HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes P&Z 100901•
CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
October 9, 2001
MINUTES
The Regular Meeting of the Planning and Zoning Commission of the City of Palm Beach Gardens,
Florida, was called to order by Chair Dennis Solomon at 6:30 P.M. in the Council Chambers of the
Municipal Complex, 10500 North Military Trail, Palm Beach Gardens, Florida, and opened with the
Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag.
REPORT BY GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR
There was no report by the Growth Management Director
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Ansay made a motion to approve the September 25, 2001 meeting minutes as submitted. Mr.
Present seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 7 -0 vote.
• ROLL CALL
•
Betty Laur, Secretary for the meeting, called the roll for Board of Zoning Appeals and Planning and
Zoning Commission.
Present
Dennis Solomon, Chairman
Craig Kunkle, Jr., Vice Chairman
Chairman Pro Tem Barry Present
Dick Ansay
Joel Channing
John Glidden.
Of
Alternate Ernest Volonte
Alternate David Kendall
Absent
Also present were Principal Planner Karen Carver, Planners John Lindgren and Planner Kara Irwin, and
City Attorney Len Rubin.
ANNOUNCEMENT
Chair Dennis Solomon announced that the Christ Fellowship PUD Amendment was not on the
agenda due to the fact the sign was not posted and letters were not sent out in time.
•
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
October 9, 2001
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS
Public Hearing and Consideration of Approval
Petition VAR- 01 -05: Ra Co Amo Landscape Buffer Variance Request
A City- initiated request for a variance from the minimum landscape buffer and planting requirements
per the Land Development Regulations, Sec. 79- 319(a)(1), that states that a minimum buffer of 15
feet is required for non - residential sites adjacent to streets that are less than 100 feet wide, to allow
3.5 feet of landscaping adjacent to a reconfigured parking area. The 3.67 -acre site is located at 4100
Burns Road, on the southwest corner of Burns Road and Interstate Highway 95 (12- 42S -42E)
SWEARING IN OF SPEAKERS
The City Attorney swore in all those intending to speak.
• DECLARATION OF EX -PARTE COMMUNICATION
Mr. Ansay reported he visited the site on October 5, 2001
Planner John Lindgren presented the project and advised that the applicant had met all required
criteria. Sean Donahue, City Engineer, reported this would be a temporary situation until FDOT
modified the Burns Road bridge as part of the I -95 widening When widened, there would be four
lanes with a suicide lane in the center until the road reached Riverside Drive intersection.
Chair Solomon declared the public hearing open. Hearing no comments from the public, Chair
Solomon declared the public hearing closed.
Mr. Channing made a motion to approve petition VAR- 01 -05. Mr. Kunkle seconded the
motion. Mr. Glidden commented this was a great example_ of a variance since the hardship
was not created by the applicant. Chair Solomon stated all criteria had been met. The motion
carried by unanimous 7 -0 vote.
PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION
Recommendation to City Council
• Petition SP- 00 -07: Eckerd @ Promenade
A request by Dodi Glas of Urban Design Studio, on behalf of Gardens East Plaza, for site plan
approval of a 14,090 square foot drugstore and 3,867 square feet of in -line retail with a tower feature
Pa
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
October 9, 2001
on tracts 1, 2, and 3 in the Promenade Shopping Center (/ka: Gardens East Plaza), located within the
Gardens East Planned Community District. The 1.67 -acre Eckerd site is located on the east side of
Alternate AIA, approximately 500 feet north of Lighthouse Drive. (7- 42S -43E)
Mr. Glidden stepped down due to conflict of interest and Mr. Volonte was seated in his place.
Planner John Lindgren presented the project. Mr. Charming commented he had wanted the petitioner
to re- design the building to match an elevation they had previously shown the Commission. Mr.
Lindgren indicated staff had changed their position since the applicant committed to get final buildout
approved. Mr. Tarr expressed concern there was not 100' for stacking. Mr. Ansay questioned the
completion date for the second phase, to which Mr. Lindgren responded there was no time period.
