ^�m,e COMMERCCRURETAIL 1 b. // _ -_I a. 1,M n 1823'sq ft r - — �►.ii e I I t i E COMMEHCIAL/R-AIL q I I�'�IIIIIID� .. � I `IIIIIII� - 4028 sq ft RESTAURANT 4y I t 1 t� fit! -yam I Y t[- PE' 1 ' 1 8l08O FT II .�• 1' tt.YMo neu Duty,oyu ' IIti,r � t �I J f t r YCY ntr � 1 I 4c1e tLY 1_fr,C 1_4 /1 ' /_1 h.CYJ•1 {EY � III,;1, C�� 1,:Y 1�yW r � Y ,CY:; R -.I�I L ::,a• GCN 1'Y,Y tWtraYYY Mt! I \ Y� , t e � e:*��'••V.ii=, r S•;1 �" 1 J_I. I { t tQ{t�m I t 2 PARKING STANDARDS I V �Y I " )$CALE:NT9 REVISIONS - 4- NE 1ST STREET 4- I( A July 16,E' r \ Dnvm hy:TD9 (T)PARKING '/PARKING UPPER LEVEL AND FIRST FLOOR -OFFICE,COMME CIALANDTOWNHOMES aWchtltauwVmllat4nLauttbnptpptycYt�wU,�a SCALE:1/18'.I'.tP me en.nM.w•.to La Y.e i....i-..:.+...... NIHOgIN PROFR.Vt5 I • itI,Ifl EEU I; :::; Y PEICA .. .• 11 0'•. IP.11IIlIIhSlSI,ISbSII,,uIS.,,I . L: . . .. [T1 - ____- - - ) - .U ... •.: . . . jJ. , . 1 . LEGEND F .s- t j h1 I 1 C BR PINEAPPLE GROVE,LTD F L 00 / DELRAYBEACH QUIIIIIIIIJ P1I I I 4 .1st SI (S I. _uI "' C Iii,.. - 4 :i :1.: :.: :i..... __ I __ j 5, __ ,, .. ,. IIHIIIII e iL I — MI•--- _____ II —;—= — ' — 4( I II I -' - 111111111 i -w-. III ii vu / ' 1) ___ I J. . . . Iiriiiiiw_..ri. z wnmmi !11 11111111 Cø • . I , . - " I uuIllIIIl - - ' !' :i I .- ,:.a-. !!? .I. '- I • rJ ' — ,.I . - ± II -- M . . iuI - 1. - 4— 4-. . 4- '1 . . REVISIONS 4- 4- NE1STSTREET 4- 4- mlu,5005 A- .O / C ()2ND FLOOR PLAN . ( S SCALE:1/16W• .. ......... JulrWy oiiuurutuiri NIHOIN FRPRTY•'' I Ni.o Inc. . 0 II - i __4 — 1 - -_ - - - __ ____ - . - - - 'L ..I 1? I I -- - IIIII;II;I IIIrnrnIp SQ )il N . . LEGEND F ________ : I BRICK PAyERS 0 II ' r k4I ( I - - jtiiiiiiiiiLl I ______ — IIIII.III_Il :::it . I I . r' II >- L - w I. - II I LI) I I > I I I ,I , 1r II 'iiL H r - 14 II ... r IP- I r LPJI ii ITT" __ _____________ ___ ____ L 1- J$FTI . REVIONS . NE 1ST STREET +- III . I&2OO5 A-4.O ( . ( 1 3RD FLOOR PLAN AN cc ,nil AM A3A.t.I cn.c-44cc QrMT S IIIIIH ' " III I lilhllllllllll hlhlllhhhllll - - : pIlIllJll.IIIIJ I _____________ hhI IhhhhIlhIhIh IIII!IIllIII ' iiii _I I — I H I IJI HhIHlHHhir1! iiiIIIHIl' 1 • I t LEGEND p ts B — IIIIllhIJIIIIIIIIIIbdHIIdIIIIIIIblIIIIII= 'I -' I ... Illh}llhIIJllhIHhIIIIIIIIIJIIIllhIII011hHhI • I'-: IIllHIIIIIIlIlIIIIIIIIHlIIOIIIIOhlIIOIIII L '1 > II W I —liii IIOlIIJIIOII1IlIIIllIOIIIIIllhI I I : iEIIOIOhIIIIIIIHIIHIIOIOIIIIIOOIlIIIIIII "' P'J :•. : . 