Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes P&Z 062601s CITY OF PALM BEACH GARDENS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION June 26, 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. ANNOUNCEMENTS Growth Management Director Charles Wu reported that the City Council had approved Lots 10 and 11 in NorthCorp, approved by this Board on May 22; and had approved a waiver from the requirement that properties west of the Urban Growth Boundary must be at least 250 acres, approved by this Board on June 12. CITY COUNCIL LIAISON There were no items by the City Council Liaison. 0 GROWTH MANAGEMENT REPORT Growth Management Director Charles Wu indicated there were no further items to report. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Vice Chair Kunkle made a motion to approve the minutes of the June 12, 2001 meeting as submitted. Mr. Volante seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 7 -0 vote. ROLL CALL Betty Laur, Secretary for the meeting, called the roll for the Local Planning Agency and the Planning and Zoning Commission: Present Absent Dennis Solomon, Chairman Joel Charming Craig Kunkle, Jr., Vice Chairman Dick Ansay Barry Present, Chairman Pro Tern John Glidden Steven Tarr Alternate Ernest Volonte s Alternate David Kendall Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 Also present were Growth Management Director Charles Wu, Senior Planners Ed Tombari and Talal Benothman, City Attorney Len Rubin, Principal Planners Karen Carver and Steve Cramer, and Planner Kara Irwin. LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY Workshop Petition L U- 01 -03: Gardens Station Small Scale FL U Amendment Henry Skokowski, of Urban Design Studio and as agent for NorthCorp Development Inc., is proposing a small -scale land use map amendment to the City's Comprehensive Plan. The amendment would change the future land use designation of a 7.6 acre parcel from Mixed Use (MXD) to Professional Office (PO). The subject parcel, known as Gardens Station, is located approximately 215 feet north of the intersection of RCA Drive and NorthCorp Parkway. Planner Kara Irwin reviewed the staff report. Issues raised at the last meeting regarding discrepancies in the calculations compared with unrelated projects had been addressed by changing the calculations _ for this project to be consistent with those used for the other projects. Using maximum 4 floors and maximum lot coverage had resulted in a much larger development. Ms. Irwin explained that the applicant had not been required to update their traffic report because the new calculations still would not require an impact analysis. Mr. Tarr commented that the use driving this was comparing infeasible to feasible and would always show less traffic. Mr. Tarr indicated he had not received the backup he had requested at the last meeting on how this was supposed to be calculated. Growth Management Director Wu explained that all DCA asked for based on the comprehensive plan was density and intensity, and this exercise was only to compare based on current land use. Mr. Wu stated the calculations met the criteria for the land use change. Mr. Tarr commented that it was misleading to show a decrease in trips to this Board and the analysis was flawed because there was not a decrease of trips, and there was not enough land to do the proposed scenario. City Attorney Rubin advised this was an academic exercise, that DCA wanted to see maximum numbers, that the project could never be built but the City was required to show DCA the numbers, that it was not reality, but the Board must get past this. Mr. Tarr addressed the Board and commented the Board had given a lot of changes based on decreases and had been misled, and he would still like to receive the backup to explain this decrease in trips or where this is found in the Florida Statutes. Attorney Rubin responded that Mr. Wu had prepared a memo with backup to explain this, and that the decrease in trips was only one thing to consider. Henry Skokowski, agent for the petitioner, commented this was the first step to look at land use compatibility and was an academic exercise. Mr. Skokowski indicated that 2 stories was standard under the use PO, but an applicant could ask for more through a PUD process; however, that was not the applicant's intent at this point although they wished to reserve that right. Mr. Kunkle expressed agreement with Mr. Tarr and questioned percentages of trips to square footage not being the same on the tables in the staff report. Mr. Skokowski indicated that there were factors that could affect mixed use and that trip generation 2 Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 could change after certain thresholds; however, there was no traffic consultant present to offer an explanation. Mr. Kunkle stated he was not