Dodi Glas, agent for the petitioner, indicated this project was before the Commission approximately one
year ago, and since that time management of the property had changed, the owner had addressed
concerns of the Commission including design and architecture, and had doubled the landscaping and
added outdoor amenities. Ms. Glas discussed conditions 4, 9, 11, and 14. Regarding condition 4, Ms.
Glas requested the applicant not be required to reinstate the fountain, only to put back the sign lettering.
Ms. Glas requested no elevated walks as required in condition 9, but that walks be designated by pavers
• at ground level. Condition 11 called for teal signage; Ms. Glas pointed out other outparcels did not use
teal signs —they were only used in the interior of the shopping center. Ms. Glas requested that signage
not be required as in condition 14 that said theater patrons could park in Eckerd's lot, and agreed to no
signs prohibiting parking in Eckerd's lot. Principal Planner Carver explained the Police Department had
suggested the elevated walks to make a distinction. It was clarified that art in public places was
required, since the $1 million threshold was eliminated in the July 2000 revision of the LDR's. Mr.
Present noted that opening the rear area solved parking for the theater, and Ms. Glas advised that the
petitioner was adding 16 parking spaces in front, plus there would be access from the back street to the
rear of the building. Chair Solomon commented the tower feature would make a nice building, and
asked for a bond for completion of Phase II by a certain time. Ms. Glas advised that the applicant was
not comfortable doing that. Mr. Lindgren explained that Phase I was a complete site plan so if Phase
1I never happened it would still be complete. Chair Solomon requested two downspouts on the north
elevation be eliminated, to which Ms. Glas agreed. Chair Solomon expressed his opinion that condition
_ 4 should _ stav as written condition 9 should be deleted, that in condition 11 the colors were. fine as
proposed, and the last sentence of condition 11 should be deleted. Mr. Kunkle noted discrepancies on
plant sizing and requested Sheet 3 of 8 be the guide for planting size specifications. Mr. Ansay
suggested something could be worked out so if Phase II was not completed by a certain time some
additional landscaping or additional enhancements would required until it was built. Mr. Tarr favored
reinstating the fountain or having art in public places; but did not think Phase II should be an issue since
Phase I could stand on its own merits.
• Mr. Channing made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of Petition SP -00 -07 with
the following conditions:
9
•
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
October 9, 2001
1. Prior to scheduling this petition for City Council, the applicant shall submit to the City a
photometric plan for tracts 1, 2 and 3 (including the drive aisle separating tract 1 and tract
2) that is signed and sealed by a Professional engineer licensed in the State of Florida. Said
photometric plan shall meet all light levels required by the City's Land Development
Regulations, except for the area under the drive - through canopy.
2. Prior to scheduling this petition for City Council, the applicant shall specify the proposed
pipe material on the Drainage Concept Plan that meets the requirements of the City
Engineer.
3. Prior to scheduling this petition for City Council, the applicant shall satisfy all comments
from Seacoast Utility Authority.
4. Prior to scheduling this petition for City Council, the applicant shall revise the plans to
include the originally approved City sign and fountains at the northwest corner of the
Promenade Shopping Center site. Prior to the final certificate of occupancy, the applicant
will be required to install said sign and fountains. The applicant can be relieved of this
requirement if they are required to provide art -in- public places, and they choose to locate
the art in this location, pursuant to Sections 78 -261 and 78 -262.
5. The applicant shall send courtesy notices to surrounding residents within 500 feet of the
Promenade Shopping Center at least 10 days prior to a public hearing before City Council,
as required by the Growth Management Director.
6. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall:
a Provide an approved permit from FDOT for improvements within the Alternate
AlA right -of -way. A curb transition from the non - mountable type "D" curb to
existing curb within the right -of -way of Alternate AlA shall be used.
b. Provide a unity of title for tracts 2 and 3 in lieu of replatting the entire project.
7. Prior to the issuance of the final certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall:
a. Install a City of Palm Beach Gardens Police Department approved video recording
system for the pharmacy drive - through lane and cash register areas.
b. Submit written authorization from all of the applicable utility owners for horizontal
• construction /planting within the utility easements.