'I Z S —IIIIOIIIIHIIHUIIIlIOJIIDIIIIHIOIIIIIll , I r -iiiiiiiiiiiiioiiiiiiiijoiiiiiiioiiijiiiiiij- l - h III 'IhIh 111111 IhIL - -- 41 ri 55] [4 (ii[ [4_iJ [I I •1 - - S 5 4- 4- j I - :: REVISIONS J .5 L I 0- 4- NE1STSTREET 4- 4- Ju15,2OG5 ( / A-5.O ( ( )4TH FLOOR PLAN.ROOF PLAN TOWN HOMES&DUPLEX ( S - /IN\ T 9/ /445 I47 U 43A _fL ,$ ..2-44. LEGEND: Jeffrey Sliberstein STANDlNG SEAM METAL ROOF SILVER AWEHB MOGIII,Inø. LOUVRE SHUTTERS COLOR WHITE WOOD TRELLIS COLOR WHITE ' " .'. PU, III US.0565 PAERIO AWNING COLOR BUNBRELLA I ,0I00N.,9,I ROYAL BLUE TRIANOULAR WOOD SHEE BRACES OSSHAO OSSHAD,PINEAPPLE GROVE,CEO COLOR WHITE -. 0 (JBXPOSED RAFTER TAILS COLOR WHITE /_CJ 0 0 0 1e WCH EDWO COLOR WHITE 0 ______ Ewoos pi '." r i1IU _f STUCCO PSH COLOR WHITE I u 'r,* u - i, ssj i Jj ,. ]WOODPINISHCOLUMNSCOLORWHITE op DSTD ,. '. II [fly fl II II !!miii miii ii iiii ii U iii liii ii U ii.uu it Iii Ui Iii CLEARIMPAOTWINOOWsM/DDOORS: PINEAPPLE GROVE,LTD. , IIII IIIIIIISI BAHAMASHUUBRAWNING WHITE DELRAYBEACH S . U -, — WHITE PANEL HURRICANE IMPACT NE OCT STROST GARAGE DOOR.WHITE OSOLID WOOD DOOR COLOR ELEVATION:NE 1ST AVENUE SUNBRELLA ROYAL BLUE SCALE:l/IS.VA' DECORAT2VE WOOD GRILL.WT-IITB iIi!J1t IIt...L'ofl-eZZ, - ' ,-.. OSSHAO PINEAPPLE GROVE.CEO OSSHAO — — — iiJm 1k I 0 0 o— I ii ii tIIifIwnAIII IIik ; : ' 11111 IEIU llI" — ® DUPLEXELEVATION SOUTH ci J. I2'CT CTBSET . S . I I III I I — 0 2 ELEVATION:FROM ALLEY LOOKINO WEST I SCALB:1/16".1-0" . k ''II H It ff11 I— II II ...II III i, - — S S OSSHAD OSSHAO,PINEAPPLE GROVE,CEO . TARE DUPLEX ELEVATION:NORTH SCALE:I/TB'•I-A" !hIII Il ii II II II II '' i' 'I i II I ii I ? i ci I F, • •r •L fl jj - a a S S — ,áT1 REVISIONS N000TBREENT IIIIII . OELEVATION:NE 1ST AVENUE W/GARDEN WALL - IliHIlIDIlI Il1OIIPh I SCALE:1/16".I'S' S julyl6,2005 6 ELEVATION:FRONT GATE VARIATIONS A6.0 SCALE:1/4'•I'S" Drawn by:BE GJI.UJeS'roJec .du,e5baaç4.. ': . GO TOE 1/IC/ZOOS 041 006 0-0.I,o,Rn,•pt00 .Je . rateln flHrF T.tI III Ill $111 701 Ifl.171.110 - 1.111,IrlsrlI,IsII?lls.Il.sll R.O . PEOTIOI1 PPJA1ION 2 2 IH D2IFIWAF?LEROVr ( Al1llIIw. I t. tr pWSn rd 0 0*IM,P lbnlfl flNkffl' I I II II II I I J 0' 0 II I U , PINEAPPLE GROVE,LT t U U Miituiiiii t - ii U U '!!, U i ii i,i ____ Uj II II — ISTANDNGEEHiMETALROOF$ILVER 5J1 LOUVRESHU7TER8COLORWWTE NVZM)E WOOD TRELLIS COLOR IMIrrE FASRIO