against the project, and the Board needed to understand this better because it did not work mathematically. Mr. Wu indicated the traffic consultant might be able to provide an answer by the next meeting. Mr. Skokowski indicated there was no question that under the PO designation there were very specific limits on development intensity, that under mixed use there was significantly higher density, and he acknowledged this needed to be clarified but assured the Board that this change fundamentally reduced impact, and that would be clarified before proceeding to City Council. Chair Solomon requested that Mr. Skokowski contact Kimley -Horn during the meeting. Chair Solomon declared the public hearing open. Hearing no comments from the public, Chair Solomon declared the public hearing closed. Mr. Kunkle recommended moving this application forward without waiting to hear from Kimley -Horn since the two people questioning the process had stated they were in favor of the project. Mr. Kunkle made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of Petition LU -01 -03 based on the staff recommendation. Mr. Volante seconded the motion. During discussion of the motion, Mr. Glidden questioned if the use was known, to which Mr. Skokowski responded that the primary market for this site was office and the applicant did not want mixed use. The applicant was requested to still obtain an explanation from Kimley -Horn. Motion carried 6 -1 with Mr. Tarr against because of the flawed process. Mr. Wu stated the formula was correct. i PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION Recommendation to City Council Petition SP -00 -13 - Legends at the Gardens Don Hearing of Cotleur Hearing, on behalf of Centex Homes, is requesting site plan approval for a residential development located within the Regional Center Development of Regional Impact (DRI). The subject site consists of approximately 24.8 acres and is on the west side of Fairchild Gardens Boulevard (Blvd.) And south of Gardens Parkway Blvd. Senior Planner Talal Benothman reviewed the staff report, noting that the first sentence on page 4 should be stricken. Mr. Benothman indicated staff supported the two requested waivers. Mr. Benothman explained that approval of this petition would be contingent upon City Council approval of the Catalfumo NOPC and comments from the City Engineer. Mr. Benothman clarified that the applicant had exceeded the number of landscape points required. Don Hearing, agent for the petitioner, introduced Mike Nissenbaum, Centex Homes, and Don Lang, Architect. Mr. Hearing clarified that the same exterior building colors would not be used side by side. Mr. Glidden requested color samples, indicating he wanted no bright white against the second floor • color. Mr. Glidden noted that landscaping had been eliminated for clarity from the graphic presented, 3 • Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 and questioned what plant materials would be used. Mr. Glidden requested that landscaping be used to soften the ends of the buildings on buildings 15, 10, 13, 12, 7, and 17. Mr. Hearing commented that Washingtonian palms and mid -level plants would be added.. Mr. Glidden requested staff to make sure the white color samples were no lighter than the color drawings. Mr. Hearing commented that it was not a bright white, but a stone color. Mr. Hearing requested flexibility in adding landscaping, proposed that on each end a minimum of 3 Washingtonian palms and one mid -story ornamental tree such as East Palatka or Ligustrum be used together with appropriate groundcovers to fit into the context and requested the ability to move existing landscaping. Mr. Kunkle requested heights be defined. Mr. Hearing agreed that the Washingtonian palms would be approximately 28' in height staggered down from the end head to head, making the heights 28', 25', and 22'. Mr. Kunkle agreed and requested switching some of the very large oaks with the 12' -14' oaks. Mr. Hearing proposed instead to upsize the seagrape trees in the 16' range instead of 12' -14'. Mr. Kunkle agreed, and indicated anything that could be added in the road buffers would be appreciated. The applicant acknowledged that the present eight conditions were valid. In response to questions from Mr. Tarr, Mr. Hearing indicated the decorative fence went all the way around, described pedestrian access gates, and how garbage pickup would be done. Mr. Glidden commented that this applicant was providing an 8' sidewalk around the lake and questioned who the Board should ask to provide other amenities. Mr. Hearing noted that the applicant was providing some benches. Mr. Wu indicated amenities would be considered at the time the City Council took up the NOPC issue. Mr. Glidden requested looking more closely at pedestrian linkage . around the lake and commented