C. Prepare an instrument that releases a portion of the 5- foot -wide limited access
L!
•
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
October 9, 2001
easement so that the existing access point can function as it is constructed.
d. Submit said easement release documentation to the City.
e. Receive City approval for said easement release documentation.
E Record said easement release documentation with Palm Beach County.
g. Remove any barriers to the parking in the rear of the theater.
8. All lighting shall be installed so as not to conflict with landscaping.
9. The two (2) parking spaces located in the south section of the east parking area shall be
marked "Compact Cars Only ".
10. Paint and tile color shall match the rest of the center.
• 11. This approval includes tract #1, and the footprint of the building shown in tract #1 and all
elevations of the 3,867 square -foot expansion, including the tower feature.
12. Parking at Eckerd shall be open to all Promenade Shopping Center patrons.
13. Upon approval of the development order, the applicant shall secure a "Seacoast Utility
Authority Capacity Allocation Commitment for Public Water and /or Sewer Service,"
which shall be verified by the delivery of a fully executed copy of the document to the
Planning & Zoning Division within 30 days of granting of the development order.
14. All previous approval and conditions of approval remain in effect unless specifically
modified or deleted herein.
_ 15. Sheet 3._of 8 of the Landscape Architectural Drawing shall control for size of planting_
16. Downspouts on the north elevation shall be eliminated.
Mr. Volonte seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 7 -0 vote.
Mr. Glidden was re- seated.
• Recommendation to City Council
Petition SP- 01 -10: McDonalds within the Promenade Plaza
5
- •
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
October 9, 2001
A request by Manny Mele, representative for McDonald's Corporation, agent for owner Harvey
Wolfe, for a major site plan amendment for an outparcel renovation at the Promenade Plaza, in order
to allow a McDonald's Restaurant. The site plan includes the addition of second drive -thru window
(127 sf.). The 0.982 -acre outparcel (Parcel 5) is located within the Promenade Plaza Shopping center
located at the northeast corner of Lighthouse Drive and Alternate AIA, at 9880 Alternate ALA. (7-
42S-43E)
Planner Kara Irwin reviewed the staff report. Mr. Glidden stated the owner, Harvey Wolfe, was his
client on the Eckerd's project, therefore he could not vote, and stated he had not seen this project. The
City Attorney verified that Mr. Glidden could not vote on this petition.
The City Attorney verified that because the petitioner was requesting waivers that gave the Board leeway
to request other items, since this was part of a PCD. Orlando Alonzo, Jr., representing the petitioner,
clarified that the request for additional square footage was the trigger that required them to seek
approval, and stated the petitioner was willing to live with all the proposed conditions, but did not want
to lose their identity. Mr. Kunkle expressed his opinion this was a great site for McDonald's and the
public would find them without a second sign facing the shopping center. Mr. Glidden stated his
• agreement and requested the applicant work with the present building instead of changing the roof line
Mr. Channing indicated he was not in favor of an outdoor cooler unless there were walls around it.
Chair Solomon agreed the existing building was better than the proposed plan. Mr. Glidden suggested
painting the wall at the front gable darker and putting a sign on it, and possibly bringing the gable out
farther to make it prominent. Mr. Tarr expressed his opinion this petition should come back to the Board
with changed architectural drawings. It was clarified by the applicant that as of October 15 management
of the McDonald's on Northlake Boulevard would be taken over by corporate McDonald's. Another
representative for the petitioner clarified red trim was preferred by staff, the roof would be left as is,
there could be red trim under the windows or the wainscoting as shown, the color of the gable end would
match the color of the walls, and agreed to one fascia sign; and stated the petitioner agreed to the
conditions of approval and requested approval of the conditions tonight and that the applicant be allowed
to return for signage. Consensus was not to grant approval without a site plan and to treat tonight's
session as a workshop. Applicant was advised if a new cooler was installed it should be treated as a part
_i of the buildm2_ The petitioner responded they would build a wall around the cooler which would match
the building.