AWNING COLOR SUNBRELLN ROYAL B WE TR WGULAR WOOD IG4EE BRACES COLOR WHITE ( \ELEVATON NE 1ST STREET EXPOSED RAFTER TALE COLOR WHITE 1/w- B INCH LAP SIDING COLOR WHITE WOOD P101<51 RAILING COLOR WHITE STUOCO FINISH COLOR WHITE WOOD FINISH COLUMNS COLOR WHITE CLEAR IMPACT WINDOWS AND DOORS: FRAMES WHITE BAHAMABHUTTERAWNPG.WWTE WHITE PANELHURRION4E IMPACT 052/PIWEAAPLE R0VZ - GARAGE 000R•WHITE SOLID WOOD DOOR COLOR SUNBR ELLA ROYAL BLUE JDEcORAT1vEWooDoRILL4M!TE I a it 'll iifluiii,u 2 III iIIu1IIiIIIiI .II II II il Ii IlliluIti ii I III L-!II IJIlt1Il ii I 1111 — I I I I II _________ II II I I I II . ii1 ' '! IT1IiTI Ii - 1)' 1W. b1 ."41 II III - _ U U 7i/ iii, U ? 'I " 'I !! A " lIu IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII— 1111111/0111 UIIIIIIIII —IIIIlIIIIIIIIIIIlIIIIIIIrIII urn o "ii liii tjIjjIE II II H ii ii I liii III iHliiiIi H ii o liE - NC1&TSTS!ET w - REVISIONS ( '\ELEVATION:NE2NDAVENUE S -) - SCALE:1/IS"-1.0, rnlsDOTS A -7i Dawn by:TOE/ES TOO I/l&tXS 11174 PH 4.74'7_$I0Itfl$ Q Jeffrey Sliberatoin koMsd&/.laBcgatu,Inc. 194 NI ITS SI, , t,lllI u,l,B 11,111, Tilt Ill ITS. Sl Flit lit'ITS.DIII l.ittt 1144,111 II Sit II,,tli.,sl • •ii TIIII'499 ttI4TincI 9, b.4 - 41 I Ii !.lII! ..._llIIIItIIJIIIIIlIIilw;llllllliuhllllllt I liii 'INIE. d -- - II II lillulIiI4 U I I1 'IIIIuuI IIIP/U ILL IJ PINEAPPLE GROVE,LTD U JI_ iIIlI1JliJ4 DEIRAYBEACH 11 II II II tI II II• LEGEND: ' B r ' r3 liii I _________ JLOREUERSCOI.ORWWTE WOODTREWSCOLORWIIrTE FABRIO AWNING COLOR BIJNEPELLA ROYAL BLUE OELEVATION:ALLEY LOOKING EAST aITRIANGULAR WOOD BREE BRACES SCALE:11I&.l0 COLOR WHITE EXPO8ED RAFTER TAII.S COLOR WHITE INCH LAP SIDING COLOR WHITE WCOD PICKET RAILING COLOR WHITE STIJCCO FINISH COLOR WHITE WOOD FiNISH COLUMNS COLOR WHITE IMPACT WINDOWS AND DOORS: FRAMES WHITE OTOiOATIQN STOIGATIOH EAHAMA SHUTTER AWNING.WHITE 2 OSDIGATION WHITEPANELHURRICMIEIMPAGT A 1. OES+IAT' QARAGEDOOR.WSNTE SOLID WOOD DOOR COLOR SUN BRE LLA ROYAL B WE — . jjDECORATLVEWOODGBILL.WHITE S II II I __ "''' : ______________ FO Di 1iJA *t II II I -. I_i u Ui u U Li i_i a .IIIII'I IIIIIIUIIIIIIIIfflIIfflhIIIOfl IIIIIIHIlII1![IIII ° ______________ ______titiui iiIJflhIUI11iL - I 1 1 IITHT±liHUH2=UII — 0—S 'U I I II II :111 II4 -° i N5VtDAVBInJB 44' " r REVISIONS ( "ELEVATION:NORTH SCALE:I/l6•I-IT . . July15 WOS A-8.O DTawnbW.TDS/SS 9/ID/t4t 46 M