that this applicant or someone else should provide other amenities. Mr. Kunkle stated he disagreed, that this applicant had done enough in providing a public sidewalk and the access and did not need to provide lingering points along the lake close to homes. Mr. Glidden expressed his opinion that staff should assign some responsibility so that the City would get something back in place of the cultural designation that they had given up. Mr. Hearing explained that the area along the lake was totally public, but there were gates between buildings and that each pod was secured. Chair Solomon indicated the City Council could look at this and add something around the lake. Mr. Glidden made a motion to recommend to City Council approval of Petition SP -00 -13 with the following conditions: 1. Prior to construction plan approval, potable water conservation devices shall be incorporated into project buildings, per Condition 12 of the Development Order of the Regional Center DRI. 2. Prior to construction plan approval, energy conservation measures identified in the Application for Development Approval (ADA) shall be implemented, per Condition 24 of the Development Order Regional Center DRI. 3. Prior to construction plan approval, the subject project shall comply with the energy plan established by the Property Owners Association Architectural Review Board (Board) for • the Regional Center DRI, per Condition 25 or the Development Order Regional Center 4 • Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 DRI. 4. Prior to construction plan approval, the applicant shall demonstrate that the proposed swimming pool located within the clubhouse shall be heated by a renewable energy source (e.g., solar energy, water heat recovery), per Condition 26 of the Development Order Regional Center DRI. S. Prior to issuance of the first certificate of occupancy, the applicant shall demonstrate that a full line of energy - efficient appliances and equipment will be used in all buildings on site, per Condition 27 of the Development Order Regional Center DRI. 6. Prior to construction plan approval, that applicant shall adequately demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that the 20 -acre park and lake depicted on the Master Plan of the Regional Center DRI will be improved as required by the South Florida Water Management District during the permitting process, per Condition 34 (a) of the Development Order Regional Center (DRI). 7. Improvements for the pak site shall be completed as the major roadways reflected on the Master Plan, abutting the park on the west and south side is constructed, per Condition • 34 (b) of the Development Order Regional Center (DRI). S. Prior to City Council approval, the petitioner must adequately satisfy all the comments raised by the City's Fire and Police Departments during DRC review. 9. Additional landscaping will be provided on the exposed ends of buildings 12,13,10,15, 7 and 17 in the form of a minimum of 5 Washingtonian palms with staggered heights which are of sufficient height to soften the upper regions of the end elevations, mid -level canopy trees, subject to staff review. Staff shall also review the perimeter buffering areas and heights of material prior to presentation to City Council 10. Samples of the exterior colors shall be compared to the color elevations to assure that contrast between light color faces and dark upper portions of buildings are no greater than shown in the color elevations. 11. Petitioner and staff shall work together prior to City Council review to define any additional pedestrian amenities that might be needed along the lake side perimeter walkway, including items such as benches, pavilions, etc. Waivers: • 1. A waiver from Section 75 of the City Code to allow a reduction in the front setback. The 5 • Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 Code requires a setback of 30 feet and the applicant proposes 23 feet. The waiver is required for seven (7) feet. 2. A waiver from Section 75 of the City Code to allow an increase in the maximum height limitation of 36 feet. The applicant proposes a height of 41 feet. The waiver is requested for five (5) feet. Mr. Kunkle seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 7 -0 vote. Recommendation to City Council Petition SP- 01 -18: Mirasol Parcel 20 6%y E. F, G) Site Plan Amendment Anne Booth, of Urban Design Studio, agent for Taylor Woodrow Communities, Inc., is requesting site plan approval for 70 semi - custom single-family dwelling units in Parcel 20 of the Mirasol Planned Community Development. The 11.06 -acre site, located on the eastern edge of the Mirasol PCD approximately one mile northeast of the intersection of Jog Road and PGA Boulevard, will have a density of 5.46 dwelling units per acre. (33-4]S-42E) Senior Planner Ed Tombari reviewed the staff report. Anne Booth, agent for the petitioner, explained that this project had been reconfigured because of the modifications to the golf course. Mr. Present questioned the contents of the June 14 memo from the City Engineer, to which Ms. Booth responded by describing minor drainage modifications which were requested. Mr. Present made a motion to recommend approval to City Council of Petition SP -01 -18 with the following conditions: 1. All conditions of approval, waivers, and exhibits listed within Resolution 72, 2000 shall remain in effect for Phase 1. 