Workshop
Petition PCD- 00 -04: Gables at Northlake Planned Community Development
A request by Henry Skokowski of Urban Design Studio, agent for Gables East Construction, Inc., and
Northlake Boulevard, LLC, to rezone the subject site from a Planned Development Area (PDA) to
Planned Community Development Overlay District (PCD) in order to construct 200 single family
units, 450 multi family units, and 146 Assisted Living Facility (ALF) units. The 240.65 -acre site is
located on the west side of the Florida Turnpike, south of Northlake Boulevard, and north of Beeline
Highway. (22- 42S -42E)
•
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
October 9, 2001
Planner Kara Irwin reviewed the staff report for the project. Mr. Tarr indicated he did not agree with
3 story versus 2 story buildings. Henry Skokowski, agent for the petitioner, clarified the overall plan
contained 200 single family homes, 415 multi - family apartments, and 146 ALF units, that 60% of the
property was set aside and 40% developed, and that densities were in compliance with code. Mr.
Skokowski described the proposed amenities, and indicated detailed plans would be submitted at a later
date but showed elevations and described the different types of units. The conceptual flavor of the
project was described as a central lake feature with a central road around the lake and garages accessed
from alleys. Steven Bozak, representative for Gables Residential, the developer, was available to answer
questions and commented they were excited about this project. The petitioner preferred to place most
of the littoral planting in the canal, leaving the lake open to use canoes, paddle boats, etc. Mr.
Skokowski indicated that littoral plants were not required within the canal and were not calculated for
the required littoral planting, which was based on the lake. Mr. Bozak explained the property line was
down the middle between the canals and if the canals were connected there would be no buffer from the
turnpike. Drainage outflow was discussed, which Mr. Bozak explained had been coordinated with
Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District. Chair Solomon expressed his opinion that although
this project complied with density requirements; it appeared to be very dense; and that a traffic signal
was needed at Northlake Boulevard. Mr. Skokowski responded that Joe Pollock had indicated there
would not be sufficient warrants to obtain a traffic signal, and explained traffic concurrency had been
issued in December of last year. Chair Solomon requested an updated traffic analysis in the interest of
safety and practicality. Mr. Solomon questioned the number of neighborhood parks, and the applicant
indicated they would present a plan. Mr. Bozak explained that Gables Residential would control the
master association and there would be a sub association under the master association. Two tot lots were
proposed within the multi - family area. Chair Solomon commented that the turnpike buffering should
be a separate issue from the littoral plantings and that he would like more littoral plants around the edges
of the lake. Mr. Skokowski indicated that development of Jog Road would determine the use for Parcel
B. Mr. Present agreed with Mr. Solomon regarding the littoral plantings, and indicated he would defer
to Mr. Pollock's expertise on the traffic signal issue. Mr. Ansay felt the design should include Jog Road
access. Since this was the first development in the City with alleys, it was suggested staff check for
challenges in other communities such as Abacoa and Celebration. Mr. Tarr indicated he would like
landscaping along Northlake and along Jog Road if it was built Petitioner indicated trees would be
added to the littoral plantings and there would be trees between the lake and the road. Mr. Tarr
requested the 3 -story units not be visible from Northlake Boulevard. Mr. Skokowski indicated the traffic
analysis did not depend on Jog Road but if it went though there was an aligned intersection with
Northlake Boulevard. Mr. Skokowski clarified for Mr. Glidden that the Turnpike Authority was going
to do an interchange just south of this parcel, if Jog Road was not developed the land would revert to
the property owners, and that the amenities within the project would be available to everyone. Chair
Solomon requested future drawings de- emphasize the right -of -way. Direction to staff on height variance
was 4' and no visibility from Northlake Boulevard; width of lake maintenance easement was acceptable
since the petitioner was to maintain it; and some members were concerned with littoral plantings and
some were not. City Forester Mark Hendrickson pointed out an approximately 11 -acre site containing
7
•
•
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
October 9, 2001
Australian pines where he would prefer to see the development occur. Mr. Skokowski explained the
environmental consultant had picked the site for Parcel B and no other area had been presented to the
petitioner as suitable for possible development. Mr. Channing recommended since it was not to be
developed immediately that the petitioner should look at it again, and that utility lines might be more
accessible. Mr. Hendrickson indicated the site he recommended could have access from both Jog Road
and Northlake. Mr. Bozak agreed to look at this issue and consult with South Florida Water
Management District.