A.7A-T_.l.vcttcnl.d.Q - erstein !!IIIII Ii II•I 07,0.0 0.1 • Id,H411 T.It III.I7P.IISI Plot III.171.0111 1.101 I.Ill,II,1,71.rosIn ill RON ROYI DEDIOAON DEDICATiON DEDICATION 2 2 COOl P1145AFPL5 AROVE IN OSEHAD 1:: TTFIC EGRRD rY HA7WMW worn J NEZ AV PINEAPPLEGROVE,LTD WOODTRELLISCOLOR WHITE FABRIC AWNING COLOR SUNEREU.A S OVAL ELU S ( SECTION: TWADJGULARWOODANEEBRACES \ J SCALE: CO•l,.O. EXFOSED RAFTER TAILS COLOR WHITE INCH LAP SlDlNGCOLORlM4flE [Jw000 PICNET RAIUNG COLOR WHITE STUCCOFINISHCOLORWH!TE WOOD FINISH COLUMNS COLOR WHITE [ JCLEAR IMPACT WINDOWS AND DOORS: FRAMES WHITE BAHWA SHUTTER AWNING.WIIITE WHITE PANEL HURRICANE IMPACT GARAGE DOOR.WHITE SCUD WOOD DOOR COLOR SUNSRELLA ROYAL EWE EJDECORATIVE WOOD GRILL.WHITE REVISIONS "lIe July 1 6,2005 A-9.s b,T TiP WEE GIuProocI1Vnited uI&pIMnp.g. . TD$ 9/IN/ZOOS 96 NH A.7-A-_.l.vEtrn.,.d,O L _ _ flh/ N.W. 3RD ST. N.E. 3RD ST. J I / N.E. 3RD ST. IHI LI_Il/i /1/ CITY 1111 ATTORNEY t w BUILDING I - Z Z MARTIN LUTHER KING JR.DR. N.E. 2ND ST. - - . I ___ 1, 1'!! .J.'J ci. I i I CITY > I / HALL < : : :.*;'; I ,LJ / N.W. 1ST ST. N.E. 1ST ST. I/Ill IItII COMMUNITY II III CENTER //II/ STADIUM SCHOOL TENNIS - L OLD ,i//[// : SQUARE Z I ATLANTIC AVENUE SOUTH 1 "I ___ COUNTY III I III I! - Il/ I XIIIc.'1 .— z I ______,<'- S.W. 1ST ST.— S.E. 1ST ST. _______ -- III — .—..' p III ___ FIDELITY / 1/ / FEDERAL - III BANK III - ---- - / fl C') N PINEAPPLE GROVE LTD. CITY OF OELRAY BEACH. FL PLANNING & ZONING DEPARTMENT -- DIGIFAL BASE MAP SYS7EM -- MAP REF: LM889 DELRAY BEACH FLOD All-America City III ' ' , I ® 1993 2001 SIGN IN SHEET Regular Historic Preservation Board Meeting February 20, 2008 PRINT FULL NAME ADDRESS OR ITEM NO. ORGANIZATION // C- bJ HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD February 20, 2008 MEETING COMMENCED: 6:05 p.m. II. A. II. B. II.C. NAME ATTEND 418 NE 2nd Avenue 211 NW jst Street Pineapple Grove Limited VOTE: TABLETO NEXT MEETING WITH 5TOO 5100 DIRECTION IN No. 1 -4 5 TO 0 ROGER COPE P SECONDED SECONDED JAN KUCERA p MADE MOTION LINDA LAKE P MADE MOTION MADE MOTION TONI DELFIANDRA P RHONDA SEXTON P SECONDED KEITH SNIDER ABSENT JOANNE PEART ABSENT Meeting Adjourned: 6:50 p.m. HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD February 20, 2008 MEETING COMMENCED: 6:0 5p.m. II.A. ( O II. B. II.C. NAME ATTEND 418 NE 2' 'Avenue 9 / 211 NW 15t Street Pineapple