2. Prior to scheduling for City Council, the applicant shall satisfy all outstanding, minor issues as identified in the June 14, 2001 memorandum from Sean Donahue, Assistant City Engineer. Mr. Volante seconded the motion, which carried by unanimous 7 -0 vote. Recommendation to City Council Petition SP- 01 -19: NorthMil Site Plan Amendment to Out - Parcels 2 and 3) Hank Skokowski of Urban Design Studio, agent forNorthMil Partners, L.C., is requesting a site plan amendment to the NorthMil Plaza Shopping Center for Site plan and architectural review for two out parcels. The NorthMil Plaza Shopping Center is located at the northeast corner of Northlake D Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 Boulevard and Military Trail. (13- 42S -42E) Senior Planner Ed Tombari described the staff report. Hank Skokowski, agent for the petitioner, explained that these outparcels were part of the overall center and must meet the code as to parking; that traffic concurrency was included in these outparcels, and only one site was allowed to have a fast food restaurant. Holly Hoover, agent for Wendy's, reviewed the proposed restaurant. Mr. Skokowski indicated the petitioner would add landscaping along the perimeter to supplement existing landscaping, and described the new location for the large strangler fig which had been moved. Building materials and signage were compatible with the existing center, and the only exception would be the Wendy's red used on the building. Mr. Skokowski described the proposed retail building, which would have 4 -5 tenants maximum. Mr. Glidden commented he would participate in discussion of this item but would step down during voting because his partner did some work for Mr. Skokowski's client on other projects. Mr. Glidden requested on the retail building that the back of the building be screened or improved, that the parapet wall screen rooftop equipment, and that no downspouts be visible. Mr. Glidden discussed the access to Wendy's restaurant. Mr. Skokowski verified that landscaping damaged during construction must be replaced before the CO could be obtained, and that replacement heights and sizes would match existing landscape plantings. Mr. Wu noted that a condition could be added to restore any damaged plants with like -kind replacements. Mr. Skokowski noted that the 6/1/01 plant detail sheet had the landscape specifications listed. Ms. Hoover verified that there was a roof overhang over the drive • through. Mr. Tombari indicated photometrics met criteria, and there were no regulations on hours of operation. Mr. Glidden clarified that the roof slope should match the existing center roof and it should wrap around. Mr. Present requested applicant provide photographs of different prototypes of Wendy's restaurants. Mr. Tarr indicated a workshop was needed, that the site plan was too small, and expressed his preference for shade trees. Chair Solomon advised that consensus of the Board was that this was a workshop rather than recommendation to City Council. Chair Solomon summarized unresolved issues: Wendy's needed to be architecturally compatible with the rest of the shopping center; better marking was needed on the one -way traffic pattern; overhang on drive through must be shown; downspouts should be eliminated on the parcel 2 building; the rooftop equipment must be adequately screened; photographs of the exterior of the shopping center should be provided; and a lot more landscaping should be added to screen the view from the street along Military Trail and Northlake Boulevard. • Workshop Petition SP- 01 -16: NorthCorp Lots 4 and 5 Henry Skokowski of Urban Design Studio, acting as agent for NorthCorp Development, Inc., is requesting site plan approval for two identical 45,144 square foot office buildings (90,288 S.F. total) within the South Park Center Plat of the NorthCorp Corporate Park. The petitioner is proposing to utilize both lot 4 and lot 5 for the building site area. The proposed site is an approximately 6.0 acre tract of land located at the southern end of the NorthCorp Planned Community District, between Riverside Drive and East Park Drive. (07- 42S -42E) VA Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 Planner Kara Irwin reviewed the staff report. Henry