OLD BUSINESS
The status of Legacy Place was reported. Principal Planner Carver commented that Jacobsen's store
permits had been applied for, and Mr. Skokowski indicated a signage and building colors package had
been submitted last week which would come before this Board.
NEW BUSINESS
Mr. Tarr requested more information on the party to be held Thursday night, and it was clarified there
would be food.
Mr. Channing commented SEPTAD recommendations had been ignored, and rather than continue to
observe form but not substance he would prefer to focus on this to determine a direction. Ms. Carver
reported SEPTAD principles were being implemented at Mirasol.
Mr. Glidden reported at the next meeting of the Design Standards Committee, approximately 12 projects
the Commission had previously approved would be reviewed as a benchmark to evaluate the
Committee's work.
Ms. Carver reminded the members of the Special Meeting to be held October 17 at 6:30 p.m.
•
•
•
Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes
October 9, 2001
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:25 p.m. The next regular meeting will
be held October 23, 2001.
A TTT /lX TTT -
LI
FORM 8B MEMORANDUM OF VOTING CONFLICT FOR
C6UNTY, MUNICIPAL, AND OTHER LOCAL PUBLIC OFFICERS
LA E - FIRST NAME - MIDDLE NAME
NAME OF BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE
G1W, B. John
Planning and Zoning
MAILING ADDRESS
THE BOARD, COUNCIL, COMMISSION, AUTHORITY OR COMMITTEE ON WHICH I SERVE IS A
8 Huntley Circle
UNIT OR
XX CITY COUNTY OTHER LOCAL AGENCY
CITY Palm Beach Gardens COUNTY Palm Beach
NAME OF POLMCAL SUBDIVISION: Palm Beach Gardens
DATE ON WHICH VOTE OCCURRED October 9, 2001
MY POSITION IS:
ELECTIVE APPOINTIVE XX
WHO MUST FILE FORM 88
This form is for use by any person serving at the county, city or other local level of government on an appointed or elected board,
council, commission, authority, or committee. It applies equally to members of advisory and non - advisory bodies who are
presented with a voting conflict of interest under Section 112.3143, Florida Statutes. The requirements of this law are mandatory;
although the use of this particular form is not required by law, you are encouraged to use it in making the disclosure required by
law.
Your responsibilities under the law when faced with a measure in which you have a conflict will vary greatly depending on whether
you hold an elective or appointive position. For this reason, please pay close attention to the instructions on this form before
completing the reverse side and filing the form.
•
•
DISCLOSURE OF LOCAL OFFICER'S INTEREST
I, John G)idden, hereby disclose that on October 9, 2001:
(measure came or will come before my agency which (check one)
inured to my special private gain; or
inured to the special gain of _Mandevco Poperties, by whom I am retained.
(b) The measure before my agency and the nature of my interest in the measure is a follows:
Eckerds at Promenade Plaza
c [ �® 6
Date Filed
Slq2tu
NOTICE: UNDER PROVISIONS OF FLORIDA STATUTES §112.317 (1985), A FAILURE TO MAKE ANY REQUIRED
DISCLOSURE CONSTITUTES GROUNDS FOR AND MAY BE PUNISHED BY ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING:
IMPEACHMENT, REMOVAL OR SUSPENSION FROM OFFICE OR EMPLOYMENT, DEMOTION, REDUCTION IN SALARY,
REPRIMAND, OR A CIVIL PENALTY NOT TO EXCEED $5,000.
L: W DM IN\PERSONALXJ OHNMP &Z%Eck3- con.wpd
Page 2