Grove Limited - ç-t c / ) VOTE: ROGER COPE ? JAN KUCERA-WINNEY '777'27 LINDA LAKE / ' 2 TONI DELFIANDRA /- 4" RHONDA SEXTON KEITH SNIDER JOANNE PEARl ABSENL . — Meeting Adjourned: p.m. ass I. , "�, .. Jr ,„ • y \ , • •A Mil • t I of - ._ " Y 1 ' \ e 1a.i ' Y 3 III ! l! . • • Way..... $. .._ :. ,(5/ 0/ ..:;•.... ... , iiiii .... "44 t fo 11-1411, - ..... .• , ' ••=444.44 .4. 4•44 .... .4•414 ., • '. tillh•i• 1P ' . i• .- . . ) , . -• a .1 _ . i I It ' i i i i i ti_ii i i• ''.' sr tii,•'.,0- ', Ir.t. .- . ' . . I 1 JO* IOW..7 , hVik t I ,:11 II III a i \., _.„..'_. 1 • i kk l „ -,i 4,.s17t.0i 1Ii 1Ii • ,. •,,,10;-4 62. _ 1.--- • .. . . . _ • . • , . -- ' • ' ' • - . .=- • , . ,• •14t., ; .. ' like7. ---.PI° -- ,--' It4.rik : ."--.c:--;"-Pit. .._L4e.-...-f...- -:' :::: , - •• - • •,041: , , ,,, " ,. __ ,. . x . .,i. - .4,4,04r_. ••.. p.v 411042, : ,..,,,,e ilt.:;..,s -, .4110. . .. - •'' ' . ' • • .• •'*%.,i) .•' .i..., 11" - ..-0 •.4e ,.• iitt' • - 114 . , . Ilsk' ... ....Q* ....,,V. .44o.--. -...k .. , „ .... . -. ,__ „moor- „, 1/1+tn$;?• • .. \ . .. . ,..,,,e„,,,, — .... - . .• , ... ., . , .... ,.I ..., • • - , -.. - • i • ram+ .� livi .1 . tlr '. _ , ...f ..„,..1 .: , 0 , , . ' r. ":lir 4 V • — Oitt • is %t�� /z/�c `�, m- . • -.4' -'4 *4 .. •-.• - ' ... .A I:g - , 116 . 4 4-• i 44,,r . - ,i0..... -.;. , .1 _ . . s • ....% ... . 4::-.t",' ' -...;,`• -.- i - 416. •, ,... -ill , .. , _ L " .,.1'64 . I ! I •..9.- % 1 - • -•!* • t % --"\„,,,...... ..............: 0.4.-• .... . _ .....A. . • ., 4 0. • 0 •-•20re ' . . 40, 00' -, 6 1 4, ' a - . . 6 , ••. 0.4 b,,,ii,..,.. //9 r r.0. . . •, ;.. -` fi';,' i r. 1 ir,,, Ai if f r +f}; MI r'` I- . • 1,1 I I . _a . . • Al.° L1611.... . . , .. 411 ,. .1 j it IMP', i.- 1 • 4••.t _ .• , I 1 [ A. --- . .,.., iie I ..rw - 7 ig'n\ a III ._.... V '. - —, --=.- . • . . N-. . . .. . . - r . . . ... ---, '). Li" •4. •--,t . /4 - .., <, -..- 0.4%,. ---- ..V..,t•. N-,i , ' MkAa* ••. 1 ' • , .. . t'I • ' s. ..-. . ...... • . , • - 1+4 . ,•..i.. . - . t - k. * . .. ---: • ...: , /0 N ,qJ ter ,a r -- r �r \ 1 ; —A lam" `... _ 'fj 15,-l I / , I , Th 1 , / i . / / , ri.V-:%• Ir. -:..1 ... . , • _ .,. ... .,. . ,•. - [ , . ...., 111.*••• - • ._ •“•••••••• .4"1"1141119114 t, i -•:. I , , . .00 ',,, ' ; •'• • ..,., •:,_-,:fw .., ,. . .. . • ., ...... . . . 1\ 1 a•—•il mom �� , * ;iss; , fo , f Iv/ h 6 " ' O ...VIM ..