Skokowski, agent for the petitioner, advised that some very large oaks had been preserved in place and others relocated, and the buildings had been placed to accommodate the trees preserved in place. Mr. Skokowski described the site plan, the existing landscaping and proposed landscaping, and provided a materials board showing materials and colors. Mr. Kendall indicated he did not see the benefit of clustering the buildings. Mr. Skokowski indicated that interconnection would lend itself to limited services being provided in one building or the other which could serve both buildings, and the proposed placement would create a patio area between the buildings that could be enjoyed by tenants of both buildings. Mr. Kendall expressed his opinion that the buildings could be shown off to better advantage by changing their placement on the property. Mr. Skokowski compared these buildings to the Forum buildings in West Palm Beach which were placed close together with common space between them which was used by people as a waiting area, etc. Chair Solomon requested staff think about whether unity of title should be used in this case. Mr. Solomon questioned whether identical buildings were allowed within the City. Chair Solomon expressed his opinion that the north building was oriented incorrectly and suggested rotating that building 45 degrees so it would face either East Park or Riverside Drive, that the stairways should be placed internally, that the buildings needed to be enhanced, and that better screening of rooftop equipment was needed. Mr. Glidden expressed his opinion that the layout including the parking was correct except suggested moving the entries; requested 3 -D perspectives of the project, suggested that the stairways not be pushed back into the buildings but be softened and enhanced, and indicated that the percentage of glass on the sides • of the building facing each other might be limited by the Building Department and that needed to be checked. Mr. Glidden suggested raising the parapet wall to screen rooftop equipment. Mr. Glidden indicated he believed the Board could not evaluate the merits of entering the sides of the buildings until 3 -D perspectives had been provided. Mr. Skokowski indicated he would bring to the next meeting 3 -D elevations and photographs of the existing landscaping, with information on estimated heights of the landscaping to address Mr. Kunkle's concerns regarding preserving the view from Burns Road. Chair Solomon requested staff research the LDR's to see if buildings were required to face the roadway, and if so that a waiver might be needed for the north building. Planner Kara Irwin indicated that a waiver would not be necessary but setbacks must be met and site plan approval granted. Mr. Present expressed his opinion that the buildings were well balanced on the site, but the stairwells just looked like they were attached, and commented that the south building provided the opportunity to make a statement as seen from Burns Road. Mr. Present suggested the main entrance between the two buildings be set back in order to make an arrival statement, and that photographs or 3 -D elevations would help in considering the merits of the site plan. Mr. Present suggested that master signage would eventually be needed in NorthCorp because it was easy to get lost. Mr. Present suggested the petitioner think about how to orient people to go to main entrances rather than an entrance only intended for employees. Mr. Tarr indicated he did not like the placement of the buildings, questioned if staff had a preference for the placement, commented that in the joint meeting with City Council it had been suggested to move buildings closer to the street with parking in the back, which might be better in this case, commented the buildings were too close together and could be farther apart to create more of a meeting place, and requested 3 -D elevations. F-01 • Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 Workshop Petition PCD- 00 -04: Parcel 16, The Gables at Northlake Hank Skokowski, Land Design South, agent for Gables East Construction, Inc., and Northlake Boulevard, L.L.C., is requesting to rezone 240.65 acres from a Planned DevelopmentArea (PDA) to Planned Community Development Overlay District (PCD) in order to construct 176 single family units, 450 multifamily units, and 194 Assisted Living Facility (ALF) units. The site is located on the western side of the Florida Turnpike, south of Northlake Boulevard, and north and east of Beeline Highway. (22- 42S -42E) Planner Kara Irwin reviewed the staff report. Ms. Irwin clarified for Mr. Tarr that PDA zoning was only a holding zone for vacant parcels until they could be rezoned, which the applicant wished to have zoned PCD. The City Attorney indicated that PDA had a residential low land use designation