•von, •••..... ••. ,. '.... . I NII 0 I� 41."j., q .. , 4 - -". I., f', " I 74 1 illII III III ii II ...._., I' IlI T. A \ ` aE /7i/ PAet, e •. 4 -7-1--..'. • . s .• ;••.'"—,,,';• ... „.. . I I . .--- ...,... .4 . - ._ • , ,,,i40'" ..,... ,, . ... .,A . • ., . 4,..,,,• _... . ..,.. . •_, ... . . . .• • „4, ,, •.t,,,.. ,..•... • • • .,. . .„ • . ... 7 e ,, .. • •• i .........„ . I- -. T ' • .' . .• .' Ari lei 2.; • •=.... ...•!....7, ,,,,,,-- .; ... . . A n •• , , , • .. .... „.. .. ... _ , ., • • . • . �4 , .11 fir, ra• : ".11f • '' , • ,tilt k 'V md AID �. - - ICI * • L _ ♦1' fh�L� 4. `' ` i. S J' .,. 4 /J) 19'U 2 D 7' 0 6A 63:)21 221.229c . % G ? - 0 A • /i/t4 } _ e G ©(per /la -72e /7) 7Yl im/ er 1 / t \ IIV /r- 624 _ ' 4_4 nt9 ', -- • — e )/4v7\ /9 6--L-1 1)- 1".7 044 .6),.}, - l V cy) - I I . 272/ap 1.0.42 0 b R-7( GatAh _a_ --:_ji,V: - IA) a- 1"i-4cvi — -- .2. � C9 P —© J -...- 0 (--z/ 6,-- - --: -L )-t. — ! . ,,r 77 &..<n , tT: t a ).1,t ,z. Lc,,___ ,... ,__... ...t.,,, _ 4_ , __..... ;5_ „__ . .,,,-7 __. .- e.- .z, ..__. . .,,_,_,„..4_ ) \ - ---.6174.4 b -ici--- /- L__, 4J- ia, -4 -.)/`(\ 7.7..vt _ 4,--- z_) - c/ ` 6Q_ s _ -rr. mil./ ,6) ctr,6_a -( 1-1 ___ ._ I IA foe- l ./ c( v f2 / 7(1 /" Ca/ ' ca `-/ oA (1)-4- c- o / d )j 9 )5/ / _9 ‘G ‘2 Lt__„3 og-A ae -P O 51;5- 2.C7 / )z cr) ) j rj; c, ay4 --t h , c p v -x _ V .__.r ____„) - /I (2_ d 9 ,_. -),Jg-&-e---ez-aef J --e /----2____. Ti--Ti,,J_ _. 5 Jd% Ay---i __- C ---ti_--f ,, _ ,e.,7- ...--726-yte 1_,__ , _(--1 ‘._. __.. - ,,,,...$) .„,, _ s.ci ,4 _1- d'-7___. .. ..e ) y.":„,,,,,a_. 4_,,„ , 6 ----- 70-,7A ,. _ /r-t- - __,_., \\ L ,4 , - / , ______t ,_,..2 - 0- /) a-')3,, \ 5Th efrz (ro TI /--- 0,22 ( ------er--azac-0)- - e- 5Th ‘•S ' e- 01•O' C . 9 61,2t ) bo)t .01 ) 3Qm da/411) ,...4yc, cy 0 se 65" 7 ?/j9é . -7-V It(3111(>2 Ze/X P -719 P 9, ---(2Y- -Th ir 7 - /I / r L2 2\ 2 Q ci ` c. 4-‘ • c_cp /2- - Zel d P O2 Q , `-r aPIZ;71/01 \ &---g 0 lJ t 1 �� '� '� N O c i..L Lam- Ldc_ -/A) 1/;)! `j' 411t J � � 0 /4 nidr - - fie3AAtcA- 1 c eto- C — QrrJ ,4J &26?-4. _ p , pp i„-L,;;R„ � ` o fi /71 °66 i. �, _s (---=446-11°C. /�f 11 deZ9-4 ( 9-) f-r 414RQ-' b., .2 - -2 -1-- c- _ * k# 02_,Zi 0 \- - t]) \ yt.7)c, _vaa /6. 9 c C rz � � • �,s \ 7( ( 9. , e>2- 40/ . c_ i) .5/L2 -717-11/ Y 0j , • • ____ a. °1-7 Voci-pz_ vJz' r,V - >/n eiz x;)_ _ I i .FLU � 6 �" �\ ,f