but was just a holding zone. Ms. Irwin commented that five dwelling units per acre were allowed in residential low, and consolidation of units could be on one portion of the property with areas set aside within the PCD for open space and preserve areas. The applicant was proposing 3.5 dwelling units per acre which was under the five per acre allowed. Hank Skokowski, agent, and Steve Boziak, representing Gables Residential, were present on behalf of the petitioner. Mr. Skokowski explained the types of dwelling units proposed, and noted that concurrency approval had been received for the proposed plan. The traffic analysis did not require construction of Jog Road to meet concurrency, the right -of -way had been dedicated to Palm Beach County before the applicant acquired this property, and the County and DOT would decide whether that section of roadway would be built. Mr. Skokowski indicated that if the roadway was not built the applicant might reconsider the design for parcel B to accommodate estate homes rather than assisted living units. Mr. Skokowski reviewed the site plan and explained the petitioner wished to expand the lake maintenance easement along the canal and place the littoral plantings along the turnpike side of the canal instead of in the proposed lake which would be shared by both the single - family and apartment residents and thus could be kept clear for boating, etc. Mr. Boziak provided an overview of the Gables Residential company which had been in south Florida for 20 years, had won numerous awards, and described their portfolio, which contained many long -term high quality projects. During discussion of drainage, the outfall for stormwater was pointed out, and Mr. Boziak indicated the applicant was working with South Florida Water Management and with Northern Palm Beach County Improvement District and the Turnpike on drainage and the current unit 28 would be joined with unit 3, and that Gables would provide the funding. Mr. Boziak indicated to Chair Solomon that the homeowners association would be responsible for maintaining the lakes and the wetlands. Mr. Boziak advised the project would be able to have a private road off Northlake Boulevard and estimated the turnpike interchange question would be known in 3 -5 years. Chair Solomon expressed his opinion that the proposed 526 dwelling units for parcel A might too intense and requested other alternate uses be . presented for parcel B. Mr. Solomon indicated he had no problems with the proposed littoral plantings E Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 and the buffers. Mr. Kunkle noted the plans had been too small to read. Mr. Glidden commented the project contained a lot of natural area, and he had no problem with the density. Mr. Tarr questioned who determined wetland areas, to which the response was there had been a full environmental assessment by the City's environmental consultant, and that SFWMD had requested all the residential development be in one area. OLD BUSINESS There was no old business to come before the Commission NEW BUSINESS Growth Management Director Charles Wu announced that at the joint workshop with City Council a subcommittee had been suggested, and requested the names of the members and the time the committee would meet. The following committee members were appointed by Chair Solomon: Committee Chair John Glidden, Joel Channing, Craig Kunkle, and David Kendall. The first meeting was set for Tuesday, July 17 in the City Council chambers at 4 p.m., and the meetings were scheduled for every other week on the weeks the Planning and Zoning Commission did not meet. The other members of the Commission were invited to attend and to provide comments. Mr. Glidden indicated he and Mr. Wu would develop guidelines which would be provided prior to the first meeting. Mr. Glidden requested someone from the City Council attend. It was agreed that a briefing from the subcommittee to the full Commission would be given every other week. Mr. Wu advised that financial disclosure statements were required by July 2 from those Commissioners who were members on December 31 of last year. Mr. Wu distributed a memo addressing methodology on assessing land use changes. Chair Solomon complimented staff on their fine work. Chair Solomon expressed his opinion that when a project with two buildings was presented for the first time that the agenda item should be labeled a workshop, and if it was found that there was enough information presented it could always be voted on as a recommendation to City Council. 10 _Z6. • Planning & Zoning Commission Minutes June 26, 2001 ADJOURNMENT • There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 10:25 p.m. The next regular meeting will be held July 10, 2001. APPROVED: Dennis A 45 s Tlirk Ancav � O i betty Laa, Secretary for the Meeting 0 11